2006-08-30
Madam Speaker Aagaard took the Chair at 10 am.
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members that responses to petition Nos 18, 28, 29, and 32 have been received and circulated to honourable members.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, on Saturday 19 August, I launched the Gurindji Heritage and Tourism Project at Kalkarindji. The projects will establish a Gurindji Heritage Visitor Precinct and a number of related enterprises associated with tourism, land management, heritage, and art and craft production and sale. What better time or place to launch this project than at the 40th anniversary Freedom Day celebrations commemorating the 1966 Wave Hill walk-off?
The struggle of Vincent Lingiari and the Gurindji is now recognised as an important part of our history, which culminated in the Whitlam Labor government handing back a portion of land to the Gurindji people in 1975. The Gurindji Heritage Tourism Project builds on Lingiari’s aspirations for the lands of his people and will, I am sure, attract a growing number of our spirited travellers as well as many Australian history buffs to the region.
In the past, the only story that travellers got when they drove through Kalkarindji was the ‘Northern Territory’s Man from Snowy River’. That is about to change, with visitors set to learn about the history of the walk-off and the heritage of Gurindji country.
This project has many partners. The Daguragu Community Government Council is driving the project, and has allocated a coordinator from the CDEP program who will be supported by a development coordinator from the NT Office of Local Government. We have also provided funding and in-kind assistance, with Tourism NT and the Departments of Planning and Infrastructure and Natural Resources, Environment and the Arts all involved. The federal Department of Environment and Heritage is right behind the project, funding the presentation and management of local heritage sites and the interpretation displays at the old power station.
The project is set to generate significant benefits. For a start, it will use a new style of flexible employment for remote communities, which will build skills that give local people more employment options across areas such as tourism, land management, heritage projects, and art and craft production. There will be close links created between the local high school and the heritage tourism project, and that will mean more opportunities for young people. Also the development of quality tourism product like the new visitor centre, heritage sites, and walking trails will draw more tourists to the region.
One story I would like to share with you is about a nutwood tree, one with great significance. The tree was a traditional meeting place and, during the long struggle after the walk-off, it became a rallying point for Ngumpin and Katiya. The tree is still at Daguragu today, and I am sure many more people will gather to admire it in the years ahead.
There is no doubt that the project will encourage more people to the Victoria River region and that, in turn, will mean more jobs and opportunities for local young people. The project has the potential to make a very real difference to the region. I especially commend the Daguragu Community Council for their vision and commitment to the project. I am sure this project will become something very special for both our visitors to the region and the traditional owners.
Madam Speaker, I thank the Gurindji and members of the Kalkarindji and Daguragu communities for the warm welcome they gave to me and to all the people who travelled to the region for the celebrations. I look forward to hearing more about the project in the months ahead.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Madam Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for her report this morning. The opposition supports the development of any new opportunity for young people in indigenous communities to further and enhance their own community.
I am very pleased to see that this project will involve young people. That may also give them some encouragement and, hopefully, allow them to remain within their community. There is no doubt that we are at the beginning of the development of indigenous art and culture within the Northern Territory, and reading the Minister for Arts and Museums’ statement last night of what is happening internationally, it is a crying shame that we do not have the best indigenous art and culture on display within the Northern Territory, rather than it being displayed overseas.
This is a wonderful opportunity for this particular community to be able to showcase what they have and encourage more tourists to come to the area. It is a whole new world that is still opening for people in that region.
Dr TOYNE (Health): Madam Speaker, I present a mid-term report card on the Building Healthier Communities five year framework for improving our health service in the Northern Territory.
Rebuilding the Health and Community Services system was one of the key priorities of the Martin government after our election victory in 2001.
Our first task was to address systemic issues arising from years of neglect and under-funding. The 2003 Bansemer Review gave government a blueprint for reorganising the Department of Health and Community Services, and providing a stable management and financial foundation for the delivery of improved services for Territorians. Once this had been achieved, we were in a position to provide a new direction and vision for the health and community services system.
Building Healthier Communities was launched in February 2004 to provide this vision. It is a five- year framework focusing our efforts on 10 key themes to improve services and deliver a better system for all Territorians. In August 2006, we are reaching the mid-point of the five year span of Building Healthier Communities and it is an appropriate time to take stock of where we are, to acknowledge the progress that has been made, and to begin the process of refocusing on what should be the next steps in Building Healthier Communities.
The achievements so far have been significant. This government has made a record investment in health and community services, increasing funding to the department by over 64% since 2001. We have met our promises to Territorians by adding 53 extra hospital beds, increasing nursing and medical staff, opening the new Emergency department and a hospice at Royal Darwin Hospital, providing extra resources for emergency and critical care at Alice Springs Hospital, and launching major initiatives in child and maternal health. On the other side of the portfolio, where the member for Karama bears ministerial responsibility, the achievements under Building Healthier Communities have been equally impressive.
However, there is still much to be done to address the challenges facing us in the Territory. Demand on our health services, and particularly our hospitals, is increasing, putting pressure on our staff and resources, particularly at peak periods. The reality of the seriously disadvantaged Aboriginal population compels us to continue to reform and improve our services and ensure that our efforts in the prevention and management of disease continue to match the increased resources needed by our hospitals.
Addressing these challenges requires new ways of doing things under the Building Healthier Communities framework. We must remain open to doing things differently as the world changes around us. New technology, better role delineation and benchmarking against best practice can deliver great gains, especially in our major hospitals and community-based services. In particular, our services need to work together better across the whole service system.
Services need to be integrated and complementary so that we can gain the most impact from the resources we have. Our workforce needs to be equipped with the skills to enable new approaches to the most critical needs in the community now and into the future. Through the Building Healthier Communities framework we are focused on critical life stages, particularly the early childhood years and the adult years affected by substance abuse and chronic disease.
This government will continue on this path, building on the gains we have made and drawing in families and the community to participate in making the next generations healthier, stronger and safer.
Members are now receiving our report card, and that details across the 10 theme areas of Building Healthier Communities the areas that have been achieved, the areas that are being worked on and the areas that we are going to work on next.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I note the report card. It will be properly scrutinised to ensure that the other side of the story is told. You may well emphasise those things that can be called achievements, but I stand not just as a spokesman from opposition but as the member for Blain.
Many in my electorate are now only just realising the decision that has been made to close down the Farrar After Hours Medical Clinic. It will be justified, explained and sold by members who also represent families of Palmerston. There has been very strong support from the families of Palmerston and the rural area for this service, so much so that there have been some thousands of signatures presented to this parliament arguing for the strengthening of that service.
If it is explained away that there are services available to these families now in the community, I ask the minister to think again. On the ground, we have 32 patients present every night at that clinic, some 200 to 250 per week. The members of my electorate are not all middle class. There are many of those who desperately need this service and that is the voice of those who provide that medical care to the families of Palmerston.
I ask you minister to re-assess and listen carefully to the voices of families within the Palmerston and rural area. There are those who desperately need this service and it will now be a service no longer provided. It will fall now to those practitioners who are already overloaded within the Palmerston area and those who cannot find their way to those services will now find themselves in Accident and Emergency, creating extra congestion in that service. It is not a good decision for the families of Palmerston.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I put on record what I think has been a sterling job by this Minister for Health. He has done it against incredible odds. I believe that he has not always received the right support and advice from his departmental officers and some of the problems highlighted in the media concerning Alice Springs Hospital have not been of his doing. I believe this man is quite sincere in his efforts.
He is right; health is a lifestyle issue. The number of appearances at our hospitals indicate the poor choices many people make in their lifestyle. It is all about education and making sure people understand that they can improve their health by making better choices. I urge him to concentrate on making sure that healthy lifestyles on communities are advocated.
I suggest that if he wants to improve the diet of people, he should be lobbying his federal minister again for vouchers instead of allowing welfare payments to be spent as the individual sees fit.
On the whole, I have not had a complaint from the Alice Springs Hospital for a while so that is good news, minister. That means you must be doing something right.
Dr Toyne: Thank you.
Mrs BRAHAM: Our only concern in Alice is that you were withdrawing services and sending some of our senior management positions to Darwin and that too often, things in Alice Springs were being controlled by Darwin when we should have been able to make the decisions down there. I note that you have appointed a Director of Nursing at Alice Springs Hospital who seems to have settled quite well.
Minister, you have had a tough portfolio - two tough portfolios - and I think the Chief Minister has really made it very difficult for you to continue doing such a hard job, but well done.
Dr TOYNE (Health): Madam Speaker, I thank members for their comments. In respect of Palmerston, there are seven GP practices there. We do not believe it is sensible to be subsidising one out of the seven. I suggest that you take, with equal enthusiasm, the case to the federal government, because they are the ones that make the bulk billing arrangements around the country. We would join you in that, because I would like to see bulk billing more available, not only in Palmerston, but throughout the Northern Territory.
I thank the member for Braitling for her comments. I am sure the person who succeeds me in this portfolio will have many things to occupy their waking hours. I am certainly not saying for a moment that all the challenges for health delivery have been sorted out, there is much really creative work needed still and I wish my successor all the best.
Dr BURNS (Infrastructure and Transport): Madam Speaker, I report to the House on my recent inspection of the Darwin Port facilities. On 19 July, I undertook an inspection in the company of Darwin Port Corporation Chief Executive Officer, Mr Barry Berwick, the Harbourmaster, Captain W Bruce Wilson, and Chairman of the Darwin Port Corporation Advisory Board, Mr David Looker. The member for Goyder, Mr Ted Warren, and the member for Port Darwin, Ms Kerry Sacilotto, were also in attendance.
The first part of the inspection covered the city port infrastructure, noting these wharves now remain mainly as cruise, defence and people activity focused. The iron ore wharf is now mainly used by the Royal Australian Navy for fuelling and lay-up operations. There has been some damage to the fendering system for this wharf, and a consultant engineer has been engaged to provide recommendations on modifications to the fender system, which will meet Defence vessel requirements.
Fort Hill Wharf, which is adjacent to the iron ore wharf, is a good solid wharf structure and is used primarily for cruise and Defence vessels. Whilst awaiting repairs to the fendering system at the iron ore wharf, the Navy will utilise the Fort Hill Wharf for fuelling and lay-up operations.
I am pleased to remind the House that the government has committed $4.5m for a new cruise ship terminal, which is to be constructed on shore in the 2006-07 year.
The adjacent roll-on, roll-off, or RORO, facility was upgraded by Defence in 2002 to meet strategic deployment needs giving rise to a 15 year access agreement. Madam Speaker, $575 000 for maintenance of the connecting link span for this facility is allocated in the 2006-07 repairs and maintenance program. Upon completion of this work, the capability of the link span will be upgraded to 50 tonne capacity to meet Defence needs for vehicle access to their ships.
The Stokes Hill Wharf is an old structure, and restaurants and cafes are now the main feature of this wharf. Pontoon facilities for charter boat operators have been established on the inside of the Stokes Hill Wharf. These are currently under review with regard to expansion to meet growing industry needs. A new berthing facility is being constructed on the inside of the Stokes Hill Wharf to accommodate Customs vessels and is due for completion by the end of the year.
Of course, the adjacent waterfront project is under construction, and it was fantastic to see the progress with this magnificent project from the water side of it.
The second part of the tour involved an inspection of East Arm, including the bulk materials handling facilities. The manganese stockpile site includes rail unloading facilities and associated conveyors. The OM manganese radial stacker and stockpile area is now operational, with ore being stockpiled in preparation for a third 30 000 tonne shipment.
We inspected the preliminary filling of the proposed new stockpile site for the Territory Iron project, which is anticipated to commence operation in mid-2007, exporting one million tonnes of iron ore per annum to China.
The Darwin Industry Fuel Terminal developed by Vopak is now fully operational and facilitating petroleum product movement into the Northern Territory. The adjacent biodiesel plant is under construction, with the storage tank construction well advanced. At the time of our inspection, the site was being prepared to accept delivery of the 500 tonne plant module.
At the main wharf, we met up with two pilots, Mark Every and Ben Meirs, and I thank them for their time and informative comment.
Foundations for the bulk loader infrastructure on the main wharf are complete and fabricated items for the conveyor gallery and ship loader are being delivered to site ready for erection. A $1m upgrade of the container crane control system is also planned for this year.
Further development needs for the port were highlighted, which include further land reclamation, covered storage and the development of permanent port offices. The inspection was beneficial to have a firsthand look at the port, its operational matters and future development needs. I am sure my colleagues enjoyed it as well, Finally, I thank the CEO, Mr Barry Berwick, and his staff for facilitating this inspection.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I am the shadow for the ports.
Mr Kiely: Did you join them?
Mr WOOD: No, in the opposition cabinet.
Minister, I am glad you presented this report because during the Estimates Committee, we never had a chance to ask questions about the port. It is an area that should come up as a statement. The port is an extremely important part of the Territory. It would be good to see figures on tonnage coming through the rail. After all, there were great things said about the railway and the port, and it would be nice to see what the promises were and what is actually happening with regard to tonnage moving across the port from the rail, and vice versa.
I was interested in the statement about the iron ore wharf used by the Navy. There were concerns when the waterfront was being established that there would be problems with refuelling for the Navy. I am interested to know what has happened in relation to that. There are reports that taxi drivers are not very happy with access to the Stokes Hill Wharf at the moment. I do not know whether that access can be improved. I presume it is because of the cross-traffic that is going to the waterfront.
It was good to hear about the manganese stockpiles and the future stockpiles for iron. I noticed you forgot to talk about the uranium stockpiles which come up from South Australia. That has helped our railway become a bit more financial, and that is important as well.
One area I have mentioned before that sometimes disappoints me with industrial developments is that for some reason, we put industrial developments as just industrial developments. There needs to be more emphasis on good industrial landscaping. I see buildings and tanks out there that are stark. For some reason, people think good landscape design is not applicable to industrial estates. Thirty years ago in Melbourne, they developed industrial estates where good landscaping design softened the blow, you might say, of harsh industrial buildings. I would like the government to look at seeing whether they can improve in that area. Just because an area is industrial does not mean it cannot look reasonable and nice.
Dr BURNS (Infrastructure and Transport): Madam Speaker, I welcome the comments made by the member for Nelson. Given his interest in the port, I would like to offer the member a similar tour and a briefing on the wharf. That might answer a few of the questions that you had, member for Nelson.
It is my advice that Navy refuelling is continuing at the Fort Hill Wharf. In respect of access to Stokes Hill, there is a construction site there. We are endeavouring to facilitate access to it. I ask people to be patient, given that it is a construction site and a very important project.
On the issue of industrial landscaping, it is a very good suggestion by the member for Nelson, and something I have discussed with the CEO for the port. You may have noticed that there has been some Larrakia artwork on some of the tanks, and we can do more in that regard. That is an issue we should have further discussions on, member for Nelson.
Reports noted.
JUSTICE LEGISLATION
AMENDMENT BILL (No 2)
(Serial 68)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The purpose of this bill is to amend various acts within the Justice portfolio, such as an amending bill is necessary from time to time to ensure acts within the portfolio are operating efficiently and appropriately. The amendments contained within this bill rectify issues identified by the Department of Justice and other stakeholders in the past few months, but are not of sufficient urgency or substance to require their own amending bill. I will now outline the amendments that are included in the bill.
The Associations Act is amended in several ways. First, an explanatory note is inserted into section 37(b), which deals with special resolutions, to make it clear that a special resolution must be passed by three-quarters of those members who actually vote, not three-quarters of all members entitled to vote. This is intended to help avoid misinterpretation of this section by the general public.
Section 72, which applies the external administration provisions of the Commonwealth Corporations Act 2001 to incorporated associations, is also amended to remove potentially misleading wording. The heading and wording of the first sentence in section 72 refers to the winding up provisions of chapter 5 of the Corporations Act applying to incorporated associations. In fact, section 72 applies most of the Corporations Act provisions in chapter 5, dealing with external administration of which winding up is only one aspect. Replacing the existing words ‘winding up’ with ‘external administration’ is intended to clarify the effect of this section.
A provision is included in the Associations Act preventing a non-trading association from disbursing profits to members. Although this is an underlying principal of the act, there is no explicit provision that such an incorporated association cannot trade for the financial gain of its members or disburse profits to members. The new provision will provide clear guidance to the committee and other members of such incorporated associations on this issue.
The Commercial and Private Agents Licensing Act is amended to make it an offence for a person licensed under the act to use harassing tactics. Although the act defines harassing tactics, it currently contains no offence or other provision prohibiting such conduct. The act is also amended to provide that the use of harassing behaviour by a person licensed under the act is grounds for disciplinary action to be taken by the licensing authority, the Commissioner of Consumer Affairs. This type of behaviour is the subject of a considerable number of complaints to the commissioner about persons licensed under the act, but the current provisions of the act have proven to be deficient in giving the commissioner the power to deal with them.
The Domestic Violence Act is also amended. First, section 7(1) is amended so that it does not require that the police officer who is exercising the power to enter premises for the purposes of removing a person and taking them into custody pending the making of a restraining order under section 6A is the same police officer who intends to make the restraining order under section 6A.
As members would be aware, the Domestic Violence Amendment (Police Orders) Act 2005, amended section 7 of the Domestic Violence Act to provide for the making of restraining orders by senior police officers. Power to enter premises and remove persons pending the making of such an order were also given under section 7(1), however the wording of section 7(1) currently suggests that only the police officer who intends making a restraining order under section 6A can exercise the powers given under section 7(1). As only senior sergeants and officers in charge of a police station can make the restraining order under section 6A, the power to enter premises under section 7(1) will, in most cases, need to be used by other more junior offices who attend premises to investigate or take action. This is an anomaly which is rectified by this amendment.
A minor amendment is also made to section 7(2) so that it applies where police propose making an order under section 6A. Section 7 allows police to detain a person for up to four hours whilst an order is sought from a magistrate under section 6. This section should apply similarly in a situation where the police propose making an order under section 6A.
A further amendment to section 10 makes it clear that an order that is amended stays in force until the amended order is served on the defendant. This resolves possible doubt on this issue that was raised by the Northern Territory Police.
The bill also makes amendments to the Interpretation Act at the request of Parliamentary Counsel to ensure this important act functions correctly.
The bill also amends section 23 of the Justices Act. Currently, section 23 allows a summons to be issued on information or complaint laid under the act, there is no power for a summons to be issued in relation to an application made under the act. However, an application is made under section 130B for an order for return to the rightful owner or to otherwise deal with property held by the police or the court, which is usually evidence that has been used in a prosecution matter. Such applications are, according to police, usually contested. However, as the matter is an application and not an informational complaint, there is no power in section 23 to summons documents or witnesses to appear to give evidence. This is an anomaly associated with the use of different terminology, which is rectified by this amendment.
The Legal Aid Commission Act is amended to validate the commission’s community legal eduction role.
The Supreme Court Act is amended to approve the process for appeals from judges’ interlocutory decisions and appeals from Master’s decisions. The effect of these amendments is that applications for leave to appeal judges’ interlocutory decisions are to be dealt with in the first instance by another single judge constituting the Court of Appeal on the papers. In the event of an application being refused, the applicant can apply to the Court of Appeal constituted by not less than three judges.
Appeals from the Master or a referee are to be heard by the Court of Appeal and in particular: (a) an appeal from final judgments of the Master or referee are as of right to the Court of Appeal constituted by three judges; and (b) an appeal from interlocutory decisions of the Master or referee are by leave and dealt with in the first instance by a single judge constituting the Court of Appeal on the papers. In the event of leave being granted, the appeal will be heard by a single judge. However, if leave is refused, the application can be considered by three judges and any subsequent appeal heard by three judges.
I thank the Honourable Chief Justice Brian Martin who, with the support of the judges, drew my attention to the desirability of these amendments.
The Unit Titles Act was amended by the Unit Titles Amendment Act 2001 which inserted a new part into the act dealing with the subdivision of buildings into building lots. Parliamentary Counsel and the Department of Justice have identified some desirable amendments to the act relating to these amendments that are essentially of a statute law revision nature. The proposed amendments will insert definitions where needed, correct grammatical or cross-referencing inconsistencies, and improve readability.
In addition, section 28 is amended to provide that if a lot is subdivided into building lots, a member of the relevant building management corporation is the body corporate of the building development plan, not the building lot owners. This amendment arises from the operation of the Unit Titles Amendment Act 2001, which provided for the creation of two or more unit plan developments within a single building. This means a building can be split into separate parts, with separate unit plans and management corporations, generally referred to as a body corporate for each part, as well as the over-arching building management corporation for the building as a whole. A useful example is a building that is a commercial car park underground, shops on the lower levels, an hotel on the next few levels, then residential apartments above.
Prior to these 2001 amendments, the Unit Titles Act forced all these owners into a single body corporate responsible for the building as a whole. This was not particularly workable as the matters of concern to the owners of each part of the building may be quite different. However, it is arguable that section 28 leaves open an interpretation that would mean each individual owner of each shop or office and residential apartment are members of the over-arching building management corporation. Such an interpretation would make many of the provisions of the act unworkable.
This amendment therefore clarifies that in the case of the building used in the example, membership of the over-arching building management corporation would be the car park owner, the management corporation body corporate for the shops, the hotel owner, and the management corporation for the residential apartments. In this scenario, the management corporation for the shops and the one for residential apartments represent the interests of individual unit owners in respect of the common property for the building as a whole.
This is a clear situation in relation to Cullen Bay. The Cullen Bay Marina Act provides that for building lots in Cullen Bay, the owner for the purposes of membership of Cullen Bay Management Corporation is the building management corporation rather than the owners of the individual units. The act is similarly amended to clarify that if a lot in an estate development is subdivided into further units, it is the body corporate for the lot that is the member of the estate management corporation, not the unit owners.
Finally, some aspects of the Youth Justice Act are amended to ensure the government’s objectives are met regarding young people’s interaction with the justice system. For example, the definition of ‘responsible adult’ in section 5(1) of the act is amended to overcome a potential interpretation difficulty.
The definition in section 5(1) currently states that:
There has been a suggestion that the definition could have a limiting effect if the youth is Aboriginal, as the court will be bound to look for a person who exercises parental responsibility in accordance with Aboriginal customary law or Aboriginal tradition, and that a person who may exercise parental responsibility in accordance with contemporary social practice will not come within the definition of the responsible adult. The section is amended so as to clarify intent and remove this potential anomaly.
Section 65(3) is amended so as to omit the words ‘for detention or imprisonment of the youth’, and replace them with the more consistent phrase ‘remanding the youth in custody’.
Section 98 is amended to provide for the signing of an order suspending a sentence, and for the provision of copies consistent with other procedural provisions for conditional orders in the Youth Justice Act, and for adults under the Sentencing Act.
Section 136(2) is amended to clarify that it applies whether the findings of guilt of a youth who has turned 15 at the time were made before or after the commencement of the act. Section 136(2) was a new provision that provides that the unrecorded convictions of a youth can be taken into account by any court if the offence resulting in the finding of guilt was committed after the youth turned 15 years of age. For removal of a doubt that has been raised, the amendment clarifies that from the date of commencement of the act, mention can be made in an adult court to the criminal history of findings of guilt where the offence was committed after 15 years of age, and whether those findings of guilt were made before or after commencement of the act.
These amendments constitute in themselves relatively minor legislative reform, however they reflect the fact that government must keep constant watch to ensure Northern Territory legislation fulfils its appropriate regulatory function.
Madam 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.
Mr HENDERSON (Business and Economic Development): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The purpose of this bill is to provide a legal framework governing access to biological resources in the Northern Territory for the purposes of bioprospecting. Bioprospecting is identifying new substances that could be used in biotechnology and is classically identified as the production of new drugs.
This bill will ensure that any bioprospector has not only the proper permit under the Fisheries Act or the Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act, but also the prior informed consent of the resource access provider, and that a share of the benefits from the discovery, if any, be returned to the resource access provider. Further, the bill requires that traditional indigenous knowledge be recognised and benefits agreed where appropriate.
The Northern Territory’s diverse biological resources are the source of much interest from researchers. Approximately 50% of all drugs in use come from natural products or synthetic copies of natural products and, as such, there is an increasing interest in this area. The Northern Territory’s biodiversity is highly conserved which, when combined with our remoteness and small population, results in high bioprospectivity. This has appeal for bioprospectors and makes the Northern Territory an attractive location to carry out such activity.
Bioprospecting typically requires high levels of investment, generally over long lead times and involving high financial risk. As such, it is not realistic to expect large up-front monetary benefits. Instead, focus should also be given to capturing an equitable share of non-monetary and indirect benefits. These may include capacity building through joint ventures, for example, early stage research and extracts; PhD and post- doctoral research positions; research nodes; and, other employment and investment opportunities.
The bill has been developed to facilitate a new industry for the Northern Territory, and additional investment and employment opportunities associated with this. Establishing a regulatory framework through this draft bill provides a safeguard for industry. Biological resources can be legally collected with prior informed consent and approval from government regulators, creating certainty of title to samples and intellectual property created by using these samples and a right to use them. In particular, it creates a transparent process and, subsequently, provides predictability and certainty for organisations wanting to come to the Northern Territory to collect biological resources. Additionally, it provides a mechanism for the return of benefits to the resource access provider.
This legislation has been developed in line with the aims of the Bonn Guidelines on Access to Genetic Resources and Fair and Equitable Sharing of the Benefits Arising Out of their Utilisation under the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, the nationally consistent approach for access and the utilisation of Australia’s native, genetic and biochemical resources, and aligns with the Commonwealth legislation on this issue.
This bill will provide an appropriate level of governance and enforcement, making it illegal to take biological resources for the purpose of bioprospecting without the appropriate permits and prior informed consent from the resource access provider. The bill requires that a benefit sharing agreement be entered into with the resource access provider so that a share of the benefits resulting from research - be this monetary or in the way of intellectual property - be returned to the access provider.
In addition to providing a robust and transparent governance framework which encourages bioprospecting within the Northern Territory, the acts and associated policy will also serve to limit the opportunities for unlawful access - or biopiracy, as it is sometimes called - to our biological resources. Such inappropriate actions are not a fanciful use of colourful language.
In 2002, the Journal of the American Medical Association published findings by a research scientist based on an extract from a Top End plant sourced from the Katherine region. Extracts of this plant were shown to have some effect against anthrax, tuberculosis, malaria and golden staph. To date, we are unable to find evidence that these samples were taken under a permit, as required by the Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act.
Similarly, the case of cyclosporine A is also noteworthy. Cyclosporine A is a drug given to organ transplant patients to prevent the body from rejecting the new organ. A scientist working for a Swiss company took soil samples whilst on holiday in Norway and the result was cyclosporine A. Norway receives no share of the approximate $US1bn per annum generated by the drug, all of which goes to the parent company.
The bill also allows for a certificate of prominence to be issued to a bioprospector. In essence, this is designed to provide certainty to end users of a biological sample or intellectual property created from that sample that the sample was obtained with the prior informed consent of the access provider, and that it was in line with the laws of the issuing jurisdiction.
Native title issues have been considered in the development of this legislation. The rights of indigenous people to access plants for traditional purposes has been confirmed within the new legislation by precluding the grant of exclusive access to a biological resource on Northern Territory government land.
Furthermore, the inherently small volumes required in relation to overall biomass of an organism, combined with the restrictions imposed by permit conditions, make it unlikely in a practical sense to impact upon traditional rights in this regard. This new legislation provides a mechanism which allows for the recognition of traditional ecological knowledge, and directly provides the opportunity for indigenous people to negotiate a benefit in return for the sharing of such knowledge.
This legislation is fundamental to establishing and protecting future jobs and training opportunities that may develop in this new industry sector in the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and table a copy of the explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of traditional owners from Myatt, near Timber Creek in the Daly electorate, and traditional owners from Centre Island from Borroloola in the Barkly electorate. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Continued from 15 June 2006.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Madam Speaker, I refer to the 20 Year Vision for Indigenous Housing in the Territory, brought to this House by the Minister for Housing. I support his vision to address the housing crisis in indigenous communities, and particularly his call for increased Commonwealth and Territory funding to address the acute housing shortage faced by indigenous Australians
One of the difficulties the minister will face in this task is dispelling the myth that the indigenous sector receives more government money than the non-indigenous sector. A number of evidence- based studies have concluded that this is simply not true. In a study done by Neutze, Sanders and Jones, titled Public Expenditure on Services for Indigenous People, it was estimated that non-indigenous persons received between 9% and 21% more in housing funding than indigenous people. The authors conclude that:
The annual outlay on housing assistance, including tax exemptions, exceeds $20bn. This assistance includes the first home owner’s scheme, Commonwealth rent assistance, the Commonwealth/States Housing Agreement, as well as tax incentives such as land tax and capital gains tax exemptions for owner occupiers, and provisions for negative gearing for investors. Indigenous access to all of these programs via the Commonwealth/State Housing Program, which provides funds for public and community housing, is almost non-existent.
The Australian government’s major social housing program is the Commonwealth Rent Assistance Program. Expenditure on this program has averaged $1.8bn per year. Over the last decade, because the program is open for all people meeting eligibility requirements, this is the only low income housing assistance program that has grown. In contrast, there has been a real decline in funding for public housing provided under the Commonwealth/States Housing Agreement so the proportion of public housing stock in Australia has fallen substantially.
The Aboriginal Rental Housing Program, which comprises about 8% of the total Commonwealth/State Housing Agreement, has declined in real terms. This presents a very real difficulty for the Territory because the Commonwealth Rent Assistance Program is not suited to indigenous residents in remote communities, and the result is that very few indigenous people access this program.
If this funding situation is not addressed, the situation in the Northern Territory will continue to worsen to the detriment of all Territorians. There is a strong case for an increased allocation for indigenous-specific housing funding on parity grounds as well as the national interest, so I join with the Minister for Housing in asking members opposite for their support. This is really important for all Territorians.
In terms of the management of housing, the minister is correct when he said that until 1996, funding for indigenous-specific housing emphasised the building of new houses without any consideration of the ongoing cost of maintaining the houses. It was the creation of IHANT and the process of engagement and debate about these issues that moved policy practice.
As a result of an increased focus on sustainability, there has been a significant increase in rent collected over the last seven years. This increase has occurred because of the financial incentives offered by the Repairs and Maintenance Program, which linked R & M funds to target rents collected by the indigenous community housing associations, or ICHOs.
In 2004-05, rent collected by indigenous community housing organisations totalled $10.4m. Despite the increase in rents collected, the ICHOs find it difficult to achieve sustainability because of the high cost associated with managing housing on remote communities, from the cost of tradesmen through to transport of materials and insurance. Remote indigenous communities have to pay premium prices. For example, last year Northern Territory ICHOs paid $4.5m out of their rental income on insurance premiums. The claims only totalled $900 000, so $3.5m ended up as profit for the insurance companies. This is an area that needs reform and needs to be addressed in any move to community housing management through a public housing model.
I have some concerns about the proposal to move community housing under public housing in that I would not like to see another layer of bureaucracy added. It ultimately achieves little to improve indigenous housing beyond imposing public housing policy and practice that could result in people in remote communities being evicted from their homes. This will create enormous conflict in communities and be detrimental to the outcomes the government is trying to achieve.
Another complicating factor is that housing on remote communities is not being built to one standard like mainstream public housing. We have heard from the Health minister during this debate about the environmental health survey conducted in his department that revealed many houses on remote communities do not even have fundamental hardware for healthy living. So levying rents in such circumstances is more complex than in mainstream public housing. How much will we charge families who live in tin sheds, for example? It is also important that people on communities continue to have a local point of contact to report R & M needs despite the move to more centralised housing management because without the timely reporting of faults, problems escalate and costs blowout.
I welcome the minister’s commitment to increase the capacity of local people in all areas of housing. A commitment to skilling local indigenous people to work in all aspects of housing, from construction to management, will drive down housing costs over time because the importation of skilled labour to remote communities is one of the most costly components of building and maintaining housing.
It has been demonstrated that training programs in indigenous communities can lead to real government savings, provided real job opportunities are present once the necessary skills have been gained. This was noted in the Spiller, Gibbins and Swan report on the central remote model about which I spoke at length in the last debate on indigenous housing.
I applaud the initiative to investigate the establishment of major housing prefabrication operations in major regional towns. Such initiatives can provide employment opportunities, but need to be thoroughly investigated to ensure real cost savings are made and that materials meet the Building Code and environmental health standards.
As the minister said in his statement, adoption of the Building Code and the environmental health standards for remote community housing has added to the cost of construction, but houses built to these standards do require fewer repairs and less maintenance over the lifespan of the house, and the savings are substantial.
I am concerned about the proposal for private investment to supply housing in Aboriginal communities. I do not think that private sector investment will be readily forthcoming, regardless of changes to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, because there is a limited mainstream economic base. The market value of land is low, and the capacity of remote indigenous people to borrow money is limited.
An analysis of Land Rights and Development Reform in Remote Australia undertaken by Altman, Linkhorn and Clarke found:
Given that the average cost of building a house in a remote community is between $200 000 and $250 000 without including the price of land, it is extremely unlikely that most indigenous people in remote and very remote communities would be able to afford to build a house. When you then consider the reality of an average life expectancy of 47 years, a 30-year mortgage becomes problematic.
In summary, we cannot expect that private sector investment will do much to reduce the chronic level of housing need in remote communities in the short to medium term so significant budgetary injections into the provision of appropriate housing and related infrastructure are required. It is an essential step in curtailing the alienation of many an indigenous community, and assist in strengthening communities’ overall social and economic prospects through improvements in health, school retention rates and the attainment of skills.
Madam Speaker, I say thank you very much to the minister for his statement. As a government, we need to work with the Commonwealth to make sure that the Commonwealth government really brings extra money - real money and new money - to the Northern Territory. I commend the minister’s statement to the House.
Ms McCARTHY (Arnhem): Madam Speaker, before I begin, I also welcome people from the Daly electorate, and also my own families from Borroloola. It is fantastic to have them here this morning.
I commend the Housing minister on his statement. It is always a pleasure to stand in support of the Housing minister, because I know he is very sincere in his genuine attempts to improve housing for Aboriginal people in communities right across the Northern Territory. If I may, I would like to reflect a little on his earlier statement about the significance of the unmet needs. I quote:
With current levels of funding:
The minister has stood in this House and said we need 4000 houses right now to address the homelessness and the desperate need for housing in our communities for all the Aboriginal people who are living in overcrowded situations, which results in sickness, the inability to be able to get up each day to be able to go to work, to do the jobs and the tasks that are required of them as citizens of this country.
It is something we have discussed many times, issues of overcrowding and I commend the steps the Northern Territory government are taking. When I look at the 16 communities that I have in the seat of Arnhem, I know when I visit Numbulwar and Minyerri, those places are increasing in size. We have beautiful houses. A tremendous number of houses are being built in those communities. It certainly gives a feeling of pride to people because everyone wants to be proud of where they live.
There is an incredible example occurring on Groote Eylandt where there are a number of communities: Alyangula, Umbakumba, Angurugu and Milyakburra. The Anindilyakwa Land Council has taken positive steps in a direction that fills the Anindilyakwa people with a great deal of hope. The land council at Groote Eylandt is embarking on an $18m tourist resort at Dugong Beach. In building that resort, they are looking at the training and development of the Anindilyakwa people. There is a great deal of hope for the future, in particular for the children, who can see that there is a positive future for them. With this resort, they are looking at training people, giving them the ability to have a job, be proud of the work that they do and know that they can work on their own communities.
GEMCO has a number of Aboriginal people working in the mining industry. One of the issues raised with Cabinet at Groote Eylandt was that there are Aboriginal people working in the mining company who want to live in Angurugu, build their own houses and be able to apply for loans. Since the minister’s introduction of this statement to House in June, we have seen what has happened on a federal level with the Commonwealth Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. There has been discussion and debate in the media and in parliament in Canberra and in the NT. The issue of home ownership for Aboriginal people has been a strong theme in the amendments made in the Commonwealth parliament.
I would like to focus on that in my response to the minister’s statement. Home ownership is something that every Aboriginal person aspires to. It is the process of that home ownership that we need to thoroughly examine. The fundamental core of home ownership for any citizen in this country is that they are involved in their own decision-making leading to an outcome. In this case, the outcome is home ownership.
On Groote Eylandt, that is something that the people are talking about in great depth. They want to own their own homes. While the amendments to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act is one avenue, with discussion of an entity in the Northern Territory, the other area that I suggest our government has a think about is legislation for financial institutions. We have a tremendous amount of land in the Northern Territory. Nearly 50% has been returned to Aboriginal ownership. The question for many Aboriginal people, including me as a traditional owner from the Gulf region, is: what happens to those Aboriginal people who wish to go down that path; who do have jobs and are quite capable of paying interest from financial institutions? Can there be a model similar to that in Canada and America, where it has been legislated that financial institutions can incorporate and loan money to people who have traditional links to land without it having to be an encompassing group; can it be individuals rather than corporate bodies or associations?
These are things that I know our government is very passionate about pursuing. I know that my colleagues representing bush electorates are encouraged by activities that occur overseas that we can explore. I know that the Minister for Housing is acutely aware of these things.
In the statement, the minister said:
I wholeheartedly agree with that statement and cannot stress enough the urgency for our remote communities and, indeed, Aboriginal people right across the Northern Territory who urgently need these houses.
The 20-year plan has been discussed in this parliament by the Chief Minister and the Minister for Housing. I agree wholeheartedly with them because we need to look at a couple of industries in our remote regions. One is roads, the need to improve our roads to allow infrastructure of all kinds in our communities. I know the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport is acutely aware of this need and is doing a tremendous job, as we heard yesterday when he spoke about what is happening on the Central Arnhem Road and the money being spent on the Wilton River bridge.
The other area we could be looking at is the housing industry. It is fantastic that the government has been able support first home ownership for all Territorians with the HomeNorth scheme and I commend you, minister, on that program. If we can expand that scheme into our remote areas where we know the need is tremendous, we can make a change. It does not have to rely solely on changes to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, because we have Aboriginal people out there who are working hard, committed to their jobs and who want economic access to purchase all the things they so desire, just like a non-Aboriginal person in Darwin, Alice Springs, Katherine and Tennant Creek.
Our remote communities are growing at a rapid rate. Minyerri, as I have said when I have discussed education, is growing at a tremendous pace and it is because of the boom, as we have seen in statistics released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the largest area of population growth is in the remote regions of the Northern Territory. I cannot stress that urgency enough.
The second part of the housing component is development of a housing industry and factories in our regions as part of the 20-year plan in an effort to genuinely acknowledge that unless all people have adequate housing, they will not be able to live with a sense of peace in their hearts, know that they have somewhere safe to go home to, to sleep without worry that rain is going to come through the roof because there are holes in it which no one has been able to fix. There is a lack of mechanics and carpenters in remote communities, many people, and especially the old people, wait for days, weeks, months even before they can have repairs done on their houses.
People wait and it becomes an accepted part of life that things do not happen straight away and that can be three to six months before someone’s house is repaired. They put up with the hole in the window or in the roof, or the fact that their toilet is not working, or their front door cannot shut properly. Then we have the Wet Season. In the Top End, we know how heavy the Wet Season is, and with cyclones, we know that houses need to be adequately built. These people wait in the hope that the carpenter will come and fix the problem, but because there are so few workers who can fix houses, people wait endlessly. It is not right that they have to wait for so long.
With the minister’s housing initiative - and I know he is very aware of all these issues - I sincerely support his efforts in trying to encourage indigenous participation within the economics of purchasing a home. If that takes the form of an extended HomeNorth scheme, I would say: ‘Well done’. I would sincerely like to see that happen out in our communities, minister. At the same time, Numbulwar, Minyerri, and Groote Eylandt give so much hope about what can be done in our communities.
At times when we are feeling really down about some of those communities that are really bad and neglected, if we look at the positive ones, they lift us out of our despair and we say: ‘It is going well in that community. How can we move that good example from this community over to this other community where this mob needs a lot of help?’
In closing, it is these discussions in parliament, and I know the Education minister is very aware of this, which highlight the impact of flooding and cyclones on already overcrowded houses that have 15 to 20 people in them. I commend our government, certainly the Education and Housing ministers what they have been able to achieve the community of Wugularr and the contributions that are being made there. Minister, well done.
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Madam Speaker, I, too, acknowledge the traditional owners in the gallery. It is fortuitous that they are here today because I do not think they get the opportunity to come and listen to debate that directly affects them on a regular basis.
Indigenous housing is something, just so they know, that is discussed, unfortunately, on a regular basis. It is a very serious matter and something that this government struggles with. It is one of the most important subjects around for people who live in the bush. You do not want to hear talk; you want to see some action; you want to see some houses. The only way that it is ever going to change and for you to see some real housing numbers in the communities is for the Commonwealth government to dip into its pocket – into its billion dollar surplus budgets they have been producing over the last few years - and pull out one or two of those billions of dollars and put it into indigenous housing.
Mrs Miller: It’s is a pretty good political speech, this one.
Mr KNIGHT: Member for Katherine, this is a very serious issue.
Mrs Miller: It certainly is. Stop blaming.
Mr KNIGHT: We have people in the gallery - and I will go through it …
Mrs Miller: Stop blaming.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr KNIGHT: Hopefully, with the consent of my dear friends from Timber Creek, I will talk to you a bit about the realities of indigenous housing. I have known the people of Timber Creek for the last 10 years. I have seen young kids grow up and now they are in their early 20s. They have kids. Guess where they are living? They are living in the same house, but they are with their wife and little children in the one bedroom, probably with other family members in there as well. That is the reality of this subject.
We can talk about the politics, but the reality is it is happening out there every single day. It is only going to be solved by more Commonwealth money. The NT government does not have the capacity to do that. It has 200 000 people in its jurisdiction. It is never going to be able to produce enough money to solve this problem. On the other hand, we have the Commonwealth government, which has buckets of money after their budget. That is the reality.
In those communities and in Borroloola, through my working life, I have had the opportunity to do housing surveys. I have said this in this House before: if you want to understand indigenous housing, if you want to understand how people live, do housing surveys. Get out there and get through every room in a house on a community and you will understand what the situation is. You will understand why people do not turn up for work at 8 o’clock in the morning. You will understand why every person in a clinic in these regional towns and communities is indigenous, why you have the health rates, why people resort to drinking and other substances, why they do not go to school. You see where a child sleeps at night or tries to sleep at night and wonder why they do not go to school.
When we talk about Aboriginal affairs, one of the centrepieces of solving this problem is solving the problem of indigenous housing. In the Northern Territory, $1000m is our backlog; $1bn is what is required. That would bring it up to some semblance of acceptability in the communities. In a nutshell, that is where we are starting from, but we have to change from talking about it to doing something about it.
The new Commonwealth minister, Mr Mal Brough – I could talk about Mr Mal Brough’s motives, but I will not. I am hoping that he is genuinely enthusiastic about Aboriginal affairs, but what I respectfully do is question his strategy. Our minister McAdam has talked about prefabricated factories within regional areas. What has happened since that statement is that the federal minister is looking at kit homes from the eastern states being built down there, with labour from down there, trucked up here and plonked on communities. We welcome the new houses and that they will be perhaps cheaper, but that is very short-sighted. There are a lot of skilled people on communities.
Again, this is questioning the strategy of the Commonwealth government, but they need to talk to the Northern Territory government about building prefabricated houses. They are cheaper. You can have a production line, but going off on some tangent, having people down in Canberra or Sydney to knock up these houses and truck them up here, drop them off and see you later is not the answer for the Northern Territory. We can do it up here. We can have these prefabrication factories. We can employ labour. At Katherine, we can do it through the training centre. They have produced dozens of Aboriginal trainees. Why can that not happen here?
We are going to get to see a couple of these prefabricated houses in Wadeye, I believe. They are being built to test them. I draw a correlation within my electorate with the style of houses. Houses nowadays on communities are costing $300 000 to $400 000 to build. Part of my constituency is the rural area of Darwin, through Berry Springs down to Manton. You have some fairly basic homes out there on large blocks, so there is obviously a lot of privacy. People go out there to get away from things, but live a basic lifestyle. There needs to be some consideration of those things. We need more housing. We have to triple or quadruple the number of houses out there. Ideas about providing more houses quickly should be examined.
The minister made comment about housing maintenance. When you look at the IHANT budget, and I believe I am correct, one-third of the money is spent on construction, one-third is spent on management, and one-third is spent on maintenance. So of our global budget for indigenous housing for the Northern Territory, only one third is spent on building houses. As you get more stock out there in the communities, you are going to be spending more of your budget on management and maintenance. If we look at the efficiencies of existing money, and it is only $45m per year, which is well below what it needs to be, but we need to look at efficiencies within that IHANT budget. We certainly need to look at better managing our indigenous housing stock. Indigenous housing management is a struggle. It is certainly very challenging because you have a diverse housing stock and getting tradespeople is very difficult.
There are some correlations, some synergies that can be worked with Territory Housing. Professional development of local indigenous staff within Territory Housing is something that I support. With the rapid change of management in these organisations, people miss out on professional development. There is the opportunity of a career path, whereas there is no career path within existing ICHOs, where you do your job and you do it forever. If it is part of a broader housing management organisation, there are career paths into government and other parts of the Territory. It is a novel and very positive idea for those people, and I support the minister’s idea.
We have to look very seriously at where there are opportunities. There are not always going to be opportunities of private sector investment. Apart from a massive injection of federal money to this area, there have to be efficiencies within housing management and maintenance, but there also has to be some private sector money.
There is one other point about which I am quite concerned. With changes to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, there is the possibility of communities being blackmailed into receiving housing on the basis that they have to lease their land back to the government or a government entity to receive it. That is an abhorrent idea; it does not engender cooperation between government and communities. The government has a moral obligation to provide housing, wherever it may be. The way the Commonwealth government may be moving in this area is something about which we need to be very conscious.
The future of indigenous housing troubles me. When you look at the numbers and indicators, it is all going in the wrong direction. It is all heading towards a brick wall. We have massive population growth, increasing costs, and an IHANT budget that has been stagnant for nearly 10 years now; it is just not going up – house prices have almost doubled in that time. If you do the calculations, we are heading towards a disastrous situation in those communities.
People want to live on their own country. That is the best place for them. They want a better lifestyle and that can be addressed through economic development on that country. However, at the moment we have 20, 30, 40 people to a house. If we look 10 years into the future, with that stagnant budget and cost increases going through the roof and population growth, the number of people per house is going to increase 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%. Where are we going to be? People are going to be wall to wall in these houses. It needs to be addressed.
With respect, we do not need a federal minister diverting down a quick-solve path. There are opportunities. We have a Northern Territory Housing Minister who is prepared to look at alternatives to address this. I encourage the federal minister to work with the NT Housing Minister in addressing this because, at the end of the day, Mr Brough moves on, Mr McAdam moves on, but we have thousands of Aboriginal people living out there, with their children and grandchildren growing up in these abhorrent conditions.
I commend the minister’s statement. I know this minister is very conscious of Aboriginal housing, having grown up in the Barkly region. He has seen the condition of housing throughout that area over his lifetime and the styles of houses that are being produced. I thank the minister, and I thank the traditional owners from Borroloola and Timber Creek for coming along today. I hope it gives you slight encouragement that this government is very focused on this area. My knowledge of the Minister for Housing is that he will not let this go. He would like to see some massive changes and better outcomes before he leaves office.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Madam Speaker, I also welcome the people from Timber Creek and from Borroloola. It is really nice to see some people here from remote communities. I know you have had to travel a long way. I hope you enjoy your time in parliament.
I thank the minister for his 20-year vision for indigenous housing in the Northern Territory. There is no doubt that the minister is genuine and very sincere in his desire to address the situation. I congratulate him for his honesty when he talks about the state of housing in the Northern Territory.
I will probably say some things today that I have said in this House before, but I will not be the only one as there are some things that have been said over and over again and will continue to be repeated for many years to come. I hope I am wrong, but the situation in some areas of indigenous housing is so substandard that it will be years and millions of dollars of government money, both from the federal and Territory governments, before we are going to be able to sit back and say we have sorted that out.
The standard of Aboriginal housing in many communities leaves much to be desired. There is no argument on that score. Some houses have no running water, no electricity or ablution facilities, conditions that none of us in this Assembly would contemplate living in. We cannot image what it would be like to live without the basic amenities of running water, power and ablution. The real dilemma is how to deal with it. It is obvious that there are numerous opinions as to what should be done.
The grossly inadequate housing situation in many communities needs to be addressed sooner rather than later and, like most things, requires enormous amounts of money over a long period of time. I listened to the member for Daly very passionately saying that the contribution by the federal government of their buckets of money would be the answer to this, but it is not the only answer to this serious problem. It is one part and it is very important to have money, but that is not the only answer.
While the Northern Territory has been at the centre of media attention over recent weeks and months, we are by no means the only place in Australia with this problem. It is a national issue and needs to be addressed by all levels of government. The federal Minister for Indigenous Affairs, Mal Brough, while some will not agree with some of his statements, should be congratulated for being bold enough to lift the lid on indigenous housing issues to get the ball rolling. There are claims that others have talked about the problems about indigenous housing and no one has listened. I remember the Minister for Housing delivering a statement earlier this year which outlined some very specific data relating to the backlog in housing. Whatever has already been said and whoever said it first is irrelevant; it is steps that are being put in place now that can begin seriously addressing the shortage of housing. That is the important thing.
Other additional and important aspects to addressing the housing shortage relate to issues of law and order and education, but that is for another debate at another time.
One of the major impediments to providing indigenous housing, especially in remote communities, is the cost. Let us face it: in remote communities, the cost is exorbitant. In a regional community such as Katherine, for instance, the cost of building a new house would be at least $100 000 less than building one on a community such as Ngukurr. There are many reasons for that. The building contractor who wins the tender to construct these houses obviously lives a long distance away, and could even come from interstate. Naturally, there is a built-in factor for accommodation, living expenses, tradesmen’s wages, freight of building supplies, and the list goes on. This pushes the price of the house out so much that it makes it impossible to build houses at the rate that is required to meet the need and blows the budget of government very quickly.
I do not see any other way of tackling this huge problem than government seriously looking at several different styles of housing. One size does not fit all, so to speak, and the type of house that would be suitable for a family in the desert regions is different from that which would be suitable for the tropical climate of the Top End of the Territory.
Obviously, the desert region requires a house that will retain its coolness during the very hot summers, but be able to be heated during the very cold weather that the centre of Australia has, as we know only too well, whereas in the Top End, the type of housing required needs lots of protection from the wet weather, designed to be much more open to suit the tropical climate.
The option of building materials needs to be explored. Has the minister looked at the suitability of mud brick dwellings in appropriate areas? This would provide community residents the opportunity of learning the skilled trade of brick making, and contribute to the development of their own housing. The same can be said for teaching trades such as carpentry, plumbing and electrical work, all vital skills which would ensure a healthy respect for the outcomes that they would achieve by contributing to their own community.
One of the difficulties for indigenous people living in remote communities is that there is no opportunity for economic development, and no incentive for them to pursue any skills or trades. Learning to build their own houses and building for others in their community would instil pride and respect for their work. There are many positive aspects to teaching these important trades to indigenous people on communities. The difficulty in providing enough houses across the whole of the Territory would be assisted through self help. The economic contribution to each community through skills learnt would be greatly beneficial for the future through addressing any maintenance and repairs as they are required. Maintenance and repairs cost government hundreds of thousands of dollars per year, and take away valuable money that should and could be directed to new housing.
In the instances of which I have had experience, and these involve many communities over several years, the repairs and maintenance would not have been anywhere as costly if, in the first instance, they were dealt with by skilled labour in the community. By the time repairs were carried out - and the member for Arnhem referred to this when she said there were some instances were people go for weeks without having any maintenance to important facilities within their house, for instance plumbing - the escalation of the cost to the repairs is obvious and it becomes a mammoth job, which costs much more money than it would had it been dealt with when the maintenance was originally needed.
This is where I believe that people in communities should be skilled in important trades that would save government hundreds of thousands of dollars and, most importantly, give these people some responsibility and, ultimately, respect for themselves and their surroundings.
Madam Speaker, not for one minute do I suggest that skilled community labour should be gained through any voluntary trade learning. Each person who makes a commitment to learning skills should go through the same processes offered to everyone. With remote communities, the answer would be to have experienced and preferably accredited builders who would work in a community to teach people the necessary skills, on the job, hands on, and to stay with these communities until the job was done. All of this may seem like pie in the sky, but these issues are very important; they need to be addressed in combination with the housing problems. They can be combined to address the problems of housing, lack of jobs, self-esteem and all the other associated problems evident in some of the communities. It will take a lot of coordination, patience, diligence and perseverance, but it can be done if there is a will to make the changes that are so important to the sustainability of remote communities.
Whilst this statement talks about the shortage of housing across the Northern Territory, it does not tell us how many houses have been abandoned. I have had several reports from people who tell me of the considerable number of houses throughout the Northern Territory that are vacant and, in some instances, have been vacant for some time. I have made some inquiries about this and have learnt of a variety of reasons as to why these houses are vacant. One of them is that a family member has died at the house, the house was smoked in the traditional practice, and then the family left. I was advised that, in some instances, the family would not return to that house for several months, and in some instances would never return. When I asked if they would live in that house if it was relocated to another community, the information I was given is that would be acceptable. If that is true, government should then look at buildings for indigenous people who practice this tradition that could be dismantled and relocated elsewhere.
What I would like to know, minister, is: has there been a survey or inventory done on the number of houses that have been abandoned and where they are throughout the Territory? What do you plan to do with houses that have been abandoned? It is hard to accept that there could be so many of these houses vacant or abandoned to which people have no intention of returning on one hand, and, on the other hand, we are told that there is such a severe shortage of housing.
As I said earlier, one size does not fit all, so a lot of investigation needs to go into what is going to be the most suitable housing for each different community. Involving indigenous people in discussions about what suitable housing would be for their community would be a wise move because they are the people who are going to live in these houses. It goes without saying that there have been many failures in housing design over the years. I am certain that designs were used with the best intentions in mind, but if someone is going to be living in and respecting a house that is there home, it would be a good idea for them to have some involvement in it and a choice of several styles. I do not believe that is unreasonable.
We have concentrated on the shortage of indigenous housing throughout the Northern Territory that the minister’s statement addresses. I will complete my reply to the statement by paying respect to those indigenous people, and there are many of them, who have lovely homes that they respect. Many of these people live in and around Katherine and take great pride in their homes, and it must be difficult for them to constantly have the conditions of some of their countrymen shouted out through the media. I know some of these people have a lot of pressure placed on them by family members and it makes their home life very challenging. It is good to see them strong and determined to make a life for themselves and their families.
One of the communities I have talked about a great deal over the time I have been here is a community called Dillinya, south of Katherine, off the Buntine Highway, next to the Delamere Range and old Delamere Station. I visited Dillinya two weekends ago, along with my husband and traditional owner Sheila Millar. I was so impressed with the way Dillinya has been set up, even more so with the tidiness and cleanliness of this community. Dillinya may only be a small community with five houses, but it is a very good example of how a well-run and organised community could and should be.
At the time I visited, there were only five people living there. There had been others until the week prior but, at this time, only Paddy, Uncle Ronnie, Brian, Patrick and William were living there. They were very pleased to have us visit them, and had gone to great lengths to make us feel welcome. Brian made scones - and I must congratulate him on his first attempt at making scones - ably assisted by over-the-phone instructions from Sheila. Well done, Brian; I do not think I have ever made scones as nice as yours. We had a fabulous day; a morning tea under a mango tree, and we sat talking for some time.
I greatly admire the way this community is run and I have spoken before of the importance that community plays in the lives of people rehabilitating from alcohol, drugs and depression. The reason I include Dillinya in my comments is that the housing and the grounds are kept very neat and well maintained. The houses, which are brick, have their own garden areas, some lawn and all have solar power. Brian has a vegetable garden and there are many mango trees in various stages of growth, all looking very healthy. They have plans to plant more fruit trees in the future. This small community has pride in itself. Another reason that I mentioned Dillinya is that this community has shown that it is responsible in maintaining its infrastructure and would like to expand to cater for larger numbers of people.
The property would also like to become financially independent by going into beef production. This would give indigenous community members the opportunity not only to learn new skills, but those like Paddy, who is a very experienced ringer and station hand, the chance to share his knowledge and skills with his people. The opportunity for economic development in most communities is limited, but here is a community that has the land to expand into cattle production and the willingness and skills to do so. However, they have not received any encouragement when trying to further their dream for independence.
From the conversations that I have had with Sheila, it is obvious that there are personality conflicts that are hindering her plans to develop Dillinya to be self-sustaining. As I have always said to her: ‘Never give up. Never, never, never!’ I will do all that I can to support and further her plans for development. Sheila is a strong Aboriginal woman and I respect and admire her tenacity in trying to bring respect and a will to live and enjoy life to so many of her people. She is very capable of doing more if she is acknowledged for her good work and supported in furthering the development of her community.
I know that I have digressed a little from the statement with that, but the way the housing has been looked after at Dillinya is commendable. When you look at some of the other communities, it is good to recognise and acknowledge Dillinya.
I also have the small community of Binjari in my electorate. Binjari has recently come under the Katherine Town Council, which has responsibility for maintaining essential services. While some of the residents there were reluctant about it, now they are going to receive the same essential services as Katherine. Of course, that includes stormwater drainage, kerbing and front fencing. I am sure the additional assistance will improve the appearance of the community which, in turn, instils pride.
I listened to the member for Macdonnell talk about rental for indigenous housing in communities, and it reminded me about inequality at Binjari, with people living in basic sheds - and they really are just basic sheds in the bottom residential camp area - paying the same fees to Katherine Town Council as those who live in the newer, well-built housing in the top residential camp area. While they have tried to negotiate a lower fee, it has not been received very well. I think residents in the bottom camp have a very good argument that they are being unfairly treated, having to pay the same amount as top camp residents.
I support the minister’s statement on indigenous housing and look forward to his regular reports and hearing when positive developments occur. It is a huge issue. I listened to the member for Daly putting the blame on the federal government and everyone else that he could. It was quite a good little political speech that he made. However, I believe that indigenous housing has to be addressed in the same way that we are addressing roads and there has to be a bipartisan approach. It has to be at all government levels so that we overcome the problem of the shortage of indigenous housing as well as the shortage of funding for roads. I thank the minister for his statement.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I intend to make quite a short contribution, and I am pleased with the positive contributions from around the Chamber.
I commend the Minister for Housing, one, for bringing on this statement and, two, for being a minister prepared to push the conventions and traditional thinking around housing. If there is anything we need for indigenous housing, it is this: it is going to have to be innovative and creative to beat back this cost barrier.
If you look at the question overall of $1bn of housing and the backlog, the member for Arnhem said it would take 33 years at current rates of progress to get on top of housing. Ignoring natural growth from high birth rates in indigenous communities, those 33 years could easily be pushed out to double or three times that.
It is easy to be defeated and think negatively if we concentrate on the big figures and the magnitude of the task ahead. We could be better helped by the Commonwealth than we are. If you consider, in the context of the Northern Territory budget, there is around $2.7bn annual expenditure, the Commonwealth will return somewhere between a $14bn and $15bn surplus this year as they did last year and the year before. A little of that out to the side - and you would not get it done; you would still take five or eight years to get it done - could assist considerably.
If we look at though the gains made in the years, and you cannot go all the way back to the 1960s, but I am familiar with photographs of communities like Yirrkala and Galiwinku in the 1960s in my electorate and they were tiny shelters, that is all they were, scattered down the hill. Compared to that, we have high quality housing in those communities today, housing that does stand the test of time, is durable and is well used and maintained.
Looking at the current costs through the North East Arnhem Land region, Nhulunbuy is remote but it is not in the same way that many of our indigenous communities are. We are looking at between $500 000 and $600 000 to put a concrete slab and block style three-bedroom house. Money is simply not going to get you across the line when you are looking at those sorts of costs. They rule out that style of housing in those sorts of communities. If they are remote, just to get the slab laid is a cost that you can get away from if you go to a prefabricated, modular style building. There are big companies in the southern states prepared to whack these out the door at $120 000 to $140 000. It is on the barge, then on the truck from the barge to the community, and you are probably getting your costs down to around $300 000. That is two quality houses.
Away from the slab, the house is movable. It can be picked up on a truck holus bolus; it is all fitted out. I am told that one factory has under roof the size of the Nhulunbuy central business district all manner of steel; it is all laid out. You simply ring and order the dimensions of the product you want. Out it goes on a truck, on to the barge and wherever you want that delivered.
That is the sort of thinking that we have to get to and, more than that, there is a business niche opportunity here for a company to set up, whether it be Katherine or elsewhere in the Territory. It would not particularly matter, but we would have local employment, people being trained in the factory there and trained to put these together in the community, so local training, local opportunities. That is the innovative thinking that we do have to reach.
I am impressed when I hear stories by the member for Arnhem in relation to indigenous involvement, and I do not pretend that delivering housing and getting a return in indigenous communities is easy, but we saw some very good things at Groote Eylandt during our Community Cabinet visit. They involved the use of royalties and indigenous investment dollars getting behind housing. In my own electorate, the Rrirratjingu Association through their investment arm, Bunuwal Investments, built 21 or 22 houses. They go on to the market, government’s leasing somewhere around one-third or half of them. They will be snapped up by the company and the Commonwealth government. They are leased before they are completed because the housing demand in Nhulunbuy township is so great.
They did that commercially. It was not use of royalties. They did not have bucket loads of money in their bank. They went to the bank. They went to the bank and struck a deal, as any association could well do, supported by Alcan and the Northern Territory government in a tripartite arrangement. I do not pretend it is that easy in an indigenous community because, quite clearly, people in indigenous communities are not in a position to be paying - I do not want to go to the sort of rentals, but they will get a very good return. Mind you, those houses are in that order of the $500 000 to $600 000 in construction costs.
If we can get away from that slab and block style of housing and move to modular styles, there are enormous employment and training opportunities right through the bush. They have to be tested for durability, robustness and cyclonic conditions, and I am sure, from what I have seen in Nhulunbuy, they meet the test there.
The member for Daly raised the point of the federal minister saying: ‘Yes, we can give you 50 houses, but you have to sign over your land’. The right to shelter for Australians is, surely, a fundamental basic right, and it ought not be at the whim of a federal minister saying: ‘Sign off here. Give us your land and we will give you 50 houses’. If they need 50 houses, they should be getting those 50 houses as a commitment from the Commonwealth in conjunction with this government. They should not be held over a barrel in relation to the land.
Whether the leasing is a good idea or not is for the traditional owners and the councils in these communities to work out for themselves. They need to fully thrash out, discuss and say: ‘Is this manageable? Do we want to do this? Do we want to have a 99-year lease on our land?’ They have to work through and understand the issues, as they could, anyway, under section 19 of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act now; they do not need this type of amendment. What they do not need is this type of offer to say: ‘We will give you 50 houses …’. In fact, Minister Brough at Galiwinku said: ‘Not only will we give you 50 houses, I will come and teach you how to build them.’ Oscar Datjarranga, an old friend of mine, was sitting right beside me, said: ‘I am a trades carpenter myself.’
This guy had no idea of the people he was talking to and the work experience and background of some of those traditional owners sitting around the table. Minister Brough thought it was terrific that if he could do it, anyone could do it, and he would be prepared to show them how notwithstanding that there were highly experienced indigenous tradespeople sitting at that very table.
I agree with the member for Daly; the right to a shelter is a basic right. It has to be met. Quite clearly, it is beyond the reach of this government to do it on a $2.7bn budget when we know the need is on or above $1bn, and I again say if the Commonwealth government is going to continue to return surplus budgets in the order of $12bn to $15bn a year every year for the last few years, they could dig a bit deeper and give the Northern Territory government a hand with what is one of our great social needs.
I commend the Minister for Housing for his statement and I wish him well into the future.
Members: Hear, hear!
Debate suspended.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Parliament House public tour program visitors. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Continued from 15 June 2006.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I looked at this bill some weeks ago and spent some time last night typing up my speech because I thought we were going to deal with it this morning. I was going to ask the member for Blain to read it on my behalf, so Attorney-General, I do not propose to do anything other than read the speech.
The opposition supports the bill. As the Attorney-General said in his second reading speech, the bill was developed through the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General and is based on a model bill developed after much consultation with stakeholders around Australia.
We do, however, have a couple of observations to make and questions, and we ask that the Attorney-General address these in his reply.
The bill provides that the Supreme Court alone be given the power to make a Vexatious Proceedings Order, which would prohibit or limit the right of a vexatious litigant from taking or continuing legal action. Given the jurisdictional limit of the Local Court, which is $100 000, we ask whether the Local Court should be able to make such an order as well. It is the case generally that parties tend to engage the services of counsel for Supreme Court matters, and the cost of so doing will clearly be expensive. We wonder why the Attorney-General took the view that the power to make a Vexatious Proceedings Order should be within the sole domain of the Supreme Court, particularly noting the jurisdictional limit of the Local Court of $100 000.
While the opposition understands the serious nature and implications of making such an order, we ask the Attorney-General why he thinks it is appropriate for such an order to be made only by the Supreme Court. Put another way: why shouldn’t magistrates be able to make such orders? We are concerned that in your second reading speech, you said:
Clearly, there is no right of appeal, but there is the ability to apply to set aside or vary a Vexatious Proceedings Order. There is an ability to issue further proceedings subject to strict conditions set out in the bill; however there is no right of appeal. The Attorney-General said in his second reading speech:
We are concerned that there is, nevertheless, no right of appeal. This is perhaps overly restrictive. On our reading of the bill, we are troubled by what appears to be no right of appeal. Certainly, there is the ability to vary or set aside, but no right of appeal from a decision of a judge to make a Vexatious Proceedings Order. We ask that the Attorney-General address this in his reply and advise whether this is the case in other jurisdictions - namely, no appeal - and to indicate what other types of matters go before a court that do not have appeal provisions.
Another observation we make is that the Attorney-General referred in his second reading speech to the fact that ‘the Attorney-General, Solicitor-General or Registrar of the Supreme Court’ may apply for a Vexatious Proceedings Order. This was apparently included in the second reading speech to create the impression that such parties could never apply to strike out a proceeding or that those parties previously had no rights in respect of vexatious litigants.
That is clearly not the case, and we cannot help but be a little cynical of the deliberate way in which those parties were included in the speech and the bill. Our point is this: clearly, if either one of those parties is an aggrieved party in a proceeding they had, and will logically have, certain rights in respect of such a proceeding. We are also a little cynical of the way much was seemingly made of the fact that a Vexatious Proceedings Order cannot be made ‘until the person in question has had an opportunity to be heard’. This was presumably included in the Attorney-General’s speech to make it appear that somehow this was a remarkable thing. In fact, it is not. There would need to be exceptional circumstances for such an order to be made without the applicant being heard.
It is the case that under clause 12, a court may dismiss an application for leave if the applicant does not appear, but the Attorney-General was not referring to such applications in his speech. He was referring to Vexatious Proceedings Orders made in the first instance. It is hard to imagine that an order would ordinarily be made on an ex parte basis. It therefore appears that a little spin was included in the second reading speech, but I suppose we are used to that.
Having made those observations, the bill is supported. However, we do ask that the Attorney-General address those matters in the reply.
Summing up: why can’t magistrates make orders? We note that this is serious, but we would like the Attorney-General to put on the Parliamentary Record why the decision was made to preclude magistrates. I have dealt with the Law Society on this matter, but I would like to hear directly from the Attorney-General. That is the first point.
The second point is in relation to the appeal provisions. I want to make it clear that we are not talking about those parts of the bill where leave needs to be obtained to set aside or vary an order. It is simply the right of appeal from a decision of a Supreme Court judge and whether the Attorney-General is comfortable with that, and for him to advise whether it exists in other jurisdictions, and to advise whether, in the Territory, he is aware of the inability of a right to appeal in matters similar to this.
Mr Deputy Speaker, that is probably it. The Attorney-General may refer to some of the other issues I raised, but certainly those key ones leapt out as being sources of concern after reading the bill. Having said that, we appreciate why the bill is necessary, and no doubt the legal profession will, like the Attorney-General’s wife, be deliriously happy.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, freedom of speech is one of the key foundations of a healthy democracy. That freedom allows the people to have opposite opinions, to be a little eccentric in what they say, criticise elected leaders, speak up against popular opinion, barrack at the footy, pray aloud, write and read, develop the intellect and to express ourselves.
Of course, with every right comes a responsibility, and freedom of speech can be abused. Speech can include libellous or slanderous, dirty or pornographic, blasphemous, sexist or racist language, and language used to incite hate or violence. If you believe the reasons for today’s legislation, you can have persistent and annoying language. The person using such persistent and annoying language could be regarded as a pest, and might be regarded as an abuser of the right to free speech.
One can understand that some people can drive judges and politicians up the wall. They can be persistent and annoying, but there is a problem: isn’t that their right? When you look at this legislation, you ask: is there anyone in the Territory who can be regarded as vexatious? The answer to that is no. Why would you write up legislation for someone who does not exist?
I know there are a couple of people around who are persistently in courts debating various issues or writing to ministers complaining about legislation, etcetera. What is wrong with that? It is not like terrorism where you need to develop strategies and pass legislation before something terrible happens. The worst that could happen with a persistent person is that someone might drive us crazy and we need to leave town for a while.
There are always people who think they are right, and they want to convince others that they are - and I might fall into that category at times - but is this legislation not a case of jumping the gun when we really do not need to have legislation? Isn’t the argument that because other states have it, we should, too, a bit weak? Why do we have to agree with what another state does?
Third, should we not be erring on the supportive or positive side of free speech? Should we not say that free speech should be the main principle we should uphold and protect, and not water down that right just because some character wants to prove he is right and the law is wrong? Lawyers have been doing that for ages, and they seem to be able to escape this bill about vexatiousness. If you look at section 5, Acting in Concert, they appear to escape this legislation:
They get off scot-free. Minister, is not this the case of a whopping big sledge hammer to kill a pesky mosquito? Are we not going to do more damage to our reputation as a free speech society if we need to introduce this legislation for something that might happen? I remind you that there are no people regarded as vexatious in the Northern Territory at present. Even when you use Queensland as an example, you find there are only 12 people in 20 years who could be called vexatious and only two at the moment.
No, we do not want our courts clogged up with frivolous claims, and of course what is frivolous will always be someone’s opinion. If you go to the definition of ‘vexatious proceedings’ under clause 2, the bill reads:
Subjective. What is the abuse?
What is annoyance? That is someone’s point of view.
What does that mean?
Another opinion.
Again, that is an opinion, and for that, we are introducing this legislation.
I have asked myself two questions about this bill: could it be used by politicians to keep someone quiet under the guise of vexatiousness? Could a government want to silence an investigation by the media into their behaviour? Who knows? There are lots of lawyer politicians around these days. Second, is the very small likelihood of having our courts clogged up with vexatious claims sufficient enough reason for us to pass legislation to stop such vexatiousness? Some may say yes, but I say no, the same no I give to this legislation. It is not needed and if our courts and lawyers require this type of legislation to stop courts being clogged up, then maybe they need to look at their own back yard and see if some improvements can be made at their end of the system.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Mr Deputy Speaker, I respectfully disagree with some of the comments that the member for Nelson has made …
Mr Wood: Another lawyer politician! You have a conflict of interest.
Mr BURKE: Yes, I guess I could be accused of coming at this from an ex-lawyer’s point of view, but it is important to remember what a vexatious litigant is. It is someone who frequently and persistently seeks to commence legal action without reasonable grounds. I have some sympathy for what the member for Nelson said in relation to a closer look at practitioners because it is the obligation of a practitioner in the first instance to look at a claim that is brought before them when agreeing to act or not act in relation to that claim. I do not want to delve into that in any great detail other than recognising that there is something in what the member for Nelson said.
Vexatious litigants may not be numerous, but they are certainly damaging.
Mr Wood: There’s none. We do not have any. That is less than numerous.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, member for Nelson!
Mr BURKE: I will come to that, and I do not want to be accused of dumbing down the argument, but I believe it is important to paint a picture because there is another procedure of which I was part and I always wondered why there wasn’t a better way of doing it.
Directions hearings are a great example of a number of lawyers involved in a number of different cases coming before a court, all waiting for their matter to be heard to get further directions from the court. Many of those, quite rightly and properly, have agreements with their clients which put them on a per hour footing in terms of the fees that they can produce to their client. When you look around the room and see 60-odd lawyers involved in 20 to 30 cases - and there are certainly many cases with multiple litigants involved - and you think of how much money is represented by those people and the time that they are spending in the court, then you look at the person who presides over the court, whether it be a magistrate, a tribunal member or a judge of the Supreme Court, and their time is being taken up. That is time that we as Territorians are paying for. It is an onerous obligation. Then you look at all the court attendants and their time. Then you have the security personnel. It all adds up fairly quickly. A vexatious litigant can take up those resources to the detriment of deserving claimants and defendants.
The court is there to try to resolve real disputes and vexatious litigants impede its ability to do so. Right around the country, and the Northern Territory is no exception, there are waiting periods as people try to have their cases listed on a very busy court agenda. Some may feel that legal professionals, whether they be the lawyers, the adjudicators or whoever, have a fairly easy life, but I am yet to meet one who does not work extremely hard and spend a great many hours performing their duties. There is very real damage that a vexatious litigant can cause.
I pick up what the member for Nelson said in relation to freedom of speech, which is a freedom we treat seriously. The ability to take redress to the courts on issues is an extremely important right, one of the fundamental pillars of our system. However, courts are not renowned for being radical. In fact, courts are often accused of being rather conservative. It is fair to say that courts are very slow indeed to limit the ability of someone to bring proceedings, or the need for someone to seek permission to bring proceedings and, given that the Supreme Court as the superior court in our jurisdiction has an inherent ability to deal with vexatious litigants, the bill makes it clear for all and it ensures that the Supreme Court maintains that role.
The member for Nelson said: ‘Don’t just do something because other people are doing it’. There is an element of truth to that, but there are significant gains to having legislation that is consistent across the country. This legislation fulfils the Territory’s obligation in ensuring a consistent approach across the country. That, as any lawyer will tell you, assists no end because you do not have to try to sort out what the different provisions are in different jurisdictions and spend a whole heap of time researching to make sure positions are similar. If, by legislation, there is a uniform position, it levels the playing field and means that those who are called to make rulings on legal principles have a wealth of case law to which to refer in doing so and not having to rely on their own interpretations of particular words in our legislation. I do see some value in this conforming with what has been done elsewhere in the country.
As I said before, the right to bring action in court is an extremely important one. I repeat what the Attorney-General said in relation to the vexatious litigant who can nevertheless gain permission from a court to commence proceedings. He said:
I agree wholeheartedly. The provision is made so that, even if someone has been declared a vexatious litigant, they can still bring a proceeding. All they have to do is convince the court that their proceeding has reasonable grounds. If I am incorrect in some detail there, I am sure the Attorney-General will correct what I have said.
In going to a court which is staffed by judges who have a great deal of experience in legal principle and applying legal principle to facts that are presented before them, all this experience is brought to bear on the issue of whether a person has reasonable grounds for proceeding, notwithstanding that they may have been declared a vexatious litigant.
I concur with what the Attorney-General said; that there are appropriate balances in this legislation and that it is necessary to ensure vexatious litigants are removed from a system that is extremely busy and operates at full speed. Whatever people think or the media says, I have never seen a court room empty, waiting for someone to turn up and present a case. It is usually the exact opposite; people are climbing over each other to try to have their case heard, and more than willing to jump into a gap created because someone else’s case is not as ready as it ought to be.
I support this bill. Members may recall I once compared the Attorney-General to the engineers at the V8 races. This is not tinkering at the edges and trying to get the engine running smoothly, but perhaps it is more in line with adding an air scoop to keep the engine cool. I commend the bill to the House.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Deputy Speaker, at the outset, I thank members for their contributions and the opposition for their support for this bill.
While the bill will have an impact on relatively few people in the community, it will have a disproportionate impact on the operation of our courts. Vexatious litigants may be relatively small in number, however information from the Supreme Court indicates that there are around eight individuals pursuing unmeritorious and serial matters before our courts in the Northern Territory. That translates into a lot of court time swallowed up by matters with no underlying merit, and that in turn translates to greater cost to the taxpayer and, more importantly, waiting times for meritorious matters to come before the courts. It is those meritorious individuals seeking their day in court who are driving this.
I will now deal with issues raised by the opposition. Why the Supreme Court? That was a decision made at the national level by the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General. It was felt that given the seriousness of the principle of people’s rights to seek legal remedies within their communities to matters that they may be involved in, whether criminal or civil, it was very important to only have the senior court of the jurisdiction deal with these matters. That was the principle adopted nationally. We simply followed the national framework that was set down by the Attorneys-General at the meetings in which this was discussed. Other jurisdictions have done exactly the same. There are no jurisdictions that allow the lower courts to put Vexatious Proceedings Orders in place.
In respect of appeals, we did not feel it was consistent with the intent of the bill to allow appeals because a vexatious litigant, by definition, will use legal process regardless of the merit of their case to prolong their engagement with a court process. A right of appeal would be just as likely to be abused as the right to originate a matter in the first place. We felt much more in line with the intent of the legislation was to put safeguards in place that could be dealt with at an operational level by the courts.
I will recap those for members. The bill has the following safeguards in recognition of people’s general right to originate legal actions. First, a person applying for a Vexatious Proceedings Order against another must obtain leave of the court to bring the application. The second thing is that the court must not make a Vexatious Proceeding Order without hearing the person or giving the person an opportunity to be heard. That appears in clause 7(5). Third, the person declared a vexatious litigant can apply to have the order buried or set aside at any time. There is a review process directly with the court, but it is short of a formal appeal hearing. We feel that is a balanced point between allowing a right of review of either the details of the proceedings order or of the order generally.
Turning to the member for Nelson, it is a problem in the Northern Territory. There are serial unmeritorious litigants in the Northern Territory. I will not drag their cases in to this debate because I do not think that it is appropriate, but I will give you a couple of examples of the type of thing we mean, and these are a couple of cases from Queensland which fuelled the Attorney-General’s enthusiasm for introducing this legislation in Queensland.
There was a person who brought repeated actions in court, arguing that Australian currency is not legal tender, therefore he does not have to pay any fine or penalty incurred in the community. It was sad that it got in to court once, let alone on repeated occasions. The second example is a person who argued that certain laws are invalid because they are inconsistent with the Magna Carta of 1297, and therefore do not apply to them.
These are the sorts of cases we are talking about. We are not talking about the person who has genuine grievance against another in a civil action or some matter that has every right to go before a court. We are not talking about, as the member for Brennan pointed out, people who have arguments of merit of any sort going before a court. We are very aware that we have to protect that right.
The member for Nelson also raised the matter of political interference and free speech. We also thought very carefully about that. It is a valid point to raise in the context of this legislation. There will not be political interference by definition. The operation of this legislation exists entirely on the other side of the firewall between politicians, the elected arm of government, and the justice system. As Attorney-General, my role has been to sit across that firewall and make sure that we are not legislating inappropriately to allow political influence to be brought to bear on the operation of the justice system or on our courts, and that principle is very carefully handled in the bill.
These are entirely matters for the Supreme Court, which will consider applications coming from any source in the community and pass a judgment on the proposition that someone is pursuing unmeritorious claims or arguments repeatedly through the court system. That is a matter that none of us in this House have a direct ability to influence other than being a member of the community who can originate an action. There is no special status of any sort for a politician to influence the courts’ judgment on these matters and the courts will judge according to the criteria in this bill as to whether they consider someone has no merit in a series of approaches to the court for a judgment.
You can be assured that we have thought those issues through. We do not want to curtail free speech in any way, but no matter how a person attempts to express it, there has to be some merit in the argument being expressed. It cannot be internally inconsistent and therefore have no merit in public discourse. That is simply what we are saying here.
We are not curtailing people’s right to get up on a soapbox any time in our community and put a point of view, but courts are there to deal with the law of the land and how it provides protections, rights, opportunities for people in the community to express their interest through a court judgment. That carries with it a judgment of merit. It is not just free speech; it is actually structuring public discourse around rights and responsibilities within our communities. That is what we are dealing with here, not free speech. Free speech is open to any individual in our country, as long as you do not break the laws of the land or defame someone without merit. I hope that distinction is clear here, that we are dealing with court, and the structure and application of the law.
Again, I thank members for their contributions to the debate. I have said enough in reply.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General)(by leave): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Mr Deputy Speaker, rather than go into committee, I thought this might be a more effective way of dealing with it.
Attorney-General, I said at the outset that the opposition supports this bill, however given your explanation in relation to the rights of appeal, I cannot in conscience say that I am supportive of that. There should be a right of appeal.
In the context of the wording of the bill and your second reading speech, it is a subtle point, nevertheless, it is an important point. Clause 7 sets out what is required for a judge to make a Vexatious Proceedings Order. In subparagraph (1) it refers to things like a person
and the list goes on. They are obviously and plainly people who are vexatious litigants by any common law or even garden variety definition. Whilst the bill intends to impose restrictions, which I support strongly, to restrict it in such a way that you are giving a Supreme Court judge the ability to make a Vexatious Proceedings Order and not provide for an appeal from that decision does not assist the administration of justice. It is the case that under other clauses in the bill, there is the ability to issue further proceedings such as personal injuries claims and so on, but there should be, as of right, the ability for someone to appeal against a decision made by a Supreme Court judge, noting the seriousness of the order from which the applicant will presumably appeal.
Often, of course, vexatious litigants are people who issue similar proceedings repeatedly or, indeed, as you have said in your second reading speech, people who issue proceedings in an attempt to harass others. It seems to me the bill is about restricting a party from issuing further or multiple proceedings, but an appeal is not a further proceeding; it is part of the existing proceeding and Territorians and Australians should be entitled to that right.
I know the bill will pass. Notwithstanding the intent of the bill, which I strongly support, my support is qualified by my very grave concerns in respect of the non-appeal provisions.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Deputy Speaker, I accept the Opposition Leader’s comments. It is a question of balance. I will name the stakeholders with whom we were in discussion when we developed this bill: the Chief Justice, the Chief Magistrate, President of the Bar Association, the Law Society, Supreme Court Registrar and Magistrate’s Court Judicial Registrar. It is the scales of justice, I suppose, in a way.
Perhaps by way of conciliation on this, we will have a look at that in review. I will commit to that review, even though I will not be overseeing it, in, say, 12 months.
Ms Carney: Will you commit your government to the review? Could you just say that?
Dr TOYNE: No. I can guarantee that my successor will ask how this is all going in 12 months and share it with you or the House.
We could not get around the argument that we are trying to cut down the use of court time so if you allow an appeal process, then you are defeating the purpose. We will have a look at it in a year on the current structure and, if it is showing some disadvantage to people’s rights, we will deal with it.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Continued from 14 June 2006.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Mr Deputy Speaker, the opposition supports this bill. Bringing many 16- and 17-year-olds on board as people who are allowed to donate their blood to the Red Cross Blood Bank is a very admirable act. The opposition wholeheartedly supports it. Obviously, 16- and 17-years-olds have physical attributes that readily make them very suitable candidates to donate their blood. It is not that we take that much anyway; it is between 300 ml to 450 ml on average once every quarter.
The question that has to be asked is why we need to increase the pool of the population that can be legally allowed to donate blood. Obviously, it is the high trauma rate that we have on our roads and the high level of social unrest that causes lots of people to have inflicted trauma from altercations. We have had a number of road traumas including people sleeping on roads and being run over. Thus, our hospitals require large amounts of blood for transfusion.
Synthetic transfusions are never the answer because they do not have any blood-carrying capacity. Called plasma expanders, they fill blood vessels with volume, but have no capacity to add oxygen-carrying capabilities. Blood transfusions are essential, especially when someone has been haemorrhaging. I listened to a radio advertisement recently for the young girl Sophie who suffered the horrendous car accident. Her father, on the radio ad, said that Sophie’s blood was replaced twice during the course of her treatment. You can imagine how much blood is required to transfuse someone who has suffered a massive haemorrhage.
While the minister might say that 16- and 17-year-olds have less exposure to blood-borne diseases, this is the pool of people who are into the drug culture. We obviously need to look into that aspect of it, but we can be assured that the Red Cross Blood Bank, when taking people on as donors, will do a full screen prior to accepting blood for transfusion use.
Increasing the pool is fine, and this probably applies more to our urban centres. I know that the Red Cross Blood Bank used to travel across the Territory to regional centres, meeting with blood donors and taking their donation from them. Katherine and Tennant Creek, for instance, used to get three-monthly visits from the Red Cross Blood Bank bleeding unit. Unfortunately, that has not been done for some two or three years. If the intent of this legislation is to increase the pool, then you would increase the pool across the Territory. You would go to Tennant Creek, Katherine, Nhulunbuy, Elliott, all those small towns where people are more than happy to donate blood. We are not doing that. We are relying on people who are in Darwin or Alice Springs to go to a blood bank. I know of people living in Tennant Creek and Katherine who have been donating blood for years. Suddenly they find that there is no way they can do it unless they make a special trip to either Darwin or Alice Springs.
If the government is genuine in increasing the pool, it must also adequately resource the Red Cross Blood Bank so that they can travel across the Territory. If not, all you are doing is increasing the pool within Darwin and Alice Springs and you soon have a very finite population to draw on. Two hundred thousand people across the Territory is small enough. When you talk about Darwin and Alice Springs, you are reducing the population down to some 50% of the total population. Minister, that is something that you seriously need to look at. You just cannot say: ‘Let’s reduce the age and increase the pool that way’. We should resource the Red Cross Blood Bank adequately so it can travel across the Territory and get people who have been long term donors to recommence donating blood.
Blood testing is becoming more and more stringent and because of that, you will find that many people who previously could donate blood will find themselves excluded. I used to be a blood donor and some 30 years ago in Adelaide, I went to the Red Cross Blood Bank, they took my blood and found that there was an antigen that would cause problems for recipients. Hence I cannot donate blood anymore because it is not going to be useful. As a result of that discovery, my whole family has been screened and that particular gene occurs in the family and makes the whole family unsuitable as blood donors.
With science, the accuracy of blood testing and tissue typing becomes more accurate and because of that, more people will be excluded from the blood donor pool. So the bigger your pool can be, the better it will be for the Red Cross Blood Bank. I ask the minister to reconsider adequately resourcing the Red Cross Blood Bank so that they can go across the Territory and recommence their three-monthly visits to communities. Adding 16- and 17-year-olds to increase the numbers will help. At the end of the day, blood donated by Territorians will be used for Territorians and that is good.
Dr TOYNE (Health): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the opposition for their support for the bill and constructive comments by the shadow health minister.
I have a couple of points on that, it is commonsense that if we are struggling to keep up with supplies not only in the Territory, but nationally, to meet the needs of patients requiring blood products for their treatment, then we widen the pool. In doing that, we are joining Western Australia, New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, ACT and South Australia. Along with Tasmania, we are the only state or territory yet to make this change. There is no doubt this is the right thing to be doing.
In terms of resourcing Red Cross blood services, a national contract is brokered through the federal minister and the health agencies. That negotiation, I am sure, will take into account the costs associated with blood collection by the Red Cross. We are very aware that we need to keep the Red Cross network across Australia as strong as possible.
The other point, I think, the member for Greatorex made was the issue of cord blood collection and, as he would be aware, we are launching that initiative in the Northern Territory as part of the national initiative on 19 September. I repeat my invitation for you to attend that event; I will not be there as Health minister, but you can certainly be involved. I acknowledge that the member for Greatorex did bring that issue to me some two years ago. I think we were at the Alice Springs Expo.
Dr Lim: A long time ago, mate.
Dr TOYNE: It was quite a while ago, but there are now going to some 20 000 cords used to extract blood for the treatment of leukaemia and other conditions, so it is good to see that come to fruition.
Thank you again for your support, and we will move on.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Dr TOYNE (Health) (by leave): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Minister for Housing’s statement. I rise for one reason only. I have listened to the contributions from all sides of politics, and it is important for me to put my name in the sand, so to speak, in relation to this important statement.
Indigenous housing has been of particular interest to me since I was first elected in 2001. As we became more aware of the deficit between what the Territory government can do for indigenous housing and what is required, we realised that the gap was widening and that there needs to be a plan.
In the earlier statements, it became obvious to me that we need a national plan, and I have spoken about that both in this House, publicly and privately to whoever will listen. The reality is that the mathematics of our situation, as the minister said in his previous statement, is leading to defeat for all the wrong reasons.
I often think about the issues facing indigenous Territorians. I realise that what we can achieve as a government is quite limited by the resources we have. The minister put it quite eloquently in his statement earlier this year when he talked about a deficit of $850m in the Northern Territory. When you consider that our total budget is $3.2bn, it would take a 33% reduction across the board in all Territory departments to deal with the need of indigenous housing alone. That means you would need to cut 33% from health, education, employment, training, police, tourism, roads, etcetera when in reality that is not going to happen because the same individuals, Aboriginal Territorians, need those services.
I will read what the minister said in his statement on 21 February under the title We are going backwards in indigenous housing:
So we need 4000 new houses. The minister is putting his cards on the table by saying we can built 120 new houses.
We have put the cards on the table. On the pure mathematics of what we’re dealing with under the agreements with the Commonwealth, we don’t have the capacity to deal with indigenous housing needs. The minister has made it quite clear that we have to develop different strategies and different plans to make the most of the resources that we have.
I contemplated this issue while attending the Kalkarindji Gurindji Freedom Day Festival. It became apparent that there is a fundamental problem with the way we look at indigenous matters, and I had the opportunity over lunch to talk to the minister about this. His theory on it is very closely associated with mine and maybe we might link together one day. Indigenous matters seem to have been addressed in the Australian context for the last 200 years in three manners: one, through the courts; second through Australian citizenship, which came out of Freedom Day; and, third is an oddity of the Australian parliament when, in 1976, they decided for purely political reasons, even though it was supposed to be a national scheme for the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, it became based in the Northern Territory. Really, there have only been two driving forces for any change in indigenous affairs. That is through the courts with decisions like the Mabo decision which, funnily enough, if you read the context of that decision, says that Mabo’s rights can be recognised under a mainstream legal system, but at the end of the day, the Commonwealth parliament has the ability to take all those rights from indigenous people.
At the end of the day, if Canberra, as John Howard has shown in his changes to the Land Rights Act, decides to take all ownership of indigenous land from indigenous people, he has authority under the High Court. The only thing stopping him is the constitution, which says that every individual’s rights are protected and that they must be paid fair compensation.
The only reason Aboriginal people are afforded that right through the High Court and the Australian Constitution were the events arising from Freedom Day, which was the referendum on Aboriginal people being treated as Australian citizens. As Australian citizens, indigenous people throughout Australia are getting services - not because they are Aboriginal. The reason is that in 1966, a referendum was held which, thankfully, Australian people passed in a record percentage, that resolved to treat Aboriginal people as Australian citizens. As Australian citizens they have access to the courts and services.
One of the big problems that we face in today’s political landscape is the fact that when there is any initiative for indigenous people, people often say: ‘Where are the indigenous funds coming from? Where is the indigenous money?’ What I would argue - and we spoke about this over the lunch period, and I believe the minister is heading down that line - is that we should not be asking about Aboriginal money. We should be saying: ‘Where is the money for Australian citizens who happen to be indigenous and happen to live in urban, remote, rural areas around Australia?’ - not because they are indigenous, but because they are Australians. Australian citizenship allows us to have access to the different benefits that all Australians seek.
The minister afforded me the opportunity to have a look at a document about the development incentives to attract skilled workers to remote Australia through regional zone tax offsets. What we have is a scheme developed so every Australian who works in remote areas receives a tax benefit. At the moment, it is people residing in remote areas who receive a zone tax offset designed to offset the increased cost of living in remote locations. The maximum benefit available under the scheme is $1173 per annum under a special area zoning, which includes most remote Territory locations. Through mainstream structures, indigenous people who work in these remote areas can get access to this tax offset. That is where the focus needs to be.
Right now, whenever an indigenous person fronts up to the Northern Territory or the Commonwealth government, it is always: ‘Where do we find the indigenous bucket of money?’ As we know, for a variety of different reasons over 200 years of political debate, that access to resources, based on the indigenous policy, is actually limited. As indigenous people, Territorians and Australians, we need to change the debate from ‘indigenous people gaining access because they are blackfellas’ to ‘indigenous people gaining access to resources because they are Australian citizens’. Indigenous people should not have anything that other Australians do not get, but they should have the same services.
I read in Common Ground that there was a school built at Galiwinku which allows kids to go to high school for the first time. We have built four or five, from my memory from the article, in five years. If you think of all these remote areas that do not have access to high school, of course, they are not going to have the same opportunities as every other Australian. You should not be building them for them because they are blackfellas; you should be building them because they are Australian citizens who happen to live in remote areas and deserve the right to receive Year 12 education.
The minister is trying to find ways within the system as it is - within the policy of the Northern Territory government and in relation to the Commonwealth government – for access to these mainstream services, access to mainstream monies for housing, to find better and cheaper ways to make houses. I believe this is the only strategy.
Have a look at the experience of ATSIC, which was, fundamentally, set up by the Australian Labor Party at a Commonwealth level. It was an organisation that was to fill gaps. The political environment of Australia, all of a sudden, made it the panacea to every indigenous problem. If you had a policing problem, an education problem, or a health problem, you went to see ATSIC. It shifted the blame from governments to deal with matters that they should routinely have been dealing with as Australian citizens.
The concept was good, but unfortunately it shifted the debate to: we should be doing things for Aboriginal people because they are Aboriginal. We have to turn that debate on its head to: Aboriginal people are Australian citizens and have rights, which mean proper housing, health, eduction and access to job opportunities. They should not be discriminated against because of their ethnic background or the places in which they live.
I was very proud to be at Kalkarindji with the members for Arafura, Macdonnell and Fannie Bay - my apologies to those I have forgotten; I think the member for Arnhem arrived late. The minister had other engagements. The spirit was that this event in 1966 led to citizenship, which led to land rights, which led to indigenous people having a voice in this country. A great source of pride for me as a member of parliament is that we have two indigenous members in Cabinet who have the ability to make policy changes.
I look forward to the day when all five indigenous members, with the Chief Minister, make this national, go to Canberra and to speak to the Prime Minister. We are the only parliament in Australia with a make-up like this, and we would see a national response through media, the political movement and by people understanding that we have elected members who are articulate, who can argue a case, who are saying that Aboriginal people do not deserve anything more than anyone else; they deserve the same rights as Australian citizens.
I congratulate the Chief Minister for the 20-year plan. It is something I have been advocating since 2001. We need to take this matter to a national debate and take the politics out of it. I have two media releases. One is from 1 June 2006 from the Chief Minister and says:
It goes on further to say that a 20-year plan is what is needed for the long term, and in the short- to medium-term, the Territory will look at alcohol management plans across the Territory, public housing management in remote communities and town camps, which the minister has been pushing with great authority and initiative throughout Alice Springs. I look in my areas in Darwin at the Bagot Community, Minmarama and Kulaluk where better governance and more efficient housing construction methods will lead to more houses and better maintenance and will decrease some of the problems that the minister identified in his statement.
For example, there is a man at Bagot Community who lives with his wife, three sons, their wives and all their kids in one three-bedroom house. At the moment, it is a choice for him because he feels more comfortable that his family is living there, but the reality is - and this is happening right across the board - you are going to have the door to your house opened 100 times in a day. You are going to have the toilet flushed 25 times. You are going to have the shower turned on and off 15 times. What that leads to, unfortunately, is wear and tear on the property.
In the 20-year plan, the Chief Minister looks at more police in remote areas. One of the biggest issues throughout those three communities is the fact that people, even within Darwin, are saying that they do not have access to police patrols. The former President of Bagot Community is only about the minister’s size, but he’s a few years younger. When a dispute breaks out at Bagot community, people expect him to go down and sort the problems out. They do not expect the member for Millner or the Chief Minister or Opposition Leader to do that. What that ex-President would like to have had is access to police helping the indigenous people in those communities.
The 20-year plan will introduce reforms to local government. Governance is one of the biggest issues in our communities. Every member who represents a bush seat will talk about the draconian administrative pressures on councils and what it does to individuals on those councils who are trying to do so many things in communities, who are under the pump all the time. Governance training is a very important way of dealing with the administrative issues facing these communities.
The bottom line is even if these administrative changes happen and governance improves on these communities, at the end of the day, they become better at writing submissions, asking for access to Commonwealth and NT government grants. The resources are not there at the moment so no matter how good they get, they are not going to get the resources they set out to achieve. We have to change this debate. People should be accessing services for one reason: because they are Australian citizens.
The final one is support for changes to welfare. Anyone who has known my family throughout the few hundred years that we have lived in this community will know that we pride ourselves on our work ethic. Most people would have seen a change in people’s work habits over the last 40 to 50 years. For example, my father once mentioned to me that in the 1960s, if you went for a Darwin City Council job, an NT government job or a Commonwealth job, there might be 50 people apply for 10 positions. Of those 50 people, 47 of them would be indigenous so at least seven of them would have got a job. Those seven people had a job and they brought up their family. As the dynamic and demographic changed, the competition and access to opportunities for work changed and what you find now is people being out-competed for these jobs so they are not getting jobs. After the second and third generation, you lose that work ethic. We need to support changes to welfare to increase work opportunities and create a better work ethic amongst indigenous people.
My feeling is that if you give one indigenous person a job, you have one family that is going to have an income, one family that is going to have housing and one family that is going to be fed. One of the big issues, of course, is CDEP, and I know the minister has his views on that and some of the Commonwealth issues, and no doubt he will talk about those.
The final thing that gives me great heart is the fact that there is a media release from 14 July 2006 from COAG, the headline of which is: COAG backs Martin’s call for generational plan:
Mr Deputy Speaker, I will wind up by saying I support the minister’s effort. He is making real changes, both politically and socially. I would like one day to see all the indigenous members, with the Chief Minister, go to Canberra. I believe that would get the attention of the nation in a political sense because we have not been able to grasp that yet.
As I said, any victories that come for indigenous Australians have come from either the courts through decisions like Mabo, or through Australian citizenships, which came from movements led by Vincent Lingiari to Freedom Day, or the anomaly of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. Members of this House, including the opposition and Independents, have often spoken about their wish to improve matters. It would be great if we could get every member of this House to go to Canberra in a united front and talk about these issues.
That is the only way to secure the proper investment in our communities. What we have seen in the last 20 years in China, for instance, which was one of the poorer countries in the world, was North American and western European countries deciding that they would invest in China simply because they would be the next capitalist country with the next consumers. We have seen billions and billions of dollars pumped into China, and they have moved the whole nation, three billion people, to be the fastest growing economy in history since the Industrial Revolution.
Investment in one of the richest countries in the world, Australia, can happen, and it can happen for Australian citizens who happen to be indigenous. I call upon all members and the minister to keep up their hard work because I know that, deep down in their hearts, they are doing the best that they can within the limits that they have to make a difference. I commend the statement to the House.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage): Mr Deputy Speaker, I will not speak for long. I support the minister’s statement on indigenous housing. The Northern Territory government has two ambitions regarding indigenous housing out bush. One is a greater spend from the Commonwealth, and two, applying Territory housing standards to indigenous housing in the bush.
I applaud the minister on both initiatives and wish him luck. I know that, for the time he has had the portfolio, he has been very passionate and advocated strongly to his counterpart in Canberra, taking the debate up with him and working through the issues so that, at the end of the day, it is people in Aboriginal communities who will benefit from any increase in Commonwealth funding. It needs both the Commonwealth and the Northern Territory government to work in a productive partnership to be able to secure outcomes for Aboriginal people.
Applying Territory Housing standards in the bush should have been done years ago. Aboriginal people are Australians. They deserve the same basic right, and nearly every person who has spoken about this statement has said that and want those standards to be applied. There are many indigenous community housing organisations that have either folded or not been able to move on from the work that they have done. There is a multitude of problems with these organisations, and the end result is that we do not get the houses built in the bush or the outstations, but I will come to those.
Like many of the bush members who have spoken on this, one of the biggest issues we have in our communities is housing. Coming from a health background, you cannot fix health or education unless you fix housing. The correlation between those three areas is so strong that you have to be able to work on the three of them and have a multipronged strategy to work with the three areas in sync so that you have better health and educational outcomes from better housing.
I agree that some housing organisations in communities need to lift their game. The minister’s strategy of applying the same standards in communities means that we will get more appropriate housing. The design of houses has been a major issue in many communities. There have been inappropriate designs for many years in a lot of these communities. Having lived on the Tiwi Islands for many years, I remember under the former government there was a consultancy set up to look at appropriate design of housing. I participated in that on behalf of the council, and I remember all of the communities that came together - including me and other Tiwi Island representatives - raised the issue of appropriate designs of houses. It was very disappointing to hear from both the Commonwealth and the then Territory government that a lot of the designs proposed had been thrown out or knocked back because governments felt they were inappropriate or they would have cost too much to be able to design a house appropriate to the communities or the residents.
In one community in my electorate, having one house constructed costs well over $400 000. That is an enormous cost burden for communities. The minister has been very passionate about looking at cost-effective housing. It should not cost our communities that amount of money, $400 000, to get a house built. It could be done better, and a lot of it gets down to the design. I am not sure whether the kit homes that are proposed would be appropriate in electorates like mine which are cyclone prone. Every Wet Season, they have the threat of cyclones, and the houses need to be built to code.
Talking about the Building Code, it was only since this government came to power in 2001 that the Building Code started applying in a lot of the Aboriginal communities. That was fantastic because, again, it was discrimination that people would only build houses that were substandard. The application of the Building Code in Aboriginal communities is something I, and other members, welcomed at the time.
Having discussed the Commonwealth’s community leasing proposal at length, particularly with my people on the Tiwi Islands, the Tiwi Land Council was the first to sign a land deal with the Commonwealth government for a whole-of- community leasing for Nguiu for $10m for a college. That deal was signed and will go ahead and maybe in time, it might change things. The community is still debating the pros and cons of whether that will provide better outcomes, but everyone is working together to see if they can reach better outcomes for development, housing and business. We need to work together.
My people, the Tiwis, have faced a lot of criticism from people who have said that they sold a lot of Aboriginal people out with the land deal, but they did it for their own reason: all of the older leaders want to see better educational outcomes for their children. To work with the Commonwealth and say: ‘Okay, we will do the community leasing in exchange for $10m’. You will always have people debating whether that it is a good or bad thing, or whether it is going to lead to anything, but at the end of the day, the Tiwis have said: ‘Okay, it has happened. We now need to try to get things working. We need to work with the Northern Territory government. We need better development’.
Things have to change because the Tiwi Islands, unlike many communities, probably has the highest suicide rates anywhere in the Northern Territory, if not Australia. It is endemic over there. Many of my families are constantly at funerals. I do not think a week goes past when there is not a funeral on that island and people are constantly grieving. Doing things radically differently and thinking outside the square means we have to change things, and that is what many of the leaders, both old and young, are trying to do.
It was good to go to Groote Eylandt with Community Cabinet and see the progress the Anindilyakwa Land Council and the people are making. The member for Arnhem spoke very eloquently about her electorate and the progress that is being made by that land council, and the resort. For too long there has been negativity about what is happening in Aboriginal communities. It was good to see the Northern Territory News run a succession of stories about the rangers at Groote Eylandt and the work that they were doing and what the Anindilyakwa Land Council was doing with the resort. They are positive stories and it was good to see.
The minister has engaged indigenous organisations with builders designers and architects through the Indigenous Housing Advisory Board to get cheaper, more appropriate designs that may be built in regional centres. I applaud you, minister. The cost of housing is very high in some communities, so if you can achieve that outcome, it would be fantastic. I know the minister is very passionate about these things - we are going to hold you accountable for a lot of them, but I know you have the passion and drive to get them.
There was a workshop with over 100 attendees where, as I understand it, you gave a commitment to continue working with that interest group, which is really important for the outcomes of those communities. When I look at what this government has done in relation to health, housing and education, much has been achieved. When we look at those three areas, there is more to do, but it does not mean that is a negative. It is a positive. We have a Cabinet of ministers who are very focused on these issues and working together. Minister, there has been a lot of progress on your reforms with housing and I know it will continue.
In relation to home ownership, there are many young families in our electorates who have aspired to it for some time. The extension of HomeNorth in our remote communities is something I look forward to happening.
I briefly mentioned outstations. There are issues in terms of some outstations that need close attention. Where you have a thriving, vibrant outstation movement with people on their country, there are issues in relation to housing. As minister, I know you will look at not just community housing, but also the issues confronting the outstation movement.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I fully support the minister’s statement. It is most welcome.
Mr McADAM (Housing): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank all speakers in relation to the statement. In the main, it has been very positive. Your views have been very forthright and honest, and it is indicative of the nature of indigenous housing in the Northern Territory and how critical it is.
It is appropriate if I start where the member for Arafura left off. She referred to a workshop that occurred last month in Darwin, convened by the Indigenous Housing Advisory Board. I thank them for their vision and commitment. Effectively, we tried to get all the people within the industry together and have an open, honest and frank assessment of where we have been, what we are doing at the moment, and where we go into the future.
As the minister indicated, it was a very worthwhile effort. We were able to bring together people from the construction industry, the building industry, architects, housing service providers, and stakeholders from right across the building construction industry. The point that I was trying to make at that meeting is that I find it pointless to have two systems of housing in the Northern Territory, where you have indigenous housing and public housing or Territory housing.
By continuing that focus, we are separating housing needs not only in respect of indigenous people, but those people in the public sector. There are great synergies to be gained through a very close relationship between the two and in respect of other issues related to management and economics.
As I have said previously, it is fair to say not only here in the Northern Territory, but throughout Australia, we have tended to look at indigenous housing as an industry within an industry. That has been one of the reasons why we have not achieved to the extent that we might have. I am not passing any criticism there, but it is a fact. By saying something is an indigenous housing program and applying a different set of principles, that we do not apply in the other sector, we compromise the indigenous housing program.
One of the things we have to do is to have a look at how we proceed not only in terms of construction, but in terms of employment and training opportunities. One of the things that I have always thought is that if you have $254m put into the Northern Territory government to indigenous housing, say, over a three year period, and that is a combination of all the grants under the bilateral agreement with the Commonwealth, that is a good base to look at regional economic opportunities in a very real way.
Quite apart from getting efficiencies into that amount of dollars, in terms of the indigenous community you also have the capacity to value add to those dollars by engaging the private sector and other interested people. You have to be able to grow the construction industry in the Northern Territory to provide the number of houses and, of course, those dollars coming in for the indigenous part will never be able to do it.
As I have said previously, there is great capacity to add on the $254m not only in the context of meeting housing demand or need for indigenous housing, but across the broader industry and looking at options to provide cost-effective housing into Western Australia, Queensland, and to southern communities.
By looking at the options of a modular set-up, something that is very robust, going to meet design needs and comply with cyclone codes, and by developing this sort of manufacturing base in the Northern Territory, you really then start to look at economies whereby you are going to be able to achieve a sustainable housing industry, which will grow outwards. By putting that in place, and it does not matter where it goes – Katherine, Tennant Creek or another region - it adds to the regional economic focus but, more importantly, you start to see real outcomes in training and employment, particularly in relation to apprentices. At the moment, you are building two or three houses in each community, and that is fine, and you are engaging local indigenous people but that is not sustainable over a long period of time if you only do that.
I am sure there are ways and means of building a real robust economy around the Indigenous Housing Association, which builds on real employment and training outcomes. Since the workshop we had in July, there has been real interest from some members of the private sector who want to talk about that sort model. Some indigenous organisations, which are not necessarily ICHOs, have also expressed an interest. We have achieved, at the very least, a perception that indigenous housing is not specifically indigenous housing any more; it is part of the broader agenda. That is the way forward.
The other matter I wanted to raise, which some members spoke about, is some of the structural changes that have occurred in Territory Housing’s capacity to provide a framework for indigenous housing in remote or bush communities. As I said before, I do not believe that you can effectively maintain two systems of housing. The only way to do it is by looking at where the synergies might apply. I want to make it very clear that it is not a case of Territory Housing imposing on communities in terms of how they do things. It will be in partnership. We will be looking at opportunities to outsource where possible, where ICHOs have the capacity to outsource some of those functions that would normally be carried out by Territory Housing.
It brings some rigidity to issues such as rent collection, to waiting lists and to R&M. If you are talking about making it sustainable out there in the bush, you have X number of government employee houses out there and you have X number of indigenous houses, but we treat them separately. That has to stop. We have to combine the two to achieve efficiencies.
My department is preparing a submission for consideration by Cabinet in respect of some of those structural changes, but I want to give an assurance to the ICHOs that it is not designed to usurp your community development management and principles; it is really a way and means of being able to provide the appropriate support and to get away from the old notion of the past that you live out there in the bush, you have an ICHO, we do not care what you do, or how you do it.
What I am trying to say is that the aim is to provide a mechanism for more support between the two.
The other thing I wanted to raise in regards to some of the structural changes is that a lot of our indigenous people who work in ICHOs work very, very hard, they are very dedicated and they are determined to achieve outcomes. As you know, some of our rent collections are very, very good and in the bush communities, some are not so good, but in the main, they are quite good and they are in no small way attributed to the dedication of those indigenous people.
I have the view that, at some time in the future and subject to some further considerations, why should you not have a career path into the public service if you are doing your work out there? If you are working at Yuendumu, a community out of Nhulunbuy or out of Alice Springs or Katherine and you are doing your job well, I do not see why you should not be able to have a career path as well.
They are the sorts of things that we are talking about with some of the structural changes. It is important to understand that these structural changes are not something we have said we are going to do; this is something that we have responded to in respect of the Commonwealth. It is not only the Northern Territory that is going down this path in regard to structural changes which, effectively, bring housing programs under the framework of states’ respective housing programs. It is something that has been agreed. Of course, more discussions will occur. We are to provide some more data, which we agreed to, and that will be going back to the Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and minister Brough towards the end of September or thereabouts. That gives the genesis of where we might go forward.
It is important to understand that the Commonwealth has to recognise that we are making these changes as, indeed, are the other states. They have to be able to work in with whatever those changes might be. I know that other members in this House have spoken about the manner in which the Commonwealth has approached housing in the Northern Territory, particularly over the last few months. Reference has been made to Galiwinku and Wadeye by members.
It is important for the Commonwealth to take a step back because they have to be able to engage the Northern Territory government in a very positive way, a way which is going to achieve outcomes. I do not think it serves anyone to go into a community and say, as other members have said: ‘We are going to build you X number of houses on the condition that you get a lease’. That is not the way to go. There are other means, ways and models that can be achieved, quite apart from the fact that it really does impact upon the goodwill and the coordination that does occur on the ground between ICC and, say, our department and, indeed, ICC and other departments. The Commonwealth has to be realistic. You cannot wave a big stick from Canberra and say: ‘We are going to do this and we are going to do that’ because we need to engage people on the ground.
It might be appropriate to place on record the issue in respect of demountables because what is important to understand here is that the goals and objectives of the Northern Territory government are the same. They are to respond to the situation that occurs in the town camps in our suburbs of Alice Springs. We know there are high levels of overcrowding. We know there is dysfunction around grog, ganja and a whole lot of other things and we are both working towards an outcome.
Our model is a little different in the sense that we are looking at a bricks and mortar approach and, of course, the federal government has their model with demountables. I say the demountable model can be achieved, providing the aesthetics, design work and environment are right in the sense of them being habitable by people. I wanted to knock that on the head and say that we do want to work with the Commonwealth government in a very positive way on this matter. Our goals and objectives are the same but, of course, how we arrive there is a little different. Nonetheless, they are both designed to alleviate overcrowding and all the other things that go on in town camps.
Responses to the statement have been many and varied. Obviously I am not in a position to respond to them all, but there are some things that I would like to talk about. The member for Macdonnell raised the issue of insurance in respect of indigenous housing. As we know at the moment, the respective ICHOs are required to provide insurance in terms of payment of premiums. I know they are substantial and the excess on that is very high. One of the things that we are looking at that might be able to alleviate the impost on the ICHOs but, more importantly, might be able to provide a few extra houses is through a system whereby Territory Housing has a look at providing insurance under their existing system. I am not too sure if that is going to be possible, but at the very least, when we are talking about structural changes, I would hope that Territory Housing will take on the issue of insurance and I know they will.
The other matter the member for Macdonnell raised - in fact, all members did, I think - is that all of a sudden home ownership is seen is to be the panacea in respect of solving all indigenous housing problems. It is an admirable aim, the aspirations are it is something worthy to achieve, but to expect it to be the only option is a little wide of the mark. As I said, we have a responsibility to provide houses across the board.
It depends upon the entity in terms of how that pans out. There was provision under section 19 under the old ALRA and that would have great credence in terms of some of the homeland type communities. I do not know whether that now becomes 19A, I am not too sure, but there is great capacity there for that to occur. I will come back to that in a moment, but there is some capacity for home ownership under the new land holding or the leasing entity. As you know, the Northern Territory’s government position is that it must be voluntary and we will continue that. We are not going to be holding communities to ransom - if you do not sign, you get nothing. That is not going to be our position.
Of course, where possible, there are some real options. Let us take a place like Ali Curung in my electorate. It is probably not the best example because population numbers are not the same as they are in other places. Let us say at Ali Curung, there was a requirement to build 10 government employee houses. The only option we have at the moment is to negotiate through the existing system and then probably the only other option we have after is for the Northern Territory government to pay for that housing. I would hope that under a new leasing entity arrangement, there would be an opportunity for the community being able to secure a lease via this entity, either the community, an ICHO or another indigenous organisation to say we are prepared to build you these 10 government employee houses and then it is purely a commercial deal. The successful company would then get the returns via rental.
It is not dissimilar to what has occurred over at Nhulunbuy in terms of the Bunuwal Investments which is an investment arm of the Rrirratjingu clan. They are the things that are possible, not only in home ownership or government employees, but police stations. It is already happening, but I am saying that the leasing entity should not be seen as a means or a mechanism to prise land away from TOs, because this government is not into that.
The other matter to which I wanted to refer is something the member for Millner raised. It is part of the approach in terms of getting the message out there that it is not an industry within an industry. We are not insular any more. The indigenous housing industry is part of the broader economic framework of the Northern Territory not only in terms of the construction side, but in terms of the management side. As a government, we have to seriously think about this. It is incumbent upon the Commonwealth government to also give due consideration to it.
You will be aware that Mr Graeme Morris was recently appointed to undertake the CHIP Review on behalf of FaCSIA, which looks at housing on indigenous communities, particularly homelands. Nonetheless, the application is across the board. We welcome that, but I say to the Commonwealth government: you should not see it as a means of being able to cut costs or compromise homelands out in the bush because they remain a very important component of our society. As I have said before, I have no doubt that a lot of the homelands will become the real economic drivers. The remote regions in future will be the real economic driver of the Northern Territory economy. I have no doubt about that.
These are structural changes within an existing framework that is applied by the Commonwealth government not only respect of the Northern Territory but right across the states. I refer to the Commonwealth Rent Assistance Scheme, a scheme whereby the Australian government provides money to those people on low incomes to be able to access private rental at an affordable rate. If you are on a social income and the rent is at a higher level then there is a gap whereby the Commonwealth government will provide rental assistance.
In 2004-05, Centrelink invested $2.5bn assisting almost a million low income earners throughout Australia. The figures are quite interesting in the sense that the benefit is accessed by 23% of the non-indigenous population and 80% of indigenous people access the gap. In the Northern Territory, only 26% of the non-indigenous population accesses that gap and only 5% of indigenous people. That gives you a very stark contrast in respect of the equity of that program and how it applies to remote communities in the Northern Territory.
The point that I am trying to make is that there is capacity within that program by looking at new ways of distributing that money so that it is more equitable, particularly in relation to indigenous people who live out in the bush communities and non-indigenous people in some of the regional towns.
The Commonwealth has done it before - I am pretty sure it was under the PCAP program, which is a health program. Effectively, what they did was work out on a formula base the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and whatever the figure might have been - I cannot remember - but it was substantial, on a per capita basis. We have written to the Commonwealth asking them to go down this path because that is one equitable way of addressing the need in the Northern Territory in respect of indigenous housing without asking for extra money.
Remember, the $2.5bn is out there at the moment and I hope the Commonwealth government takes our submission into consideration because it is a good way of ensuring that the money is distributed to where the most need is. They developed health services, and I am sure the member for Arafura would be aware of this, in terms of what they did in the past, and what we are really saying is that there is no reason why you cannot apply the same formula to housing.
The other one can be a Commonwealth government initiative, and can kick start the so-called private investment in indigenous communities, but obviously it is going to take time. For instance, as I understand it, the current rate of depreciation on an investment is something like 2.5% over 40 years. Of course, that does not make it attractive for the private sector, and when I refer to private sector, I also refer to indigenous organisations or royalty groups, or other people who also access this sort of model. On any view, 2.5% over 40 years is not an attractive way to get investment into the bush, and one of the things that we have suggested to the Commonwealth government is that perhaps they give consideration to maybe a 10% depreciation rate over a 10 year period. That is not prescriptive. We have not done all the sums in regard to it, but really what we are saying to the Commonwealth is there are these other options, so give them consideration.
I talked about government employee housing. There is something like 670 local recruits out there at the moment. I am talking about indigenous people in the main - teachers, ACPOs, police officers, the whole lot - who do not qualify for housing, but if you were able to attract private investment to build those houses, and you get a return on those houses, then 10% return is a lot more attractive over 10 years than 2.5% over 40 years. Again, there is a bit of work for the government there, but we are not relying on the fact the Commonwealth is going to continue to throw money at us because those days are over and we have to think of other ways and means of addressing it.
Regional development is related to the issue. Most members will be aware that under the Australia taxation scheme there are regional zone tax offsets, and they apply throughout the Northern Territory. They have been in place since the early 1950s. The figure to attract people into the regions is $1173 per annum for special area zoning, and that really includes most of the Northern Territory. We are saying that the Commonwealth government should review that. They should look at making a variation and upping it to attract people into the regions. The Commonwealth announced a $5000 incentive scheme to attract plumbers and other trades people to the bush. I do not know whether it is prescriptive, but reviewing and increasing the zone rebate is another way.
Mr Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, I thank all the speakers for their contribution. It has been much appreciated. The member for Stuart spoke very well in terms of his enduring commitment to housing, particularly from an environmental health perspective. I wish to acknowledge him as the Minister for Health and for his outstanding contribution in the area of health. I know he has been very committed and we thank him. He leaves a legacy across government which will be very hard to fill. I thank him very much, and wish the member for Stuart all the very best.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Parks and Wildlife): Mr Deputy Speaker, in July this year I spent two weeks in Europe. The main purpose of my trip was to visit nuclear power plants and nuclear waste facilities in France and Finland, and to talk to various agencies and officials involved in this industry. I will be reporting to this House on that aspect of my visits in due course.
However, there was more than a nuclear focus to my time in France. I would like to inform the House about the great things that are happening to promote our Northern Territory in that most iconic of cities, Paris. There are strong links between the Northern Territory and France, which might not be immediately obvious, but these links are growing stronger and are bringing about some wonderful business opportunities with mutual benefits. Importantly, these French connections are benefiting Territory indigenous communities. I will explain.
As Minister for Parks and Wildlife, I have been well aware of the role of crocodile egg harvesting in the economy of remote communities. I was less well aware of the role of these humble eggs as the single most important element in the chain of supply equation for the high end crocodile skin industry, and the value of these eggs to the high fashion houses of Europe. It has been a privilege not afforded to many to have viewed firsthand every single element of this long chain of supply and manufacture, from the risky business of taking crocodile eggs from the Territory’s wetlands to the production of luxury handbags to satisfy an ever increasing demand from the wealthy women of Europe, Japan and America. The making of, for example, an exclusive Hermes handbag starts in the Northern Territory, most likely in the swamps of Arnhem Land.
The Northern Territory’s highly regarded crocodile management plan essentially sets the framework for the whole crocodile industry. The plan covers wild harvesting, captive breeding and the farming of the saltwater crocodile, Crocodylus porosus. The wild harvesting component of the plan includes the taking of eggs as well as hatchlings, juvenile and adult crocodiles for commercial purposes. The harvesting of crocodiles primarily for their skins, but also for their flesh and body parts, supports a small industry in the Northern Territory. The world market for crocodile skins is 650 000 skins per year. The Australian crocodile industry supplies approximately 2% of the world market. This world market, however, includes other species such as the Nile crocodile and the North American alligator. I am told - in fact, I was repeatedly told by businessmen in France - that the Northern Territory porosus, our own salty, is the pick of the bunch. Porosus supplies the best skins and are, therefore, the most sought after by the fashion industry.
The first crocodile farm in the Territory was established in 1980 and the first skins were commercially produced in 1987. In 1987, 251 crocodile skins were produced. This year, two of our crocodile farms - Lagoon Farm and Porosus Pty Ltd - will sell approximately 10 000 skins internationally. The crocodile skin industry has really come of age. It is on the brink of becoming a fully-fledged industry, a stable and growing component of our economy, and is moving on from the quaint cottage industry status it has had until now.
There are real economic achievements emerging from this industry. Earlier this year, representatives from Hermes and their tannery, the Gordon-Choisy Tannery, signed a contract with Lagoon and Porosus Crocodile Farms. These are long-term contracts with one of the world’s most famous fashion brands to provide skins for the luxury handbags for which Hermes is renowned.
It was a privilege for me to be the guest for one day of Hermes and the Gordon-Choisy Tannery. The precious skin tannery in rural France just south of Paris is an eye opener. Part medieval, part modern, it processes thousands of skins of several species in a very labour intensive, multistaged process. It was odd to see boxes of full of tagged skins labelled ‘the Northern Territory’.
The consistent comment I received from the workers - the tannery employs about 80 people - was that porosus is best. From sorting to washing, to dying to preserving, to stretching and every part of the complex process of preparing a skin for manufacture, the porosus crocodile is apparently the best. It was the same story at the Hermes factory in suburban Paris where the fully prepared skins are made into luxury handbags, another very labour intensive and skilled process. Each step is done by hand in a painstakingly detailed way.
The finished products are something that I can only covet from afar. They are well out of consideration for most people - one completed bag I saw for sold US$140 000, but they sell as soon as they are made and there is a waiting list. In discussions with the executive of both the tannery and Hermes, one resounding message came out loud and clear: more skins, more eggs, please, from the Northern Territory.
It is clear to me that the investment that private players in the Northern Territory have made in their crocodile farms is paying off. Michael Hannon and Mick Burns, in particular, are to be commended for growing the industry to its present level, and for their hard work in building it up. As I said before, I believe that the crocodile industry in the Territory is on the verge of transforming from a cottage industry to a sustainable long term, mainstream industry which will contribute increasingly to our employment and our economy. It is clear that world demand for the product is growing and industry needs a reliable and long term source of skins.
From crocodiles I will briefly turn to another Northern Territory export that is making a big impact in France, and that is indigenous art. A key component of the Northern Territory’s economy is that of the Aboriginal arts and craft industry. Estimates vary, but sales from Aboriginal-owned arts and crafts centres now stand at around $28m annually and have doubled in the past 10 years. Retail outlets in the Territory are reckoned to have similar sales figures. Indeed, in Central Australia, Aboriginal art out performs the cattle industry.
European interest in Aboriginal art remains very buoyant and this was evident in France. I was fortunate to be shown around the newly completed Muse du Quai Branly, or MQB, some weeks after its opening by French President Chirac. As many of you would know, the collection now housed by the MQB has been drawn from other museums holding indigenous art and material culture in Paris and now forms one of the richest collections of its kind in the world. More to the point, the very fabric of the newly built MQB incorporates the work of contemporary Australian Aboriginal artists. Even more to the point, the MQB commissions three Northern Territory artists, Ningura Napurrula, Gulumbu Yunupingu, and John Mawurndjul to participate.
Anyone who has seen these works at the MQB cannot help but be astounded: their richness of expression, their power and their profound roots in the spiritual traditions of the artists. The building literally breathes with the creativity of these extraordinary artists. A little known aspect of the project is that the Australian curators of the MQB project also have an indelible Territory connection. The Art Gallery of New South Wales Art Curator, Hetty Perkins, is an Arrernte woman, and National Gallery of Australia Curator, Brenda Croft, is of Gurindji heritage. Both women deserve high praise for their work and courage in tackling such a major project.
The Territory’s two indigenous art representative bodies, the Association of Northern Kimberley and Arnhem Artists Association, ANKAAA, and Desart, kindly supplied me with material on the 6000 artists across more than 70 Aboriginal-controlled art centres they represent, as well as factual and promotional material. They also supplied me with the materials on the ethics of purchasing Aboriginal art. I am very happy to report this information is eagerly received wherever I distributed it.
Desart and ANKAAA perform an extraordinarily important role in representing the interests of Aboriginal artists in the Territory, yet they are largely unsung heroes of the indigenous art industry. They were instrumental in contributing to the terms of reference for the inquiry into the indigenous art industry recently announced by federal minister Kemp. The two groups provide industry leadership on par with any other industry representative body in the Northern Territory.
Their role is not just to reflect the views of their members, but also to play an important part in maintaining integrity within the tourist industry. My visit to this marvellous museum showed me more than tangible benefits for the Northern Territory are possible, and I am working towards realising some of these benefits. For example, the Museum Shop, a label which, by the way, fails to adequately describe this immense operation, stocked nothing of indigenous Territory art apart from a few book marks. I believe that this Museum Shop is now France’s leading sales point in the field of tribal art. To have some Territory products available and perhaps used in the museum cafes and restaurants would really help raise our profile as well as provide real benefit to the artists, but there are other less tangible but no less important long term benefits for this museum.
A recent article in the New York Times talked about the pride of people of many nationalities as they visited Muse du Quai Branly. This museum is now attracting people who might not normally set foot in a museum. It is estimated that about one-quarter of visitors are a new public who are coming because the museum speaks especially to them. This is what I would love to see with our own museums to become: places that speak to people of different cultures, the cultures that contribute to the society of the Northern Territory. This museum, Quai Branly, was intended as a bridge between the west and the rest of the world. It abandoned the notion of cultural purity on which many former ethnological museums rested, and which make no sense today.
Mr Deputy Speaker, speaking from my own personal experience of MQB, I have to say that many of the objects are extraordinary and the way that they displayed is quite remarkable. The Australian Collection and particularly the items from my own country, the Tiwi, certainly did speak to me. We could learn some great lessons from the French from their understanding of the importance of culture to their nation’s sanctity and sanity. I very much admire Mr Chirac and the French people for their vision and commitment in this area.
In closing, Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend the Territorians who have been involved with creating these connections with France and in creating the business opportunities which will have many local benefits. I look forward to our ongoing French connections and to strengthening them in a diverse range of endeavours.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, the minister has reported on what happened on a recent trip to Europe. I thank her for the statement. It is obvious that the minister enjoyed her trip. I certainly endorse what she has said. Looking at such fine quality products and such lovely things as the Hermes handbags, which are exquisite, and to know that the skins they are made of come from the Northern Territory would be pretty special when you are visiting a place like France.
The minister covered aspects of how private investors of crocodile farms in the Northern Territory have been visionary with their investments and how they are now reaping the rewards of their investment through the quality crocodile skin from our Northern Territory saltie, the porosus. That is very good for Territory business, and I encourage and applaud the two main crocodile farms, Lagoon Farm and Porosus Pty Ltd.
The minister said in her statement that at all stages of the skin processing that she witnessed in Hermes at the Gordon-Choisy Tannery and at the end stage where the fully prepared skins are made into luxury handbags that the quality of these skins was applauded. There is no doubt that this particular sector of the crocodile industry is doing well in the Northern Territory and has a very bright future.
Theoretically, if the quantity of skins exported was increased, the price of the end product should be reduced; the old supply and demand theory. However, obviously there is such a labour intensive treatment of these skins to get them to the final preparation for the manufacture of such high quality products that a reduction in the price would be negated. It is all good news for the porosus crocodile skin from the Northern Territory. I am so glad that the minister covets having one of these bags. I must confess, they are on my list of desires, too, but I am a little like the minister; it will be a very long time before I would be able to afford one of these beautiful quality bags. As I said, it is all good news for crocodile skins and I am sure my colleagues would support that.
The next part of the minister’s statement dealt with art, and I have to say that I am envious that she has visited the Musee du Quai Branly or MQB in Paris. I have been watching the development of this centre with interest and pride that Australian indigenous art has not only been incorporated into the building structure so will be there for ever, but that this building is housing a unique collection of indigenous art. It would seem a little surreal to be visiting a gallery in Paris that has such a great collection of indigenous art and we should all be proud of what the French have done to promote Australia through indigenous art.
I do not believe it is unfair to ask questions about the sales of indigenous art in the Northern Territory, because it intrigues me that the sales of Aboriginal arts and crafts is estimated to be around $28m annually. As the minister said, these figures have doubled in the past 10 years. The curiosity I have is: if there are sales of indigenous art around that enormous figure of $28m per year, who gets the money? Where is the money now? If there is so much money made from this very important industry, why is it that so many indigenous people are living in appalling conditions? I cannot understand how that amount of money is not making a difference in these people’s lives. I do not think it is unfair to ask: where does it go? Is there someone helping these artists manage their money to enable them to have a better lifestyle? There are many questions that are not unreasonable to ask.
Having read of the intense interest towards indigenous art in France, and the number of people who visit the museum, as they call it there, why on earth aren’t we in the Northern Territory taking advantage of our own artists and establishing our own unique cultural collection as one of the major attractions to the Northern Territory? Government could well do to look at it sooner rather than later. We in the Northern Territory are missing out on a unique opportunity to establish the biggest and most prized collection of indigenous art in the world. Heavens above, it is painted and crafted in our own Territory. We should capture and retain our own indigenous art for future generations and as a history of the Northern Territory. Certainly, indigenous artists need to sell their works where they can, but we have a responsibility to ensure that the Northern Territory has the most significant indigenous art and craft collection in the world.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for her statement. I am glad she had the opportunity to visit such places in France that support our crocodile products and our indigenous art industries.
Mr WARREN (Goyder): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I support the statement on opportunities for crocodile and art industries by the Minister for Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage and Arts and Museums.
I will talk specifically today on the burgeoning crocodile industry, as it has particular relevance to my electorate of Goyder. As the minister pointed out, crocodile eggs are the single most important element in the production chain for the high end of the crocodile industry. Of course, these eggs ultimately lead to the high end of the fashion houses of Europe.
However, I suggest that the fashion shows of Europe and beyond are not on the minds of our local indigenous harvesters in the Top End wetlands, many only armed with a paddle for protection, operating in the middle of the build-up collecting those invaluable eggs.
It conjures up in your mind’s eye the skills that have been honed over many centuries. They are valuable, unique skills that our indigenous people have, and they have transferred those skills to the modern day. I am reminded of the film The Ten Canoes. We all know the story, but behind the story was the unique and very visual aspect of life during the goose collecting season. It is similar for the crocodile collecting period. To have visions of these guys going out in these canoes has quite an impact on my mind’s eye. However, in this day and age, these are very sophisticated groups - mainly rangers - out there collecting these crocodile eggs in very well orchestrated and organised manner. It is just nice anecdotally to think in the mind’s eye about the history behind it and where these skills were honed.
Let us not forget that the Territory Crocodile Management Plan provides a sound framework for the sustainability of the entire crocodile industry, one that provides the foundations for our local crocodile farming industry while satisfying international conventions. It should be borne in mind that, in framing this management plan, the Northern Territory government made sure that it satisfied the very rigorous requirements of the Commonwealth Environment, Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, as well as the equally rigorous Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act.
I point out that this management plan incorporates management aspects encompassing not just the industry, but the protection of the crocodile population. Things such as the harvest quotas are rigorously maintained and monitored so that our wild populations of crocodiles are not put in any danger so the industry can be sustainable. That is the important thing. It is a good case of triple bottom line sustainability. It is about the environment sustainability so that the crocodiles survive, and social sustainability so the indigenous people in that part of the world can benefit financially from that aspect of the industry. It is also economically sustainable. Another aspect of the management plan is that they control permits to take the eggs and, of course, crocodiles which is an important aspect.
Operational aspects are also included in the management plan for the crocodile industry for quality control, our export markets and so on. Another oft talked about but seldom considered aspect is public safety. What I am talking about here is rogue crocodile removal whereby they are taken out of the environment, because crocodiles have a very strong homing instinct and they tend to come back to these areas again and again. These crocodiles need to be removed and that is part of the management plan. Of course, they are taken to the crocodile farms, either for breeding purposes or, if they do not fit in, they are value added, I guess you could say euphemistically.
Then there is the tourism aspect, not just the tourism for the crocodile tours out into the wetlands, but also the tourism side of our croc farms. People who are coming to Darwin only for a day, particularly our international visitors, can go out and actually see what crocodiles are really like. They can also see the good aspects of what is happening with the industries. That is a really important aspect of the management plan. Of course, the management plan tries to be all encompassing.
There are five major farms in the Darwin and rural areas showcasing their products and promoting the Territory in the local and international makets. It is also an important contributor to tourism, as I discussed before, as international tourists certainly flock to view crocs and the croc farming industry. The larger farms are Porosus Crocodile Farm also known as Crocodile Farms NT at Noonamah, and the Janamba Crocodile farm at Middle Point, both within my electorate of Goyder. There is also Crocodylus Park and Lagoon Crocodile Farm at Berrimah, and a small rearing facility at Noonamah, again in my electorate of Goyder. Finally, there is the Coolibah Crocodile Farm on the Victoria River near Timber Creek in the member for Daly’s electorate.
I am sure that he will speak a little about that. Crocodile abattoirs operate at both the Porosus Crocodile Farm operation at Noonamah and the Lagoon Crocodile Farm. Previously, there were other abattoirs at Janamba and Coolibah, but for economic reasons these are not currently operational. The owners of Janamba Crocodile Farm operate farms in Queensland and that is where they transport their two-year-old crocs from here to Queensland for finishing and slaughter at about three years of age. Similarly, Coolibah Farm now only sells live crocodiles to other farmers.
Joe Wilson from Elizabeth Valley Crocodile Farm at Elizabeth Valley in Noonamah collects about 4000 eggs annually and currently has some 2400 eggs for rearing. He takes them to about 12 months of age. These hatchlings are then sold mainly to Janamba Farm. As mentioned earlier, eggs are collected from the wild under permit from Wildlife Management in NRETA. These are then hatched and the crocodiles reared until slaughter age at about three years. Crocodile skins are the primary product, with meat being a minor part of the industry.
Between 6500 to 10 000 skins are produced within the NT annually. In 2004-05, some 4700 crocodiles were slaughtered in NT abattoirs. It is difficult to accumulate the farming industry value due to privacy issues related to the emerging status of this very important industry, but is considerable and has significantly more potential as the minister explained in her statement. Only about 500 of the skins are currently sent to domestic markets for tanning while the rest has been exported to France.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, the Department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Mines has a technical officer to assist the crocodile farming industry. It is primarily a regulatory role in ensuring compliance with the Convention of the International Trade in Endangered Species, or CITES, as it is known. There is a regulatory process in place to ensure that only farmed crocodiles are traded for skins and meat to protect the crocodile population. These skins are given a unique tag, the skins are then inspected and appropriate certification produced. Without this service, the croc farming industry would not be able to export to the world. We cannot over emphasise how important that is and how we fit into the whole CITES scheme of things, not just for crocodile skins; it is about us being a signatory to this most important aspect of wildlife protection and helping minimise the illegal trade in protected species products. It also acts as a quality control where you are actually tagging that product from a farm right through to the marketplace where they tan, produce and value-add to it. This trail can be followed and it ensures that the quality is there of the Northern Territory product. It also ensures that trade in illegal skins and products is absolutely minimised.
Under the NT Crocodile Strategy, the hatchlings are annually audited by the technical officer at all our farms. Furthermore, a mandatory five year audit of each farm is carried out. There cannot be anyone who can say that we have insufficiently regulated this industry. Some might say that we over-regulate, but when we are talking about such important unique products as our crocodile skins and protection of our wildlife, management of sustainability, it is absolutely imperative that we have sufficient regulation there to protect our industries, to protect our farms, to protect our wildlife.
The technical officer also recently attended the Crocodile Specialist Group meeting in France in June 2006, and will now be able to provide advice on improving skin quality to improve the market value. We need this kind of feedback. We have the potential to grow this industry, but it is important that we do give our people in the industry, our regulators, the chance not only to be regulators, but to learn something about value-adding to the industry so that they can bring that back to the NT and help our producers because our producers do not always have sufficient funds to go off and do those sorts of things. This is where our government is playing an important role because that is what we are about.
The department provides a disease investigation and disease control service to all our crocodile farms. That is an important aspect. The department is currently working on a variety of Chlamydia discovered in crocs. Although reported as a sex disease by some media outlets, let me assure the House that it is not transmitted during breeding. It is a variety peculiar to crocodiles and unrelated to their breeding process.
As has been reported in the past, the department is working closely with the farming industry in a retrospective study to investigate the possible sources of infection and possible future disease control measures. Again, we need to ensure that this burgeoning industry prospers and industry best practice is there. That is what we do as government. We get out there and help industry grow. I spoke before about the technical officer going over and studying aspects of the trade. It is also important that we help the industry to make sure that the quality of our product is there because we rely on the quality of our products and that is important.
The minister mentioned that Lagoon Croc Farm and Porosus Croc Farms both signed long-term contracts in June this year to supply the world renowned Hermes fashion company. As Porosus’ Managing Director Mick Burns said, and I quote:
In conclusion, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I can only reiterate the words uttered to the minister while she was in France promoting this burgeoning and unique Top End industry:
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I will provide some additional comments in support of the minister’s statement, and I follow a very thorough speech from the member for Goyder about the industry. I will give a more localised explanation as the member for Daly.
One of the crocodile ventures that is due to be operating in my electorate is at the community of Wudapuli. Wudapuli is some 150 km to the west of Daly River, and the main families are the Nadjics, and Aloysius Nadjic is well and truly the visionary within that community. People may have noticed Aloysius and his family visited the Darwin Crocodile Farm over the last couple of months and were featured in the NT News holding some small crocodiles. Aloysius sees the future for his community, his family, is very much about economic development. His community sits on the edge of the Moyle floodplains, home to not only a massive number of birds but also a large population of crocodiles. The area, because of its nature, it is very conducive to nesting.
Over the last few years, Aloysius has worked in partnership with a number of egg collectors, predominantly from the Coolibah Crocodile Farm on Coolibah Station in the upper VRD area. In that partnership, eggs are collected with the use of local people and Mr Bluey Pugh. They come up and collect eggs and the people are paid per egg a royalty from that. Aloysius wants a bit more. He certainly sees the opportunity for a hatchery there and he is working in conjunction with the Northern Land Council and the Northern Territory government, and I believe the Commonwealth government, in establishing a hatchery at his community to employ his family and get a lot more income into his community as opposed to just receiving some royalties for eggs collected. That is certainly a visionary step by Aloysius, and I see the enthusiasm every time I speak to him about that. I believe DBERD are helping; Sean Bowden and Tracker Tilmouth are consulting to the Northern Land Council on this project. I look forward to that opening in the next year or two because there certainly is a market for it.
It is those partnerships across the Top End of the Northern Territory that will expand this industry into the communities. Mr Mick Burns is someone who is talking to Aboriginal people across the Northern Territory about similar types of ventures. That is the way to go in the beginning, through partnerships, and then, as time goes by, people can decide whether they want to remain in that partnership or whether they would like to take on full ownership and reap the rewards from that.
I wanted to comment in relation to crocodiles on economic development, but in a different sense. Certainly, safari hunting for crocodiles is something that certain groups of Aboriginal people are very keen on. Having worked in a safari camp, European and North American hunters pay top dollar to come to just shoot a buffalo or shoot a pig, and they will certainly pay top dollar to shoot a crocodile. The royalties and camp costs which could be gained from such a venture are certainly considerable. I hope our government keeps pushing for the federal minister to relax his view on safari camps in Australia. Mr Steve Irwin probably should stick to his own state and let us get on with ours and develop our own interests up here.
Crocodiles numbers are certainly increasing. I have had pastoralists saying to me that with improved pastures across the Territory, you have a greater population of wallabies, and wallabies and cattle obviously go down to the river banks and there is a lot more food about for these crocodiles. Bigger crocodiles are coming further up the river whereas before there was not a great deal of feed about, the larger fish would move down the river for those Dry Season periods, so larger crocodiles are coming up into some of those shallower, narrower parts of the river. There is a safety aspect, not only for pastoralists but local indigenous communities, to a reduction in those numbers. I support their call for humane culling or productive safari camps on stations.
The products the minister saw in Europe, and what you can see here in Australia, are certainly beautiful. I would like to afford - and my wife would - a crocodile handbag. At the Darwin Show, I saw a crocodile belt was selling for something like $250. It is certainly at the upper end of the market. People are obviously prepared to pay for that premium product. This industry has a long future. If we can value-add with tanning facilities in the regional areas and communities, it would represent increased income.
There is, obviously, a huge interest in crocodiles. Just recently, it was announced that there will be a crocodile display in the middle of Mitchell Street. Mitchell Street is a very busy, noisy area of Darwin. It goes to show that there are opportunities. You do not spend that sort of money to have crocodiles housed in facilities in the inner city if you do not think people are going to visit.
I wrap up my contribution today by thanking the minister. We have so many attractions in the Northern Territory. People see crocodiles as a large part of the Northern Territory. Crocodile Dundee has put the Northern Territory on the map. Having been to some of the sites where Crocodile Dundee was filmed - Gunlom Falls and a few other locations through Kakadu - it is what a lot of international and interstate tourists remember of the Northern Territory, and should be something that we promote. It is an icon of the Northern Territory. We should own, promote and use it as much as possible.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for her statement. I hope she had a lovely trip in France, and we can get some cheap crocodile products for Christmas if she has some contacts. I commend the statement to the House.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I strongly support the minister’s statement. This is a very important issue for the Northern Territory: how to live in harmony with crocodiles. I wish everyone who lives in the Top End all the best in their attempts to do that because my approach is to keep them as far away as possible.
I would like to talk in particular about the program that has been recently introduced at Berrimah prison. This is a Pilot Crocodile Handling Course. I believe it is being run as a pilot to see how many prisoners get eaten and, if too many are eaten, they will probably not do it. I jest. It is a Certificate I in Crocodile Handling and Farming and is delivered over 12 weeks at the Darwin Crocodile Farm. The pilot course has been developed in partnership with NT Correctional Services and the International College of Advanced Education in association with the Myriad Group. The course aims to provide indigenous men with the chance to enhance their aquaculture skills and to build the capacity to develop crocodile farming and breeding enterprises in remote indigenous communities. There are six prisoners participating in the first course and six more will attend the second course. I table two photographs of the survivors with the crocodiles just to show members the enthusiasm with which the prisoners and prison officers have taken to this new activity.
Participants in the course will have an opportunity to gain employment in the crocodile industry post-release which, for many, will mean employment in their communities. That may be employment in established crocodile farms or the opportunity to establish new ventures, and in the conservation and removal of crocodiles from populated areas. Helping prisoners develop self-esteem through skill development and training will help them reintegrate positively into the community, and avoid the cycle of crime. These courses are a great example of efforts being made by NT Correctional Services staff to build real job skills for prisoners and of the partnerships that can be achieved with industry for a win-win situation.
This new course at Berrimah epitomises the policy that the government is moving towards in terms of providing more options for the courts in reintegration of offenders. Recently, Cabinet has made a decision to offer arrangements particularly to the magistrates’ courts for sentences up to six months to divert offenders into out-of-prison programs under the auspices of Community Corrections. Cabinet has also adopted a policy position of allowing diversion at the back end of sentences, from prison into community-related Correctional Services programs.
The diversions will obviously have an impact on the number of prisoners in our prisons. There is substantial potential for bringing prisoners into other arrangements alternative to prison. Most importantly, the out-of-prison alternatives will provide much greater scope for linking prison rehabilitation programs to regional development, particularly regional economic development in the form of vocational training and other job-related skills such as driving and plant operation licences. We can achieve a number of related benefits from adopting this policy position.
The heart of these new programs will be a Conditional Release Centre, which will be a place that can operate both as a bail hostel for offenders awaiting their time before a court, and particularly those accused who have no fixed address and would normally be remanded in one of our two prisons. The CRC provides a much more creative space in which prisoners can be put through programs while they are either awaiting their time in court and as a bail condition or for people who would ordinarily be sentenced to a period of imprisonment who could be put on a court order to attend a CRC and take part in the programs.
We hope to go into partnership with the private sector such as horticultural development, and the crocodile enterprises we have discussed tonight. It could be any number of areas of economic development at a regional level. By looking at a potential range of locations where these programs could be established, we can target new economic developments, whether it be mining, primary industries or other more specialised forms of economic development and employment such as the stages of exploiting crocodile production that is the feature of this debate tonight.
That is where the government is going as a matter of policy. We have a lot to work out as yet to see it implemented in practical terms, but it will be a far more creative response to the numbers of prisoners in our correctional services than simply building more gaol capacity or another gaol.
For the same amount of money, we believe, on interstate and overseas examples, we can get much better re-offending outcomes and what that translates, in turn, to is less victimisation in our communities by offenders who have gone through a correctional process but have returned, only to re-offend, to their communities. The whole aim of correctional services is clearly to reduce re-offending as much as possible in the community so we are following firm evidence on programs that, in other jurisdictions, have proved to be more effective than just purely warehousing prisoners in a prison.
There will be a multifaceted approach to correctional services in the Northern Territory in the future. We will continue with our prison reforms and to develop programs such as our crocodile handling courses and other equally creative courses that are being developed in both prisons. We are also going to be setting up conditional release centres to take a significant number of offenders into alternatives to a prison sentence. We look forward to working particularly with the magistrates’ courts to put these options in place. I am sure Cabinet, beyond my time, will deal with the complexities of the implementation of this policy, but it is great that Cabinet has settled the policy and that the agency can now come back with details of implementation.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arts and Museums): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank everyone who contributed to the debate and gave their view on the statement.
I will go through quickly to wrap up. Before I get to the member for Katherine who asked two questions, I will go to the Minister for Justice who talked about the prison reforms and the crocodile programs. The photos are outstanding. I thought they were fantastic. I talked in my speech about being privileged to be able to see the whole crocodile process from the eggs through to the bags, but when you look at the issue of the egg collection - and I know from my electorate, both in Maningrida and Oenpelli - there is a lot of work by the indigenous ranger groups who go out and collect the crocodile eggs and the work they do with crocodile handling and all the husbandry work that goes with it. They do a fantastic job and I can see that running this program in the prisons would energise those prisoners and give them a good diversion into something that many of them have probably done in their own communities with programs like Caring for Sea Country.
I have, like the member for Arnhem, a very good ranger group, the Djelk Rangers, for whom I have a lot of respect and admiration. I enjoyed visiting Maningrida and going out with those rangers. It is not easy work. It is dangerous work when they go into those floodplains and up the rivers to where the female crocodile lays eggs in the nest. It is dangerous work and to watch the deft skills of those rangers is fantastic. I do not think any of us would contemplate undertaking the work that they do. The Djelk Rangers do a lot of work with Graeme Webb and Crocodylus Park. In the member for Arnhem’s electorate, a lot of eggs are collected from the Muwangi Swamp and around Ramingining so that community is involved. The Lagoon Farm and the Porosus Farm at Noonamah have agreements with the traditional owners at Ramingining to get the eggs out of the Muwangi Swamp. Both Mick Burns and Mick Hannon work with the community and rangers at Oenpelli to collect the eggs from the floodplains to send into Darwin for their farms.
It has proven to be quite a lucrative business, not just for the farms, but particularly for those indigenous ranger groups who receive very little funding. The Northern Territory government, through the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries, provide some funding to those ranger groups, but still to this day, we have a federal government that fails to recognise the value, skills and expertise of those rangers, not just in the crocodile business, but with illegal fishing and all of those areas. My colleague, the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries has been lobbying his federal counterpart to try to make that happen.
I digress, so I will return to the statement. Member for Goyder, thank you for your positive wrap-up of the crocodile management plan, sustainability of the industry and comments about the two farms. They do a lot of good work. He talked about the issue of Chlamydia, which is under investigation. DPIFM and NRETA are working with these crocodile farms to address the issue of Chlamydia that can be detrimental to an industry that has taken so long to build up. He talked about DPIFM and the appointment of a technical officer to oversight crocodile farms. That is a good move from the minister to put a technical officer in place in the farm to help the three farms. With the issue of Chlamydia, there is a danger of us losing quite a lucrative enterprise in the Top End, which would be disastrous.
I thank the member for Daly for his contribution. He talked about the involvement in a project with family and community. He mentioned the involvement of the Northern Land Council through Sean Bowden and Tracker Tilmouth and how that is expanding. He also talked about how he would like to get safari hunting back here and keep pushing the feds. I point out to the member for Daly that we have probably pushed the feds as far as we can take them. Their decision was disappointing. I said that federal minister Campbell was pandering to the needs of a Queensland theme operator and was not listening to the Northern Territory, nor was he prepared to come to the Northern Territory and meet with Aboriginal communities and pastoralists. My predecessor, the member for Johnston, was pushing this issue when he was the Minister for Parks and Wildlife and passionately advocated. I remember going with the minister at that time to Canberra and talking to the then federal minister Kemp when he had crocodiles under his portfolio arrangement. We were making some headway in that meeting, but we came back and heard the disappointing news. Of course, the federal government then shifted ministers. Ian Campbell became the Environment minister. We know that the Prime Minister is very close to Steve Irwin and the Humane Society and that influence went to Ian Campbell.
We have pursued this at all levels, including seeking legal advice as to how far we take this. The Commonwealth’s letter was very clear. The issue of safari hunting was taken out of the crocodile management plan; we can no longer do that. As a government, to build up the industry in terms of harvesting, if we can work with industry to build satellite farms out in communities and have incubation and hatching of the eggs in those communities, and work with the industry on the issue of transportation of the small animals into the bigger farms in Darwin. If we can work with industry and bring about a proper industry plan with everyone, including the Northern Land Council and Aboriginal communities, there are a lot of benefits that could come out of that.
On the issue of tanneries, we have not looked that far. I think the member for Daly raised tanning facilities in communities. The Gordon-Choisy Tannery in France is quite a costly business because everything is manual. There is no mechanisation. That tannery employs about 80 staff outside of Paris, as I said. The overheads and costs to Hermes are quite expensive. Their method is centuries old, and I did describe it as part-medieval. They have not changed their method of tanning because it is the quality that makes their name what it is today.
The member for Katherine posed two questions. She agreed with most of the statement. Her questions were: if sales of Aboriginal art is $28m, then where does the money go? Why are so many Aboriginal people living in appalling conditions? The member for Katherine needs to get out there and have a look a bit more. Yes, we all know the appalling conditions in some of our communities. The $28m - and it could be more - is a global figure that Aboriginal art adds to the economy. Some of that money goes to artists, but a lot of those artists die poor. A lot of those artists have extended families. They do not just feed themselves or their immediate families such as their wives and children; they also take on responsibility for many extended family members. It is certainly not the responsibility of those Aboriginal artists to fix health, education or other areas on the ground in those communities. Aboriginal artists are usually the only person in their family working, so the income that they generate, as I said, is not just for them, but for a huge number of family members.
She contributed to the indigenous housing debate just before this statement with the same intent. While she thinks that $28m goes back to every Aboriginal community, she needs to be better informed on that.
She asked why we are not establishing our own unique cultural collection of Northern Territory culture and heritage. I do not know when the last time the member for Katherine was in MAGNT or the Araluen Centre. Sure, MQB is a unique collection and nowhere else in the world are you going to have a collection such as this. The poignant thing and what was sad for some of the cultures is it was very clear that those collections were acquired where the French had set up colonies. So whilst people can feel the cultures talking to them, there has been a lot written in the media from some of the countries the French colonised about the French acquiring the collections housed in the MQB, particularly some of the really sensitive male ceremonial implements that are on display from Papua New Guinea and other areas. However, everyone got the sense of that these cultures were speaking to us and they were displayed very well.
In respect of the Australian collection, I was shocked and a bit saddened when I saw a collection of the best barks I have ever seen. To know that these barks are held in a collection overseas made me feel sad. There were 30 of probably the best barks from Arnhem Land. I asked the MQB officials how the French acquired such a collection, and that is something I am going to continue to pursue. I also saw a collection of some of the oldest Tiwi Pukamani Poles with paintings of those totems from my people that I have not seen before. The only similar paintings are on the ceiling of an old church on the island. To see those, which our people no longer paint, sitting on poles in a collection on French soil evoked feelings that there was a very significant Aboriginal collection on foreign soil. The consolation was that on a little piece of foreign soil Aboriginal people and their art are represented.
My proudest moment was going into the bookshop and seeing Johnny Mawurndjul, the painter from Maningrida and what he has painted, the legacy for his people and family, was breathtaking. It is absolutely outstanding. Some of his stories from the opening when he met President Chirac, Kofi Annan and many other high level dignitaries, meant, for him, it was a very proud moment. He was standing on the corner where he had painted the big pole at the museum when Jacques Chirac walked up to him and shook his hand. Johnny Mawurndjul was reported to have said to Jacques Chirac: ‘Are you as important to these people as I am to my people?’, without realising that he was actually talking to the French President. He had no sense of being overwhelmed.
The same applies to Gulumbu Yunupingu. When I walked in there with Leslie and others, it took my breath away. I felt immense pride that Northern Territory artists were commissioned to paint this building. If anyone is going over to France, please take the time to go to the MQB. The French are renowned, of course, for their good coffee and croissants, but one thing that really struck me in France, particularly in Paris, was the museums. Every museum I visited talks to you. That is what we need a sense of here; our museum has to be able to talk to us and have the different cultures talk.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
I take the opportunity to reflect on an article that appeared recently in The Weekend Australian. As a child, my mother used to take me back and forth to Nguiu. As an adult I had the privilege of working there as the Nguiu Community Government Council Office Manager, for most of that time under the presidency of Barry Puruntatameri, whom I call father. Nguiu is a place that is very familiar and dear to me. Like all communities, it has had its share of problems, but for me, Nguiu is also a place where the evolving Tiwi identity is expressed and affirmed.
Last year, I had a dream, a nightmare really, which has since recurred. In my dream, I went back to Nguiu and found the town with high rise buildings and franchise businesses which was unrecognisable as the Nguiu I used to know. There were no Tiwis living there. They all had to move away somewhere else. Fortunately, that was just a dream, but I did not dream up the comments that the member for Solomon made in the House of Representatives this year. His take on Aboriginal communities was:
On the hairdresser bit, he obviously has not been to Maningrida lately. As regards to McDonalds and Irish theme pubs, they are the sort of things that would fit right into the nightmare about the future of Nguiu.
My thoughts were again unpleasantly dragged back to Nguiu when I read an article in the Inquirer section of last weekend’s Weekend Australian newspaper, headed Days of Promise in Tiwi Plan. The article was a sort of puff piece for the Tiwi Land Council, which tried to portray the organisation known as the Tiwi Island Local Government, or TILG, as an oppositional vehicle for the minority part-Aboriginal bureaucratic welfare administering class. TILG is also described as ‘the kingdom of the part-Tiwi’. I can only assume that this is the view that has been conveyed to the journalist by senior Tiwi Land Council representatives, which is very sad for the Tiwi people who rely on those representatives to be responsible and responsive leaders who will look after the interest of all Tiwis.
When I was working for the Nguiu Community Government Council and the Tiwi Land Council, they had a mutually respectful and harmonious relationship. There were hardly any non-Aboriginal staff and most of the employees were Tiwis. I had grave misgivings at the time and still wish that things could go back to how they were.
TILG has been through two non-Aboriginal CEOs. Very recently, a Tiwi CEO took over. His father is a well respected Tiwi man and his name is Mr Lawrence Costa. Lawrence is trying his best to overcome various problems he has inherited. It is a difficult and challenging task and what he needs from the land council is support and assistance, not back stabbing in the national media.
Another dynamic and important member of TILG is Gawain Tipiloura whose father preceded me as the member for Arafura for many years and who was also a member of the Tiwi Land Council. No one would have dared to challenge the Tiwi identity of my uncle. My immediate predecessor as member for Arafura, Maurice Rioli, also works for TILG. His father is Cyril Kalippa, one of the founding members of the Tiwi Land Council and still one of its senior members.
The basic thrust of the Inquirer article was that Tiwi Land Council is kicking goals in terms of attracting large scale investment and economic development to the Tiwi Islands. There have been some notable failures with past projects, but like all Tiwis, I encourage and support all of the ongoing efforts to promote economic development on our land. That encouragement and support is, of course, qualified by a desire to ensure that all proposals are economically and environmentally safe, and that the proper consultation and approval processes required under both the Land Rights Act and other applicable legislation are complied with.
As for the spurious attempts in the article to divide the Tiwi population between full-blood Tiwis and others, the fact is, that long before white settlement in the Northern Territory, Tiwi men intermarried with women from other Aboriginal tribes and groups, including Larrakia and Iwaidja. The tradition has continued to this day. I was angered and a bit saddened by the false analysis adopted in the article about the part-Tiwi. In contrast to many other societies, the Tiwi social identity and rights traditionally pass down a matrilineal line. My mother was a proud and universally respected Tiwi woman.
I have had some opportunity to speak to some of my leaders on the island, and I know that the article and its content have created much distress to all my Tiwi families. There have been some meetings between the Tiwi Land Council and the Tiwi Island Local Government to resolve this over the last few days. I am hoping that the outcome of those meetings is that everyone gets together, puts behind them all of the bickering and the back stabbing, which is not productive given that in recent times, there has been so much progress made with a lot of the businesses and when amalgamations of TILG are starting to bear fruit. It is counterproductive for all of this fighting to happen.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I hope that we can resolve a lot of these problems, because what this article has created is a deep chasm of division that has been around for a long time, where the full-Aboriginal versus part-Aboriginal has been played out for too long in some of our communities and has been used as a divisive tool by many people. There was a meeting today, hopefully to resolve this issue. I hope that my people can overcome this adversity, that there can be some resolution and we can move forward.
Ms MARTIN (Fannie Bay): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, on 21 June this year, I had the pleasure of opening the IFAP, which is the Industrial Foundation for Accident Prevention, Darwin North Australia Safety Centre. The new centre, which is located at Berrimah, is good news for the Territory’s rapidly expanding oil and gas industry, with top quality safety training and consulting services now more accessible to industry in our region. Previously, courses like Crisis and Emergency Management training and accredited OH&S training, for example, were largely conducted interstate. Now we have around 90 expert instructors and consultants on call to meet the needs of industry. Previously, there were only six. What this means is safer and healthier workplaces, and increasing levels of professionalism in the industry.
The North Australia Safety Centre has been up and running since 1989, thanks mainly to the vision and dedication of Alex Saundry, the past Executive Director and Chairman of the Safety Centre, but our growing oil and gas industry prompted IFAP to purchase and expand the centre to meet an increasing offshore customer demand. We worked closely with IFAP to renegotiate the lease and to ensure a smooth transition to the new owners. By the way, it is not just the oil and gas industry that is benefiting from the new expanded centre. IFAP also trains Defence personnel, and in June, over 400 Defence personnel were trained in various survival techniques, including helicopter underwater escape training and sea survival training. This nationally accredited course is designed to give participants the knowledge, skills and confidence to deal with unforeseen events, like ditching at sea or platform abandonment.
Thanks to Craig Parrick, IFAP’s Operations Manager, I was lucky enough to see the HUET course in action. The training was conducted in a purpose-built indoor training facility which includes classrooms, change room amenities, a 6 m deep pool and a crane-tracked module based on the Puma helicopter. The module is lowered and rolled into the pool to simulate an emergency landing of a helicopter at sea.
From there, we moved to the fire safety training facility where accredited courses are run by Red Alert. Red Alert is a registered training organisation and will work with our offshore operators. They will run both onshore fire emergency response exercises and offshore installation-specific training. Successful participants received a chemical hydrocarbons and oil refining training qualification, which is recognised by the Australian National Training Authority.
It was an amazing experience watching the fire demonstrations and feeling the intensity of the heat. One particular demonstration that summed up the dangers our firefighters face was the simulated house fire and gas leak in a pipeline construction. It is frightening to think that in only 60 seconds when oxygen is allowed to fuel a house fire, people only have a matter of seconds to escape. The gas pipeline simulation will provide the oil and gas industry with the training it needs to deal with emergencies like these.
I had the pleasure of meeting many people involved with the upgraded safety centre at the opening. I especially acknowledge the hard work and support of the following people: Bob Adams, Chairman of the North Australia Safety Centre; Craig Parrick, Operations Manager NASC; Dan Smetana, President IFAP; Martin Ralph, Managing Director of IFAP; Bob Brockley, Red Alert Australia; Peter Hopton, CEO Perkins Shipping.
The IFAP Darwin North Australia Safety Centre will provide our growing oil and gas industry with the knowledge and services it needs to operate in a safe and professional way. I am sure I speak for everyone here in congratulating IFAP, Red Alert Australia, and the North Australian Safety Centre for their hard work and significant contribution to the Territory.
September marks the beginning of Dementia Month. Dementia is an issue of growing importance in the Territory and, indeed, for a number of my constituents. I recently discussed the issues surrounding the condition with the new chair of the NT Branch of Alzheimer’s Association, Ray Norman. Ray is a long-term member of our community with a distinguished career in our public sector, as well as being recognised as an active and pivotal member of many non-government organisations.
It has been 100 years since Dr Alzheimer identified what is known now as Alzheimer’s Disease. In 2005, there were 210 000 recorded cases of dementia in Australia. It is expected that a further 53 000 new cases will be diagnosed in 2006. Alzheimer’s Disease accounts for between 50% and 70% of dementia cases. It is important to remember that dementia is not an automatic part of growing old. Indeed, many people live to a ripe old age without suffering dementia. However, age is one of the high risk factors. With the ageing of our population, as well as many more people in the Territory now approaching retirement age, the number of people in our community with dementia can only grow.
It is timely for us to be reminded of what we can do to minimise the risk of getting dementia, and also of the excellent services that are available in the Territory. The single most important message in combating the risk of dementia is to live a healthy lifestyle. It is worth remembering that what is good for the heart is also good for the brain.
The Mind Your Mind program is a user’s guide to dementia risk reduction. It contains seven signposts to a healthier life that also combat dementia onset. The main messages are to mind your brain with intellectual stimulation such as puzzles, reading or playing musical instruments; mind your body with regular exercise; mind your diet for increased brain health; and mind your health checks to identify, monitor and reduce risk factors. There are expert services available, and the Northern Territory office of Alzheimer’s Australia has qualified staff who will deal with inquiries and offer a wide range of support services and activities. These support services include carers for people with dementia and their families, face-to-face counselling, respite care, opportunities to learn new skills, and the very effective Living With Memory Loss program.
The Alzheimer’s Australia’s national hotline, manned by qualified personnel, is available to Territorians and is often a good first step in determining whether action needs to be taken. The aged care assessment teams located in the Department of Health and Community Services provide professional advice, assistance and specialist services. The Territory Older Persons’ Support Service operated by Frontier Services, provides services and assessment to older people and their families in a considerate and confidential way. As I said earlier, Ray Norman has recently become the Chair of Alzheimer’s Australia NT and is continuing the good work of his predecessors in raising the profile of dementia related services in the Territory.
Ray is well supported by Marianne Fitch, the Executive Director, and the rest of the staff who, in a few short years, have expanded the range and quality of dementia support services to Territorians. Dementia can be better managed if diagnosed early and appropriate treatment and support is put in place for both the client and family.
An important message for all of us is that if you have concerns for yourself or for a family member, take advantage of the many excellent services in the Territory and ask for help as soon as possible. Early intervention will ensure the best outcomes for the individual and for the family. I encourage all members to support the Alzheimer’s Association, particularly during Dementia Month in September, and the excellent work they do throughout our community.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I will continue from last night. I realise that at the rate I am going, we could be here until the end of year so I will do my best to shorten some of what I have to say.
Last night, I mentioned that I visited the Sheriff’s office and the Probate and Juvenile Court. The interesting thing in the United States is the number of police forces they have. In the town of Marysville they have a police force; in Union County they have a police force; and on top of that you have the State Patrol. You have three police forces in the one area. It was a bit of a surprise and I said perhaps they make employment out of administration because obviously you have to have three administrations, but they have a reason for it. You have to go back to the history of the United States to understand why. Personally, I think our system of one Northern Territory Police Force doing the whole lot is much better.
On the same day I visited the Probate and Juvenile Court for Union County, I also visited Lila Dodd who is the mother of Judi and the sister of Captain Strauss. The local Marysville Journey Tribune was doing a story on the family and my visit to the United States. Judy and Paden spoke about their trip to the NT and Lila spoke about her brother, Al, and her memories of the last time she saw him before he headed off to Australia and on to Darwin in 1942.
The next day, Judi, Dave and I went to Wadesville, Indiana, west of Ohio where Captain Strauss is buried. Before I go too far, I should mention I do have a copy of the Marysville Journey Tribune and I know on my non-PowerPoint presentation, you cannot see that but over here is a front page of my trip to the United States, so I was pleased to see that. I should let you know at that time, on Thursday, 6 July 2006, regular fuel in Marysville was $2.95.9 cents per gallon. If someone wants to work that out they can compare the price of fuel here with the price in the United States.
As I said, the next day we travelled off to Wadesville in Indiana. Wadesville is a small country town of about 3500 people and just out of the town overlooking a wheat field is a beautifully kept cemetery. Captain Strauss is buried between his mother and father, but has a special headstone recognising when he was interred at the cemetery. The Australian and Territory flags I took with me were laid on the ground and we paused to remember and say a prayer. It was a very special moment.
The story that started many years ago at a World War II cricket pitch near Noonamah had taken me to the other side of the world. Some years ago I had been told Captain Strauss had some connection with Wadesville. In 2003, I looked up the Wadesville phone book and wrote to Paul Strauss. Just before I go any further, I should on my non-PowerPoint presentation, show you the picture of the cemetery where Captain Strauss is buried, which is outside of the town of Wadesville just above a wheat field that had just been harvested. It is a beautiful little spot. It is called Laura Hill and that is the memorial to say he was interred after being brought back from Australia.
As I said, the history of how I found Captain Strauss was that in 2003, I looked up the Wadesville phone book and wrote to a Paul Strauss. The letter ended up with a Mrs Marie Strauss, wife of Paul but no relation at all to Captain Strauss. After asking around the district, she found a person who knew where Lila Dodd lived and from there, my letter eventually got to Lila who passed it on to Judi who received it on Thanksgiving Day.
Back to the present, the question for me was whether Marie Strauss was still in Wadesville. To find out, we stopped at the local fire brigade headquarters because we reckoned they would know. After explaining who I was and why I was there, they presented me with a Wadesville T-shirt and cooler and then, like many Americans who are so friendly, they took me for a ride in the fire truck. In fact, they took me to the next town where the fire brigade driver lived, through the cornfields and back again. They are very friendly people and that reaction was typical of the people I met.
In the meantime, we found out where Marie Strauss lived. She lived in a little place called Aubrey Lane, which is a back street of Wadesville. We went to this house and knocked on the door. No one answered and we thought: ‘We’ve come all this way and this lady’s not going to be here’. We knocked on the door again and she answered the door. When we told her where I had come from, she could not believe it at first. When I passed her a map of Australia and a copy of the Australian Geographic, she believed it. She and Judi Green’s mother, Lila Dodd, have resumed a relationship that, you might say, 18 years ago had disappeared and she had forgotten all about the Strauss family who lived in Wadesville. It has all started up again and they have now a new relationship. It was a bit of a teary moment, but it was very important that we found Marie Strauss because that has nearly completed the circle that started here some years ago.
After 750 miles that day, we eventually got home about 10.30. I will not bore you with the trip home, but even that was exciting. It was a very worthwhile day, even though it was very tiring and we all enjoyed it.
The day before 4 July, there was a big fireworks display called the Red, White and Bloom in Columbus and people from all over Ohio come to enjoy the celebrations. The evening starts off with a big parade, which, in this case, was delayed for about an hour because of a storm and tornado warning which, thankfully, did not eventuate. There is nothing like sitting in the hotel seeing, time after time, warnings about tornadoes and storm warnings coming across the television. The Americans love to make a big deal about these storms and tornadoes. In fact, whatever it was that hit Columbus, they got a little drizzle and they delayed the parade for an hour. Nothing really happened but it made good news on television. Luckily, it did not hit. They have their spectacular fireworks display, just like we have on our independence day, and in this case, it was choreographed to the 1812 Overture. Unfortunately, we could not hear the music, but we could hear the bangs.
I need to talk a little about 4 July. I was over there during Independence Day, and part of the reason I was there was to understand how Americans live and celebrate. 4 July was a day that started off with rain, but by mid-afternoon it had cleared up and I went out to the farm on Blues Creek Road, met lots of members of the family and I am sure there were members of the family out there that not even Judi and Dave Green knew. They play a game called Corn Hole, which is played with packets of corn in little bags and you throw it through a hole. We might be able to introduce it to Australia and then we could have the Australian Corn Hole Championships and they will be held in Ohio. I can go back there and say I am representing Australia.
They have a great day. As usual, they have a barbecue, or grill, as they call it. They eat plenty of corn on the cob. The flags were flying and you might have seen our picture in the Northern Territory News. That is the picture there of the farm where all the flags are flying, so I did feel a little proud on that day that way out in the middle of Ohio, a long way from the Northern Territory, our flag was flying with the American flag, which was a great occasion. One of the main reasons I was visiting Ohio was to remember Captain Strauss, and when you see the distance from this place, which is near Indiana, to where he eventually died, it is an awful long way, so in 1942, it was probably the end of the world. He came out to Australia from a far land.
It is funny. There has been a lot of debate about fireworks in the Northern Territory when they go off at the wrong time, etcetera. In Ohio, they are illegal, but the police regard it as a very minor misdemeanour so fireworks do happen in Ohio. They do not regard it as a big deal, but they do use them sensibly, I must admit.
I should mention that Ohio has quite a number of Honda plants within the state. The one near Marysville employs about 6200 workers and they produce the Gold Wing and other motorbikes and the Acura and Accord motor vehicles. It is funny, when you talk about planning, how in the Territory we tend to stick our industries over here, and we tend to put our residential here, and we have our farming there. In Marysville, you travel out of town along the Honda Parkway, a beautiful big four-lane highway, and here is this Honda factory sitting out in the cornfields by itself. They have a tendency with large manufacturing industries to put them away and put them out in the agricultural areas. There is also Scotts industry, which makes fertilisers, fertiliser spreaders and garden equipment. They also have a place in Marysville and that is sitting out in the paddocks right away from main residential areas. It is an interesting way to look at where we place our industries.
A couple of days later, I visited the David-Besse nuclear power plant. Originally, I was going to visit another power plant and, as luck turned out, we had problems with communicating with them and the Sheriff, Rocky Nelson, whom I mentioned earlier, when we told him that we were having problems getting permission to visit the power station, said: ‘I know the sheriff up near Port Clinton. I will give him a ring’. Sure enough, he made an appointment and we went to the Davis-Besse nuclear power plant.
The Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station is just north of Oak Harbour. You can see the cooling tower for many miles around. It is also close to Port Clinton, which is a favourite spot for tourists wanting to visit islands offshore just south of the Canadian border. We were met by Mr David Kline who, naturally, checked our ID, as happens often in America. He then led us into the main administration building where visitors are permitted and there is a large display showing how the plant operates. The power station is on 950 acres, and I will use acres and imperial measurements here, 733 acres of which are protected wetlands, jointly managed with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
At this nuclear power plant, heat is created through fission, the splitting of uranium atoms. I will not go into the explanation. I am sure those people who know about how a nuclear power station works will understand that. Security at the plant, as you would imagine, is very tight so I was not able to visit inside the reactor and the power plant, but it was still good to visit the plant because they had problems in 2002 when it was discovered there was corrosion at the head of the reactor pressure vessel. The plant was then shut down. I asked Mr Kline about this episode. He replied that the company had since nearly rebuilt the reactor and the previous management, naturally, had been sacked. My understanding is the company was fined millions of dollars and a number of their former managers have been indicted. If you are interested in more on this matter, you can read it on the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission website.
There are over 100 nuclear power plants in the United States and many of them are coming up for licence renewal, so it will be interesting to see where that leads. I believe with the issues related to global warming, nuclear has its place but, at the same time, realising that it is only part of a number of energy options, for example geothermal, that we may need to look at. It was hoped that thorium reactors may be the answer, but they are still in the development stage. The problem is that, while we procrastinate, the world is getting hotter. Even though there is some opposition to nuclear power in the US, my feeling was that people in Ohio accepted the role of nuclear power. I know the media or my opponents will ask: would you like one of those in your back yard? Look at where they are sited in Ohio; amongst the cornfields and near small towns and marinas. It is interesting to note that presently, low and high level radioactive waste is stored on-site. I was glad I visited this site because if I had gone to a squeaky clean site, I would have been accused of having a skewed picture. My lasting impression will be the amazement of seeing a nuclear power plant amongst the cornfield farms, houses and marinas of Ottawa county. I am sure there will be plenty more to debate upon this issue in the months ahead.
After we had finished that day, we drove up to Michigan through Toledo to a little town called Dundee, and it actually has a place called Cabelas, which is the biggest hunting and sporting store I have ever seen in my life. If you think Fishing and Outdoor was big, you would have to multiply that by about 500 times to have any idea how big this store is. It just shows you how much emphasis the Americans put on hunting and outdoor recreation in that part of the world.
I noticed in the supermarket in Marysville that they had introduced the self-scan checkout. I think I have mentioned this before, about the worry about people losing their jobs. In Kroger’s Supermarket, there was one supervisor and four self-scan checkouts. People were using them and they certainly do work. You can use your credit card or you can put notes or coins in the machine. You just scan it, and put it in your plastic bag. There is someone keeping an eye on you to make sure you put everything past the scanner. That is the way they are going in that part of the world. I am told it has come to Australia, but I have concerns about whether that means fewer jobs.
The Sunday after I had been to the power plant, I visited Columbus for the Ohio Florist Association Short Course. I do not have time to talk on that today, but I will quickly show a picture on my non-PowerPoint presentation to give you some idea what it was about. It was one of the biggest floriculture conventions in America. I will give you a rundown on that later.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I talk about a solemn occasion. A good friend of mine, Kevin Gould, unfortunately, succumbed to an untimely death owing to a mysterious illness.
Kevin Gould was a good friend of mine, I am proud to say. I only knew him for the last five years. Through my position as the member for Millner, I became good friends with both he and his wife, Betty. I got to know Kevin and Betty through the Coconut Grove Seniors Hall. With the election of Kevin as chairperson, I worked closely with him for the last five years. It has been an enjoyable time, and he definitely assisted me during that period and became a great friend. If I get to live as many years as he did, even though, sadly, he left us too soon, I would be happy to be half the man Kevin was in intelligence, kindness and temperament. He was a very wise and kind person.
I would like to read a poem by Helen Butler Farr, which is one of Kevin’s favourites. It is called The Pleasant Mile:
Kevin Gould was born on the 28 October 1936 and, unfortunately, passed away on 29 July 2006.
Kevin and family came to Darwin in 1971 chasing the good weather, like many others have done over the years. He loved the Flinders Ranges and Port Augusta, but could not take the extremes of summer and winter. He put a ruler on the map and saw Darwin was the same latitude as where they were in Africa so, when the position of Paymaster came up in Darwin he transferred to the North Australian Railways. He left the country he loved for the kinder climate, but found he had made a grave mistake as Darwin, being on the coast, is very humid. His part of Africa, Northern Rhodesia, was 900 m to 1500 m above sea level, where the temperature in the day was 9 to 23C, and, in the Wet, it was 18 to 31C. He said the lifestyle made up for the heat.
He became involved in church affairs, but also in the social life of the railways. He was the secretary of their cricket team and was member No 3 of the new Railway Institute. He and Betty were keen dancers and hardly missed the wonderful balls that were held on the forecourt of the Civic Centre. The uneven cement was hard on the legs and especially the footwear, but it never stopped Darwinites donning their finery – those were the days!
His children attended Catholic schools in Darwin. Paula and Helen went south to boarding school after Cyclone Tracy. Later on, Patrick went south to boarding school, but, like his father, could not take the weather, so moved to Cairns to finish his schooling. When the North Australian Railways were finishing up, Kevin was offered work in South Australia with the Commonwealth Railways, as were many of his co-workers. He obtained a short-term position with the Darwin Reconstruction Commission. Unfortunately, with no golden handshake with either the Railways or the DRC, he then worked in several government departments and his last position was with Power and Water.
He was never tempted to go south as he loved Darwin but did not regret the many changes that meant progress. He knew these changes were necessary. The three long overseas holidays and several trips to Asia satisfied his itchy feet.
Kevin had a very generous nature and was willing to help where and when he could. Several organisations over the years asked him to rehash their constitutions, and this was right up his alley.
He loved to write verse, poetry and words to songs. When Denise Goodfellow asked him to sing Red Sails in the Sunset one evening at the sewage ponds, he decided to write suitable words to the Mountains of Mourne and sang it at a couple of Denise’s dos. It was about the wildlife at the pond and how future generations may not see these vanishing species. Another time he wrote words to Tit Willow and once again performed it at the sewage ponds for Denise.
I met Kevin at the Coconut Grove Seniors Hall where he was chairman. He was trying to build it up as he felt the organisation’s hall was not being used to the full potential. They had three lunches a year and a couple of sale days. Kevin suggested to Betty to do more luncheons and a couple of boat outings. I and Steve Brennan, my electorate officer, who also worked very closely with Betty and Kevin, did barbecues on Australia Day and Anzac Day at the hall and always had Kevin’s full support.
Kevin was kind enough to quarantine those particular barbecues as the member for Millner’s days. Everyone around the area and the seniors committee recognises that Australia Day and Anzac Day are the days that the member for Millner holds his functions at the Coconut Grove Seniors Hall.
Having done bingo in Africa and Port Augusta, Kevin, with Betty’s help, made bingo a monthly event. When some of the committee wanted to cancel it when numbers would sometimes drop to 12 or 15, he refused. Kevin said it was run for the members and not the committee. Sometimes there would only be the two of them to run it. Betty came up with a new formula for the prizes and this gave it a shot in the arm and numbers increased.
Also, we held a couple of bingo bonanzas. We had donated prizes from local businesses and me, and we were able to really help kick start the bingo. It was a fantastic venture by both Kevin and Betty.
Kevin put the Coconut Grove seniors first and rarely let his private life outside interfere with the running of this organisation during the four years he was chairman. He promised Betty there would be a life after the ‘Coconutties’ as he called them.
He said after the new constitution he was working on was in place, he would resign. Alas, he left it too late and passed away two months after his resignation. Kevin can be proud that he left the organisation in a much healthier situation than when he took it over. He wanted to open the hall several mornings a week for socialising for the members but the committee would not roster on for this and, as he worked, he could not do it himself. At least the bingo and the lunches he and Betty ran kept them busy.
Kevin said: ‘If you took on a job, you had to give it 100%’. That is what he did and always with a joke and a smile. Kevin loved politics. It could have been because his parents were members of the Labour Party in the United Kingdom before coming to Australia. This must have rubbed off on him as he was Secretary of the Australian Labor Party in Port Augusta. He listened to Radio National all day so he could keep up with world and Australian affairs. When Fred McCue ran Talkback, Kevin would use his acting skills and call in under different names. Everyone knew his usual voice but not the others! This gave him a good laugh.
Kevin gave 120% to whatever he took on: church for the seventeen years with the Saint Pat’s Race Club or the four years at the Coconut Grove Seniors. He loved the stage work he did for 28 years and gave enjoyment to many who would not miss a show he was in. In his every day life, he had a laugh and a joke for everyone, and hummed and whistled most of the time. His happy mood was infectious.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, the final words I would like to say about Kevin are that he was a very good, kind, hard working man. He obviously spent a lot of time with his family and his family was first, second and third. He will be sadly missed by Paula, Helen and Patrick, his children. I know that they make Betty and Kevin proud.
Kevin showed me that there is life in retirement, even though he was only semi-retired. He had fantastic skills as an organiser and he used those as best he could for the benefit of his community. Kevin will be sorely missed by all of the residents of the Millner electorate and definitely by all the Coconut Grove Seniors members. So, Kevin Gould, mate, no doubt one day I will meet you. I will see you upstairs. Take care.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, today I asked a series of questions of the Minister for Health and I was most disappointed with his answers. For the first question I asked about the Royal Darwin Hospital, the minister obviously did not have any idea what was going on at the hospital until someone rushed him a hand-written note, it came from upstairs, to advise him that several areas of the hospital had been questioned by the accrediters as not measuring up to standard. I understand that the maintenance area, X-ray, the children’s ward and the laboratory were all brought under question. I am not sure what the real difficulties are. I will wait to read the response from the minister after he received the report that was brought down to him.
The minister needs to be more across what is going on. If the opposition is able to obtain information about the dropping of standards, then the minister ought to know and the minister should be able to prevent that from happening. To wait until an accrediter to come along and say: ‘Look, sorry, your hospital is not up to standard. You have to fix it’, yes, it is within the four year accreditation period and that is fine, it is not removing the accreditation, but it has been subject to some questions.
I have said to the minister before: the accreditation process is a snapshot in time. You now need to put processes in place if you want to maintain the standards right through the whole period of accreditation. Only then can you say that our hospitals are up to scratch. I am glad to see that the other hospitals have not been brought into question at this time. Perhaps it is because the accrediters have not done their review of those hospitals and if they have, I would like to hear that from the minister.
I will be loath to think that the Alice Springs Hospital, Tennant Creek Hospital, Katherine Hospital and even Gove would be called into question. I know the minister is probably not particularly interested any more; he has another day to go and that is the end of his career in this Chamber. Whoever is the new minister, I request that you get up to speed on that.
When I asked about nursing numbers, the minister said he signed off on a letter. I am still waiting to receive it. It would be good to know what the nursing numbers are, where they have been allocated, to which hospitals, and to what areas within each hospital.
When I tried to source the information from the Nursing Federation, they could not tell me either. They said: ‘We do not know where they are, but whenever we talk to our member nurses in the ANF, those nurses will roll their eyes and say, “Well, we don’t where they are either”. There are more nurses leaving than we see new nurses’,
The ones who were recruited from overseas, nurses who came from the Philippines, some were Filipino nurses who came from Ireland, there are nurses from India, who are now all working in our hospitals. I am very interested to know what the attrition rate is. How many of them have left? I know a whole swag of Filipino nurses have left Alice Springs Hospital. It is well and good for the minister to get up and say: ‘We have 100 new nurses’. Tell us how many you have lost because that has a huge bearing on the staffing in our hospitals.
When it came to the EBA negotiations with the ANF, the minister said, ‘It is not my responsibility’. That is funny because the negotiations were being carried out by the OCPE and are obviously done on behalf of the Department of Health and Community Services, so the minister would have some responsibility for what is going on.
When I went into the ANF website, many things came to light. For instance, when the minister said, ‘We are offering the nurses an 11.34% increase in salaries’, that is not true, and the ANF said that is not true. It was 11.34% over 18 months, as described by the minister today. I will read from the media release by the ANF on 10 August: Yvonne Falckh, Branch Secretary of ANFNT, said:
I will jump a paragraph and continue:
That is how the nurses perceive it and, because of the persistent way that the government continues to negotiate with the nurses, not giving them what appears to be adequate increments in their salaries over the next few years, their salary scale will actually degrade from their current third highest in the country out of eight states down to about the fifth position in about two years’ time.
The government was out there promising nurses that they will be the best paid in the country - never mind that they are not the best paid in the country, they are the third best paid - over the next two years, if they accept the government’s current offer, they will degrade to the fifth highest out of eight states. Obviously, from the nurses’ point of view, it is not good enough. It is not good enough.
In the negotiations, many other issues have come to light. For instance, remote nurses are facing quite a significant loss of conditions within their EBA. On Sunday, their on-call allowances will be cut right back to something like $1.70 or $1.50 per hour. If you are on call anywhere, if you want to relax and have a glass of wine, you are not able to do that. You have to be within calling distance so that you can get to the clinic fairly quickly if someone comes in for emergency help. To have to sit around, waiting all night for maybe nothing, you get paid $1.50 or $1.70 and for a whole night, being unable to go anywhere, confined to home or near the clinic, for a few measly dollars is most inappropriate.
Worst of all is the way the government has decided to define what are normal or ordinary hours of work. Most businesses would consider that normal hours of work are between 8 am and 5 pm. In health, there is a bit of a leeway, and normally we consider 6 am to approximately 6 pm as normal working hours. That is a 12-hour period. The government, wants to now change it to make it as late as 8 pm. Yes, it is true; a 12-hour period from 8 am to 8 pm. However, most shifts in hospitals start earlier than 8 am. How are you going to define a person working overtime or out of hours? They have to work to past 8 pm before they are defined to be working out of hours? How many of us in normal employment would accept that? The minister needs to really get his head around it and talk to the OCPE to ensure that the conditions are more conducive to good staff loyalty and commitment to work.
The other thing is rental concessions. If you are a nurse recruited from elsewhere to work in a remote community, usually it is rent free. I am not sure, but I understand that the government is now going to only provide a $40 flat rate per fortnight rental subsidy instead of the rental concession they had before. That is another degradation of conditions. There are many issues there the minister needs to address, and address quickly, so that he can ensure that our nurses have good conditions that will encourage them to stay on to work in the Territory.
I then raised the question about what has happened with St John Ambulance. I know that the contract ran out on 31 July. I also know that the government has given a temporary reprieve to extend the contract to September, and then it runs out. That is only a month away; not very long. To date, we have not heard any indication that a new contract will be signed. The government has also sought a review of St John’s operations. We know that report was completed a long while ago - the Bernie McKay report was done, I think, in November 2005. It is not available. The government’s comment about why it would not release the document is that it is not in the public interest. What does that mean? It was done with public funds to assess the operations of the St John Ambulance service and what costs have been incurred by the service and how the government could adequately resource the service or not. The report is not to be released because it is not in the public interest? What a load of rubbish.
We know that the greater Darwin and Alice Springs areas, while served with a 24-hour ambulance service, are under-serviced. In Darwin, they need a fourth vehicle and crew to ensure there is adequate cover after hours. It is similar in Alice Springs. Essentially, it is only one vehicle and crew that looks after the whole of Alice Springs. The whole of Alice Springs is quite large, too. It is not a little town like Tennant Creek or Katherine. It is quite a large town with nearly 30 000 people and others living on the periphery of Alice Springs. They need at least two full crews and vehicles after hours to ensure there is adequate cover in Alice Springs.
At the moment, the Territory has the best paramedic training course in the country and many people choose to have their paramedics training here, but once they graduate, the salary offered to them to work in the Territory is not as good as interstate. Once they have the experience, they are head-hunted by interstate ambulance services and away they go. We lose our paramedics. The government needs to address that, and address it soon, so that we not only train our paramedics, but retain them.
Finally, when I asked the minister to give us an undertaking that once the radiation oncology service is ready in Darwin and operational, patients in Alice Springs have the choice to seek treatment interstate and that PATS assistance will be provided to these patients so that they can travel interstate to seek cancer treatment. At the moment, the fear is that if this service is available in Darwin, patients will have to come to Darwin for treatment. That is not on. They have developed strong relationships with Adelaide. They should be allowed to continue to go there.
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I will make a short but very important statement this evening in relation to a former constituent. Her name is Kiya Gill. Kiya has just left employment with the Coomalie Community Government Council and joined the Red Cross.
Kiya has been a member of the staff at the Coomalie Community Government Council since January 2003. She started as a clerical trainee and ended up in the position titled Council Secretary/Senior Administration Officer, but it really was a jack of all trades. Kiya did anything that was asked of her and she really threw herself into her job.
I became aware of Kiya during my activities as both a candidate and after that as a member. Kiya had the responsibility of organising a great deal of the council’s functions, including Australia Day celebrations, the nationally famous Anzac Day Dawn Service at Adelaide River, Territory Day celebrations, other events like the seniors’ outings which are very well attended, and many other events the council ran or community-run events for which she would give up her time.
Kiya was able to instil a great deal of enthusiasm in other volunteers within the community. She did a very professional job, well above what was asked, and I want to acknowledge her efforts. She will be very sadly missed. I met Kiya on the Seniors’ Mystery Bus Tour as it came into Palmerston. Many of the seniors are very upset that she has left. They are very thankful for all her efforts. She was a lovely young lady. They and I wish her all the best.
As I said, she has moved on to the Australian Red Cross as their Fundraising Coordinator, and she will do an absolutely fabulous job with them. She has the capacity of organisation, honesty and enthusiasm which will bode well with her work for the Red Cross.
I have been approached by citizens of the town and by the council to wish her every success. They hope she comes back at some time in the future. She is growing as a person and her abilities will continue to grow and she will hopefully come back to the region in a more responsible role. I wish her all the best. In the Territory, paths always cross, but thanks for all your work, Kiya, and good luck in your future endeavours.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, it is with great pleasure tonight that I once again recognise the important work of Elva Whitbread and her work on Palmerston Seniors’ Week. Elva and the committee do a fantastic job organising events for seniors in Palmerston, all on a volunteer basis, and they put together some great activities.
I was present at the launch of Palmerston Seniors’ Week, which was a function at Woodroffe Primary School. There was a good turn out, down a little on last year, but quite a few of Palmerston seniors made it to the day. There was some great food and some excellent entertainment, as always, by the Senior Songsters. The people who are part of the Senior Songsters really ought to be congratulated on the number of productions that they put on.
I would also like make mention of Gray Primary School and Good Shepherd Lutheran School in Palmerston. I went to both schools to do book readings as part of Literacy Week, an important week to encourage children to enjoy stories and reading. Reading really does open up a whole realm for the imagination. The book I read was called Run, Hare, Run, which is all about a picture of a hare. It is a fascinating story and a fascinating concept. The author wrote the book on the basis of having seen a picture of a hare in an art gallery in Vienna and decided that he would write a story about how the artist came to paint such a picture.
I was very privileged today to be at Wanguri Primary School for its 30 year anniversary celebration. As someone who attended Wanguri Primary from 1977 until 1982, it was great to go back to the school and see the children who are there now, and the teachers. The reunion is tonight, unfortunately, and I have not been able to get there, but I caught up with some parents of people with whom I went to school - Mrs Hillis, a great long time resident of Wanguri - and I took the opportunity to go through the school and have a look at the photos of days gone by. It really shows the great history that Wanguri Primary School has. It has always had strong support from the community and parents of the student body who are going to the school. Congratulations to everyone on the 30 years celebration.
They had a choir perform as part of the Assembly this morning and that was conducted or directed, I am not sure what the correct term is, by Ms Judy Weepers, who we all know puts so much work into the community and young people, and will again be part of this year’s Beat which is, if my memory serves me correct, on the 8th of the coming month, so I encourage everyone to get there if possible. The Beat is a great institution of the Northern Territory, great to encourage children to get out and not be afraid of expressing themselves, which is extremely important. We encourage our sports greatly and we need to also encourage the expression that comes from the arts, whether it be performance, drawing, singing or what have you.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, there is one serious matter I would like to deal with and that, of course, is the announcement that was made regarding health services in Palmerston. I understand that there may be a petition going around Palmerston, and I am not sure who is the organiser of the petition, but I am concerned that there is some inaccuracy in it. It needs to be plainly stated that, as the minister said in his statement, the subsidy that was being provided to one medical service has not been continued, and one of the reasons for that is that there are now a number of providers - I believe four, the minister said - who provide an after hours bulk billing service, so it is unfair to have them try to compete on a commercial level with a service funded by government to some level.
Further, it is the Commonwealth government’s responsibility to look after general practitioner services and bulk billing services. The federal government really needs to do a lot more in this area to ensure that people have access, wherever they may live, to a GP and GP services and bulk billing services. The after hours service that all the providers have given is important and people should have those there, but if a service decides to no longer operate for commercial reasons, then people should really be directing their anger towards the federal government, and perhaps getting on the phone to Dave Tollner or Nigel Scullion, and really hitting them up about what they are doing to advance the cause of the Northern Territory within the federal government, although I do not hold out any great hopes for the response they may get or the activity that may result.
The people of Palmerston need to know that services have been increased by the Northern Territory government. The money that was being used to subsidise one particular after hours service is not being removed; it is going into other services in addition to extra resources and extra funds to provide greater services for people in Palmerston, both in the Health area and in the Family and Community Services area.
One of those extra services is in relation to Alcohol and Other Drugs and counselling services around that. That is something that a number of constituents have raised with me, and I am very happy to see that it is a service which is being picked up and provided by this government, and extended in terms of the total amount and the broad range of services that are being provided properly by the Northern Territory instead of having to divert resources to pick up a responsibility that is being ignored by the federal government. Palmerston has a very young population and some of these extra services deal with antenatal health and areas of school dental health, that sort of thing.
The home visit program will see an improvement with more home visits being able to be provided. This is a great win for Palmerston. I urge people to read very carefully any petition that might be presented to them, because this government has done nothing to reduce any services whatsoever. It is, in fact, increasing the health services available.
On health services, I cannot help but pick up on the member for Greatorex’s sudden concern for nurses and their working conditions. When he was a minister, I do not know if anyone could recall him advocating better wages and conditions for nurses. It was with some interest I listened to him do so tonight. I hope that he will continue to champion the cause of nurses because they do provide a necessary, fundamental service to the community. Government should be negotiating with them, as they are. The minister mentioned today ongoing negotiations for the enterprise bargaining agreement. I encourage the government to keep negotiating with all public servants in the variety of fields that we employ people in, to ensure that people get a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work.
It is interesting, however, that the member for Greatorex is not so concerned about the people who work at Palmerston City Council who are engaged under Australian Workplace Agreements. There is no EBA there at all. I would like to see the member call on the Palmerston Council to engage in EBA negotiations with their workforce and provide them with fair conditions.
I know Lucio Matarazzo at the ASU will continue to try to push for an EBA for his members, as will the Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Union, which has members in local government as well. It is one thing that the Darwin City Council has over the Palmerston Council. Darwin City Council has an EBA with its staff and is committed to continuing to engage with its workforce through the enterprise bargaining process. I hope, having said that, they do not suddenly change their approach because there can be no doubt workplace agreements remove the working conditions of employees. They slowly erode over time what many people have come to accept as normal working conditions such as, for example, penalty rates for working on weekends or outside the ordinary hours of work, whatever those hours may be in their particular profession.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, there have been a number of federal colleagues coming to the Territory. It has been good for the Territory to be able to hear their views and have people visit. Martin Ferguson has recently visited and met with people. A number of other shadow ministers have also been in the Top End. Tonight, Julia Gillard is at a function and will be out meeting many Territorians. It is great to have those visits from our federal colleagues.
The events just keep rolling into one another in Palmerston. It is a vibrant, growing place and has many great people. I mentioned the seniors, I previously mentioned the young people who have been involved in events right the way through the community. There is a fantastic community feel. Once again, I have to say it is a great privilege to be representing the seat of Brennan and the people of Palmerston.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
RESPONSES TO PETITIONS
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members that responses to petition Nos 18, 28, 29, and 32 have been received and circulated to honourable members.
- Petition No 18
Save our Parks Estate
Date Presented: 4 May 2006
Presented by: Dr Lim
Referred to: Chief Minister
Date response due: 11 October 2006
Date response received: 29 August 2006
Date response presented: 30 August 2006
The parks to which the petitioners have referred are listed under Schedule 1 of the Parks and Reserves (Framework for the Future) Act to be included in Schedule 1 to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act (ALRA). They are subject to joint management arrangements, in accordance with the Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act.
The result of the 2002 Ward High Court decision created legal uncertainty for 49 Territory parks and reserves.
Legal opinion provided to government was that the declarations of these parks and reserves were potentially invalid. Thirty-eight of these parks were quickly re-declared but legal advice confirmed they were still vulnerable to native title determinations and compensation claims. The remaining 11 parks could not be re-declared because they were already subject to claim under the ALRA, preventing the grant of other interests in that land.
To secure certainty over the future of the 49 parks and reserves, the Northern Territory negotiated settlement of outstanding land rights and native title claims. To pursue settlement through the court system was seen to risk losing some areas from the parks system altogether, at great public expense.
The Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act defines the joint management partners as the Northern Territory government and the Aboriginal traditional owners of the park or reserve.
The objective of joint management is to manage parks for the benefit of traditional owners and the wider community, for biological diversity and to serve visitor and community needs for education and enjoyment.
Day-to-day management of jointly managed parks will remain with the Northern Territory Parks and Wildlife Service.
Under the terms of the joint management agreements, there will be no entry fee to these parks, and no requirement for a permit.
Public access within most parks is already controlled for safety, conservation or cultural reasons. Traditional owners generally want to share their country, so expanded access and opportunities is a likely result.
In the long term, many Aboriginal people will be employed directly and indirectly on parks. Through joint management, traditional owners are also keen to engage in the tourism economy, thereby meeting the large and increasing interstate and international demand for authentic cultural tourism products.
Joint Management Plans will be prepared and the public will be invited to comment on the draft plans as has always been the case.
Joint management is a great success story, and is well supported by Territorians.
- Petition No 28
Save our Parks Estate – Central Australia
Date Presented: 14 June 2006
Presented by: Dr Lim
Referred to: Chief Minister
Date response due: 17 October 2006
Date response received: 29 August 2006
Date response presented: 30 August 2006
- The parks to which the petitioners have referred are listed under Schedule 1 of the Parks and Reserves (Framework for the Future) Act to be included in Schedule 1 to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act (ALRA). They are subject to joint management arrangements, in accordance with the Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act.
The result of the 2002 Ward High Court decision created legal uncertainty for 49 Territory parks and reserves. Legal opinion provided to government was that the declarations of these parks and reserves were potentially invalid. Thirty-eight of these parks were quickly re-declared but legal advice confirmed they were still vulnerable to native title determinations and compensation claims. The remaining 11 parks could not be re-declared because they were already subject to claim under the ALRA, preventing the grant of other interests in that land.
To secure certainty over the future of the 49 parks and reserves, the Northern Territory negotiated settlement of outstanding land rights and native title claims. To pursue settlement through the court system was seen to risk losing some areas from the parks system altogether, at great public expense.
The Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act defines the joint management partners as the Northern Territory government and the Aboriginal traditional owners of the park or reserve.
The objective of joint management is to manage parks for the benefit of traditional owners and the wider community, for biological diversity and to serve visitor and community needs for education and enjoyment.
Day-to-day management of jointly managed parks will remain with the Northern Territory Parks and Wildlife Service.
Under the terms of the joint management agreements, there will be no entry fee to these parks, and no requirement for a permit.
Public access within most parks is already controlled for safety, conservation or cultural reasons. Traditional owners generally want to share their country, so expanded access and opportunities is a likely result.
In the long term, many Aboriginal people will be employed directly and indirectly on parks. Through joint management, traditional owners are also keen to engage in the tourism economy, thereby meeting the large and increasing interstate and international demand for authentic cultural tourism products.
Joint Management Plans will be prepared and the public will be invited to comment on the draft plans as has always been the case.
Joint management is a great success story, and is well supported by Territorians.
- Petition No 29
Save our Parks Estate – Top End
Date Presented: 14 June 2006
Presented by: Dr Lim
Referred to: Chief Minister
Date response due: 17 October 2006
Date response received: 29 August 2006
Date response presented: 30 August 2006
- The parks to which the petitioners have referred are listed under Schedules 1, 2 and 3 of the Parks and Reserves (Framework for the Future) Act.
Parks listed in Schedule 1 are to be included in the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act (ALRA).
Parks listed in Schedule 2 will be granted freehold title.
Parks listed in Schedule 3 will be subject to joint management agreements.
All parks listed in the schedules are subject to joint management arrangements, in accordance with the Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act.
The result of the 2002 Ward High Court decision created legal uncertainty for 49 Territory parks and reserves.
Legal opinion provided to government was that the declarations of these parks and reserves were potentially invalid. Thirty-eight of these parks were quickly re-declared but legal advice confirmed they were still vulnerable to native title determinations and compensation claims. The remaining 11 parks could not be re-declared because they were already subject to claim under the ALRA, preventing the grant of other interests in that land.
To secure certainty over the future of the 49 parks and reserves, the Northern Territory negotiated settlement of outstanding land rights and native title claims. To pursue settlement through the court system was seen to risk losing some areas from the parks system altogether, at great public expense.
The Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act defines the joint management partners as the Northern Territory government and the Aboriginal traditional owners of the park or reserve.
The objective of joint management is to manage parks for the benefit of traditional owners and the wider community, for biological diversity and to serve visitor and community needs for education and enjoyment.
Day-to-day management of jointly managed parks will remain with the Northern Territory Parks and Wildlife Service.
Under the terms of the joint management agreements, there will be no entry fee to these parks, and no requirement for a permit.
Public access within most parks is already controlled for safety, conservation or cultural reasons. Traditional owners generally want to share their country, so expanded access and opportunities is a likely result.
In the long term, many Aboriginal people will be employed directly and indirectly on parks. Through joint management, traditional owners are also keen to engage in the tourism economy, thereby meeting the large and increasing interstate and international demand for authentic cultural tourism products.
Joint Management Plans will be prepared and the public will be invited to comment on the draft plans as has always been the case.
Joint management is a great success story, and is well supported by Territorians.
- Petition No 32
Save our Parks Estate – Top End
Date Presented: 14 June 2006
Presented by: Dr Lim
Referred to: Chief Minister
Date response due: 17 October 2006
Date response received: 29 August 2006
Date response presented: 30 August 2006
- The parks to which the petitioners have referred are listed under Schedules 1, 2 and 3 of the Parks and Reserves (Framework for the Future) Act.
Parks listed in Schedule 1 are to be included in the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act (ALRA).
Parks listed in Schedule 2 will be granted freehold title.
Parks listed in Schedule 3 will be subject to joint management agreements.
All parks listed in the schedules are subject to joint management arrangements, in accordance with the Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act.
The result of the 2002 Ward High Court decision created legal uncertainty for 49 Territory parks and reserves.
Legal opinion provided to government was that the declarations of these parks and reserves were potentially invalid. Thirty-eight of these parks were quickly re-declared but legal advice confirmed they were still vulnerable to native title determinations and compensation claims. The remaining 11 parks could not be re-declared because they were already subject to claim under the ALRA, preventing the grant of other interests in that land.
To secure certainty over the future of the 49 parks and reserves, the Northern Territory negotiated settlement of outstanding land rights and native title claims. To pursue settlement through the court system was seen to risk losing some areas from the parks system altogether, at great public expense.
The Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act defines the joint management partners as the Northern Territory government and the Aboriginal traditional owners of the park or reserve.
The objective of joint management is to manage parks for the benefit of traditional owners and the wider community, for biological diversity and to serve visitor and community needs for education and enjoyment.
Day-to-day management of jointly managed parks will remain with the Northern Territory Parks and Wildlife Service.
Under the terms of the joint management agreements, there will be no entry fee to these parks, and no requirement for a permit.
Public access within most parks is already controlled for safety, conservation or cultural reasons. Traditional owners generally want to share their country, so expanded access and opportunities is a likely result.
In the long term, many Aboriginal people will be employed directly and indirectly on parks. Through joint management, traditional owners are also keen to engage in the tourism economy, thereby meeting the large and increasing interstate and international demand for authentic cultural tourism products.
Joint Management Plans will be prepared and the public will be invited to comment on the draft plans as has always been the case.
Joint management is a great success story, and is well supported by Territorians.
MINISTERIAL REPORTS
Gurindji Heritage and Tourism Project Launch
Gurindji Heritage and Tourism Project Launch
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, on Saturday 19 August, I launched the Gurindji Heritage and Tourism Project at Kalkarindji. The projects will establish a Gurindji Heritage Visitor Precinct and a number of related enterprises associated with tourism, land management, heritage, and art and craft production and sale. What better time or place to launch this project than at the 40th anniversary Freedom Day celebrations commemorating the 1966 Wave Hill walk-off?
The struggle of Vincent Lingiari and the Gurindji is now recognised as an important part of our history, which culminated in the Whitlam Labor government handing back a portion of land to the Gurindji people in 1975. The Gurindji Heritage Tourism Project builds on Lingiari’s aspirations for the lands of his people and will, I am sure, attract a growing number of our spirited travellers as well as many Australian history buffs to the region.
In the past, the only story that travellers got when they drove through Kalkarindji was the ‘Northern Territory’s Man from Snowy River’. That is about to change, with visitors set to learn about the history of the walk-off and the heritage of Gurindji country.
This project has many partners. The Daguragu Community Government Council is driving the project, and has allocated a coordinator from the CDEP program who will be supported by a development coordinator from the NT Office of Local Government. We have also provided funding and in-kind assistance, with Tourism NT and the Departments of Planning and Infrastructure and Natural Resources, Environment and the Arts all involved. The federal Department of Environment and Heritage is right behind the project, funding the presentation and management of local heritage sites and the interpretation displays at the old power station.
The project is set to generate significant benefits. For a start, it will use a new style of flexible employment for remote communities, which will build skills that give local people more employment options across areas such as tourism, land management, heritage projects, and art and craft production. There will be close links created between the local high school and the heritage tourism project, and that will mean more opportunities for young people. Also the development of quality tourism product like the new visitor centre, heritage sites, and walking trails will draw more tourists to the region.
One story I would like to share with you is about a nutwood tree, one with great significance. The tree was a traditional meeting place and, during the long struggle after the walk-off, it became a rallying point for Ngumpin and Katiya. The tree is still at Daguragu today, and I am sure many more people will gather to admire it in the years ahead.
There is no doubt that the project will encourage more people to the Victoria River region and that, in turn, will mean more jobs and opportunities for local young people. The project has the potential to make a very real difference to the region. I especially commend the Daguragu Community Council for their vision and commitment to the project. I am sure this project will become something very special for both our visitors to the region and the traditional owners.
Madam Speaker, I thank the Gurindji and members of the Kalkarindji and Daguragu communities for the warm welcome they gave to me and to all the people who travelled to the region for the celebrations. I look forward to hearing more about the project in the months ahead.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Madam Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for her report this morning. The opposition supports the development of any new opportunity for young people in indigenous communities to further and enhance their own community.
I am very pleased to see that this project will involve young people. That may also give them some encouragement and, hopefully, allow them to remain within their community. There is no doubt that we are at the beginning of the development of indigenous art and culture within the Northern Territory, and reading the Minister for Arts and Museums’ statement last night of what is happening internationally, it is a crying shame that we do not have the best indigenous art and culture on display within the Northern Territory, rather than it being displayed overseas.
This is a wonderful opportunity for this particular community to be able to showcase what they have and encourage more tourists to come to the area. It is a whole new world that is still opening for people in that region.
Building Healthier Communities–
Mid-Term Report
Mid-Term Report
Dr TOYNE (Health): Madam Speaker, I present a mid-term report card on the Building Healthier Communities five year framework for improving our health service in the Northern Territory.
Rebuilding the Health and Community Services system was one of the key priorities of the Martin government after our election victory in 2001.
Our first task was to address systemic issues arising from years of neglect and under-funding. The 2003 Bansemer Review gave government a blueprint for reorganising the Department of Health and Community Services, and providing a stable management and financial foundation for the delivery of improved services for Territorians. Once this had been achieved, we were in a position to provide a new direction and vision for the health and community services system.
Building Healthier Communities was launched in February 2004 to provide this vision. It is a five- year framework focusing our efforts on 10 key themes to improve services and deliver a better system for all Territorians. In August 2006, we are reaching the mid-point of the five year span of Building Healthier Communities and it is an appropriate time to take stock of where we are, to acknowledge the progress that has been made, and to begin the process of refocusing on what should be the next steps in Building Healthier Communities.
The achievements so far have been significant. This government has made a record investment in health and community services, increasing funding to the department by over 64% since 2001. We have met our promises to Territorians by adding 53 extra hospital beds, increasing nursing and medical staff, opening the new Emergency department and a hospice at Royal Darwin Hospital, providing extra resources for emergency and critical care at Alice Springs Hospital, and launching major initiatives in child and maternal health. On the other side of the portfolio, where the member for Karama bears ministerial responsibility, the achievements under Building Healthier Communities have been equally impressive.
However, there is still much to be done to address the challenges facing us in the Territory. Demand on our health services, and particularly our hospitals, is increasing, putting pressure on our staff and resources, particularly at peak periods. The reality of the seriously disadvantaged Aboriginal population compels us to continue to reform and improve our services and ensure that our efforts in the prevention and management of disease continue to match the increased resources needed by our hospitals.
Addressing these challenges requires new ways of doing things under the Building Healthier Communities framework. We must remain open to doing things differently as the world changes around us. New technology, better role delineation and benchmarking against best practice can deliver great gains, especially in our major hospitals and community-based services. In particular, our services need to work together better across the whole service system.
Services need to be integrated and complementary so that we can gain the most impact from the resources we have. Our workforce needs to be equipped with the skills to enable new approaches to the most critical needs in the community now and into the future. Through the Building Healthier Communities framework we are focused on critical life stages, particularly the early childhood years and the adult years affected by substance abuse and chronic disease.
This government will continue on this path, building on the gains we have made and drawing in families and the community to participate in making the next generations healthier, stronger and safer.
Members are now receiving our report card, and that details across the 10 theme areas of Building Healthier Communities the areas that have been achieved, the areas that are being worked on and the areas that we are going to work on next.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I note the report card. It will be properly scrutinised to ensure that the other side of the story is told. You may well emphasise those things that can be called achievements, but I stand not just as a spokesman from opposition but as the member for Blain.
Many in my electorate are now only just realising the decision that has been made to close down the Farrar After Hours Medical Clinic. It will be justified, explained and sold by members who also represent families of Palmerston. There has been very strong support from the families of Palmerston and the rural area for this service, so much so that there have been some thousands of signatures presented to this parliament arguing for the strengthening of that service.
If it is explained away that there are services available to these families now in the community, I ask the minister to think again. On the ground, we have 32 patients present every night at that clinic, some 200 to 250 per week. The members of my electorate are not all middle class. There are many of those who desperately need this service and that is the voice of those who provide that medical care to the families of Palmerston.
I ask you minister to re-assess and listen carefully to the voices of families within the Palmerston and rural area. There are those who desperately need this service and it will now be a service no longer provided. It will fall now to those practitioners who are already overloaded within the Palmerston area and those who cannot find their way to those services will now find themselves in Accident and Emergency, creating extra congestion in that service. It is not a good decision for the families of Palmerston.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I put on record what I think has been a sterling job by this Minister for Health. He has done it against incredible odds. I believe that he has not always received the right support and advice from his departmental officers and some of the problems highlighted in the media concerning Alice Springs Hospital have not been of his doing. I believe this man is quite sincere in his efforts.
He is right; health is a lifestyle issue. The number of appearances at our hospitals indicate the poor choices many people make in their lifestyle. It is all about education and making sure people understand that they can improve their health by making better choices. I urge him to concentrate on making sure that healthy lifestyles on communities are advocated.
I suggest that if he wants to improve the diet of people, he should be lobbying his federal minister again for vouchers instead of allowing welfare payments to be spent as the individual sees fit.
On the whole, I have not had a complaint from the Alice Springs Hospital for a while so that is good news, minister. That means you must be doing something right.
Dr Toyne: Thank you.
Mrs BRAHAM: Our only concern in Alice is that you were withdrawing services and sending some of our senior management positions to Darwin and that too often, things in Alice Springs were being controlled by Darwin when we should have been able to make the decisions down there. I note that you have appointed a Director of Nursing at Alice Springs Hospital who seems to have settled quite well.
Minister, you have had a tough portfolio - two tough portfolios - and I think the Chief Minister has really made it very difficult for you to continue doing such a hard job, but well done.
Dr TOYNE (Health): Madam Speaker, I thank members for their comments. In respect of Palmerston, there are seven GP practices there. We do not believe it is sensible to be subsidising one out of the seven. I suggest that you take, with equal enthusiasm, the case to the federal government, because they are the ones that make the bulk billing arrangements around the country. We would join you in that, because I would like to see bulk billing more available, not only in Palmerston, but throughout the Northern Territory.
I thank the member for Braitling for her comments. I am sure the person who succeeds me in this portfolio will have many things to occupy their waking hours. I am certainly not saying for a moment that all the challenges for health delivery have been sorted out, there is much really creative work needed still and I wish my successor all the best.
Darwin Port Facilities Inspection
Dr BURNS (Infrastructure and Transport): Madam Speaker, I report to the House on my recent inspection of the Darwin Port facilities. On 19 July, I undertook an inspection in the company of Darwin Port Corporation Chief Executive Officer, Mr Barry Berwick, the Harbourmaster, Captain W Bruce Wilson, and Chairman of the Darwin Port Corporation Advisory Board, Mr David Looker. The member for Goyder, Mr Ted Warren, and the member for Port Darwin, Ms Kerry Sacilotto, were also in attendance.
The first part of the inspection covered the city port infrastructure, noting these wharves now remain mainly as cruise, defence and people activity focused. The iron ore wharf is now mainly used by the Royal Australian Navy for fuelling and lay-up operations. There has been some damage to the fendering system for this wharf, and a consultant engineer has been engaged to provide recommendations on modifications to the fender system, which will meet Defence vessel requirements.
Fort Hill Wharf, which is adjacent to the iron ore wharf, is a good solid wharf structure and is used primarily for cruise and Defence vessels. Whilst awaiting repairs to the fendering system at the iron ore wharf, the Navy will utilise the Fort Hill Wharf for fuelling and lay-up operations.
I am pleased to remind the House that the government has committed $4.5m for a new cruise ship terminal, which is to be constructed on shore in the 2006-07 year.
The adjacent roll-on, roll-off, or RORO, facility was upgraded by Defence in 2002 to meet strategic deployment needs giving rise to a 15 year access agreement. Madam Speaker, $575 000 for maintenance of the connecting link span for this facility is allocated in the 2006-07 repairs and maintenance program. Upon completion of this work, the capability of the link span will be upgraded to 50 tonne capacity to meet Defence needs for vehicle access to their ships.
The Stokes Hill Wharf is an old structure, and restaurants and cafes are now the main feature of this wharf. Pontoon facilities for charter boat operators have been established on the inside of the Stokes Hill Wharf. These are currently under review with regard to expansion to meet growing industry needs. A new berthing facility is being constructed on the inside of the Stokes Hill Wharf to accommodate Customs vessels and is due for completion by the end of the year.
Of course, the adjacent waterfront project is under construction, and it was fantastic to see the progress with this magnificent project from the water side of it.
The second part of the tour involved an inspection of East Arm, including the bulk materials handling facilities. The manganese stockpile site includes rail unloading facilities and associated conveyors. The OM manganese radial stacker and stockpile area is now operational, with ore being stockpiled in preparation for a third 30 000 tonne shipment.
We inspected the preliminary filling of the proposed new stockpile site for the Territory Iron project, which is anticipated to commence operation in mid-2007, exporting one million tonnes of iron ore per annum to China.
The Darwin Industry Fuel Terminal developed by Vopak is now fully operational and facilitating petroleum product movement into the Northern Territory. The adjacent biodiesel plant is under construction, with the storage tank construction well advanced. At the time of our inspection, the site was being prepared to accept delivery of the 500 tonne plant module.
At the main wharf, we met up with two pilots, Mark Every and Ben Meirs, and I thank them for their time and informative comment.
Foundations for the bulk loader infrastructure on the main wharf are complete and fabricated items for the conveyor gallery and ship loader are being delivered to site ready for erection. A $1m upgrade of the container crane control system is also planned for this year.
Further development needs for the port were highlighted, which include further land reclamation, covered storage and the development of permanent port offices. The inspection was beneficial to have a firsthand look at the port, its operational matters and future development needs. I am sure my colleagues enjoyed it as well, Finally, I thank the CEO, Mr Barry Berwick, and his staff for facilitating this inspection.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I am the shadow for the ports.
Mr Kiely: Did you join them?
Mr WOOD: No, in the opposition cabinet.
Minister, I am glad you presented this report because during the Estimates Committee, we never had a chance to ask questions about the port. It is an area that should come up as a statement. The port is an extremely important part of the Territory. It would be good to see figures on tonnage coming through the rail. After all, there were great things said about the railway and the port, and it would be nice to see what the promises were and what is actually happening with regard to tonnage moving across the port from the rail, and vice versa.
I was interested in the statement about the iron ore wharf used by the Navy. There were concerns when the waterfront was being established that there would be problems with refuelling for the Navy. I am interested to know what has happened in relation to that. There are reports that taxi drivers are not very happy with access to the Stokes Hill Wharf at the moment. I do not know whether that access can be improved. I presume it is because of the cross-traffic that is going to the waterfront.
It was good to hear about the manganese stockpiles and the future stockpiles for iron. I noticed you forgot to talk about the uranium stockpiles which come up from South Australia. That has helped our railway become a bit more financial, and that is important as well.
One area I have mentioned before that sometimes disappoints me with industrial developments is that for some reason, we put industrial developments as just industrial developments. There needs to be more emphasis on good industrial landscaping. I see buildings and tanks out there that are stark. For some reason, people think good landscape design is not applicable to industrial estates. Thirty years ago in Melbourne, they developed industrial estates where good landscaping design softened the blow, you might say, of harsh industrial buildings. I would like the government to look at seeing whether they can improve in that area. Just because an area is industrial does not mean it cannot look reasonable and nice.
Dr BURNS (Infrastructure and Transport): Madam Speaker, I welcome the comments made by the member for Nelson. Given his interest in the port, I would like to offer the member a similar tour and a briefing on the wharf. That might answer a few of the questions that you had, member for Nelson.
It is my advice that Navy refuelling is continuing at the Fort Hill Wharf. In respect of access to Stokes Hill, there is a construction site there. We are endeavouring to facilitate access to it. I ask people to be patient, given that it is a construction site and a very important project.
On the issue of industrial landscaping, it is a very good suggestion by the member for Nelson, and something I have discussed with the CEO for the port. You may have noticed that there has been some Larrakia artwork on some of the tanks, and we can do more in that regard. That is an issue we should have further discussions on, member for Nelson.
Reports noted.
JUSTICE LEGISLATION
AMENDMENT BILL (No 2)
(Serial 68)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The purpose of this bill is to amend various acts within the Justice portfolio, such as an amending bill is necessary from time to time to ensure acts within the portfolio are operating efficiently and appropriately. The amendments contained within this bill rectify issues identified by the Department of Justice and other stakeholders in the past few months, but are not of sufficient urgency or substance to require their own amending bill. I will now outline the amendments that are included in the bill.
The Associations Act is amended in several ways. First, an explanatory note is inserted into section 37(b), which deals with special resolutions, to make it clear that a special resolution must be passed by three-quarters of those members who actually vote, not three-quarters of all members entitled to vote. This is intended to help avoid misinterpretation of this section by the general public.
Section 72, which applies the external administration provisions of the Commonwealth Corporations Act 2001 to incorporated associations, is also amended to remove potentially misleading wording. The heading and wording of the first sentence in section 72 refers to the winding up provisions of chapter 5 of the Corporations Act applying to incorporated associations. In fact, section 72 applies most of the Corporations Act provisions in chapter 5, dealing with external administration of which winding up is only one aspect. Replacing the existing words ‘winding up’ with ‘external administration’ is intended to clarify the effect of this section.
A provision is included in the Associations Act preventing a non-trading association from disbursing profits to members. Although this is an underlying principal of the act, there is no explicit provision that such an incorporated association cannot trade for the financial gain of its members or disburse profits to members. The new provision will provide clear guidance to the committee and other members of such incorporated associations on this issue.
The Commercial and Private Agents Licensing Act is amended to make it an offence for a person licensed under the act to use harassing tactics. Although the act defines harassing tactics, it currently contains no offence or other provision prohibiting such conduct. The act is also amended to provide that the use of harassing behaviour by a person licensed under the act is grounds for disciplinary action to be taken by the licensing authority, the Commissioner of Consumer Affairs. This type of behaviour is the subject of a considerable number of complaints to the commissioner about persons licensed under the act, but the current provisions of the act have proven to be deficient in giving the commissioner the power to deal with them.
The Domestic Violence Act is also amended. First, section 7(1) is amended so that it does not require that the police officer who is exercising the power to enter premises for the purposes of removing a person and taking them into custody pending the making of a restraining order under section 6A is the same police officer who intends to make the restraining order under section 6A.
As members would be aware, the Domestic Violence Amendment (Police Orders) Act 2005, amended section 7 of the Domestic Violence Act to provide for the making of restraining orders by senior police officers. Power to enter premises and remove persons pending the making of such an order were also given under section 7(1), however the wording of section 7(1) currently suggests that only the police officer who intends making a restraining order under section 6A can exercise the powers given under section 7(1). As only senior sergeants and officers in charge of a police station can make the restraining order under section 6A, the power to enter premises under section 7(1) will, in most cases, need to be used by other more junior offices who attend premises to investigate or take action. This is an anomaly which is rectified by this amendment.
A minor amendment is also made to section 7(2) so that it applies where police propose making an order under section 6A. Section 7 allows police to detain a person for up to four hours whilst an order is sought from a magistrate under section 6. This section should apply similarly in a situation where the police propose making an order under section 6A.
A further amendment to section 10 makes it clear that an order that is amended stays in force until the amended order is served on the defendant. This resolves possible doubt on this issue that was raised by the Northern Territory Police.
The bill also makes amendments to the Interpretation Act at the request of Parliamentary Counsel to ensure this important act functions correctly.
The bill also amends section 23 of the Justices Act. Currently, section 23 allows a summons to be issued on information or complaint laid under the act, there is no power for a summons to be issued in relation to an application made under the act. However, an application is made under section 130B for an order for return to the rightful owner or to otherwise deal with property held by the police or the court, which is usually evidence that has been used in a prosecution matter. Such applications are, according to police, usually contested. However, as the matter is an application and not an informational complaint, there is no power in section 23 to summons documents or witnesses to appear to give evidence. This is an anomaly associated with the use of different terminology, which is rectified by this amendment.
The Legal Aid Commission Act is amended to validate the commission’s community legal eduction role.
The Supreme Court Act is amended to approve the process for appeals from judges’ interlocutory decisions and appeals from Master’s decisions. The effect of these amendments is that applications for leave to appeal judges’ interlocutory decisions are to be dealt with in the first instance by another single judge constituting the Court of Appeal on the papers. In the event of an application being refused, the applicant can apply to the Court of Appeal constituted by not less than three judges.
Appeals from the Master or a referee are to be heard by the Court of Appeal and in particular: (a) an appeal from final judgments of the Master or referee are as of right to the Court of Appeal constituted by three judges; and (b) an appeal from interlocutory decisions of the Master or referee are by leave and dealt with in the first instance by a single judge constituting the Court of Appeal on the papers. In the event of leave being granted, the appeal will be heard by a single judge. However, if leave is refused, the application can be considered by three judges and any subsequent appeal heard by three judges.
I thank the Honourable Chief Justice Brian Martin who, with the support of the judges, drew my attention to the desirability of these amendments.
The Unit Titles Act was amended by the Unit Titles Amendment Act 2001 which inserted a new part into the act dealing with the subdivision of buildings into building lots. Parliamentary Counsel and the Department of Justice have identified some desirable amendments to the act relating to these amendments that are essentially of a statute law revision nature. The proposed amendments will insert definitions where needed, correct grammatical or cross-referencing inconsistencies, and improve readability.
In addition, section 28 is amended to provide that if a lot is subdivided into building lots, a member of the relevant building management corporation is the body corporate of the building development plan, not the building lot owners. This amendment arises from the operation of the Unit Titles Amendment Act 2001, which provided for the creation of two or more unit plan developments within a single building. This means a building can be split into separate parts, with separate unit plans and management corporations, generally referred to as a body corporate for each part, as well as the over-arching building management corporation for the building as a whole. A useful example is a building that is a commercial car park underground, shops on the lower levels, an hotel on the next few levels, then residential apartments above.
Prior to these 2001 amendments, the Unit Titles Act forced all these owners into a single body corporate responsible for the building as a whole. This was not particularly workable as the matters of concern to the owners of each part of the building may be quite different. However, it is arguable that section 28 leaves open an interpretation that would mean each individual owner of each shop or office and residential apartment are members of the over-arching building management corporation. Such an interpretation would make many of the provisions of the act unworkable.
This amendment therefore clarifies that in the case of the building used in the example, membership of the over-arching building management corporation would be the car park owner, the management corporation body corporate for the shops, the hotel owner, and the management corporation for the residential apartments. In this scenario, the management corporation for the shops and the one for residential apartments represent the interests of individual unit owners in respect of the common property for the building as a whole.
This is a clear situation in relation to Cullen Bay. The Cullen Bay Marina Act provides that for building lots in Cullen Bay, the owner for the purposes of membership of Cullen Bay Management Corporation is the building management corporation rather than the owners of the individual units. The act is similarly amended to clarify that if a lot in an estate development is subdivided into further units, it is the body corporate for the lot that is the member of the estate management corporation, not the unit owners.
Finally, some aspects of the Youth Justice Act are amended to ensure the government’s objectives are met regarding young people’s interaction with the justice system. For example, the definition of ‘responsible adult’ in section 5(1) of the act is amended to overcome a potential interpretation difficulty.
The definition in section 5(1) currently states that:
“responsible adult", in respect of a youth, means a person who exercises parental responsibility for the youth, including –
(a) in accordance with contemporary social practice; or
(b) if the youth is Aboriginal – in accordance with Aboriginal customary law or Aboriginal tradition;
There has been a suggestion that the definition could have a limiting effect if the youth is Aboriginal, as the court will be bound to look for a person who exercises parental responsibility in accordance with Aboriginal customary law or Aboriginal tradition, and that a person who may exercise parental responsibility in accordance with contemporary social practice will not come within the definition of the responsible adult. The section is amended so as to clarify intent and remove this potential anomaly.
Section 65(3) is amended so as to omit the words ‘for detention or imprisonment of the youth’, and replace them with the more consistent phrase ‘remanding the youth in custody’.
Section 98 is amended to provide for the signing of an order suspending a sentence, and for the provision of copies consistent with other procedural provisions for conditional orders in the Youth Justice Act, and for adults under the Sentencing Act.
Section 136(2) is amended to clarify that it applies whether the findings of guilt of a youth who has turned 15 at the time were made before or after the commencement of the act. Section 136(2) was a new provision that provides that the unrecorded convictions of a youth can be taken into account by any court if the offence resulting in the finding of guilt was committed after the youth turned 15 years of age. For removal of a doubt that has been raised, the amendment clarifies that from the date of commencement of the act, mention can be made in an adult court to the criminal history of findings of guilt where the offence was committed after 15 years of age, and whether those findings of guilt were made before or after commencement of the act.
These amendments constitute in themselves relatively minor legislative reform, however they reflect the fact that government must keep constant watch to ensure Northern Territory legislation fulfils its appropriate regulatory function.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and table a copy of the explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES BILL
(Serial 69)
(Serial 69)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr HENDERSON (Business and Economic Development): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The purpose of this bill is to provide a legal framework governing access to biological resources in the Northern Territory for the purposes of bioprospecting. Bioprospecting is identifying new substances that could be used in biotechnology and is classically identified as the production of new drugs.
This bill will ensure that any bioprospector has not only the proper permit under the Fisheries Act or the Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act, but also the prior informed consent of the resource access provider, and that a share of the benefits from the discovery, if any, be returned to the resource access provider. Further, the bill requires that traditional indigenous knowledge be recognised and benefits agreed where appropriate.
The Northern Territory’s diverse biological resources are the source of much interest from researchers. Approximately 50% of all drugs in use come from natural products or synthetic copies of natural products and, as such, there is an increasing interest in this area. The Northern Territory’s biodiversity is highly conserved which, when combined with our remoteness and small population, results in high bioprospectivity. This has appeal for bioprospectors and makes the Northern Territory an attractive location to carry out such activity.
Bioprospecting typically requires high levels of investment, generally over long lead times and involving high financial risk. As such, it is not realistic to expect large up-front monetary benefits. Instead, focus should also be given to capturing an equitable share of non-monetary and indirect benefits. These may include capacity building through joint ventures, for example, early stage research and extracts; PhD and post- doctoral research positions; research nodes; and, other employment and investment opportunities.
The bill has been developed to facilitate a new industry for the Northern Territory, and additional investment and employment opportunities associated with this. Establishing a regulatory framework through this draft bill provides a safeguard for industry. Biological resources can be legally collected with prior informed consent and approval from government regulators, creating certainty of title to samples and intellectual property created by using these samples and a right to use them. In particular, it creates a transparent process and, subsequently, provides predictability and certainty for organisations wanting to come to the Northern Territory to collect biological resources. Additionally, it provides a mechanism for the return of benefits to the resource access provider.
This legislation has been developed in line with the aims of the Bonn Guidelines on Access to Genetic Resources and Fair and Equitable Sharing of the Benefits Arising Out of their Utilisation under the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, the nationally consistent approach for access and the utilisation of Australia’s native, genetic and biochemical resources, and aligns with the Commonwealth legislation on this issue.
This bill will provide an appropriate level of governance and enforcement, making it illegal to take biological resources for the purpose of bioprospecting without the appropriate permits and prior informed consent from the resource access provider. The bill requires that a benefit sharing agreement be entered into with the resource access provider so that a share of the benefits resulting from research - be this monetary or in the way of intellectual property - be returned to the access provider.
In addition to providing a robust and transparent governance framework which encourages bioprospecting within the Northern Territory, the acts and associated policy will also serve to limit the opportunities for unlawful access - or biopiracy, as it is sometimes called - to our biological resources. Such inappropriate actions are not a fanciful use of colourful language.
In 2002, the Journal of the American Medical Association published findings by a research scientist based on an extract from a Top End plant sourced from the Katherine region. Extracts of this plant were shown to have some effect against anthrax, tuberculosis, malaria and golden staph. To date, we are unable to find evidence that these samples were taken under a permit, as required by the Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act.
Similarly, the case of cyclosporine A is also noteworthy. Cyclosporine A is a drug given to organ transplant patients to prevent the body from rejecting the new organ. A scientist working for a Swiss company took soil samples whilst on holiday in Norway and the result was cyclosporine A. Norway receives no share of the approximate $US1bn per annum generated by the drug, all of which goes to the parent company.
The bill also allows for a certificate of prominence to be issued to a bioprospector. In essence, this is designed to provide certainty to end users of a biological sample or intellectual property created from that sample that the sample was obtained with the prior informed consent of the access provider, and that it was in line with the laws of the issuing jurisdiction.
Native title issues have been considered in the development of this legislation. The rights of indigenous people to access plants for traditional purposes has been confirmed within the new legislation by precluding the grant of exclusive access to a biological resource on Northern Territory government land.
Furthermore, the inherently small volumes required in relation to overall biomass of an organism, combined with the restrictions imposed by permit conditions, make it unlikely in a practical sense to impact upon traditional rights in this regard. This new legislation provides a mechanism which allows for the recognition of traditional ecological knowledge, and directly provides the opportunity for indigenous people to negotiate a benefit in return for the sharing of such knowledge.
This legislation is fundamental to establishing and protecting future jobs and training opportunities that may develop in this new industry sector in the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and table a copy of the explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of traditional owners from Myatt, near Timber Creek in the Daly electorate, and traditional owners from Centre Island from Borroloola in the Barkly electorate. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
MOTION
Note Statement - Twenty-Year Vision
for Indigenous Housing
in the Northern Territory
Note Statement - Twenty-Year Vision
for Indigenous Housing
in the Northern Territory
Continued from 15 June 2006.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Madam Speaker, I refer to the 20 Year Vision for Indigenous Housing in the Territory, brought to this House by the Minister for Housing. I support his vision to address the housing crisis in indigenous communities, and particularly his call for increased Commonwealth and Territory funding to address the acute housing shortage faced by indigenous Australians
One of the difficulties the minister will face in this task is dispelling the myth that the indigenous sector receives more government money than the non-indigenous sector. A number of evidence- based studies have concluded that this is simply not true. In a study done by Neutze, Sanders and Jones, titled Public Expenditure on Services for Indigenous People, it was estimated that non-indigenous persons received between 9% and 21% more in housing funding than indigenous people. The authors conclude that:
- … considering the much greater housing needs of indigenous people, existing housing policies, far from being favourable to them have been, on balance, inequitable and inadequate.
The annual outlay on housing assistance, including tax exemptions, exceeds $20bn. This assistance includes the first home owner’s scheme, Commonwealth rent assistance, the Commonwealth/States Housing Agreement, as well as tax incentives such as land tax and capital gains tax exemptions for owner occupiers, and provisions for negative gearing for investors. Indigenous access to all of these programs via the Commonwealth/State Housing Program, which provides funds for public and community housing, is almost non-existent.
The Australian government’s major social housing program is the Commonwealth Rent Assistance Program. Expenditure on this program has averaged $1.8bn per year. Over the last decade, because the program is open for all people meeting eligibility requirements, this is the only low income housing assistance program that has grown. In contrast, there has been a real decline in funding for public housing provided under the Commonwealth/States Housing Agreement so the proportion of public housing stock in Australia has fallen substantially.
The Aboriginal Rental Housing Program, which comprises about 8% of the total Commonwealth/State Housing Agreement, has declined in real terms. This presents a very real difficulty for the Territory because the Commonwealth Rent Assistance Program is not suited to indigenous residents in remote communities, and the result is that very few indigenous people access this program.
If this funding situation is not addressed, the situation in the Northern Territory will continue to worsen to the detriment of all Territorians. There is a strong case for an increased allocation for indigenous-specific housing funding on parity grounds as well as the national interest, so I join with the Minister for Housing in asking members opposite for their support. This is really important for all Territorians.
In terms of the management of housing, the minister is correct when he said that until 1996, funding for indigenous-specific housing emphasised the building of new houses without any consideration of the ongoing cost of maintaining the houses. It was the creation of IHANT and the process of engagement and debate about these issues that moved policy practice.
As a result of an increased focus on sustainability, there has been a significant increase in rent collected over the last seven years. This increase has occurred because of the financial incentives offered by the Repairs and Maintenance Program, which linked R & M funds to target rents collected by the indigenous community housing associations, or ICHOs.
In 2004-05, rent collected by indigenous community housing organisations totalled $10.4m. Despite the increase in rents collected, the ICHOs find it difficult to achieve sustainability because of the high cost associated with managing housing on remote communities, from the cost of tradesmen through to transport of materials and insurance. Remote indigenous communities have to pay premium prices. For example, last year Northern Territory ICHOs paid $4.5m out of their rental income on insurance premiums. The claims only totalled $900 000, so $3.5m ended up as profit for the insurance companies. This is an area that needs reform and needs to be addressed in any move to community housing management through a public housing model.
I have some concerns about the proposal to move community housing under public housing in that I would not like to see another layer of bureaucracy added. It ultimately achieves little to improve indigenous housing beyond imposing public housing policy and practice that could result in people in remote communities being evicted from their homes. This will create enormous conflict in communities and be detrimental to the outcomes the government is trying to achieve.
Another complicating factor is that housing on remote communities is not being built to one standard like mainstream public housing. We have heard from the Health minister during this debate about the environmental health survey conducted in his department that revealed many houses on remote communities do not even have fundamental hardware for healthy living. So levying rents in such circumstances is more complex than in mainstream public housing. How much will we charge families who live in tin sheds, for example? It is also important that people on communities continue to have a local point of contact to report R & M needs despite the move to more centralised housing management because without the timely reporting of faults, problems escalate and costs blowout.
I welcome the minister’s commitment to increase the capacity of local people in all areas of housing. A commitment to skilling local indigenous people to work in all aspects of housing, from construction to management, will drive down housing costs over time because the importation of skilled labour to remote communities is one of the most costly components of building and maintaining housing.
It has been demonstrated that training programs in indigenous communities can lead to real government savings, provided real job opportunities are present once the necessary skills have been gained. This was noted in the Spiller, Gibbins and Swan report on the central remote model about which I spoke at length in the last debate on indigenous housing.
I applaud the initiative to investigate the establishment of major housing prefabrication operations in major regional towns. Such initiatives can provide employment opportunities, but need to be thoroughly investigated to ensure real cost savings are made and that materials meet the Building Code and environmental health standards.
As the minister said in his statement, adoption of the Building Code and the environmental health standards for remote community housing has added to the cost of construction, but houses built to these standards do require fewer repairs and less maintenance over the lifespan of the house, and the savings are substantial.
I am concerned about the proposal for private investment to supply housing in Aboriginal communities. I do not think that private sector investment will be readily forthcoming, regardless of changes to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, because there is a limited mainstream economic base. The market value of land is low, and the capacity of remote indigenous people to borrow money is limited.
An analysis of Land Rights and Development Reform in Remote Australia undertaken by Altman, Linkhorn and Clarke found:
- … unless income levels increase dramatically in remote Indigenous communities, a push to private ownership will not result in private financing of the construction of a significant number of new dwellings. This is primarily because the cost of constructing housing is far higher than the likely value of the land, even if individuated and privatised. Hence land would be of insufficient value to use as mortgage collateral even if the commercial banking sector was disposed to provide loans on Indigenous leasehold land.
- The responses she received …
- … indicate that conventional reasons for not advancing loans would likely apply to Indigenous land. Most prominent among them is that the land is not generally commercially valuable and that prospective borrowers will generally struggle to demonstrate that they have reliable income streams.
Given that the average cost of building a house in a remote community is between $200 000 and $250 000 without including the price of land, it is extremely unlikely that most indigenous people in remote and very remote communities would be able to afford to build a house. When you then consider the reality of an average life expectancy of 47 years, a 30-year mortgage becomes problematic.
In summary, we cannot expect that private sector investment will do much to reduce the chronic level of housing need in remote communities in the short to medium term so significant budgetary injections into the provision of appropriate housing and related infrastructure are required. It is an essential step in curtailing the alienation of many an indigenous community, and assist in strengthening communities’ overall social and economic prospects through improvements in health, school retention rates and the attainment of skills.
Madam Speaker, I say thank you very much to the minister for his statement. As a government, we need to work with the Commonwealth to make sure that the Commonwealth government really brings extra money - real money and new money - to the Northern Territory. I commend the minister’s statement to the House.
Ms McCARTHY (Arnhem): Madam Speaker, before I begin, I also welcome people from the Daly electorate, and also my own families from Borroloola. It is fantastic to have them here this morning.
I commend the Housing minister on his statement. It is always a pleasure to stand in support of the Housing minister, because I know he is very sincere in his genuine attempts to improve housing for Aboriginal people in communities right across the Northern Territory. If I may, I would like to reflect a little on his earlier statement about the significance of the unmet needs. I quote:
- … be able to build approximately 120 new houses a year from 2006 to 2007.
With current levels of funding:
- At that rate, it will take the Northern Territory 33 years to fulfil current housing needs.
The minister has stood in this House and said we need 4000 houses right now to address the homelessness and the desperate need for housing in our communities for all the Aboriginal people who are living in overcrowded situations, which results in sickness, the inability to be able to get up each day to be able to go to work, to do the jobs and the tasks that are required of them as citizens of this country.
It is something we have discussed many times, issues of overcrowding and I commend the steps the Northern Territory government are taking. When I look at the 16 communities that I have in the seat of Arnhem, I know when I visit Numbulwar and Minyerri, those places are increasing in size. We have beautiful houses. A tremendous number of houses are being built in those communities. It certainly gives a feeling of pride to people because everyone wants to be proud of where they live.
There is an incredible example occurring on Groote Eylandt where there are a number of communities: Alyangula, Umbakumba, Angurugu and Milyakburra. The Anindilyakwa Land Council has taken positive steps in a direction that fills the Anindilyakwa people with a great deal of hope. The land council at Groote Eylandt is embarking on an $18m tourist resort at Dugong Beach. In building that resort, they are looking at the training and development of the Anindilyakwa people. There is a great deal of hope for the future, in particular for the children, who can see that there is a positive future for them. With this resort, they are looking at training people, giving them the ability to have a job, be proud of the work that they do and know that they can work on their own communities.
GEMCO has a number of Aboriginal people working in the mining industry. One of the issues raised with Cabinet at Groote Eylandt was that there are Aboriginal people working in the mining company who want to live in Angurugu, build their own houses and be able to apply for loans. Since the minister’s introduction of this statement to House in June, we have seen what has happened on a federal level with the Commonwealth Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. There has been discussion and debate in the media and in parliament in Canberra and in the NT. The issue of home ownership for Aboriginal people has been a strong theme in the amendments made in the Commonwealth parliament.
I would like to focus on that in my response to the minister’s statement. Home ownership is something that every Aboriginal person aspires to. It is the process of that home ownership that we need to thoroughly examine. The fundamental core of home ownership for any citizen in this country is that they are involved in their own decision-making leading to an outcome. In this case, the outcome is home ownership.
On Groote Eylandt, that is something that the people are talking about in great depth. They want to own their own homes. While the amendments to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act is one avenue, with discussion of an entity in the Northern Territory, the other area that I suggest our government has a think about is legislation for financial institutions. We have a tremendous amount of land in the Northern Territory. Nearly 50% has been returned to Aboriginal ownership. The question for many Aboriginal people, including me as a traditional owner from the Gulf region, is: what happens to those Aboriginal people who wish to go down that path; who do have jobs and are quite capable of paying interest from financial institutions? Can there be a model similar to that in Canada and America, where it has been legislated that financial institutions can incorporate and loan money to people who have traditional links to land without it having to be an encompassing group; can it be individuals rather than corporate bodies or associations?
These are things that I know our government is very passionate about pursuing. I know that my colleagues representing bush electorates are encouraged by activities that occur overseas that we can explore. I know that the Minister for Housing is acutely aware of these things.
In the statement, the minister said:
- … the Northern Territory is falling behind in housing needs at the rate of four houses a week. Nationally, the figure is 10 houses a week. On any analysis, the current situation is economically and socially unsustainable. The myth that there is currently a mass exodus from the bush to our towns and cities is just that - a myth. The Territory already has 20 remote population centres of more than 500. In the next 25 years, Wadeye and Maningrida will be larger than present-day Nhulunbuy. The number of towns with a population of more than 2000 people will be eight to nine times the current number. There will be at least another three towns with populations in excess of 3000 people. Like many rural areas elsewhere in Australia, these communities are seeing a population boom. However, the myth may well become a reality if we do not act to avoid major social collapse in our remote towns and communities.
I wholeheartedly agree with that statement and cannot stress enough the urgency for our remote communities and, indeed, Aboriginal people right across the Northern Territory who urgently need these houses.
The 20-year plan has been discussed in this parliament by the Chief Minister and the Minister for Housing. I agree wholeheartedly with them because we need to look at a couple of industries in our remote regions. One is roads, the need to improve our roads to allow infrastructure of all kinds in our communities. I know the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport is acutely aware of this need and is doing a tremendous job, as we heard yesterday when he spoke about what is happening on the Central Arnhem Road and the money being spent on the Wilton River bridge.
The other area we could be looking at is the housing industry. It is fantastic that the government has been able support first home ownership for all Territorians with the HomeNorth scheme and I commend you, minister, on that program. If we can expand that scheme into our remote areas where we know the need is tremendous, we can make a change. It does not have to rely solely on changes to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, because we have Aboriginal people out there who are working hard, committed to their jobs and who want economic access to purchase all the things they so desire, just like a non-Aboriginal person in Darwin, Alice Springs, Katherine and Tennant Creek.
Our remote communities are growing at a rapid rate. Minyerri, as I have said when I have discussed education, is growing at a tremendous pace and it is because of the boom, as we have seen in statistics released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the largest area of population growth is in the remote regions of the Northern Territory. I cannot stress that urgency enough.
The second part of the housing component is development of a housing industry and factories in our regions as part of the 20-year plan in an effort to genuinely acknowledge that unless all people have adequate housing, they will not be able to live with a sense of peace in their hearts, know that they have somewhere safe to go home to, to sleep without worry that rain is going to come through the roof because there are holes in it which no one has been able to fix. There is a lack of mechanics and carpenters in remote communities, many people, and especially the old people, wait for days, weeks, months even before they can have repairs done on their houses.
People wait and it becomes an accepted part of life that things do not happen straight away and that can be three to six months before someone’s house is repaired. They put up with the hole in the window or in the roof, or the fact that their toilet is not working, or their front door cannot shut properly. Then we have the Wet Season. In the Top End, we know how heavy the Wet Season is, and with cyclones, we know that houses need to be adequately built. These people wait in the hope that the carpenter will come and fix the problem, but because there are so few workers who can fix houses, people wait endlessly. It is not right that they have to wait for so long.
With the minister’s housing initiative - and I know he is very aware of all these issues - I sincerely support his efforts in trying to encourage indigenous participation within the economics of purchasing a home. If that takes the form of an extended HomeNorth scheme, I would say: ‘Well done’. I would sincerely like to see that happen out in our communities, minister. At the same time, Numbulwar, Minyerri, and Groote Eylandt give so much hope about what can be done in our communities.
At times when we are feeling really down about some of those communities that are really bad and neglected, if we look at the positive ones, they lift us out of our despair and we say: ‘It is going well in that community. How can we move that good example from this community over to this other community where this mob needs a lot of help?’
In closing, it is these discussions in parliament, and I know the Education minister is very aware of this, which highlight the impact of flooding and cyclones on already overcrowded houses that have 15 to 20 people in them. I commend our government, certainly the Education and Housing ministers what they have been able to achieve the community of Wugularr and the contributions that are being made there. Minister, well done.
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Madam Speaker, I, too, acknowledge the traditional owners in the gallery. It is fortuitous that they are here today because I do not think they get the opportunity to come and listen to debate that directly affects them on a regular basis.
Indigenous housing is something, just so they know, that is discussed, unfortunately, on a regular basis. It is a very serious matter and something that this government struggles with. It is one of the most important subjects around for people who live in the bush. You do not want to hear talk; you want to see some action; you want to see some houses. The only way that it is ever going to change and for you to see some real housing numbers in the communities is for the Commonwealth government to dip into its pocket – into its billion dollar surplus budgets they have been producing over the last few years - and pull out one or two of those billions of dollars and put it into indigenous housing.
Mrs Miller: It’s is a pretty good political speech, this one.
Mr KNIGHT: Member for Katherine, this is a very serious issue.
Mrs Miller: It certainly is. Stop blaming.
Mr KNIGHT: We have people in the gallery - and I will go through it …
Mrs Miller: Stop blaming.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr KNIGHT: Hopefully, with the consent of my dear friends from Timber Creek, I will talk to you a bit about the realities of indigenous housing. I have known the people of Timber Creek for the last 10 years. I have seen young kids grow up and now they are in their early 20s. They have kids. Guess where they are living? They are living in the same house, but they are with their wife and little children in the one bedroom, probably with other family members in there as well. That is the reality of this subject.
We can talk about the politics, but the reality is it is happening out there every single day. It is only going to be solved by more Commonwealth money. The NT government does not have the capacity to do that. It has 200 000 people in its jurisdiction. It is never going to be able to produce enough money to solve this problem. On the other hand, we have the Commonwealth government, which has buckets of money after their budget. That is the reality.
In those communities and in Borroloola, through my working life, I have had the opportunity to do housing surveys. I have said this in this House before: if you want to understand indigenous housing, if you want to understand how people live, do housing surveys. Get out there and get through every room in a house on a community and you will understand what the situation is. You will understand why people do not turn up for work at 8 o’clock in the morning. You will understand why every person in a clinic in these regional towns and communities is indigenous, why you have the health rates, why people resort to drinking and other substances, why they do not go to school. You see where a child sleeps at night or tries to sleep at night and wonder why they do not go to school.
When we talk about Aboriginal affairs, one of the centrepieces of solving this problem is solving the problem of indigenous housing. In the Northern Territory, $1000m is our backlog; $1bn is what is required. That would bring it up to some semblance of acceptability in the communities. In a nutshell, that is where we are starting from, but we have to change from talking about it to doing something about it.
The new Commonwealth minister, Mr Mal Brough – I could talk about Mr Mal Brough’s motives, but I will not. I am hoping that he is genuinely enthusiastic about Aboriginal affairs, but what I respectfully do is question his strategy. Our minister McAdam has talked about prefabricated factories within regional areas. What has happened since that statement is that the federal minister is looking at kit homes from the eastern states being built down there, with labour from down there, trucked up here and plonked on communities. We welcome the new houses and that they will be perhaps cheaper, but that is very short-sighted. There are a lot of skilled people on communities.
Again, this is questioning the strategy of the Commonwealth government, but they need to talk to the Northern Territory government about building prefabricated houses. They are cheaper. You can have a production line, but going off on some tangent, having people down in Canberra or Sydney to knock up these houses and truck them up here, drop them off and see you later is not the answer for the Northern Territory. We can do it up here. We can have these prefabrication factories. We can employ labour. At Katherine, we can do it through the training centre. They have produced dozens of Aboriginal trainees. Why can that not happen here?
We are going to get to see a couple of these prefabricated houses in Wadeye, I believe. They are being built to test them. I draw a correlation within my electorate with the style of houses. Houses nowadays on communities are costing $300 000 to $400 000 to build. Part of my constituency is the rural area of Darwin, through Berry Springs down to Manton. You have some fairly basic homes out there on large blocks, so there is obviously a lot of privacy. People go out there to get away from things, but live a basic lifestyle. There needs to be some consideration of those things. We need more housing. We have to triple or quadruple the number of houses out there. Ideas about providing more houses quickly should be examined.
The minister made comment about housing maintenance. When you look at the IHANT budget, and I believe I am correct, one-third of the money is spent on construction, one-third is spent on management, and one-third is spent on maintenance. So of our global budget for indigenous housing for the Northern Territory, only one third is spent on building houses. As you get more stock out there in the communities, you are going to be spending more of your budget on management and maintenance. If we look at the efficiencies of existing money, and it is only $45m per year, which is well below what it needs to be, but we need to look at efficiencies within that IHANT budget. We certainly need to look at better managing our indigenous housing stock. Indigenous housing management is a struggle. It is certainly very challenging because you have a diverse housing stock and getting tradespeople is very difficult.
There are some correlations, some synergies that can be worked with Territory Housing. Professional development of local indigenous staff within Territory Housing is something that I support. With the rapid change of management in these organisations, people miss out on professional development. There is the opportunity of a career path, whereas there is no career path within existing ICHOs, where you do your job and you do it forever. If it is part of a broader housing management organisation, there are career paths into government and other parts of the Territory. It is a novel and very positive idea for those people, and I support the minister’s idea.
We have to look very seriously at where there are opportunities. There are not always going to be opportunities of private sector investment. Apart from a massive injection of federal money to this area, there have to be efficiencies within housing management and maintenance, but there also has to be some private sector money.
There is one other point about which I am quite concerned. With changes to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, there is the possibility of communities being blackmailed into receiving housing on the basis that they have to lease their land back to the government or a government entity to receive it. That is an abhorrent idea; it does not engender cooperation between government and communities. The government has a moral obligation to provide housing, wherever it may be. The way the Commonwealth government may be moving in this area is something about which we need to be very conscious.
The future of indigenous housing troubles me. When you look at the numbers and indicators, it is all going in the wrong direction. It is all heading towards a brick wall. We have massive population growth, increasing costs, and an IHANT budget that has been stagnant for nearly 10 years now; it is just not going up – house prices have almost doubled in that time. If you do the calculations, we are heading towards a disastrous situation in those communities.
People want to live on their own country. That is the best place for them. They want a better lifestyle and that can be addressed through economic development on that country. However, at the moment we have 20, 30, 40 people to a house. If we look 10 years into the future, with that stagnant budget and cost increases going through the roof and population growth, the number of people per house is going to increase 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%. Where are we going to be? People are going to be wall to wall in these houses. It needs to be addressed.
With respect, we do not need a federal minister diverting down a quick-solve path. There are opportunities. We have a Northern Territory Housing Minister who is prepared to look at alternatives to address this. I encourage the federal minister to work with the NT Housing Minister in addressing this because, at the end of the day, Mr Brough moves on, Mr McAdam moves on, but we have thousands of Aboriginal people living out there, with their children and grandchildren growing up in these abhorrent conditions.
I commend the minister’s statement. I know this minister is very conscious of Aboriginal housing, having grown up in the Barkly region. He has seen the condition of housing throughout that area over his lifetime and the styles of houses that are being produced. I thank the minister, and I thank the traditional owners from Borroloola and Timber Creek for coming along today. I hope it gives you slight encouragement that this government is very focused on this area. My knowledge of the Minister for Housing is that he will not let this go. He would like to see some massive changes and better outcomes before he leaves office.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Madam Speaker, I also welcome the people from Timber Creek and from Borroloola. It is really nice to see some people here from remote communities. I know you have had to travel a long way. I hope you enjoy your time in parliament.
I thank the minister for his 20-year vision for indigenous housing in the Northern Territory. There is no doubt that the minister is genuine and very sincere in his desire to address the situation. I congratulate him for his honesty when he talks about the state of housing in the Northern Territory.
I will probably say some things today that I have said in this House before, but I will not be the only one as there are some things that have been said over and over again and will continue to be repeated for many years to come. I hope I am wrong, but the situation in some areas of indigenous housing is so substandard that it will be years and millions of dollars of government money, both from the federal and Territory governments, before we are going to be able to sit back and say we have sorted that out.
The standard of Aboriginal housing in many communities leaves much to be desired. There is no argument on that score. Some houses have no running water, no electricity or ablution facilities, conditions that none of us in this Assembly would contemplate living in. We cannot image what it would be like to live without the basic amenities of running water, power and ablution. The real dilemma is how to deal with it. It is obvious that there are numerous opinions as to what should be done.
The grossly inadequate housing situation in many communities needs to be addressed sooner rather than later and, like most things, requires enormous amounts of money over a long period of time. I listened to the member for Daly very passionately saying that the contribution by the federal government of their buckets of money would be the answer to this, but it is not the only answer to this serious problem. It is one part and it is very important to have money, but that is not the only answer.
While the Northern Territory has been at the centre of media attention over recent weeks and months, we are by no means the only place in Australia with this problem. It is a national issue and needs to be addressed by all levels of government. The federal Minister for Indigenous Affairs, Mal Brough, while some will not agree with some of his statements, should be congratulated for being bold enough to lift the lid on indigenous housing issues to get the ball rolling. There are claims that others have talked about the problems about indigenous housing and no one has listened. I remember the Minister for Housing delivering a statement earlier this year which outlined some very specific data relating to the backlog in housing. Whatever has already been said and whoever said it first is irrelevant; it is steps that are being put in place now that can begin seriously addressing the shortage of housing. That is the important thing.
Other additional and important aspects to addressing the housing shortage relate to issues of law and order and education, but that is for another debate at another time.
One of the major impediments to providing indigenous housing, especially in remote communities, is the cost. Let us face it: in remote communities, the cost is exorbitant. In a regional community such as Katherine, for instance, the cost of building a new house would be at least $100 000 less than building one on a community such as Ngukurr. There are many reasons for that. The building contractor who wins the tender to construct these houses obviously lives a long distance away, and could even come from interstate. Naturally, there is a built-in factor for accommodation, living expenses, tradesmen’s wages, freight of building supplies, and the list goes on. This pushes the price of the house out so much that it makes it impossible to build houses at the rate that is required to meet the need and blows the budget of government very quickly.
I do not see any other way of tackling this huge problem than government seriously looking at several different styles of housing. One size does not fit all, so to speak, and the type of house that would be suitable for a family in the desert regions is different from that which would be suitable for the tropical climate of the Top End of the Territory.
Obviously, the desert region requires a house that will retain its coolness during the very hot summers, but be able to be heated during the very cold weather that the centre of Australia has, as we know only too well, whereas in the Top End, the type of housing required needs lots of protection from the wet weather, designed to be much more open to suit the tropical climate.
The option of building materials needs to be explored. Has the minister looked at the suitability of mud brick dwellings in appropriate areas? This would provide community residents the opportunity of learning the skilled trade of brick making, and contribute to the development of their own housing. The same can be said for teaching trades such as carpentry, plumbing and electrical work, all vital skills which would ensure a healthy respect for the outcomes that they would achieve by contributing to their own community.
One of the difficulties for indigenous people living in remote communities is that there is no opportunity for economic development, and no incentive for them to pursue any skills or trades. Learning to build their own houses and building for others in their community would instil pride and respect for their work. There are many positive aspects to teaching these important trades to indigenous people on communities. The difficulty in providing enough houses across the whole of the Territory would be assisted through self help. The economic contribution to each community through skills learnt would be greatly beneficial for the future through addressing any maintenance and repairs as they are required. Maintenance and repairs cost government hundreds of thousands of dollars per year, and take away valuable money that should and could be directed to new housing.
In the instances of which I have had experience, and these involve many communities over several years, the repairs and maintenance would not have been anywhere as costly if, in the first instance, they were dealt with by skilled labour in the community. By the time repairs were carried out - and the member for Arnhem referred to this when she said there were some instances were people go for weeks without having any maintenance to important facilities within their house, for instance plumbing - the escalation of the cost to the repairs is obvious and it becomes a mammoth job, which costs much more money than it would had it been dealt with when the maintenance was originally needed.
This is where I believe that people in communities should be skilled in important trades that would save government hundreds of thousands of dollars and, most importantly, give these people some responsibility and, ultimately, respect for themselves and their surroundings.
Madam Speaker, not for one minute do I suggest that skilled community labour should be gained through any voluntary trade learning. Each person who makes a commitment to learning skills should go through the same processes offered to everyone. With remote communities, the answer would be to have experienced and preferably accredited builders who would work in a community to teach people the necessary skills, on the job, hands on, and to stay with these communities until the job was done. All of this may seem like pie in the sky, but these issues are very important; they need to be addressed in combination with the housing problems. They can be combined to address the problems of housing, lack of jobs, self-esteem and all the other associated problems evident in some of the communities. It will take a lot of coordination, patience, diligence and perseverance, but it can be done if there is a will to make the changes that are so important to the sustainability of remote communities.
Whilst this statement talks about the shortage of housing across the Northern Territory, it does not tell us how many houses have been abandoned. I have had several reports from people who tell me of the considerable number of houses throughout the Northern Territory that are vacant and, in some instances, have been vacant for some time. I have made some inquiries about this and have learnt of a variety of reasons as to why these houses are vacant. One of them is that a family member has died at the house, the house was smoked in the traditional practice, and then the family left. I was advised that, in some instances, the family would not return to that house for several months, and in some instances would never return. When I asked if they would live in that house if it was relocated to another community, the information I was given is that would be acceptable. If that is true, government should then look at buildings for indigenous people who practice this tradition that could be dismantled and relocated elsewhere.
What I would like to know, minister, is: has there been a survey or inventory done on the number of houses that have been abandoned and where they are throughout the Territory? What do you plan to do with houses that have been abandoned? It is hard to accept that there could be so many of these houses vacant or abandoned to which people have no intention of returning on one hand, and, on the other hand, we are told that there is such a severe shortage of housing.
As I said earlier, one size does not fit all, so a lot of investigation needs to go into what is going to be the most suitable housing for each different community. Involving indigenous people in discussions about what suitable housing would be for their community would be a wise move because they are the people who are going to live in these houses. It goes without saying that there have been many failures in housing design over the years. I am certain that designs were used with the best intentions in mind, but if someone is going to be living in and respecting a house that is there home, it would be a good idea for them to have some involvement in it and a choice of several styles. I do not believe that is unreasonable.
We have concentrated on the shortage of indigenous housing throughout the Northern Territory that the minister’s statement addresses. I will complete my reply to the statement by paying respect to those indigenous people, and there are many of them, who have lovely homes that they respect. Many of these people live in and around Katherine and take great pride in their homes, and it must be difficult for them to constantly have the conditions of some of their countrymen shouted out through the media. I know some of these people have a lot of pressure placed on them by family members and it makes their home life very challenging. It is good to see them strong and determined to make a life for themselves and their families.
One of the communities I have talked about a great deal over the time I have been here is a community called Dillinya, south of Katherine, off the Buntine Highway, next to the Delamere Range and old Delamere Station. I visited Dillinya two weekends ago, along with my husband and traditional owner Sheila Millar. I was so impressed with the way Dillinya has been set up, even more so with the tidiness and cleanliness of this community. Dillinya may only be a small community with five houses, but it is a very good example of how a well-run and organised community could and should be.
At the time I visited, there were only five people living there. There had been others until the week prior but, at this time, only Paddy, Uncle Ronnie, Brian, Patrick and William were living there. They were very pleased to have us visit them, and had gone to great lengths to make us feel welcome. Brian made scones - and I must congratulate him on his first attempt at making scones - ably assisted by over-the-phone instructions from Sheila. Well done, Brian; I do not think I have ever made scones as nice as yours. We had a fabulous day; a morning tea under a mango tree, and we sat talking for some time.
I greatly admire the way this community is run and I have spoken before of the importance that community plays in the lives of people rehabilitating from alcohol, drugs and depression. The reason I include Dillinya in my comments is that the housing and the grounds are kept very neat and well maintained. The houses, which are brick, have their own garden areas, some lawn and all have solar power. Brian has a vegetable garden and there are many mango trees in various stages of growth, all looking very healthy. They have plans to plant more fruit trees in the future. This small community has pride in itself. Another reason that I mentioned Dillinya is that this community has shown that it is responsible in maintaining its infrastructure and would like to expand to cater for larger numbers of people.
The property would also like to become financially independent by going into beef production. This would give indigenous community members the opportunity not only to learn new skills, but those like Paddy, who is a very experienced ringer and station hand, the chance to share his knowledge and skills with his people. The opportunity for economic development in most communities is limited, but here is a community that has the land to expand into cattle production and the willingness and skills to do so. However, they have not received any encouragement when trying to further their dream for independence.
From the conversations that I have had with Sheila, it is obvious that there are personality conflicts that are hindering her plans to develop Dillinya to be self-sustaining. As I have always said to her: ‘Never give up. Never, never, never!’ I will do all that I can to support and further her plans for development. Sheila is a strong Aboriginal woman and I respect and admire her tenacity in trying to bring respect and a will to live and enjoy life to so many of her people. She is very capable of doing more if she is acknowledged for her good work and supported in furthering the development of her community.
I know that I have digressed a little from the statement with that, but the way the housing has been looked after at Dillinya is commendable. When you look at some of the other communities, it is good to recognise and acknowledge Dillinya.
I also have the small community of Binjari in my electorate. Binjari has recently come under the Katherine Town Council, which has responsibility for maintaining essential services. While some of the residents there were reluctant about it, now they are going to receive the same essential services as Katherine. Of course, that includes stormwater drainage, kerbing and front fencing. I am sure the additional assistance will improve the appearance of the community which, in turn, instils pride.
I listened to the member for Macdonnell talk about rental for indigenous housing in communities, and it reminded me about inequality at Binjari, with people living in basic sheds - and they really are just basic sheds in the bottom residential camp area - paying the same fees to Katherine Town Council as those who live in the newer, well-built housing in the top residential camp area. While they have tried to negotiate a lower fee, it has not been received very well. I think residents in the bottom camp have a very good argument that they are being unfairly treated, having to pay the same amount as top camp residents.
I support the minister’s statement on indigenous housing and look forward to his regular reports and hearing when positive developments occur. It is a huge issue. I listened to the member for Daly putting the blame on the federal government and everyone else that he could. It was quite a good little political speech that he made. However, I believe that indigenous housing has to be addressed in the same way that we are addressing roads and there has to be a bipartisan approach. It has to be at all government levels so that we overcome the problem of the shortage of indigenous housing as well as the shortage of funding for roads. I thank the minister for his statement.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I intend to make quite a short contribution, and I am pleased with the positive contributions from around the Chamber.
I commend the Minister for Housing, one, for bringing on this statement and, two, for being a minister prepared to push the conventions and traditional thinking around housing. If there is anything we need for indigenous housing, it is this: it is going to have to be innovative and creative to beat back this cost barrier.
If you look at the question overall of $1bn of housing and the backlog, the member for Arnhem said it would take 33 years at current rates of progress to get on top of housing. Ignoring natural growth from high birth rates in indigenous communities, those 33 years could easily be pushed out to double or three times that.
It is easy to be defeated and think negatively if we concentrate on the big figures and the magnitude of the task ahead. We could be better helped by the Commonwealth than we are. If you consider, in the context of the Northern Territory budget, there is around $2.7bn annual expenditure, the Commonwealth will return somewhere between a $14bn and $15bn surplus this year as they did last year and the year before. A little of that out to the side - and you would not get it done; you would still take five or eight years to get it done - could assist considerably.
If we look at though the gains made in the years, and you cannot go all the way back to the 1960s, but I am familiar with photographs of communities like Yirrkala and Galiwinku in the 1960s in my electorate and they were tiny shelters, that is all they were, scattered down the hill. Compared to that, we have high quality housing in those communities today, housing that does stand the test of time, is durable and is well used and maintained.
Looking at the current costs through the North East Arnhem Land region, Nhulunbuy is remote but it is not in the same way that many of our indigenous communities are. We are looking at between $500 000 and $600 000 to put a concrete slab and block style three-bedroom house. Money is simply not going to get you across the line when you are looking at those sorts of costs. They rule out that style of housing in those sorts of communities. If they are remote, just to get the slab laid is a cost that you can get away from if you go to a prefabricated, modular style building. There are big companies in the southern states prepared to whack these out the door at $120 000 to $140 000. It is on the barge, then on the truck from the barge to the community, and you are probably getting your costs down to around $300 000. That is two quality houses.
Away from the slab, the house is movable. It can be picked up on a truck holus bolus; it is all fitted out. I am told that one factory has under roof the size of the Nhulunbuy central business district all manner of steel; it is all laid out. You simply ring and order the dimensions of the product you want. Out it goes on a truck, on to the barge and wherever you want that delivered.
That is the sort of thinking that we have to get to and, more than that, there is a business niche opportunity here for a company to set up, whether it be Katherine or elsewhere in the Territory. It would not particularly matter, but we would have local employment, people being trained in the factory there and trained to put these together in the community, so local training, local opportunities. That is the innovative thinking that we do have to reach.
I am impressed when I hear stories by the member for Arnhem in relation to indigenous involvement, and I do not pretend that delivering housing and getting a return in indigenous communities is easy, but we saw some very good things at Groote Eylandt during our Community Cabinet visit. They involved the use of royalties and indigenous investment dollars getting behind housing. In my own electorate, the Rrirratjingu Association through their investment arm, Bunuwal Investments, built 21 or 22 houses. They go on to the market, government’s leasing somewhere around one-third or half of them. They will be snapped up by the company and the Commonwealth government. They are leased before they are completed because the housing demand in Nhulunbuy township is so great.
They did that commercially. It was not use of royalties. They did not have bucket loads of money in their bank. They went to the bank. They went to the bank and struck a deal, as any association could well do, supported by Alcan and the Northern Territory government in a tripartite arrangement. I do not pretend it is that easy in an indigenous community because, quite clearly, people in indigenous communities are not in a position to be paying - I do not want to go to the sort of rentals, but they will get a very good return. Mind you, those houses are in that order of the $500 000 to $600 000 in construction costs.
If we can get away from that slab and block style of housing and move to modular styles, there are enormous employment and training opportunities right through the bush. They have to be tested for durability, robustness and cyclonic conditions, and I am sure, from what I have seen in Nhulunbuy, they meet the test there.
The member for Daly raised the point of the federal minister saying: ‘Yes, we can give you 50 houses, but you have to sign over your land’. The right to shelter for Australians is, surely, a fundamental basic right, and it ought not be at the whim of a federal minister saying: ‘Sign off here. Give us your land and we will give you 50 houses’. If they need 50 houses, they should be getting those 50 houses as a commitment from the Commonwealth in conjunction with this government. They should not be held over a barrel in relation to the land.
Whether the leasing is a good idea or not is for the traditional owners and the councils in these communities to work out for themselves. They need to fully thrash out, discuss and say: ‘Is this manageable? Do we want to do this? Do we want to have a 99-year lease on our land?’ They have to work through and understand the issues, as they could, anyway, under section 19 of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act now; they do not need this type of amendment. What they do not need is this type of offer to say: ‘We will give you 50 houses …’. In fact, Minister Brough at Galiwinku said: ‘Not only will we give you 50 houses, I will come and teach you how to build them.’ Oscar Datjarranga, an old friend of mine, was sitting right beside me, said: ‘I am a trades carpenter myself.’
This guy had no idea of the people he was talking to and the work experience and background of some of those traditional owners sitting around the table. Minister Brough thought it was terrific that if he could do it, anyone could do it, and he would be prepared to show them how notwithstanding that there were highly experienced indigenous tradespeople sitting at that very table.
I agree with the member for Daly; the right to a shelter is a basic right. It has to be met. Quite clearly, it is beyond the reach of this government to do it on a $2.7bn budget when we know the need is on or above $1bn, and I again say if the Commonwealth government is going to continue to return surplus budgets in the order of $12bn to $15bn a year every year for the last few years, they could dig a bit deeper and give the Northern Territory government a hand with what is one of our great social needs.
I commend the Minister for Housing for his statement and I wish him well into the future.
Members: Hear, hear!
Debate suspended.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Parliament House public tour program visitors. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
VEXATIOUS PROCEEDINGS BILL
(Serial 60)
(Serial 60)
Continued from 15 June 2006.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I looked at this bill some weeks ago and spent some time last night typing up my speech because I thought we were going to deal with it this morning. I was going to ask the member for Blain to read it on my behalf, so Attorney-General, I do not propose to do anything other than read the speech.
The opposition supports the bill. As the Attorney-General said in his second reading speech, the bill was developed through the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General and is based on a model bill developed after much consultation with stakeholders around Australia.
We do, however, have a couple of observations to make and questions, and we ask that the Attorney-General address these in his reply.
The bill provides that the Supreme Court alone be given the power to make a Vexatious Proceedings Order, which would prohibit or limit the right of a vexatious litigant from taking or continuing legal action. Given the jurisdictional limit of the Local Court, which is $100 000, we ask whether the Local Court should be able to make such an order as well. It is the case generally that parties tend to engage the services of counsel for Supreme Court matters, and the cost of so doing will clearly be expensive. We wonder why the Attorney-General took the view that the power to make a Vexatious Proceedings Order should be within the sole domain of the Supreme Court, particularly noting the jurisdictional limit of the Local Court of $100 000.
While the opposition understands the serious nature and implications of making such an order, we ask the Attorney-General why he thinks it is appropriate for such an order to be made only by the Supreme Court. Put another way: why shouldn’t magistrates be able to make such orders? We are concerned that in your second reading speech, you said:
- There is no right of appeal from the decision of the court to dismiss the application.
Clearly, there is no right of appeal, but there is the ability to apply to set aside or vary a Vexatious Proceedings Order. There is an ability to issue further proceedings subject to strict conditions set out in the bill; however there is no right of appeal. The Attorney-General said in his second reading speech:
- It was considered necessary to block off another avenue of appeal as vexatious litigants tend, by their nature, to take action in any way possible to question a court’s decision, regardless of the merit of their position.
We are concerned that there is, nevertheless, no right of appeal. This is perhaps overly restrictive. On our reading of the bill, we are troubled by what appears to be no right of appeal. Certainly, there is the ability to vary or set aside, but no right of appeal from a decision of a judge to make a Vexatious Proceedings Order. We ask that the Attorney-General address this in his reply and advise whether this is the case in other jurisdictions - namely, no appeal - and to indicate what other types of matters go before a court that do not have appeal provisions.
Another observation we make is that the Attorney-General referred in his second reading speech to the fact that ‘the Attorney-General, Solicitor-General or Registrar of the Supreme Court’ may apply for a Vexatious Proceedings Order. This was apparently included in the second reading speech to create the impression that such parties could never apply to strike out a proceeding or that those parties previously had no rights in respect of vexatious litigants.
That is clearly not the case, and we cannot help but be a little cynical of the deliberate way in which those parties were included in the speech and the bill. Our point is this: clearly, if either one of those parties is an aggrieved party in a proceeding they had, and will logically have, certain rights in respect of such a proceeding. We are also a little cynical of the way much was seemingly made of the fact that a Vexatious Proceedings Order cannot be made ‘until the person in question has had an opportunity to be heard’. This was presumably included in the Attorney-General’s speech to make it appear that somehow this was a remarkable thing. In fact, it is not. There would need to be exceptional circumstances for such an order to be made without the applicant being heard.
It is the case that under clause 12, a court may dismiss an application for leave if the applicant does not appear, but the Attorney-General was not referring to such applications in his speech. He was referring to Vexatious Proceedings Orders made in the first instance. It is hard to imagine that an order would ordinarily be made on an ex parte basis. It therefore appears that a little spin was included in the second reading speech, but I suppose we are used to that.
Having made those observations, the bill is supported. However, we do ask that the Attorney-General address those matters in the reply.
Summing up: why can’t magistrates make orders? We note that this is serious, but we would like the Attorney-General to put on the Parliamentary Record why the decision was made to preclude magistrates. I have dealt with the Law Society on this matter, but I would like to hear directly from the Attorney-General. That is the first point.
The second point is in relation to the appeal provisions. I want to make it clear that we are not talking about those parts of the bill where leave needs to be obtained to set aside or vary an order. It is simply the right of appeal from a decision of a Supreme Court judge and whether the Attorney-General is comfortable with that, and for him to advise whether it exists in other jurisdictions, and to advise whether, in the Territory, he is aware of the inability of a right to appeal in matters similar to this.
Mr Deputy Speaker, that is probably it. The Attorney-General may refer to some of the other issues I raised, but certainly those key ones leapt out as being sources of concern after reading the bill. Having said that, we appreciate why the bill is necessary, and no doubt the legal profession will, like the Attorney-General’s wife, be deliriously happy.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Deputy Speaker, freedom of speech is one of the key foundations of a healthy democracy. That freedom allows the people to have opposite opinions, to be a little eccentric in what they say, criticise elected leaders, speak up against popular opinion, barrack at the footy, pray aloud, write and read, develop the intellect and to express ourselves.
Of course, with every right comes a responsibility, and freedom of speech can be abused. Speech can include libellous or slanderous, dirty or pornographic, blasphemous, sexist or racist language, and language used to incite hate or violence. If you believe the reasons for today’s legislation, you can have persistent and annoying language. The person using such persistent and annoying language could be regarded as a pest, and might be regarded as an abuser of the right to free speech.
One can understand that some people can drive judges and politicians up the wall. They can be persistent and annoying, but there is a problem: isn’t that their right? When you look at this legislation, you ask: is there anyone in the Territory who can be regarded as vexatious? The answer to that is no. Why would you write up legislation for someone who does not exist?
I know there are a couple of people around who are persistently in courts debating various issues or writing to ministers complaining about legislation, etcetera. What is wrong with that? It is not like terrorism where you need to develop strategies and pass legislation before something terrible happens. The worst that could happen with a persistent person is that someone might drive us crazy and we need to leave town for a while.
There are always people who think they are right, and they want to convince others that they are - and I might fall into that category at times - but is this legislation not a case of jumping the gun when we really do not need to have legislation? Isn’t the argument that because other states have it, we should, too, a bit weak? Why do we have to agree with what another state does?
Third, should we not be erring on the supportive or positive side of free speech? Should we not say that free speech should be the main principle we should uphold and protect, and not water down that right just because some character wants to prove he is right and the law is wrong? Lawyers have been doing that for ages, and they seem to be able to escape this bill about vexatiousness. If you look at section 5, Acting in Concert, they appear to escape this legislation:
A reference in this act to a person acting in concert with another person in instituting or conducting proceedings does not include a reference to a person who is acting as a legal practitioner or representative for the proceedings.
They get off scot-free. Minister, is not this the case of a whopping big sledge hammer to kill a pesky mosquito? Are we not going to do more damage to our reputation as a free speech society if we need to introduce this legislation for something that might happen? I remind you that there are no people regarded as vexatious in the Northern Territory at present. Even when you use Queensland as an example, you find there are only 12 people in 20 years who could be called vexatious and only two at the moment.
No, we do not want our courts clogged up with frivolous claims, and of course what is frivolous will always be someone’s opinion. If you go to the definition of ‘vexatious proceedings’ under clause 2, the bill reads:
- (a) a proceeding that is an abuse of the process of a court or tribunal;
Subjective. What is the abuse?
- (b) a proceeding instituted to harass or annoy, …
What is annoyance? That is someone’s point of view.
- … to cause delay or detriment, …
What does that mean?
- (c) a proceeding instituted or pursued without reasonable ground;
Another opinion.
- (d) a proceeding conducted in a way so as to harass or annoy, cause delay or detriment or achieve another wrongful purpose.
Again, that is an opinion, and for that, we are introducing this legislation.
I have asked myself two questions about this bill: could it be used by politicians to keep someone quiet under the guise of vexatiousness? Could a government want to silence an investigation by the media into their behaviour? Who knows? There are lots of lawyer politicians around these days. Second, is the very small likelihood of having our courts clogged up with vexatious claims sufficient enough reason for us to pass legislation to stop such vexatiousness? Some may say yes, but I say no, the same no I give to this legislation. It is not needed and if our courts and lawyers require this type of legislation to stop courts being clogged up, then maybe they need to look at their own back yard and see if some improvements can be made at their end of the system.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Mr Deputy Speaker, I respectfully disagree with some of the comments that the member for Nelson has made …
Mr Wood: Another lawyer politician! You have a conflict of interest.
Mr BURKE: Yes, I guess I could be accused of coming at this from an ex-lawyer’s point of view, but it is important to remember what a vexatious litigant is. It is someone who frequently and persistently seeks to commence legal action without reasonable grounds. I have some sympathy for what the member for Nelson said in relation to a closer look at practitioners because it is the obligation of a practitioner in the first instance to look at a claim that is brought before them when agreeing to act or not act in relation to that claim. I do not want to delve into that in any great detail other than recognising that there is something in what the member for Nelson said.
Vexatious litigants may not be numerous, but they are certainly damaging.
Mr Wood: There’s none. We do not have any. That is less than numerous.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, member for Nelson!
Mr BURKE: I will come to that, and I do not want to be accused of dumbing down the argument, but I believe it is important to paint a picture because there is another procedure of which I was part and I always wondered why there wasn’t a better way of doing it.
Directions hearings are a great example of a number of lawyers involved in a number of different cases coming before a court, all waiting for their matter to be heard to get further directions from the court. Many of those, quite rightly and properly, have agreements with their clients which put them on a per hour footing in terms of the fees that they can produce to their client. When you look around the room and see 60-odd lawyers involved in 20 to 30 cases - and there are certainly many cases with multiple litigants involved - and you think of how much money is represented by those people and the time that they are spending in the court, then you look at the person who presides over the court, whether it be a magistrate, a tribunal member or a judge of the Supreme Court, and their time is being taken up. That is time that we as Territorians are paying for. It is an onerous obligation. Then you look at all the court attendants and their time. Then you have the security personnel. It all adds up fairly quickly. A vexatious litigant can take up those resources to the detriment of deserving claimants and defendants.
The court is there to try to resolve real disputes and vexatious litigants impede its ability to do so. Right around the country, and the Northern Territory is no exception, there are waiting periods as people try to have their cases listed on a very busy court agenda. Some may feel that legal professionals, whether they be the lawyers, the adjudicators or whoever, have a fairly easy life, but I am yet to meet one who does not work extremely hard and spend a great many hours performing their duties. There is very real damage that a vexatious litigant can cause.
I pick up what the member for Nelson said in relation to freedom of speech, which is a freedom we treat seriously. The ability to take redress to the courts on issues is an extremely important right, one of the fundamental pillars of our system. However, courts are not renowned for being radical. In fact, courts are often accused of being rather conservative. It is fair to say that courts are very slow indeed to limit the ability of someone to bring proceedings, or the need for someone to seek permission to bring proceedings and, given that the Supreme Court as the superior court in our jurisdiction has an inherent ability to deal with vexatious litigants, the bill makes it clear for all and it ensures that the Supreme Court maintains that role.
The member for Nelson said: ‘Don’t just do something because other people are doing it’. There is an element of truth to that, but there are significant gains to having legislation that is consistent across the country. This legislation fulfils the Territory’s obligation in ensuring a consistent approach across the country. That, as any lawyer will tell you, assists no end because you do not have to try to sort out what the different provisions are in different jurisdictions and spend a whole heap of time researching to make sure positions are similar. If, by legislation, there is a uniform position, it levels the playing field and means that those who are called to make rulings on legal principles have a wealth of case law to which to refer in doing so and not having to rely on their own interpretations of particular words in our legislation. I do see some value in this conforming with what has been done elsewhere in the country.
As I said before, the right to bring action in court is an extremely important one. I repeat what the Attorney-General said in relation to the vexatious litigant who can nevertheless gain permission from a court to commence proceedings. He said:
- It is vitally necessary to exercise care to ensure that the fundamental right of citizens to approach the courts to seek justice in accordance with the law are maintained.
I agree wholeheartedly. The provision is made so that, even if someone has been declared a vexatious litigant, they can still bring a proceeding. All they have to do is convince the court that their proceeding has reasonable grounds. If I am incorrect in some detail there, I am sure the Attorney-General will correct what I have said.
In going to a court which is staffed by judges who have a great deal of experience in legal principle and applying legal principle to facts that are presented before them, all this experience is brought to bear on the issue of whether a person has reasonable grounds for proceeding, notwithstanding that they may have been declared a vexatious litigant.
I concur with what the Attorney-General said; that there are appropriate balances in this legislation and that it is necessary to ensure vexatious litigants are removed from a system that is extremely busy and operates at full speed. Whatever people think or the media says, I have never seen a court room empty, waiting for someone to turn up and present a case. It is usually the exact opposite; people are climbing over each other to try to have their case heard, and more than willing to jump into a gap created because someone else’s case is not as ready as it ought to be.
I support this bill. Members may recall I once compared the Attorney-General to the engineers at the V8 races. This is not tinkering at the edges and trying to get the engine running smoothly, but perhaps it is more in line with adding an air scoop to keep the engine cool. I commend the bill to the House.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Deputy Speaker, at the outset, I thank members for their contributions and the opposition for their support for this bill.
While the bill will have an impact on relatively few people in the community, it will have a disproportionate impact on the operation of our courts. Vexatious litigants may be relatively small in number, however information from the Supreme Court indicates that there are around eight individuals pursuing unmeritorious and serial matters before our courts in the Northern Territory. That translates into a lot of court time swallowed up by matters with no underlying merit, and that in turn translates to greater cost to the taxpayer and, more importantly, waiting times for meritorious matters to come before the courts. It is those meritorious individuals seeking their day in court who are driving this.
I will now deal with issues raised by the opposition. Why the Supreme Court? That was a decision made at the national level by the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General. It was felt that given the seriousness of the principle of people’s rights to seek legal remedies within their communities to matters that they may be involved in, whether criminal or civil, it was very important to only have the senior court of the jurisdiction deal with these matters. That was the principle adopted nationally. We simply followed the national framework that was set down by the Attorneys-General at the meetings in which this was discussed. Other jurisdictions have done exactly the same. There are no jurisdictions that allow the lower courts to put Vexatious Proceedings Orders in place.
In respect of appeals, we did not feel it was consistent with the intent of the bill to allow appeals because a vexatious litigant, by definition, will use legal process regardless of the merit of their case to prolong their engagement with a court process. A right of appeal would be just as likely to be abused as the right to originate a matter in the first place. We felt much more in line with the intent of the legislation was to put safeguards in place that could be dealt with at an operational level by the courts.
I will recap those for members. The bill has the following safeguards in recognition of people’s general right to originate legal actions. First, a person applying for a Vexatious Proceedings Order against another must obtain leave of the court to bring the application. The second thing is that the court must not make a Vexatious Proceeding Order without hearing the person or giving the person an opportunity to be heard. That appears in clause 7(5). Third, the person declared a vexatious litigant can apply to have the order buried or set aside at any time. There is a review process directly with the court, but it is short of a formal appeal hearing. We feel that is a balanced point between allowing a right of review of either the details of the proceedings order or of the order generally.
Turning to the member for Nelson, it is a problem in the Northern Territory. There are serial unmeritorious litigants in the Northern Territory. I will not drag their cases in to this debate because I do not think that it is appropriate, but I will give you a couple of examples of the type of thing we mean, and these are a couple of cases from Queensland which fuelled the Attorney-General’s enthusiasm for introducing this legislation in Queensland.
There was a person who brought repeated actions in court, arguing that Australian currency is not legal tender, therefore he does not have to pay any fine or penalty incurred in the community. It was sad that it got in to court once, let alone on repeated occasions. The second example is a person who argued that certain laws are invalid because they are inconsistent with the Magna Carta of 1297, and therefore do not apply to them.
These are the sorts of cases we are talking about. We are not talking about the person who has genuine grievance against another in a civil action or some matter that has every right to go before a court. We are not talking about, as the member for Brennan pointed out, people who have arguments of merit of any sort going before a court. We are very aware that we have to protect that right.
The member for Nelson also raised the matter of political interference and free speech. We also thought very carefully about that. It is a valid point to raise in the context of this legislation. There will not be political interference by definition. The operation of this legislation exists entirely on the other side of the firewall between politicians, the elected arm of government, and the justice system. As Attorney-General, my role has been to sit across that firewall and make sure that we are not legislating inappropriately to allow political influence to be brought to bear on the operation of the justice system or on our courts, and that principle is very carefully handled in the bill.
These are entirely matters for the Supreme Court, which will consider applications coming from any source in the community and pass a judgment on the proposition that someone is pursuing unmeritorious claims or arguments repeatedly through the court system. That is a matter that none of us in this House have a direct ability to influence other than being a member of the community who can originate an action. There is no special status of any sort for a politician to influence the courts’ judgment on these matters and the courts will judge according to the criteria in this bill as to whether they consider someone has no merit in a series of approaches to the court for a judgment.
You can be assured that we have thought those issues through. We do not want to curtail free speech in any way, but no matter how a person attempts to express it, there has to be some merit in the argument being expressed. It cannot be internally inconsistent and therefore have no merit in public discourse. That is simply what we are saying here.
We are not curtailing people’s right to get up on a soapbox any time in our community and put a point of view, but courts are there to deal with the law of the land and how it provides protections, rights, opportunities for people in the community to express their interest through a court judgment. That carries with it a judgment of merit. It is not just free speech; it is actually structuring public discourse around rights and responsibilities within our communities. That is what we are dealing with here, not free speech. Free speech is open to any individual in our country, as long as you do not break the laws of the land or defame someone without merit. I hope that distinction is clear here, that we are dealing with court, and the structure and application of the law.
Again, I thank members for their contributions to the debate. I have said enough in reply.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General)(by leave): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Mr Deputy Speaker, rather than go into committee, I thought this might be a more effective way of dealing with it.
Attorney-General, I said at the outset that the opposition supports this bill, however given your explanation in relation to the rights of appeal, I cannot in conscience say that I am supportive of that. There should be a right of appeal.
In the context of the wording of the bill and your second reading speech, it is a subtle point, nevertheless, it is an important point. Clause 7 sets out what is required for a judge to make a Vexatious Proceedings Order. In subparagraph (1) it refers to things like a person
- (a) has frequently instituted or conducted vexatious proceedings in Australia; or
(b) acting in concert with someone …
and the list goes on. They are obviously and plainly people who are vexatious litigants by any common law or even garden variety definition. Whilst the bill intends to impose restrictions, which I support strongly, to restrict it in such a way that you are giving a Supreme Court judge the ability to make a Vexatious Proceedings Order and not provide for an appeal from that decision does not assist the administration of justice. It is the case that under other clauses in the bill, there is the ability to issue further proceedings such as personal injuries claims and so on, but there should be, as of right, the ability for someone to appeal against a decision made by a Supreme Court judge, noting the seriousness of the order from which the applicant will presumably appeal.
Often, of course, vexatious litigants are people who issue similar proceedings repeatedly or, indeed, as you have said in your second reading speech, people who issue proceedings in an attempt to harass others. It seems to me the bill is about restricting a party from issuing further or multiple proceedings, but an appeal is not a further proceeding; it is part of the existing proceeding and Territorians and Australians should be entitled to that right.
I know the bill will pass. Notwithstanding the intent of the bill, which I strongly support, my support is qualified by my very grave concerns in respect of the non-appeal provisions.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Deputy Speaker, I accept the Opposition Leader’s comments. It is a question of balance. I will name the stakeholders with whom we were in discussion when we developed this bill: the Chief Justice, the Chief Magistrate, President of the Bar Association, the Law Society, Supreme Court Registrar and Magistrate’s Court Judicial Registrar. It is the scales of justice, I suppose, in a way.
Perhaps by way of conciliation on this, we will have a look at that in review. I will commit to that review, even though I will not be overseeing it, in, say, 12 months.
Ms Carney: Will you commit your government to the review? Could you just say that?
Dr TOYNE: No. I can guarantee that my successor will ask how this is all going in 12 months and share it with you or the House.
We could not get around the argument that we are trying to cut down the use of court time so if you allow an appeal process, then you are defeating the purpose. We will have a look at it in a year on the current structure and, if it is showing some disadvantage to people’s rights, we will deal with it.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
HUMAN TISSUE TRANSPLANT
AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 57)
AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 57)
Continued from 14 June 2006.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Mr Deputy Speaker, the opposition supports this bill. Bringing many 16- and 17-year-olds on board as people who are allowed to donate their blood to the Red Cross Blood Bank is a very admirable act. The opposition wholeheartedly supports it. Obviously, 16- and 17-years-olds have physical attributes that readily make them very suitable candidates to donate their blood. It is not that we take that much anyway; it is between 300 ml to 450 ml on average once every quarter.
The question that has to be asked is why we need to increase the pool of the population that can be legally allowed to donate blood. Obviously, it is the high trauma rate that we have on our roads and the high level of social unrest that causes lots of people to have inflicted trauma from altercations. We have had a number of road traumas including people sleeping on roads and being run over. Thus, our hospitals require large amounts of blood for transfusion.
Synthetic transfusions are never the answer because they do not have any blood-carrying capacity. Called plasma expanders, they fill blood vessels with volume, but have no capacity to add oxygen-carrying capabilities. Blood transfusions are essential, especially when someone has been haemorrhaging. I listened to a radio advertisement recently for the young girl Sophie who suffered the horrendous car accident. Her father, on the radio ad, said that Sophie’s blood was replaced twice during the course of her treatment. You can imagine how much blood is required to transfuse someone who has suffered a massive haemorrhage.
While the minister might say that 16- and 17-year-olds have less exposure to blood-borne diseases, this is the pool of people who are into the drug culture. We obviously need to look into that aspect of it, but we can be assured that the Red Cross Blood Bank, when taking people on as donors, will do a full screen prior to accepting blood for transfusion use.
Increasing the pool is fine, and this probably applies more to our urban centres. I know that the Red Cross Blood Bank used to travel across the Territory to regional centres, meeting with blood donors and taking their donation from them. Katherine and Tennant Creek, for instance, used to get three-monthly visits from the Red Cross Blood Bank bleeding unit. Unfortunately, that has not been done for some two or three years. If the intent of this legislation is to increase the pool, then you would increase the pool across the Territory. You would go to Tennant Creek, Katherine, Nhulunbuy, Elliott, all those small towns where people are more than happy to donate blood. We are not doing that. We are relying on people who are in Darwin or Alice Springs to go to a blood bank. I know of people living in Tennant Creek and Katherine who have been donating blood for years. Suddenly they find that there is no way they can do it unless they make a special trip to either Darwin or Alice Springs.
If the government is genuine in increasing the pool, it must also adequately resource the Red Cross Blood Bank so that they can travel across the Territory. If not, all you are doing is increasing the pool within Darwin and Alice Springs and you soon have a very finite population to draw on. Two hundred thousand people across the Territory is small enough. When you talk about Darwin and Alice Springs, you are reducing the population down to some 50% of the total population. Minister, that is something that you seriously need to look at. You just cannot say: ‘Let’s reduce the age and increase the pool that way’. We should resource the Red Cross Blood Bank adequately so it can travel across the Territory and get people who have been long term donors to recommence donating blood.
Blood testing is becoming more and more stringent and because of that, you will find that many people who previously could donate blood will find themselves excluded. I used to be a blood donor and some 30 years ago in Adelaide, I went to the Red Cross Blood Bank, they took my blood and found that there was an antigen that would cause problems for recipients. Hence I cannot donate blood anymore because it is not going to be useful. As a result of that discovery, my whole family has been screened and that particular gene occurs in the family and makes the whole family unsuitable as blood donors.
With science, the accuracy of blood testing and tissue typing becomes more accurate and because of that, more people will be excluded from the blood donor pool. So the bigger your pool can be, the better it will be for the Red Cross Blood Bank. I ask the minister to reconsider adequately resourcing the Red Cross Blood Bank so that they can go across the Territory and recommence their three-monthly visits to communities. Adding 16- and 17-year-olds to increase the numbers will help. At the end of the day, blood donated by Territorians will be used for Territorians and that is good.
Dr TOYNE (Health): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the opposition for their support for the bill and constructive comments by the shadow health minister.
I have a couple of points on that, it is commonsense that if we are struggling to keep up with supplies not only in the Territory, but nationally, to meet the needs of patients requiring blood products for their treatment, then we widen the pool. In doing that, we are joining Western Australia, New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, ACT and South Australia. Along with Tasmania, we are the only state or territory yet to make this change. There is no doubt this is the right thing to be doing.
In terms of resourcing Red Cross blood services, a national contract is brokered through the federal minister and the health agencies. That negotiation, I am sure, will take into account the costs associated with blood collection by the Red Cross. We are very aware that we need to keep the Red Cross network across Australia as strong as possible.
The other point, I think, the member for Greatorex made was the issue of cord blood collection and, as he would be aware, we are launching that initiative in the Northern Territory as part of the national initiative on 19 September. I repeat my invitation for you to attend that event; I will not be there as Health minister, but you can certainly be involved. I acknowledge that the member for Greatorex did bring that issue to me some two years ago. I think we were at the Alice Springs Expo.
Dr Lim: A long time ago, mate.
Dr TOYNE: It was quite a while ago, but there are now going to some 20 000 cords used to extract blood for the treatment of leukaemia and other conditions, so it is good to see that come to fruition.
Thank you again for your support, and we will move on.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Dr TOYNE (Health) (by leave): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MOTION
Note Statement - Twenty-Year Vision
for Indigenous Housing
in the Northern Territory
Note Statement - Twenty-Year Vision
for Indigenous Housing
in the Northern Territory
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Minister for Housing’s statement. I rise for one reason only. I have listened to the contributions from all sides of politics, and it is important for me to put my name in the sand, so to speak, in relation to this important statement.
Indigenous housing has been of particular interest to me since I was first elected in 2001. As we became more aware of the deficit between what the Territory government can do for indigenous housing and what is required, we realised that the gap was widening and that there needs to be a plan.
In the earlier statements, it became obvious to me that we need a national plan, and I have spoken about that both in this House, publicly and privately to whoever will listen. The reality is that the mathematics of our situation, as the minister said in his previous statement, is leading to defeat for all the wrong reasons.
I often think about the issues facing indigenous Territorians. I realise that what we can achieve as a government is quite limited by the resources we have. The minister put it quite eloquently in his statement earlier this year when he talked about a deficit of $850m in the Northern Territory. When you consider that our total budget is $3.2bn, it would take a 33% reduction across the board in all Territory departments to deal with the need of indigenous housing alone. That means you would need to cut 33% from health, education, employment, training, police, tourism, roads, etcetera when in reality that is not going to happen because the same individuals, Aboriginal Territorians, need those services.
I will read what the minister said in his statement on 21 February under the title We are going backwards in indigenous housing:
- In 2004, it was estimated that the unmet need for indigenous housing in the Northern Territory was $850m; nationally at $2.5bn. This is the result of 35 years of underdevelopment in indigenous housing. With even modest allowances for cost inflation in the construction industry, that figure must now be nudging very close to $1bn in the Northern Territory alone.
In broad terms, that means we must build 4000 new houses to meet that need. Yet, despite the rolling together of Commonwealth and Territory housing funds under the overarching agreement that our Chief Minister signed with the Prime Minister, John Howard, and confirmed through the Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Agreement, even with a modest increase in funding, our projections are that we will only be able to build approximately 120 new houses a year from 2006 to 2007.
So we need 4000 new houses. The minister is putting his cards on the table by saying we can built 120 new houses.
- At that rate, it will take the Northern Territory 33 years to fulfil current housing needs.
We have put the cards on the table. On the pure mathematics of what we’re dealing with under the agreements with the Commonwealth, we don’t have the capacity to deal with indigenous housing needs. The minister has made it quite clear that we have to develop different strategies and different plans to make the most of the resources that we have.
I contemplated this issue while attending the Kalkarindji Gurindji Freedom Day Festival. It became apparent that there is a fundamental problem with the way we look at indigenous matters, and I had the opportunity over lunch to talk to the minister about this. His theory on it is very closely associated with mine and maybe we might link together one day. Indigenous matters seem to have been addressed in the Australian context for the last 200 years in three manners: one, through the courts; second through Australian citizenship, which came out of Freedom Day; and, third is an oddity of the Australian parliament when, in 1976, they decided for purely political reasons, even though it was supposed to be a national scheme for the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, it became based in the Northern Territory. Really, there have only been two driving forces for any change in indigenous affairs. That is through the courts with decisions like the Mabo decision which, funnily enough, if you read the context of that decision, says that Mabo’s rights can be recognised under a mainstream legal system, but at the end of the day, the Commonwealth parliament has the ability to take all those rights from indigenous people.
At the end of the day, if Canberra, as John Howard has shown in his changes to the Land Rights Act, decides to take all ownership of indigenous land from indigenous people, he has authority under the High Court. The only thing stopping him is the constitution, which says that every individual’s rights are protected and that they must be paid fair compensation.
The only reason Aboriginal people are afforded that right through the High Court and the Australian Constitution were the events arising from Freedom Day, which was the referendum on Aboriginal people being treated as Australian citizens. As Australian citizens, indigenous people throughout Australia are getting services - not because they are Aboriginal. The reason is that in 1966, a referendum was held which, thankfully, Australian people passed in a record percentage, that resolved to treat Aboriginal people as Australian citizens. As Australian citizens they have access to the courts and services.
One of the big problems that we face in today’s political landscape is the fact that when there is any initiative for indigenous people, people often say: ‘Where are the indigenous funds coming from? Where is the indigenous money?’ What I would argue - and we spoke about this over the lunch period, and I believe the minister is heading down that line - is that we should not be asking about Aboriginal money. We should be saying: ‘Where is the money for Australian citizens who happen to be indigenous and happen to live in urban, remote, rural areas around Australia?’ - not because they are indigenous, but because they are Australians. Australian citizenship allows us to have access to the different benefits that all Australians seek.
The minister afforded me the opportunity to have a look at a document about the development incentives to attract skilled workers to remote Australia through regional zone tax offsets. What we have is a scheme developed so every Australian who works in remote areas receives a tax benefit. At the moment, it is people residing in remote areas who receive a zone tax offset designed to offset the increased cost of living in remote locations. The maximum benefit available under the scheme is $1173 per annum under a special area zoning, which includes most remote Territory locations. Through mainstream structures, indigenous people who work in these remote areas can get access to this tax offset. That is where the focus needs to be.
Right now, whenever an indigenous person fronts up to the Northern Territory or the Commonwealth government, it is always: ‘Where do we find the indigenous bucket of money?’ As we know, for a variety of different reasons over 200 years of political debate, that access to resources, based on the indigenous policy, is actually limited. As indigenous people, Territorians and Australians, we need to change the debate from ‘indigenous people gaining access because they are blackfellas’ to ‘indigenous people gaining access to resources because they are Australian citizens’. Indigenous people should not have anything that other Australians do not get, but they should have the same services.
I read in Common Ground that there was a school built at Galiwinku which allows kids to go to high school for the first time. We have built four or five, from my memory from the article, in five years. If you think of all these remote areas that do not have access to high school, of course, they are not going to have the same opportunities as every other Australian. You should not be building them for them because they are blackfellas; you should be building them because they are Australian citizens who happen to live in remote areas and deserve the right to receive Year 12 education.
The minister is trying to find ways within the system as it is - within the policy of the Northern Territory government and in relation to the Commonwealth government – for access to these mainstream services, access to mainstream monies for housing, to find better and cheaper ways to make houses. I believe this is the only strategy.
Have a look at the experience of ATSIC, which was, fundamentally, set up by the Australian Labor Party at a Commonwealth level. It was an organisation that was to fill gaps. The political environment of Australia, all of a sudden, made it the panacea to every indigenous problem. If you had a policing problem, an education problem, or a health problem, you went to see ATSIC. It shifted the blame from governments to deal with matters that they should routinely have been dealing with as Australian citizens.
The concept was good, but unfortunately it shifted the debate to: we should be doing things for Aboriginal people because they are Aboriginal. We have to turn that debate on its head to: Aboriginal people are Australian citizens and have rights, which mean proper housing, health, eduction and access to job opportunities. They should not be discriminated against because of their ethnic background or the places in which they live.
I was very proud to be at Kalkarindji with the members for Arafura, Macdonnell and Fannie Bay - my apologies to those I have forgotten; I think the member for Arnhem arrived late. The minister had other engagements. The spirit was that this event in 1966 led to citizenship, which led to land rights, which led to indigenous people having a voice in this country. A great source of pride for me as a member of parliament is that we have two indigenous members in Cabinet who have the ability to make policy changes.
I look forward to the day when all five indigenous members, with the Chief Minister, make this national, go to Canberra and to speak to the Prime Minister. We are the only parliament in Australia with a make-up like this, and we would see a national response through media, the political movement and by people understanding that we have elected members who are articulate, who can argue a case, who are saying that Aboriginal people do not deserve anything more than anyone else; they deserve the same rights as Australian citizens.
I congratulate the Chief Minister for the 20-year plan. It is something I have been advocating since 2001. We need to take this matter to a national debate and take the politics out of it. I have two media releases. One is from 1 June 2006 from the Chief Minister and says:
- Australia needs to commit to a long term plan if it’s to tackle the causes and symptoms of problems in Indigenous communities.
…
‘If we don’t deal with the causes of these long-standing problems – the symptoms will just get worse,’ Ms Martin said.
- ‘I’ve proposed a 20 year plan – that goes beyond short-term political cycles – that will set clear targets at 5, 10, 15 and 20 years.’
It goes on further to say that a 20-year plan is what is needed for the long term, and in the short- to medium-term, the Territory will look at alcohol management plans across the Territory, public housing management in remote communities and town camps, which the minister has been pushing with great authority and initiative throughout Alice Springs. I look in my areas in Darwin at the Bagot Community, Minmarama and Kulaluk where better governance and more efficient housing construction methods will lead to more houses and better maintenance and will decrease some of the problems that the minister identified in his statement.
For example, there is a man at Bagot Community who lives with his wife, three sons, their wives and all their kids in one three-bedroom house. At the moment, it is a choice for him because he feels more comfortable that his family is living there, but the reality is - and this is happening right across the board - you are going to have the door to your house opened 100 times in a day. You are going to have the toilet flushed 25 times. You are going to have the shower turned on and off 15 times. What that leads to, unfortunately, is wear and tear on the property.
In the 20-year plan, the Chief Minister looks at more police in remote areas. One of the biggest issues throughout those three communities is the fact that people, even within Darwin, are saying that they do not have access to police patrols. The former President of Bagot Community is only about the minister’s size, but he’s a few years younger. When a dispute breaks out at Bagot community, people expect him to go down and sort the problems out. They do not expect the member for Millner or the Chief Minister or Opposition Leader to do that. What that ex-President would like to have had is access to police helping the indigenous people in those communities.
The 20-year plan will introduce reforms to local government. Governance is one of the biggest issues in our communities. Every member who represents a bush seat will talk about the draconian administrative pressures on councils and what it does to individuals on those councils who are trying to do so many things in communities, who are under the pump all the time. Governance training is a very important way of dealing with the administrative issues facing these communities.
The bottom line is even if these administrative changes happen and governance improves on these communities, at the end of the day, they become better at writing submissions, asking for access to Commonwealth and NT government grants. The resources are not there at the moment so no matter how good they get, they are not going to get the resources they set out to achieve. We have to change this debate. People should be accessing services for one reason: because they are Australian citizens.
The final one is support for changes to welfare. Anyone who has known my family throughout the few hundred years that we have lived in this community will know that we pride ourselves on our work ethic. Most people would have seen a change in people’s work habits over the last 40 to 50 years. For example, my father once mentioned to me that in the 1960s, if you went for a Darwin City Council job, an NT government job or a Commonwealth job, there might be 50 people apply for 10 positions. Of those 50 people, 47 of them would be indigenous so at least seven of them would have got a job. Those seven people had a job and they brought up their family. As the dynamic and demographic changed, the competition and access to opportunities for work changed and what you find now is people being out-competed for these jobs so they are not getting jobs. After the second and third generation, you lose that work ethic. We need to support changes to welfare to increase work opportunities and create a better work ethic amongst indigenous people.
My feeling is that if you give one indigenous person a job, you have one family that is going to have an income, one family that is going to have housing and one family that is going to be fed. One of the big issues, of course, is CDEP, and I know the minister has his views on that and some of the Commonwealth issues, and no doubt he will talk about those.
The final thing that gives me great heart is the fact that there is a media release from 14 July 2006 from COAG, the headline of which is: COAG backs Martin’s call for generational plan:
- The Council of Australian Governments has backed Chief Minister Clare Martin’s call for the development of a long-term generational plan to tackle Indigenous issues.
Chief Minister Clare Martin said work will now begin to develop a detailed proposal for concerted, sustained action.
‘This will go down as the day when Australia’s leaders came together to push for generational change in our Indigenous communities,’ Ms Martin said.
‘I’d like to thank the Prime Minister, Premiers and the other Chief Minister for supporting my call for a national generational plan.
‘COAG agreed it was important to significantly close the gap in outcomes between Indigenous people and other Australians.
- ‘By working together, and indigenous communities playing their part, we can make a real difference to housing, health, law and order, education, and governance.
‘There needs to be definite goals over the short and medium term and I favour targets at 5, 10, 15 and 20 years.’
Mr Deputy Speaker, I will wind up by saying I support the minister’s effort. He is making real changes, both politically and socially. I would like one day to see all the indigenous members, with the Chief Minister, go to Canberra. I believe that would get the attention of the nation in a political sense because we have not been able to grasp that yet.
As I said, any victories that come for indigenous Australians have come from either the courts through decisions like Mabo, or through Australian citizenships, which came from movements led by Vincent Lingiari to Freedom Day, or the anomaly of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. Members of this House, including the opposition and Independents, have often spoken about their wish to improve matters. It would be great if we could get every member of this House to go to Canberra in a united front and talk about these issues.
That is the only way to secure the proper investment in our communities. What we have seen in the last 20 years in China, for instance, which was one of the poorer countries in the world, was North American and western European countries deciding that they would invest in China simply because they would be the next capitalist country with the next consumers. We have seen billions and billions of dollars pumped into China, and they have moved the whole nation, three billion people, to be the fastest growing economy in history since the Industrial Revolution.
Investment in one of the richest countries in the world, Australia, can happen, and it can happen for Australian citizens who happen to be indigenous. I call upon all members and the minister to keep up their hard work because I know that, deep down in their hearts, they are doing the best that they can within the limits that they have to make a difference. I commend the statement to the House.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage): Mr Deputy Speaker, I will not speak for long. I support the minister’s statement on indigenous housing. The Northern Territory government has two ambitions regarding indigenous housing out bush. One is a greater spend from the Commonwealth, and two, applying Territory housing standards to indigenous housing in the bush.
I applaud the minister on both initiatives and wish him luck. I know that, for the time he has had the portfolio, he has been very passionate and advocated strongly to his counterpart in Canberra, taking the debate up with him and working through the issues so that, at the end of the day, it is people in Aboriginal communities who will benefit from any increase in Commonwealth funding. It needs both the Commonwealth and the Northern Territory government to work in a productive partnership to be able to secure outcomes for Aboriginal people.
Applying Territory Housing standards in the bush should have been done years ago. Aboriginal people are Australians. They deserve the same basic right, and nearly every person who has spoken about this statement has said that and want those standards to be applied. There are many indigenous community housing organisations that have either folded or not been able to move on from the work that they have done. There is a multitude of problems with these organisations, and the end result is that we do not get the houses built in the bush or the outstations, but I will come to those.
Like many of the bush members who have spoken on this, one of the biggest issues we have in our communities is housing. Coming from a health background, you cannot fix health or education unless you fix housing. The correlation between those three areas is so strong that you have to be able to work on the three of them and have a multipronged strategy to work with the three areas in sync so that you have better health and educational outcomes from better housing.
I agree that some housing organisations in communities need to lift their game. The minister’s strategy of applying the same standards in communities means that we will get more appropriate housing. The design of houses has been a major issue in many communities. There have been inappropriate designs for many years in a lot of these communities. Having lived on the Tiwi Islands for many years, I remember under the former government there was a consultancy set up to look at appropriate design of housing. I participated in that on behalf of the council, and I remember all of the communities that came together - including me and other Tiwi Island representatives - raised the issue of appropriate designs of houses. It was very disappointing to hear from both the Commonwealth and the then Territory government that a lot of the designs proposed had been thrown out or knocked back because governments felt they were inappropriate or they would have cost too much to be able to design a house appropriate to the communities or the residents.
In one community in my electorate, having one house constructed costs well over $400 000. That is an enormous cost burden for communities. The minister has been very passionate about looking at cost-effective housing. It should not cost our communities that amount of money, $400 000, to get a house built. It could be done better, and a lot of it gets down to the design. I am not sure whether the kit homes that are proposed would be appropriate in electorates like mine which are cyclone prone. Every Wet Season, they have the threat of cyclones, and the houses need to be built to code.
Talking about the Building Code, it was only since this government came to power in 2001 that the Building Code started applying in a lot of the Aboriginal communities. That was fantastic because, again, it was discrimination that people would only build houses that were substandard. The application of the Building Code in Aboriginal communities is something I, and other members, welcomed at the time.
Having discussed the Commonwealth’s community leasing proposal at length, particularly with my people on the Tiwi Islands, the Tiwi Land Council was the first to sign a land deal with the Commonwealth government for a whole-of- community leasing for Nguiu for $10m for a college. That deal was signed and will go ahead and maybe in time, it might change things. The community is still debating the pros and cons of whether that will provide better outcomes, but everyone is working together to see if they can reach better outcomes for development, housing and business. We need to work together.
My people, the Tiwis, have faced a lot of criticism from people who have said that they sold a lot of Aboriginal people out with the land deal, but they did it for their own reason: all of the older leaders want to see better educational outcomes for their children. To work with the Commonwealth and say: ‘Okay, we will do the community leasing in exchange for $10m’. You will always have people debating whether that it is a good or bad thing, or whether it is going to lead to anything, but at the end of the day, the Tiwis have said: ‘Okay, it has happened. We now need to try to get things working. We need to work with the Northern Territory government. We need better development’.
Things have to change because the Tiwi Islands, unlike many communities, probably has the highest suicide rates anywhere in the Northern Territory, if not Australia. It is endemic over there. Many of my families are constantly at funerals. I do not think a week goes past when there is not a funeral on that island and people are constantly grieving. Doing things radically differently and thinking outside the square means we have to change things, and that is what many of the leaders, both old and young, are trying to do.
It was good to go to Groote Eylandt with Community Cabinet and see the progress the Anindilyakwa Land Council and the people are making. The member for Arnhem spoke very eloquently about her electorate and the progress that is being made by that land council, and the resort. For too long there has been negativity about what is happening in Aboriginal communities. It was good to see the Northern Territory News run a succession of stories about the rangers at Groote Eylandt and the work that they were doing and what the Anindilyakwa Land Council was doing with the resort. They are positive stories and it was good to see.
The minister has engaged indigenous organisations with builders designers and architects through the Indigenous Housing Advisory Board to get cheaper, more appropriate designs that may be built in regional centres. I applaud you, minister. The cost of housing is very high in some communities, so if you can achieve that outcome, it would be fantastic. I know the minister is very passionate about these things - we are going to hold you accountable for a lot of them, but I know you have the passion and drive to get them.
There was a workshop with over 100 attendees where, as I understand it, you gave a commitment to continue working with that interest group, which is really important for the outcomes of those communities. When I look at what this government has done in relation to health, housing and education, much has been achieved. When we look at those three areas, there is more to do, but it does not mean that is a negative. It is a positive. We have a Cabinet of ministers who are very focused on these issues and working together. Minister, there has been a lot of progress on your reforms with housing and I know it will continue.
In relation to home ownership, there are many young families in our electorates who have aspired to it for some time. The extension of HomeNorth in our remote communities is something I look forward to happening.
I briefly mentioned outstations. There are issues in terms of some outstations that need close attention. Where you have a thriving, vibrant outstation movement with people on their country, there are issues in relation to housing. As minister, I know you will look at not just community housing, but also the issues confronting the outstation movement.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I fully support the minister’s statement. It is most welcome.
Mr McADAM (Housing): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank all speakers in relation to the statement. In the main, it has been very positive. Your views have been very forthright and honest, and it is indicative of the nature of indigenous housing in the Northern Territory and how critical it is.
It is appropriate if I start where the member for Arafura left off. She referred to a workshop that occurred last month in Darwin, convened by the Indigenous Housing Advisory Board. I thank them for their vision and commitment. Effectively, we tried to get all the people within the industry together and have an open, honest and frank assessment of where we have been, what we are doing at the moment, and where we go into the future.
As the minister indicated, it was a very worthwhile effort. We were able to bring together people from the construction industry, the building industry, architects, housing service providers, and stakeholders from right across the building construction industry. The point that I was trying to make at that meeting is that I find it pointless to have two systems of housing in the Northern Territory, where you have indigenous housing and public housing or Territory housing.
By continuing that focus, we are separating housing needs not only in respect of indigenous people, but those people in the public sector. There are great synergies to be gained through a very close relationship between the two and in respect of other issues related to management and economics.
As I have said previously, it is fair to say not only here in the Northern Territory, but throughout Australia, we have tended to look at indigenous housing as an industry within an industry. That has been one of the reasons why we have not achieved to the extent that we might have. I am not passing any criticism there, but it is a fact. By saying something is an indigenous housing program and applying a different set of principles, that we do not apply in the other sector, we compromise the indigenous housing program.
One of the things we have to do is to have a look at how we proceed not only in terms of construction, but in terms of employment and training opportunities. One of the things that I have always thought is that if you have $254m put into the Northern Territory government to indigenous housing, say, over a three year period, and that is a combination of all the grants under the bilateral agreement with the Commonwealth, that is a good base to look at regional economic opportunities in a very real way.
Quite apart from getting efficiencies into that amount of dollars, in terms of the indigenous community you also have the capacity to value add to those dollars by engaging the private sector and other interested people. You have to be able to grow the construction industry in the Northern Territory to provide the number of houses and, of course, those dollars coming in for the indigenous part will never be able to do it.
As I have said previously, there is great capacity to add on the $254m not only in the context of meeting housing demand or need for indigenous housing, but across the broader industry and looking at options to provide cost-effective housing into Western Australia, Queensland, and to southern communities.
By looking at the options of a modular set-up, something that is very robust, going to meet design needs and comply with cyclone codes, and by developing this sort of manufacturing base in the Northern Territory, you really then start to look at economies whereby you are going to be able to achieve a sustainable housing industry, which will grow outwards. By putting that in place, and it does not matter where it goes – Katherine, Tennant Creek or another region - it adds to the regional economic focus but, more importantly, you start to see real outcomes in training and employment, particularly in relation to apprentices. At the moment, you are building two or three houses in each community, and that is fine, and you are engaging local indigenous people but that is not sustainable over a long period of time if you only do that.
I am sure there are ways and means of building a real robust economy around the Indigenous Housing Association, which builds on real employment and training outcomes. Since the workshop we had in July, there has been real interest from some members of the private sector who want to talk about that sort model. Some indigenous organisations, which are not necessarily ICHOs, have also expressed an interest. We have achieved, at the very least, a perception that indigenous housing is not specifically indigenous housing any more; it is part of the broader agenda. That is the way forward.
The other matter I wanted to raise, which some members spoke about, is some of the structural changes that have occurred in Territory Housing’s capacity to provide a framework for indigenous housing in remote or bush communities. As I said before, I do not believe that you can effectively maintain two systems of housing. The only way to do it is by looking at where the synergies might apply. I want to make it very clear that it is not a case of Territory Housing imposing on communities in terms of how they do things. It will be in partnership. We will be looking at opportunities to outsource where possible, where ICHOs have the capacity to outsource some of those functions that would normally be carried out by Territory Housing.
It brings some rigidity to issues such as rent collection, to waiting lists and to R&M. If you are talking about making it sustainable out there in the bush, you have X number of government employee houses out there and you have X number of indigenous houses, but we treat them separately. That has to stop. We have to combine the two to achieve efficiencies.
My department is preparing a submission for consideration by Cabinet in respect of some of those structural changes, but I want to give an assurance to the ICHOs that it is not designed to usurp your community development management and principles; it is really a way and means of being able to provide the appropriate support and to get away from the old notion of the past that you live out there in the bush, you have an ICHO, we do not care what you do, or how you do it.
What I am trying to say is that the aim is to provide a mechanism for more support between the two.
The other thing I wanted to raise in regards to some of the structural changes is that a lot of our indigenous people who work in ICHOs work very, very hard, they are very dedicated and they are determined to achieve outcomes. As you know, some of our rent collections are very, very good and in the bush communities, some are not so good, but in the main, they are quite good and they are in no small way attributed to the dedication of those indigenous people.
I have the view that, at some time in the future and subject to some further considerations, why should you not have a career path into the public service if you are doing your work out there? If you are working at Yuendumu, a community out of Nhulunbuy or out of Alice Springs or Katherine and you are doing your job well, I do not see why you should not be able to have a career path as well.
They are the sorts of things that we are talking about with some of the structural changes. It is important to understand that these structural changes are not something we have said we are going to do; this is something that we have responded to in respect of the Commonwealth. It is not only the Northern Territory that is going down this path in regard to structural changes which, effectively, bring housing programs under the framework of states’ respective housing programs. It is something that has been agreed. Of course, more discussions will occur. We are to provide some more data, which we agreed to, and that will be going back to the Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and minister Brough towards the end of September or thereabouts. That gives the genesis of where we might go forward.
It is important to understand that the Commonwealth has to recognise that we are making these changes as, indeed, are the other states. They have to be able to work in with whatever those changes might be. I know that other members in this House have spoken about the manner in which the Commonwealth has approached housing in the Northern Territory, particularly over the last few months. Reference has been made to Galiwinku and Wadeye by members.
It is important for the Commonwealth to take a step back because they have to be able to engage the Northern Territory government in a very positive way, a way which is going to achieve outcomes. I do not think it serves anyone to go into a community and say, as other members have said: ‘We are going to build you X number of houses on the condition that you get a lease’. That is not the way to go. There are other means, ways and models that can be achieved, quite apart from the fact that it really does impact upon the goodwill and the coordination that does occur on the ground between ICC and, say, our department and, indeed, ICC and other departments. The Commonwealth has to be realistic. You cannot wave a big stick from Canberra and say: ‘We are going to do this and we are going to do that’ because we need to engage people on the ground.
It might be appropriate to place on record the issue in respect of demountables because what is important to understand here is that the goals and objectives of the Northern Territory government are the same. They are to respond to the situation that occurs in the town camps in our suburbs of Alice Springs. We know there are high levels of overcrowding. We know there is dysfunction around grog, ganja and a whole lot of other things and we are both working towards an outcome.
Our model is a little different in the sense that we are looking at a bricks and mortar approach and, of course, the federal government has their model with demountables. I say the demountable model can be achieved, providing the aesthetics, design work and environment are right in the sense of them being habitable by people. I wanted to knock that on the head and say that we do want to work with the Commonwealth government in a very positive way on this matter. Our goals and objectives are the same but, of course, how we arrive there is a little different. Nonetheless, they are both designed to alleviate overcrowding and all the other things that go on in town camps.
Responses to the statement have been many and varied. Obviously I am not in a position to respond to them all, but there are some things that I would like to talk about. The member for Macdonnell raised the issue of insurance in respect of indigenous housing. As we know at the moment, the respective ICHOs are required to provide insurance in terms of payment of premiums. I know they are substantial and the excess on that is very high. One of the things that we are looking at that might be able to alleviate the impost on the ICHOs but, more importantly, might be able to provide a few extra houses is through a system whereby Territory Housing has a look at providing insurance under their existing system. I am not too sure if that is going to be possible, but at the very least, when we are talking about structural changes, I would hope that Territory Housing will take on the issue of insurance and I know they will.
The other matter the member for Macdonnell raised - in fact, all members did, I think - is that all of a sudden home ownership is seen is to be the panacea in respect of solving all indigenous housing problems. It is an admirable aim, the aspirations are it is something worthy to achieve, but to expect it to be the only option is a little wide of the mark. As I said, we have a responsibility to provide houses across the board.
It depends upon the entity in terms of how that pans out. There was provision under section 19 under the old ALRA and that would have great credence in terms of some of the homeland type communities. I do not know whether that now becomes 19A, I am not too sure, but there is great capacity there for that to occur. I will come back to that in a moment, but there is some capacity for home ownership under the new land holding or the leasing entity. As you know, the Northern Territory’s government position is that it must be voluntary and we will continue that. We are not going to be holding communities to ransom - if you do not sign, you get nothing. That is not going to be our position.
Of course, where possible, there are some real options. Let us take a place like Ali Curung in my electorate. It is probably not the best example because population numbers are not the same as they are in other places. Let us say at Ali Curung, there was a requirement to build 10 government employee houses. The only option we have at the moment is to negotiate through the existing system and then probably the only other option we have after is for the Northern Territory government to pay for that housing. I would hope that under a new leasing entity arrangement, there would be an opportunity for the community being able to secure a lease via this entity, either the community, an ICHO or another indigenous organisation to say we are prepared to build you these 10 government employee houses and then it is purely a commercial deal. The successful company would then get the returns via rental.
It is not dissimilar to what has occurred over at Nhulunbuy in terms of the Bunuwal Investments which is an investment arm of the Rrirratjingu clan. They are the things that are possible, not only in home ownership or government employees, but police stations. It is already happening, but I am saying that the leasing entity should not be seen as a means or a mechanism to prise land away from TOs, because this government is not into that.
The other matter to which I wanted to refer is something the member for Millner raised. It is part of the approach in terms of getting the message out there that it is not an industry within an industry. We are not insular any more. The indigenous housing industry is part of the broader economic framework of the Northern Territory not only in terms of the construction side, but in terms of the management side. As a government, we have to seriously think about this. It is incumbent upon the Commonwealth government to also give due consideration to it.
You will be aware that Mr Graeme Morris was recently appointed to undertake the CHIP Review on behalf of FaCSIA, which looks at housing on indigenous communities, particularly homelands. Nonetheless, the application is across the board. We welcome that, but I say to the Commonwealth government: you should not see it as a means of being able to cut costs or compromise homelands out in the bush because they remain a very important component of our society. As I have said before, I have no doubt that a lot of the homelands will become the real economic drivers. The remote regions in future will be the real economic driver of the Northern Territory economy. I have no doubt about that.
These are structural changes within an existing framework that is applied by the Commonwealth government not only respect of the Northern Territory but right across the states. I refer to the Commonwealth Rent Assistance Scheme, a scheme whereby the Australian government provides money to those people on low incomes to be able to access private rental at an affordable rate. If you are on a social income and the rent is at a higher level then there is a gap whereby the Commonwealth government will provide rental assistance.
In 2004-05, Centrelink invested $2.5bn assisting almost a million low income earners throughout Australia. The figures are quite interesting in the sense that the benefit is accessed by 23% of the non-indigenous population and 80% of indigenous people access the gap. In the Northern Territory, only 26% of the non-indigenous population accesses that gap and only 5% of indigenous people. That gives you a very stark contrast in respect of the equity of that program and how it applies to remote communities in the Northern Territory.
The point that I am trying to make is that there is capacity within that program by looking at new ways of distributing that money so that it is more equitable, particularly in relation to indigenous people who live out in the bush communities and non-indigenous people in some of the regional towns.
The Commonwealth has done it before - I am pretty sure it was under the PCAP program, which is a health program. Effectively, what they did was work out on a formula base the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and whatever the figure might have been - I cannot remember - but it was substantial, on a per capita basis. We have written to the Commonwealth asking them to go down this path because that is one equitable way of addressing the need in the Northern Territory in respect of indigenous housing without asking for extra money.
Remember, the $2.5bn is out there at the moment and I hope the Commonwealth government takes our submission into consideration because it is a good way of ensuring that the money is distributed to where the most need is. They developed health services, and I am sure the member for Arafura would be aware of this, in terms of what they did in the past, and what we are really saying is that there is no reason why you cannot apply the same formula to housing.
The other one can be a Commonwealth government initiative, and can kick start the so-called private investment in indigenous communities, but obviously it is going to take time. For instance, as I understand it, the current rate of depreciation on an investment is something like 2.5% over 40 years. Of course, that does not make it attractive for the private sector, and when I refer to private sector, I also refer to indigenous organisations or royalty groups, or other people who also access this sort of model. On any view, 2.5% over 40 years is not an attractive way to get investment into the bush, and one of the things that we have suggested to the Commonwealth government is that perhaps they give consideration to maybe a 10% depreciation rate over a 10 year period. That is not prescriptive. We have not done all the sums in regard to it, but really what we are saying to the Commonwealth is there are these other options, so give them consideration.
I talked about government employee housing. There is something like 670 local recruits out there at the moment. I am talking about indigenous people in the main - teachers, ACPOs, police officers, the whole lot - who do not qualify for housing, but if you were able to attract private investment to build those houses, and you get a return on those houses, then 10% return is a lot more attractive over 10 years than 2.5% over 40 years. Again, there is a bit of work for the government there, but we are not relying on the fact the Commonwealth is going to continue to throw money at us because those days are over and we have to think of other ways and means of addressing it.
Regional development is related to the issue. Most members will be aware that under the Australia taxation scheme there are regional zone tax offsets, and they apply throughout the Northern Territory. They have been in place since the early 1950s. The figure to attract people into the regions is $1173 per annum for special area zoning, and that really includes most of the Northern Territory. We are saying that the Commonwealth government should review that. They should look at making a variation and upping it to attract people into the regions. The Commonwealth announced a $5000 incentive scheme to attract plumbers and other trades people to the bush. I do not know whether it is prescriptive, but reviewing and increasing the zone rebate is another way.
Mr Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, I thank all the speakers for their contribution. It has been much appreciated. The member for Stuart spoke very well in terms of his enduring commitment to housing, particularly from an environmental health perspective. I wish to acknowledge him as the Minister for Health and for his outstanding contribution in the area of health. I know he has been very committed and we thank him. He leaves a legacy across government which will be very hard to fill. I thank him very much, and wish the member for Stuart all the very best.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Crocodile and Art Industries –
Opportunities Overseas
Crocodile and Art Industries –
Opportunities Overseas
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Parks and Wildlife): Mr Deputy Speaker, in July this year I spent two weeks in Europe. The main purpose of my trip was to visit nuclear power plants and nuclear waste facilities in France and Finland, and to talk to various agencies and officials involved in this industry. I will be reporting to this House on that aspect of my visits in due course.
However, there was more than a nuclear focus to my time in France. I would like to inform the House about the great things that are happening to promote our Northern Territory in that most iconic of cities, Paris. There are strong links between the Northern Territory and France, which might not be immediately obvious, but these links are growing stronger and are bringing about some wonderful business opportunities with mutual benefits. Importantly, these French connections are benefiting Territory indigenous communities. I will explain.
As Minister for Parks and Wildlife, I have been well aware of the role of crocodile egg harvesting in the economy of remote communities. I was less well aware of the role of these humble eggs as the single most important element in the chain of supply equation for the high end crocodile skin industry, and the value of these eggs to the high fashion houses of Europe. It has been a privilege not afforded to many to have viewed firsthand every single element of this long chain of supply and manufacture, from the risky business of taking crocodile eggs from the Territory’s wetlands to the production of luxury handbags to satisfy an ever increasing demand from the wealthy women of Europe, Japan and America. The making of, for example, an exclusive Hermes handbag starts in the Northern Territory, most likely in the swamps of Arnhem Land.
The Northern Territory’s highly regarded crocodile management plan essentially sets the framework for the whole crocodile industry. The plan covers wild harvesting, captive breeding and the farming of the saltwater crocodile, Crocodylus porosus. The wild harvesting component of the plan includes the taking of eggs as well as hatchlings, juvenile and adult crocodiles for commercial purposes. The harvesting of crocodiles primarily for their skins, but also for their flesh and body parts, supports a small industry in the Northern Territory. The world market for crocodile skins is 650 000 skins per year. The Australian crocodile industry supplies approximately 2% of the world market. This world market, however, includes other species such as the Nile crocodile and the North American alligator. I am told - in fact, I was repeatedly told by businessmen in France - that the Northern Territory porosus, our own salty, is the pick of the bunch. Porosus supplies the best skins and are, therefore, the most sought after by the fashion industry.
The first crocodile farm in the Territory was established in 1980 and the first skins were commercially produced in 1987. In 1987, 251 crocodile skins were produced. This year, two of our crocodile farms - Lagoon Farm and Porosus Pty Ltd - will sell approximately 10 000 skins internationally. The crocodile skin industry has really come of age. It is on the brink of becoming a fully-fledged industry, a stable and growing component of our economy, and is moving on from the quaint cottage industry status it has had until now.
There are real economic achievements emerging from this industry. Earlier this year, representatives from Hermes and their tannery, the Gordon-Choisy Tannery, signed a contract with Lagoon and Porosus Crocodile Farms. These are long-term contracts with one of the world’s most famous fashion brands to provide skins for the luxury handbags for which Hermes is renowned.
It was a privilege for me to be the guest for one day of Hermes and the Gordon-Choisy Tannery. The precious skin tannery in rural France just south of Paris is an eye opener. Part medieval, part modern, it processes thousands of skins of several species in a very labour intensive, multistaged process. It was odd to see boxes of full of tagged skins labelled ‘the Northern Territory’.
The consistent comment I received from the workers - the tannery employs about 80 people - was that porosus is best. From sorting to washing, to dying to preserving, to stretching and every part of the complex process of preparing a skin for manufacture, the porosus crocodile is apparently the best. It was the same story at the Hermes factory in suburban Paris where the fully prepared skins are made into luxury handbags, another very labour intensive and skilled process. Each step is done by hand in a painstakingly detailed way.
The finished products are something that I can only covet from afar. They are well out of consideration for most people - one completed bag I saw for sold US$140 000, but they sell as soon as they are made and there is a waiting list. In discussions with the executive of both the tannery and Hermes, one resounding message came out loud and clear: more skins, more eggs, please, from the Northern Territory.
It is clear to me that the investment that private players in the Northern Territory have made in their crocodile farms is paying off. Michael Hannon and Mick Burns, in particular, are to be commended for growing the industry to its present level, and for their hard work in building it up. As I said before, I believe that the crocodile industry in the Territory is on the verge of transforming from a cottage industry to a sustainable long term, mainstream industry which will contribute increasingly to our employment and our economy. It is clear that world demand for the product is growing and industry needs a reliable and long term source of skins.
From crocodiles I will briefly turn to another Northern Territory export that is making a big impact in France, and that is indigenous art. A key component of the Northern Territory’s economy is that of the Aboriginal arts and craft industry. Estimates vary, but sales from Aboriginal-owned arts and crafts centres now stand at around $28m annually and have doubled in the past 10 years. Retail outlets in the Territory are reckoned to have similar sales figures. Indeed, in Central Australia, Aboriginal art out performs the cattle industry.
European interest in Aboriginal art remains very buoyant and this was evident in France. I was fortunate to be shown around the newly completed Muse du Quai Branly, or MQB, some weeks after its opening by French President Chirac. As many of you would know, the collection now housed by the MQB has been drawn from other museums holding indigenous art and material culture in Paris and now forms one of the richest collections of its kind in the world. More to the point, the very fabric of the newly built MQB incorporates the work of contemporary Australian Aboriginal artists. Even more to the point, the MQB commissions three Northern Territory artists, Ningura Napurrula, Gulumbu Yunupingu, and John Mawurndjul to participate.
Anyone who has seen these works at the MQB cannot help but be astounded: their richness of expression, their power and their profound roots in the spiritual traditions of the artists. The building literally breathes with the creativity of these extraordinary artists. A little known aspect of the project is that the Australian curators of the MQB project also have an indelible Territory connection. The Art Gallery of New South Wales Art Curator, Hetty Perkins, is an Arrernte woman, and National Gallery of Australia Curator, Brenda Croft, is of Gurindji heritage. Both women deserve high praise for their work and courage in tackling such a major project.
The Territory’s two indigenous art representative bodies, the Association of Northern Kimberley and Arnhem Artists Association, ANKAAA, and Desart, kindly supplied me with material on the 6000 artists across more than 70 Aboriginal-controlled art centres they represent, as well as factual and promotional material. They also supplied me with the materials on the ethics of purchasing Aboriginal art. I am very happy to report this information is eagerly received wherever I distributed it.
Desart and ANKAAA perform an extraordinarily important role in representing the interests of Aboriginal artists in the Territory, yet they are largely unsung heroes of the indigenous art industry. They were instrumental in contributing to the terms of reference for the inquiry into the indigenous art industry recently announced by federal minister Kemp. The two groups provide industry leadership on par with any other industry representative body in the Northern Territory.
Their role is not just to reflect the views of their members, but also to play an important part in maintaining integrity within the tourist industry. My visit to this marvellous museum showed me more than tangible benefits for the Northern Territory are possible, and I am working towards realising some of these benefits. For example, the Museum Shop, a label which, by the way, fails to adequately describe this immense operation, stocked nothing of indigenous Territory art apart from a few book marks. I believe that this Museum Shop is now France’s leading sales point in the field of tribal art. To have some Territory products available and perhaps used in the museum cafes and restaurants would really help raise our profile as well as provide real benefit to the artists, but there are other less tangible but no less important long term benefits for this museum.
A recent article in the New York Times talked about the pride of people of many nationalities as they visited Muse du Quai Branly. This museum is now attracting people who might not normally set foot in a museum. It is estimated that about one-quarter of visitors are a new public who are coming because the museum speaks especially to them. This is what I would love to see with our own museums to become: places that speak to people of different cultures, the cultures that contribute to the society of the Northern Territory. This museum, Quai Branly, was intended as a bridge between the west and the rest of the world. It abandoned the notion of cultural purity on which many former ethnological museums rested, and which make no sense today.
Mr Deputy Speaker, speaking from my own personal experience of MQB, I have to say that many of the objects are extraordinary and the way that they displayed is quite remarkable. The Australian Collection and particularly the items from my own country, the Tiwi, certainly did speak to me. We could learn some great lessons from the French from their understanding of the importance of culture to their nation’s sanctity and sanity. I very much admire Mr Chirac and the French people for their vision and commitment in this area.
In closing, Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend the Territorians who have been involved with creating these connections with France and in creating the business opportunities which will have many local benefits. I look forward to our ongoing French connections and to strengthening them in a diverse range of endeavours.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, the minister has reported on what happened on a recent trip to Europe. I thank her for the statement. It is obvious that the minister enjoyed her trip. I certainly endorse what she has said. Looking at such fine quality products and such lovely things as the Hermes handbags, which are exquisite, and to know that the skins they are made of come from the Northern Territory would be pretty special when you are visiting a place like France.
The minister covered aspects of how private investors of crocodile farms in the Northern Territory have been visionary with their investments and how they are now reaping the rewards of their investment through the quality crocodile skin from our Northern Territory saltie, the porosus. That is very good for Territory business, and I encourage and applaud the two main crocodile farms, Lagoon Farm and Porosus Pty Ltd.
The minister said in her statement that at all stages of the skin processing that she witnessed in Hermes at the Gordon-Choisy Tannery and at the end stage where the fully prepared skins are made into luxury handbags that the quality of these skins was applauded. There is no doubt that this particular sector of the crocodile industry is doing well in the Northern Territory and has a very bright future.
Theoretically, if the quantity of skins exported was increased, the price of the end product should be reduced; the old supply and demand theory. However, obviously there is such a labour intensive treatment of these skins to get them to the final preparation for the manufacture of such high quality products that a reduction in the price would be negated. It is all good news for the porosus crocodile skin from the Northern Territory. I am so glad that the minister covets having one of these bags. I must confess, they are on my list of desires, too, but I am a little like the minister; it will be a very long time before I would be able to afford one of these beautiful quality bags. As I said, it is all good news for crocodile skins and I am sure my colleagues would support that.
The next part of the minister’s statement dealt with art, and I have to say that I am envious that she has visited the Musee du Quai Branly or MQB in Paris. I have been watching the development of this centre with interest and pride that Australian indigenous art has not only been incorporated into the building structure so will be there for ever, but that this building is housing a unique collection of indigenous art. It would seem a little surreal to be visiting a gallery in Paris that has such a great collection of indigenous art and we should all be proud of what the French have done to promote Australia through indigenous art.
I do not believe it is unfair to ask questions about the sales of indigenous art in the Northern Territory, because it intrigues me that the sales of Aboriginal arts and crafts is estimated to be around $28m annually. As the minister said, these figures have doubled in the past 10 years. The curiosity I have is: if there are sales of indigenous art around that enormous figure of $28m per year, who gets the money? Where is the money now? If there is so much money made from this very important industry, why is it that so many indigenous people are living in appalling conditions? I cannot understand how that amount of money is not making a difference in these people’s lives. I do not think it is unfair to ask: where does it go? Is there someone helping these artists manage their money to enable them to have a better lifestyle? There are many questions that are not unreasonable to ask.
Having read of the intense interest towards indigenous art in France, and the number of people who visit the museum, as they call it there, why on earth aren’t we in the Northern Territory taking advantage of our own artists and establishing our own unique cultural collection as one of the major attractions to the Northern Territory? Government could well do to look at it sooner rather than later. We in the Northern Territory are missing out on a unique opportunity to establish the biggest and most prized collection of indigenous art in the world. Heavens above, it is painted and crafted in our own Territory. We should capture and retain our own indigenous art for future generations and as a history of the Northern Territory. Certainly, indigenous artists need to sell their works where they can, but we have a responsibility to ensure that the Northern Territory has the most significant indigenous art and craft collection in the world.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for her statement. I am glad she had the opportunity to visit such places in France that support our crocodile products and our indigenous art industries.
Mr WARREN (Goyder): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I support the statement on opportunities for crocodile and art industries by the Minister for Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage and Arts and Museums.
I will talk specifically today on the burgeoning crocodile industry, as it has particular relevance to my electorate of Goyder. As the minister pointed out, crocodile eggs are the single most important element in the production chain for the high end of the crocodile industry. Of course, these eggs ultimately lead to the high end of the fashion houses of Europe.
However, I suggest that the fashion shows of Europe and beyond are not on the minds of our local indigenous harvesters in the Top End wetlands, many only armed with a paddle for protection, operating in the middle of the build-up collecting those invaluable eggs.
It conjures up in your mind’s eye the skills that have been honed over many centuries. They are valuable, unique skills that our indigenous people have, and they have transferred those skills to the modern day. I am reminded of the film The Ten Canoes. We all know the story, but behind the story was the unique and very visual aspect of life during the goose collecting season. It is similar for the crocodile collecting period. To have visions of these guys going out in these canoes has quite an impact on my mind’s eye. However, in this day and age, these are very sophisticated groups - mainly rangers - out there collecting these crocodile eggs in very well orchestrated and organised manner. It is just nice anecdotally to think in the mind’s eye about the history behind it and where these skills were honed.
Let us not forget that the Territory Crocodile Management Plan provides a sound framework for the sustainability of the entire crocodile industry, one that provides the foundations for our local crocodile farming industry while satisfying international conventions. It should be borne in mind that, in framing this management plan, the Northern Territory government made sure that it satisfied the very rigorous requirements of the Commonwealth Environment, Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, as well as the equally rigorous Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act.
I point out that this management plan incorporates management aspects encompassing not just the industry, but the protection of the crocodile population. Things such as the harvest quotas are rigorously maintained and monitored so that our wild populations of crocodiles are not put in any danger so the industry can be sustainable. That is the important thing. It is a good case of triple bottom line sustainability. It is about the environment sustainability so that the crocodiles survive, and social sustainability so the indigenous people in that part of the world can benefit financially from that aspect of the industry. It is also economically sustainable. Another aspect of the management plan is that they control permits to take the eggs and, of course, crocodiles which is an important aspect.
Operational aspects are also included in the management plan for the crocodile industry for quality control, our export markets and so on. Another oft talked about but seldom considered aspect is public safety. What I am talking about here is rogue crocodile removal whereby they are taken out of the environment, because crocodiles have a very strong homing instinct and they tend to come back to these areas again and again. These crocodiles need to be removed and that is part of the management plan. Of course, they are taken to the crocodile farms, either for breeding purposes or, if they do not fit in, they are value added, I guess you could say euphemistically.
Then there is the tourism aspect, not just the tourism for the crocodile tours out into the wetlands, but also the tourism side of our croc farms. People who are coming to Darwin only for a day, particularly our international visitors, can go out and actually see what crocodiles are really like. They can also see the good aspects of what is happening with the industries. That is a really important aspect of the management plan. Of course, the management plan tries to be all encompassing.
There are five major farms in the Darwin and rural areas showcasing their products and promoting the Territory in the local and international makets. It is also an important contributor to tourism, as I discussed before, as international tourists certainly flock to view crocs and the croc farming industry. The larger farms are Porosus Crocodile Farm also known as Crocodile Farms NT at Noonamah, and the Janamba Crocodile farm at Middle Point, both within my electorate of Goyder. There is also Crocodylus Park and Lagoon Crocodile Farm at Berrimah, and a small rearing facility at Noonamah, again in my electorate of Goyder. Finally, there is the Coolibah Crocodile Farm on the Victoria River near Timber Creek in the member for Daly’s electorate.
I am sure that he will speak a little about that. Crocodile abattoirs operate at both the Porosus Crocodile Farm operation at Noonamah and the Lagoon Crocodile Farm. Previously, there were other abattoirs at Janamba and Coolibah, but for economic reasons these are not currently operational. The owners of Janamba Crocodile Farm operate farms in Queensland and that is where they transport their two-year-old crocs from here to Queensland for finishing and slaughter at about three years of age. Similarly, Coolibah Farm now only sells live crocodiles to other farmers.
Joe Wilson from Elizabeth Valley Crocodile Farm at Elizabeth Valley in Noonamah collects about 4000 eggs annually and currently has some 2400 eggs for rearing. He takes them to about 12 months of age. These hatchlings are then sold mainly to Janamba Farm. As mentioned earlier, eggs are collected from the wild under permit from Wildlife Management in NRETA. These are then hatched and the crocodiles reared until slaughter age at about three years. Crocodile skins are the primary product, with meat being a minor part of the industry.
Between 6500 to 10 000 skins are produced within the NT annually. In 2004-05, some 4700 crocodiles were slaughtered in NT abattoirs. It is difficult to accumulate the farming industry value due to privacy issues related to the emerging status of this very important industry, but is considerable and has significantly more potential as the minister explained in her statement. Only about 500 of the skins are currently sent to domestic markets for tanning while the rest has been exported to France.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, the Department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Mines has a technical officer to assist the crocodile farming industry. It is primarily a regulatory role in ensuring compliance with the Convention of the International Trade in Endangered Species, or CITES, as it is known. There is a regulatory process in place to ensure that only farmed crocodiles are traded for skins and meat to protect the crocodile population. These skins are given a unique tag, the skins are then inspected and appropriate certification produced. Without this service, the croc farming industry would not be able to export to the world. We cannot over emphasise how important that is and how we fit into the whole CITES scheme of things, not just for crocodile skins; it is about us being a signatory to this most important aspect of wildlife protection and helping minimise the illegal trade in protected species products. It also acts as a quality control where you are actually tagging that product from a farm right through to the marketplace where they tan, produce and value-add to it. This trail can be followed and it ensures that the quality is there of the Northern Territory product. It also ensures that trade in illegal skins and products is absolutely minimised.
Under the NT Crocodile Strategy, the hatchlings are annually audited by the technical officer at all our farms. Furthermore, a mandatory five year audit of each farm is carried out. There cannot be anyone who can say that we have insufficiently regulated this industry. Some might say that we over-regulate, but when we are talking about such important unique products as our crocodile skins and protection of our wildlife, management of sustainability, it is absolutely imperative that we have sufficient regulation there to protect our industries, to protect our farms, to protect our wildlife.
The technical officer also recently attended the Crocodile Specialist Group meeting in France in June 2006, and will now be able to provide advice on improving skin quality to improve the market value. We need this kind of feedback. We have the potential to grow this industry, but it is important that we do give our people in the industry, our regulators, the chance not only to be regulators, but to learn something about value-adding to the industry so that they can bring that back to the NT and help our producers because our producers do not always have sufficient funds to go off and do those sorts of things. This is where our government is playing an important role because that is what we are about.
The department provides a disease investigation and disease control service to all our crocodile farms. That is an important aspect. The department is currently working on a variety of Chlamydia discovered in crocs. Although reported as a sex disease by some media outlets, let me assure the House that it is not transmitted during breeding. It is a variety peculiar to crocodiles and unrelated to their breeding process.
As has been reported in the past, the department is working closely with the farming industry in a retrospective study to investigate the possible sources of infection and possible future disease control measures. Again, we need to ensure that this burgeoning industry prospers and industry best practice is there. That is what we do as government. We get out there and help industry grow. I spoke before about the technical officer going over and studying aspects of the trade. It is also important that we help the industry to make sure that the quality of our product is there because we rely on the quality of our products and that is important.
The minister mentioned that Lagoon Croc Farm and Porosus Croc Farms both signed long-term contracts in June this year to supply the world renowned Hermes fashion company. As Porosus’ Managing Director Mick Burns said, and I quote:
- We have the most aggressive crocs in the world, but they have the best skins.
In conclusion, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I can only reiterate the words uttered to the minister while she was in France promoting this burgeoning and unique Top End industry:
- The Northern Territory porosus, our own ‘saltie’, is the pick of the bunch.
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I will provide some additional comments in support of the minister’s statement, and I follow a very thorough speech from the member for Goyder about the industry. I will give a more localised explanation as the member for Daly.
One of the crocodile ventures that is due to be operating in my electorate is at the community of Wudapuli. Wudapuli is some 150 km to the west of Daly River, and the main families are the Nadjics, and Aloysius Nadjic is well and truly the visionary within that community. People may have noticed Aloysius and his family visited the Darwin Crocodile Farm over the last couple of months and were featured in the NT News holding some small crocodiles. Aloysius sees the future for his community, his family, is very much about economic development. His community sits on the edge of the Moyle floodplains, home to not only a massive number of birds but also a large population of crocodiles. The area, because of its nature, it is very conducive to nesting.
Over the last few years, Aloysius has worked in partnership with a number of egg collectors, predominantly from the Coolibah Crocodile Farm on Coolibah Station in the upper VRD area. In that partnership, eggs are collected with the use of local people and Mr Bluey Pugh. They come up and collect eggs and the people are paid per egg a royalty from that. Aloysius wants a bit more. He certainly sees the opportunity for a hatchery there and he is working in conjunction with the Northern Land Council and the Northern Territory government, and I believe the Commonwealth government, in establishing a hatchery at his community to employ his family and get a lot more income into his community as opposed to just receiving some royalties for eggs collected. That is certainly a visionary step by Aloysius, and I see the enthusiasm every time I speak to him about that. I believe DBERD are helping; Sean Bowden and Tracker Tilmouth are consulting to the Northern Land Council on this project. I look forward to that opening in the next year or two because there certainly is a market for it.
It is those partnerships across the Top End of the Northern Territory that will expand this industry into the communities. Mr Mick Burns is someone who is talking to Aboriginal people across the Northern Territory about similar types of ventures. That is the way to go in the beginning, through partnerships, and then, as time goes by, people can decide whether they want to remain in that partnership or whether they would like to take on full ownership and reap the rewards from that.
I wanted to comment in relation to crocodiles on economic development, but in a different sense. Certainly, safari hunting for crocodiles is something that certain groups of Aboriginal people are very keen on. Having worked in a safari camp, European and North American hunters pay top dollar to come to just shoot a buffalo or shoot a pig, and they will certainly pay top dollar to shoot a crocodile. The royalties and camp costs which could be gained from such a venture are certainly considerable. I hope our government keeps pushing for the federal minister to relax his view on safari camps in Australia. Mr Steve Irwin probably should stick to his own state and let us get on with ours and develop our own interests up here.
Crocodiles numbers are certainly increasing. I have had pastoralists saying to me that with improved pastures across the Territory, you have a greater population of wallabies, and wallabies and cattle obviously go down to the river banks and there is a lot more food about for these crocodiles. Bigger crocodiles are coming further up the river whereas before there was not a great deal of feed about, the larger fish would move down the river for those Dry Season periods, so larger crocodiles are coming up into some of those shallower, narrower parts of the river. There is a safety aspect, not only for pastoralists but local indigenous communities, to a reduction in those numbers. I support their call for humane culling or productive safari camps on stations.
The products the minister saw in Europe, and what you can see here in Australia, are certainly beautiful. I would like to afford - and my wife would - a crocodile handbag. At the Darwin Show, I saw a crocodile belt was selling for something like $250. It is certainly at the upper end of the market. People are obviously prepared to pay for that premium product. This industry has a long future. If we can value-add with tanning facilities in the regional areas and communities, it would represent increased income.
There is, obviously, a huge interest in crocodiles. Just recently, it was announced that there will be a crocodile display in the middle of Mitchell Street. Mitchell Street is a very busy, noisy area of Darwin. It goes to show that there are opportunities. You do not spend that sort of money to have crocodiles housed in facilities in the inner city if you do not think people are going to visit.
I wrap up my contribution today by thanking the minister. We have so many attractions in the Northern Territory. People see crocodiles as a large part of the Northern Territory. Crocodile Dundee has put the Northern Territory on the map. Having been to some of the sites where Crocodile Dundee was filmed - Gunlom Falls and a few other locations through Kakadu - it is what a lot of international and interstate tourists remember of the Northern Territory, and should be something that we promote. It is an icon of the Northern Territory. We should own, promote and use it as much as possible.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for her statement. I hope she had a lovely trip in France, and we can get some cheap crocodile products for Christmas if she has some contacts. I commend the statement to the House.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I strongly support the minister’s statement. This is a very important issue for the Northern Territory: how to live in harmony with crocodiles. I wish everyone who lives in the Top End all the best in their attempts to do that because my approach is to keep them as far away as possible.
I would like to talk in particular about the program that has been recently introduced at Berrimah prison. This is a Pilot Crocodile Handling Course. I believe it is being run as a pilot to see how many prisoners get eaten and, if too many are eaten, they will probably not do it. I jest. It is a Certificate I in Crocodile Handling and Farming and is delivered over 12 weeks at the Darwin Crocodile Farm. The pilot course has been developed in partnership with NT Correctional Services and the International College of Advanced Education in association with the Myriad Group. The course aims to provide indigenous men with the chance to enhance their aquaculture skills and to build the capacity to develop crocodile farming and breeding enterprises in remote indigenous communities. There are six prisoners participating in the first course and six more will attend the second course. I table two photographs of the survivors with the crocodiles just to show members the enthusiasm with which the prisoners and prison officers have taken to this new activity.
Participants in the course will have an opportunity to gain employment in the crocodile industry post-release which, for many, will mean employment in their communities. That may be employment in established crocodile farms or the opportunity to establish new ventures, and in the conservation and removal of crocodiles from populated areas. Helping prisoners develop self-esteem through skill development and training will help them reintegrate positively into the community, and avoid the cycle of crime. These courses are a great example of efforts being made by NT Correctional Services staff to build real job skills for prisoners and of the partnerships that can be achieved with industry for a win-win situation.
This new course at Berrimah epitomises the policy that the government is moving towards in terms of providing more options for the courts in reintegration of offenders. Recently, Cabinet has made a decision to offer arrangements particularly to the magistrates’ courts for sentences up to six months to divert offenders into out-of-prison programs under the auspices of Community Corrections. Cabinet has also adopted a policy position of allowing diversion at the back end of sentences, from prison into community-related Correctional Services programs.
The diversions will obviously have an impact on the number of prisoners in our prisons. There is substantial potential for bringing prisoners into other arrangements alternative to prison. Most importantly, the out-of-prison alternatives will provide much greater scope for linking prison rehabilitation programs to regional development, particularly regional economic development in the form of vocational training and other job-related skills such as driving and plant operation licences. We can achieve a number of related benefits from adopting this policy position.
The heart of these new programs will be a Conditional Release Centre, which will be a place that can operate both as a bail hostel for offenders awaiting their time before a court, and particularly those accused who have no fixed address and would normally be remanded in one of our two prisons. The CRC provides a much more creative space in which prisoners can be put through programs while they are either awaiting their time in court and as a bail condition or for people who would ordinarily be sentenced to a period of imprisonment who could be put on a court order to attend a CRC and take part in the programs.
We hope to go into partnership with the private sector such as horticultural development, and the crocodile enterprises we have discussed tonight. It could be any number of areas of economic development at a regional level. By looking at a potential range of locations where these programs could be established, we can target new economic developments, whether it be mining, primary industries or other more specialised forms of economic development and employment such as the stages of exploiting crocodile production that is the feature of this debate tonight.
That is where the government is going as a matter of policy. We have a lot to work out as yet to see it implemented in practical terms, but it will be a far more creative response to the numbers of prisoners in our correctional services than simply building more gaol capacity or another gaol.
For the same amount of money, we believe, on interstate and overseas examples, we can get much better re-offending outcomes and what that translates, in turn, to is less victimisation in our communities by offenders who have gone through a correctional process but have returned, only to re-offend, to their communities. The whole aim of correctional services is clearly to reduce re-offending as much as possible in the community so we are following firm evidence on programs that, in other jurisdictions, have proved to be more effective than just purely warehousing prisoners in a prison.
There will be a multifaceted approach to correctional services in the Northern Territory in the future. We will continue with our prison reforms and to develop programs such as our crocodile handling courses and other equally creative courses that are being developed in both prisons. We are also going to be setting up conditional release centres to take a significant number of offenders into alternatives to a prison sentence. We look forward to working particularly with the magistrates’ courts to put these options in place. I am sure Cabinet, beyond my time, will deal with the complexities of the implementation of this policy, but it is great that Cabinet has settled the policy and that the agency can now come back with details of implementation.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arts and Museums): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank everyone who contributed to the debate and gave their view on the statement.
I will go through quickly to wrap up. Before I get to the member for Katherine who asked two questions, I will go to the Minister for Justice who talked about the prison reforms and the crocodile programs. The photos are outstanding. I thought they were fantastic. I talked in my speech about being privileged to be able to see the whole crocodile process from the eggs through to the bags, but when you look at the issue of the egg collection - and I know from my electorate, both in Maningrida and Oenpelli - there is a lot of work by the indigenous ranger groups who go out and collect the crocodile eggs and the work they do with crocodile handling and all the husbandry work that goes with it. They do a fantastic job and I can see that running this program in the prisons would energise those prisoners and give them a good diversion into something that many of them have probably done in their own communities with programs like Caring for Sea Country.
I have, like the member for Arnhem, a very good ranger group, the Djelk Rangers, for whom I have a lot of respect and admiration. I enjoyed visiting Maningrida and going out with those rangers. It is not easy work. It is dangerous work when they go into those floodplains and up the rivers to where the female crocodile lays eggs in the nest. It is dangerous work and to watch the deft skills of those rangers is fantastic. I do not think any of us would contemplate undertaking the work that they do. The Djelk Rangers do a lot of work with Graeme Webb and Crocodylus Park. In the member for Arnhem’s electorate, a lot of eggs are collected from the Muwangi Swamp and around Ramingining so that community is involved. The Lagoon Farm and the Porosus Farm at Noonamah have agreements with the traditional owners at Ramingining to get the eggs out of the Muwangi Swamp. Both Mick Burns and Mick Hannon work with the community and rangers at Oenpelli to collect the eggs from the floodplains to send into Darwin for their farms.
It has proven to be quite a lucrative business, not just for the farms, but particularly for those indigenous ranger groups who receive very little funding. The Northern Territory government, through the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries, provide some funding to those ranger groups, but still to this day, we have a federal government that fails to recognise the value, skills and expertise of those rangers, not just in the crocodile business, but with illegal fishing and all of those areas. My colleague, the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries has been lobbying his federal counterpart to try to make that happen.
I digress, so I will return to the statement. Member for Goyder, thank you for your positive wrap-up of the crocodile management plan, sustainability of the industry and comments about the two farms. They do a lot of good work. He talked about the issue of Chlamydia, which is under investigation. DPIFM and NRETA are working with these crocodile farms to address the issue of Chlamydia that can be detrimental to an industry that has taken so long to build up. He talked about DPIFM and the appointment of a technical officer to oversight crocodile farms. That is a good move from the minister to put a technical officer in place in the farm to help the three farms. With the issue of Chlamydia, there is a danger of us losing quite a lucrative enterprise in the Top End, which would be disastrous.
I thank the member for Daly for his contribution. He talked about the involvement in a project with family and community. He mentioned the involvement of the Northern Land Council through Sean Bowden and Tracker Tilmouth and how that is expanding. He also talked about how he would like to get safari hunting back here and keep pushing the feds. I point out to the member for Daly that we have probably pushed the feds as far as we can take them. Their decision was disappointing. I said that federal minister Campbell was pandering to the needs of a Queensland theme operator and was not listening to the Northern Territory, nor was he prepared to come to the Northern Territory and meet with Aboriginal communities and pastoralists. My predecessor, the member for Johnston, was pushing this issue when he was the Minister for Parks and Wildlife and passionately advocated. I remember going with the minister at that time to Canberra and talking to the then federal minister Kemp when he had crocodiles under his portfolio arrangement. We were making some headway in that meeting, but we came back and heard the disappointing news. Of course, the federal government then shifted ministers. Ian Campbell became the Environment minister. We know that the Prime Minister is very close to Steve Irwin and the Humane Society and that influence went to Ian Campbell.
We have pursued this at all levels, including seeking legal advice as to how far we take this. The Commonwealth’s letter was very clear. The issue of safari hunting was taken out of the crocodile management plan; we can no longer do that. As a government, to build up the industry in terms of harvesting, if we can work with industry to build satellite farms out in communities and have incubation and hatching of the eggs in those communities, and work with the industry on the issue of transportation of the small animals into the bigger farms in Darwin. If we can work with industry and bring about a proper industry plan with everyone, including the Northern Land Council and Aboriginal communities, there are a lot of benefits that could come out of that.
On the issue of tanneries, we have not looked that far. I think the member for Daly raised tanning facilities in communities. The Gordon-Choisy Tannery in France is quite a costly business because everything is manual. There is no mechanisation. That tannery employs about 80 staff outside of Paris, as I said. The overheads and costs to Hermes are quite expensive. Their method is centuries old, and I did describe it as part-medieval. They have not changed their method of tanning because it is the quality that makes their name what it is today.
The member for Katherine posed two questions. She agreed with most of the statement. Her questions were: if sales of Aboriginal art is $28m, then where does the money go? Why are so many Aboriginal people living in appalling conditions? The member for Katherine needs to get out there and have a look a bit more. Yes, we all know the appalling conditions in some of our communities. The $28m - and it could be more - is a global figure that Aboriginal art adds to the economy. Some of that money goes to artists, but a lot of those artists die poor. A lot of those artists have extended families. They do not just feed themselves or their immediate families such as their wives and children; they also take on responsibility for many extended family members. It is certainly not the responsibility of those Aboriginal artists to fix health, education or other areas on the ground in those communities. Aboriginal artists are usually the only person in their family working, so the income that they generate, as I said, is not just for them, but for a huge number of family members.
She contributed to the indigenous housing debate just before this statement with the same intent. While she thinks that $28m goes back to every Aboriginal community, she needs to be better informed on that.
She asked why we are not establishing our own unique cultural collection of Northern Territory culture and heritage. I do not know when the last time the member for Katherine was in MAGNT or the Araluen Centre. Sure, MQB is a unique collection and nowhere else in the world are you going to have a collection such as this. The poignant thing and what was sad for some of the cultures is it was very clear that those collections were acquired where the French had set up colonies. So whilst people can feel the cultures talking to them, there has been a lot written in the media from some of the countries the French colonised about the French acquiring the collections housed in the MQB, particularly some of the really sensitive male ceremonial implements that are on display from Papua New Guinea and other areas. However, everyone got the sense of that these cultures were speaking to us and they were displayed very well.
In respect of the Australian collection, I was shocked and a bit saddened when I saw a collection of the best barks I have ever seen. To know that these barks are held in a collection overseas made me feel sad. There were 30 of probably the best barks from Arnhem Land. I asked the MQB officials how the French acquired such a collection, and that is something I am going to continue to pursue. I also saw a collection of some of the oldest Tiwi Pukamani Poles with paintings of those totems from my people that I have not seen before. The only similar paintings are on the ceiling of an old church on the island. To see those, which our people no longer paint, sitting on poles in a collection on French soil evoked feelings that there was a very significant Aboriginal collection on foreign soil. The consolation was that on a little piece of foreign soil Aboriginal people and their art are represented.
My proudest moment was going into the bookshop and seeing Johnny Mawurndjul, the painter from Maningrida and what he has painted, the legacy for his people and family, was breathtaking. It is absolutely outstanding. Some of his stories from the opening when he met President Chirac, Kofi Annan and many other high level dignitaries, meant, for him, it was a very proud moment. He was standing on the corner where he had painted the big pole at the museum when Jacques Chirac walked up to him and shook his hand. Johnny Mawurndjul was reported to have said to Jacques Chirac: ‘Are you as important to these people as I am to my people?’, without realising that he was actually talking to the French President. He had no sense of being overwhelmed.
The same applies to Gulumbu Yunupingu. When I walked in there with Leslie and others, it took my breath away. I felt immense pride that Northern Territory artists were commissioned to paint this building. If anyone is going over to France, please take the time to go to the MQB. The French are renowned, of course, for their good coffee and croissants, but one thing that really struck me in France, particularly in Paris, was the museums. Every museum I visited talks to you. That is what we need a sense of here; our museum has to be able to talk to us and have the different cultures talk.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
ADJOURNMENT
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
I take the opportunity to reflect on an article that appeared recently in The Weekend Australian. As a child, my mother used to take me back and forth to Nguiu. As an adult I had the privilege of working there as the Nguiu Community Government Council Office Manager, for most of that time under the presidency of Barry Puruntatameri, whom I call father. Nguiu is a place that is very familiar and dear to me. Like all communities, it has had its share of problems, but for me, Nguiu is also a place where the evolving Tiwi identity is expressed and affirmed.
Last year, I had a dream, a nightmare really, which has since recurred. In my dream, I went back to Nguiu and found the town with high rise buildings and franchise businesses which was unrecognisable as the Nguiu I used to know. There were no Tiwis living there. They all had to move away somewhere else. Fortunately, that was just a dream, but I did not dream up the comments that the member for Solomon made in the House of Representatives this year. His take on Aboriginal communities was:
- You do not see a hairdresser, you do not see clothing stores or a McDonalds or an Irish theme pub.
On the hairdresser bit, he obviously has not been to Maningrida lately. As regards to McDonalds and Irish theme pubs, they are the sort of things that would fit right into the nightmare about the future of Nguiu.
My thoughts were again unpleasantly dragged back to Nguiu when I read an article in the Inquirer section of last weekend’s Weekend Australian newspaper, headed Days of Promise in Tiwi Plan. The article was a sort of puff piece for the Tiwi Land Council, which tried to portray the organisation known as the Tiwi Island Local Government, or TILG, as an oppositional vehicle for the minority part-Aboriginal bureaucratic welfare administering class. TILG is also described as ‘the kingdom of the part-Tiwi’. I can only assume that this is the view that has been conveyed to the journalist by senior Tiwi Land Council representatives, which is very sad for the Tiwi people who rely on those representatives to be responsible and responsive leaders who will look after the interest of all Tiwis.
When I was working for the Nguiu Community Government Council and the Tiwi Land Council, they had a mutually respectful and harmonious relationship. There were hardly any non-Aboriginal staff and most of the employees were Tiwis. I had grave misgivings at the time and still wish that things could go back to how they were.
TILG has been through two non-Aboriginal CEOs. Very recently, a Tiwi CEO took over. His father is a well respected Tiwi man and his name is Mr Lawrence Costa. Lawrence is trying his best to overcome various problems he has inherited. It is a difficult and challenging task and what he needs from the land council is support and assistance, not back stabbing in the national media.
Another dynamic and important member of TILG is Gawain Tipiloura whose father preceded me as the member for Arafura for many years and who was also a member of the Tiwi Land Council. No one would have dared to challenge the Tiwi identity of my uncle. My immediate predecessor as member for Arafura, Maurice Rioli, also works for TILG. His father is Cyril Kalippa, one of the founding members of the Tiwi Land Council and still one of its senior members.
The basic thrust of the Inquirer article was that Tiwi Land Council is kicking goals in terms of attracting large scale investment and economic development to the Tiwi Islands. There have been some notable failures with past projects, but like all Tiwis, I encourage and support all of the ongoing efforts to promote economic development on our land. That encouragement and support is, of course, qualified by a desire to ensure that all proposals are economically and environmentally safe, and that the proper consultation and approval processes required under both the Land Rights Act and other applicable legislation are complied with.
As for the spurious attempts in the article to divide the Tiwi population between full-blood Tiwis and others, the fact is, that long before white settlement in the Northern Territory, Tiwi men intermarried with women from other Aboriginal tribes and groups, including Larrakia and Iwaidja. The tradition has continued to this day. I was angered and a bit saddened by the false analysis adopted in the article about the part-Tiwi. In contrast to many other societies, the Tiwi social identity and rights traditionally pass down a matrilineal line. My mother was a proud and universally respected Tiwi woman.
I have had some opportunity to speak to some of my leaders on the island, and I know that the article and its content have created much distress to all my Tiwi families. There have been some meetings between the Tiwi Land Council and the Tiwi Island Local Government to resolve this over the last few days. I am hoping that the outcome of those meetings is that everyone gets together, puts behind them all of the bickering and the back stabbing, which is not productive given that in recent times, there has been so much progress made with a lot of the businesses and when amalgamations of TILG are starting to bear fruit. It is counterproductive for all of this fighting to happen.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I hope that we can resolve a lot of these problems, because what this article has created is a deep chasm of division that has been around for a long time, where the full-Aboriginal versus part-Aboriginal has been played out for too long in some of our communities and has been used as a divisive tool by many people. There was a meeting today, hopefully to resolve this issue. I hope that my people can overcome this adversity, that there can be some resolution and we can move forward.
Ms MARTIN (Fannie Bay): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, on 21 June this year, I had the pleasure of opening the IFAP, which is the Industrial Foundation for Accident Prevention, Darwin North Australia Safety Centre. The new centre, which is located at Berrimah, is good news for the Territory’s rapidly expanding oil and gas industry, with top quality safety training and consulting services now more accessible to industry in our region. Previously, courses like Crisis and Emergency Management training and accredited OH&S training, for example, were largely conducted interstate. Now we have around 90 expert instructors and consultants on call to meet the needs of industry. Previously, there were only six. What this means is safer and healthier workplaces, and increasing levels of professionalism in the industry.
The North Australia Safety Centre has been up and running since 1989, thanks mainly to the vision and dedication of Alex Saundry, the past Executive Director and Chairman of the Safety Centre, but our growing oil and gas industry prompted IFAP to purchase and expand the centre to meet an increasing offshore customer demand. We worked closely with IFAP to renegotiate the lease and to ensure a smooth transition to the new owners. By the way, it is not just the oil and gas industry that is benefiting from the new expanded centre. IFAP also trains Defence personnel, and in June, over 400 Defence personnel were trained in various survival techniques, including helicopter underwater escape training and sea survival training. This nationally accredited course is designed to give participants the knowledge, skills and confidence to deal with unforeseen events, like ditching at sea or platform abandonment.
Thanks to Craig Parrick, IFAP’s Operations Manager, I was lucky enough to see the HUET course in action. The training was conducted in a purpose-built indoor training facility which includes classrooms, change room amenities, a 6 m deep pool and a crane-tracked module based on the Puma helicopter. The module is lowered and rolled into the pool to simulate an emergency landing of a helicopter at sea.
From there, we moved to the fire safety training facility where accredited courses are run by Red Alert. Red Alert is a registered training organisation and will work with our offshore operators. They will run both onshore fire emergency response exercises and offshore installation-specific training. Successful participants received a chemical hydrocarbons and oil refining training qualification, which is recognised by the Australian National Training Authority.
It was an amazing experience watching the fire demonstrations and feeling the intensity of the heat. One particular demonstration that summed up the dangers our firefighters face was the simulated house fire and gas leak in a pipeline construction. It is frightening to think that in only 60 seconds when oxygen is allowed to fuel a house fire, people only have a matter of seconds to escape. The gas pipeline simulation will provide the oil and gas industry with the training it needs to deal with emergencies like these.
I had the pleasure of meeting many people involved with the upgraded safety centre at the opening. I especially acknowledge the hard work and support of the following people: Bob Adams, Chairman of the North Australia Safety Centre; Craig Parrick, Operations Manager NASC; Dan Smetana, President IFAP; Martin Ralph, Managing Director of IFAP; Bob Brockley, Red Alert Australia; Peter Hopton, CEO Perkins Shipping.
The IFAP Darwin North Australia Safety Centre will provide our growing oil and gas industry with the knowledge and services it needs to operate in a safe and professional way. I am sure I speak for everyone here in congratulating IFAP, Red Alert Australia, and the North Australian Safety Centre for their hard work and significant contribution to the Territory.
September marks the beginning of Dementia Month. Dementia is an issue of growing importance in the Territory and, indeed, for a number of my constituents. I recently discussed the issues surrounding the condition with the new chair of the NT Branch of Alzheimer’s Association, Ray Norman. Ray is a long-term member of our community with a distinguished career in our public sector, as well as being recognised as an active and pivotal member of many non-government organisations.
It has been 100 years since Dr Alzheimer identified what is known now as Alzheimer’s Disease. In 2005, there were 210 000 recorded cases of dementia in Australia. It is expected that a further 53 000 new cases will be diagnosed in 2006. Alzheimer’s Disease accounts for between 50% and 70% of dementia cases. It is important to remember that dementia is not an automatic part of growing old. Indeed, many people live to a ripe old age without suffering dementia. However, age is one of the high risk factors. With the ageing of our population, as well as many more people in the Territory now approaching retirement age, the number of people in our community with dementia can only grow.
It is timely for us to be reminded of what we can do to minimise the risk of getting dementia, and also of the excellent services that are available in the Territory. The single most important message in combating the risk of dementia is to live a healthy lifestyle. It is worth remembering that what is good for the heart is also good for the brain.
The Mind Your Mind program is a user’s guide to dementia risk reduction. It contains seven signposts to a healthier life that also combat dementia onset. The main messages are to mind your brain with intellectual stimulation such as puzzles, reading or playing musical instruments; mind your body with regular exercise; mind your diet for increased brain health; and mind your health checks to identify, monitor and reduce risk factors. There are expert services available, and the Northern Territory office of Alzheimer’s Australia has qualified staff who will deal with inquiries and offer a wide range of support services and activities. These support services include carers for people with dementia and their families, face-to-face counselling, respite care, opportunities to learn new skills, and the very effective Living With Memory Loss program.
The Alzheimer’s Australia’s national hotline, manned by qualified personnel, is available to Territorians and is often a good first step in determining whether action needs to be taken. The aged care assessment teams located in the Department of Health and Community Services provide professional advice, assistance and specialist services. The Territory Older Persons’ Support Service operated by Frontier Services, provides services and assessment to older people and their families in a considerate and confidential way. As I said earlier, Ray Norman has recently become the Chair of Alzheimer’s Australia NT and is continuing the good work of his predecessors in raising the profile of dementia related services in the Territory.
Ray is well supported by Marianne Fitch, the Executive Director, and the rest of the staff who, in a few short years, have expanded the range and quality of dementia support services to Territorians. Dementia can be better managed if diagnosed early and appropriate treatment and support is put in place for both the client and family.
An important message for all of us is that if you have concerns for yourself or for a family member, take advantage of the many excellent services in the Territory and ask for help as soon as possible. Early intervention will ensure the best outcomes for the individual and for the family. I encourage all members to support the Alzheimer’s Association, particularly during Dementia Month in September, and the excellent work they do throughout our community.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I will continue from last night. I realise that at the rate I am going, we could be here until the end of year so I will do my best to shorten some of what I have to say.
Last night, I mentioned that I visited the Sheriff’s office and the Probate and Juvenile Court. The interesting thing in the United States is the number of police forces they have. In the town of Marysville they have a police force; in Union County they have a police force; and on top of that you have the State Patrol. You have three police forces in the one area. It was a bit of a surprise and I said perhaps they make employment out of administration because obviously you have to have three administrations, but they have a reason for it. You have to go back to the history of the United States to understand why. Personally, I think our system of one Northern Territory Police Force doing the whole lot is much better.
On the same day I visited the Probate and Juvenile Court for Union County, I also visited Lila Dodd who is the mother of Judi and the sister of Captain Strauss. The local Marysville Journey Tribune was doing a story on the family and my visit to the United States. Judy and Paden spoke about their trip to the NT and Lila spoke about her brother, Al, and her memories of the last time she saw him before he headed off to Australia and on to Darwin in 1942.
The next day, Judi, Dave and I went to Wadesville, Indiana, west of Ohio where Captain Strauss is buried. Before I go too far, I should mention I do have a copy of the Marysville Journey Tribune and I know on my non-PowerPoint presentation, you cannot see that but over here is a front page of my trip to the United States, so I was pleased to see that. I should let you know at that time, on Thursday, 6 July 2006, regular fuel in Marysville was $2.95.9 cents per gallon. If someone wants to work that out they can compare the price of fuel here with the price in the United States.
As I said, the next day we travelled off to Wadesville in Indiana. Wadesville is a small country town of about 3500 people and just out of the town overlooking a wheat field is a beautifully kept cemetery. Captain Strauss is buried between his mother and father, but has a special headstone recognising when he was interred at the cemetery. The Australian and Territory flags I took with me were laid on the ground and we paused to remember and say a prayer. It was a very special moment.
The story that started many years ago at a World War II cricket pitch near Noonamah had taken me to the other side of the world. Some years ago I had been told Captain Strauss had some connection with Wadesville. In 2003, I looked up the Wadesville phone book and wrote to Paul Strauss. Just before I go any further, I should on my non-PowerPoint presentation, show you the picture of the cemetery where Captain Strauss is buried, which is outside of the town of Wadesville just above a wheat field that had just been harvested. It is a beautiful little spot. It is called Laura Hill and that is the memorial to say he was interred after being brought back from Australia.
As I said, the history of how I found Captain Strauss was that in 2003, I looked up the Wadesville phone book and wrote to a Paul Strauss. The letter ended up with a Mrs Marie Strauss, wife of Paul but no relation at all to Captain Strauss. After asking around the district, she found a person who knew where Lila Dodd lived and from there, my letter eventually got to Lila who passed it on to Judi who received it on Thanksgiving Day.
Back to the present, the question for me was whether Marie Strauss was still in Wadesville. To find out, we stopped at the local fire brigade headquarters because we reckoned they would know. After explaining who I was and why I was there, they presented me with a Wadesville T-shirt and cooler and then, like many Americans who are so friendly, they took me for a ride in the fire truck. In fact, they took me to the next town where the fire brigade driver lived, through the cornfields and back again. They are very friendly people and that reaction was typical of the people I met.
In the meantime, we found out where Marie Strauss lived. She lived in a little place called Aubrey Lane, which is a back street of Wadesville. We went to this house and knocked on the door. No one answered and we thought: ‘We’ve come all this way and this lady’s not going to be here’. We knocked on the door again and she answered the door. When we told her where I had come from, she could not believe it at first. When I passed her a map of Australia and a copy of the Australian Geographic, she believed it. She and Judi Green’s mother, Lila Dodd, have resumed a relationship that, you might say, 18 years ago had disappeared and she had forgotten all about the Strauss family who lived in Wadesville. It has all started up again and they have now a new relationship. It was a bit of a teary moment, but it was very important that we found Marie Strauss because that has nearly completed the circle that started here some years ago.
After 750 miles that day, we eventually got home about 10.30. I will not bore you with the trip home, but even that was exciting. It was a very worthwhile day, even though it was very tiring and we all enjoyed it.
The day before 4 July, there was a big fireworks display called the Red, White and Bloom in Columbus and people from all over Ohio come to enjoy the celebrations. The evening starts off with a big parade, which, in this case, was delayed for about an hour because of a storm and tornado warning which, thankfully, did not eventuate. There is nothing like sitting in the hotel seeing, time after time, warnings about tornadoes and storm warnings coming across the television. The Americans love to make a big deal about these storms and tornadoes. In fact, whatever it was that hit Columbus, they got a little drizzle and they delayed the parade for an hour. Nothing really happened but it made good news on television. Luckily, it did not hit. They have their spectacular fireworks display, just like we have on our independence day, and in this case, it was choreographed to the 1812 Overture. Unfortunately, we could not hear the music, but we could hear the bangs.
I need to talk a little about 4 July. I was over there during Independence Day, and part of the reason I was there was to understand how Americans live and celebrate. 4 July was a day that started off with rain, but by mid-afternoon it had cleared up and I went out to the farm on Blues Creek Road, met lots of members of the family and I am sure there were members of the family out there that not even Judi and Dave Green knew. They play a game called Corn Hole, which is played with packets of corn in little bags and you throw it through a hole. We might be able to introduce it to Australia and then we could have the Australian Corn Hole Championships and they will be held in Ohio. I can go back there and say I am representing Australia.
They have a great day. As usual, they have a barbecue, or grill, as they call it. They eat plenty of corn on the cob. The flags were flying and you might have seen our picture in the Northern Territory News. That is the picture there of the farm where all the flags are flying, so I did feel a little proud on that day that way out in the middle of Ohio, a long way from the Northern Territory, our flag was flying with the American flag, which was a great occasion. One of the main reasons I was visiting Ohio was to remember Captain Strauss, and when you see the distance from this place, which is near Indiana, to where he eventually died, it is an awful long way, so in 1942, it was probably the end of the world. He came out to Australia from a far land.
It is funny. There has been a lot of debate about fireworks in the Northern Territory when they go off at the wrong time, etcetera. In Ohio, they are illegal, but the police regard it as a very minor misdemeanour so fireworks do happen in Ohio. They do not regard it as a big deal, but they do use them sensibly, I must admit.
I should mention that Ohio has quite a number of Honda plants within the state. The one near Marysville employs about 6200 workers and they produce the Gold Wing and other motorbikes and the Acura and Accord motor vehicles. It is funny, when you talk about planning, how in the Territory we tend to stick our industries over here, and we tend to put our residential here, and we have our farming there. In Marysville, you travel out of town along the Honda Parkway, a beautiful big four-lane highway, and here is this Honda factory sitting out in the cornfields by itself. They have a tendency with large manufacturing industries to put them away and put them out in the agricultural areas. There is also Scotts industry, which makes fertilisers, fertiliser spreaders and garden equipment. They also have a place in Marysville and that is sitting out in the paddocks right away from main residential areas. It is an interesting way to look at where we place our industries.
A couple of days later, I visited the David-Besse nuclear power plant. Originally, I was going to visit another power plant and, as luck turned out, we had problems with communicating with them and the Sheriff, Rocky Nelson, whom I mentioned earlier, when we told him that we were having problems getting permission to visit the power station, said: ‘I know the sheriff up near Port Clinton. I will give him a ring’. Sure enough, he made an appointment and we went to the Davis-Besse nuclear power plant.
The Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station is just north of Oak Harbour. You can see the cooling tower for many miles around. It is also close to Port Clinton, which is a favourite spot for tourists wanting to visit islands offshore just south of the Canadian border. We were met by Mr David Kline who, naturally, checked our ID, as happens often in America. He then led us into the main administration building where visitors are permitted and there is a large display showing how the plant operates. The power station is on 950 acres, and I will use acres and imperial measurements here, 733 acres of which are protected wetlands, jointly managed with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
At this nuclear power plant, heat is created through fission, the splitting of uranium atoms. I will not go into the explanation. I am sure those people who know about how a nuclear power station works will understand that. Security at the plant, as you would imagine, is very tight so I was not able to visit inside the reactor and the power plant, but it was still good to visit the plant because they had problems in 2002 when it was discovered there was corrosion at the head of the reactor pressure vessel. The plant was then shut down. I asked Mr Kline about this episode. He replied that the company had since nearly rebuilt the reactor and the previous management, naturally, had been sacked. My understanding is the company was fined millions of dollars and a number of their former managers have been indicted. If you are interested in more on this matter, you can read it on the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission website.
There are over 100 nuclear power plants in the United States and many of them are coming up for licence renewal, so it will be interesting to see where that leads. I believe with the issues related to global warming, nuclear has its place but, at the same time, realising that it is only part of a number of energy options, for example geothermal, that we may need to look at. It was hoped that thorium reactors may be the answer, but they are still in the development stage. The problem is that, while we procrastinate, the world is getting hotter. Even though there is some opposition to nuclear power in the US, my feeling was that people in Ohio accepted the role of nuclear power. I know the media or my opponents will ask: would you like one of those in your back yard? Look at where they are sited in Ohio; amongst the cornfields and near small towns and marinas. It is interesting to note that presently, low and high level radioactive waste is stored on-site. I was glad I visited this site because if I had gone to a squeaky clean site, I would have been accused of having a skewed picture. My lasting impression will be the amazement of seeing a nuclear power plant amongst the cornfield farms, houses and marinas of Ottawa county. I am sure there will be plenty more to debate upon this issue in the months ahead.
After we had finished that day, we drove up to Michigan through Toledo to a little town called Dundee, and it actually has a place called Cabelas, which is the biggest hunting and sporting store I have ever seen in my life. If you think Fishing and Outdoor was big, you would have to multiply that by about 500 times to have any idea how big this store is. It just shows you how much emphasis the Americans put on hunting and outdoor recreation in that part of the world.
I noticed in the supermarket in Marysville that they had introduced the self-scan checkout. I think I have mentioned this before, about the worry about people losing their jobs. In Kroger’s Supermarket, there was one supervisor and four self-scan checkouts. People were using them and they certainly do work. You can use your credit card or you can put notes or coins in the machine. You just scan it, and put it in your plastic bag. There is someone keeping an eye on you to make sure you put everything past the scanner. That is the way they are going in that part of the world. I am told it has come to Australia, but I have concerns about whether that means fewer jobs.
The Sunday after I had been to the power plant, I visited Columbus for the Ohio Florist Association Short Course. I do not have time to talk on that today, but I will quickly show a picture on my non-PowerPoint presentation to give you some idea what it was about. It was one of the biggest floriculture conventions in America. I will give you a rundown on that later.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I talk about a solemn occasion. A good friend of mine, Kevin Gould, unfortunately, succumbed to an untimely death owing to a mysterious illness.
Kevin Gould was a good friend of mine, I am proud to say. I only knew him for the last five years. Through my position as the member for Millner, I became good friends with both he and his wife, Betty. I got to know Kevin and Betty through the Coconut Grove Seniors Hall. With the election of Kevin as chairperson, I worked closely with him for the last five years. It has been an enjoyable time, and he definitely assisted me during that period and became a great friend. If I get to live as many years as he did, even though, sadly, he left us too soon, I would be happy to be half the man Kevin was in intelligence, kindness and temperament. He was a very wise and kind person.
I would like to read a poem by Helen Butler Farr, which is one of Kevin’s favourites. It is called The Pleasant Mile:
- People come into our lives
And walk with us a mile
And then because of circumstance
They only stay a while.
They serve a need within the days
that move so quickly by
And then they are gone beyond our reach.
We often wonder why.
God only knows the reasons that
We meet and share a smile
Why people come into our lives
And walk with us a mile.
Kevin Gould was born on the 28 October 1936 and, unfortunately, passed away on 29 July 2006.
Kevin and family came to Darwin in 1971 chasing the good weather, like many others have done over the years. He loved the Flinders Ranges and Port Augusta, but could not take the extremes of summer and winter. He put a ruler on the map and saw Darwin was the same latitude as where they were in Africa so, when the position of Paymaster came up in Darwin he transferred to the North Australian Railways. He left the country he loved for the kinder climate, but found he had made a grave mistake as Darwin, being on the coast, is very humid. His part of Africa, Northern Rhodesia, was 900 m to 1500 m above sea level, where the temperature in the day was 9 to 23C, and, in the Wet, it was 18 to 31C. He said the lifestyle made up for the heat.
He became involved in church affairs, but also in the social life of the railways. He was the secretary of their cricket team and was member No 3 of the new Railway Institute. He and Betty were keen dancers and hardly missed the wonderful balls that were held on the forecourt of the Civic Centre. The uneven cement was hard on the legs and especially the footwear, but it never stopped Darwinites donning their finery – those were the days!
His children attended Catholic schools in Darwin. Paula and Helen went south to boarding school after Cyclone Tracy. Later on, Patrick went south to boarding school, but, like his father, could not take the weather, so moved to Cairns to finish his schooling. When the North Australian Railways were finishing up, Kevin was offered work in South Australia with the Commonwealth Railways, as were many of his co-workers. He obtained a short-term position with the Darwin Reconstruction Commission. Unfortunately, with no golden handshake with either the Railways or the DRC, he then worked in several government departments and his last position was with Power and Water.
He was never tempted to go south as he loved Darwin but did not regret the many changes that meant progress. He knew these changes were necessary. The three long overseas holidays and several trips to Asia satisfied his itchy feet.
Kevin had a very generous nature and was willing to help where and when he could. Several organisations over the years asked him to rehash their constitutions, and this was right up his alley.
He loved to write verse, poetry and words to songs. When Denise Goodfellow asked him to sing Red Sails in the Sunset one evening at the sewage ponds, he decided to write suitable words to the Mountains of Mourne and sang it at a couple of Denise’s dos. It was about the wildlife at the pond and how future generations may not see these vanishing species. Another time he wrote words to Tit Willow and once again performed it at the sewage ponds for Denise.
I met Kevin at the Coconut Grove Seniors Hall where he was chairman. He was trying to build it up as he felt the organisation’s hall was not being used to the full potential. They had three lunches a year and a couple of sale days. Kevin suggested to Betty to do more luncheons and a couple of boat outings. I and Steve Brennan, my electorate officer, who also worked very closely with Betty and Kevin, did barbecues on Australia Day and Anzac Day at the hall and always had Kevin’s full support.
Kevin was kind enough to quarantine those particular barbecues as the member for Millner’s days. Everyone around the area and the seniors committee recognises that Australia Day and Anzac Day are the days that the member for Millner holds his functions at the Coconut Grove Seniors Hall.
Having done bingo in Africa and Port Augusta, Kevin, with Betty’s help, made bingo a monthly event. When some of the committee wanted to cancel it when numbers would sometimes drop to 12 or 15, he refused. Kevin said it was run for the members and not the committee. Sometimes there would only be the two of them to run it. Betty came up with a new formula for the prizes and this gave it a shot in the arm and numbers increased.
Also, we held a couple of bingo bonanzas. We had donated prizes from local businesses and me, and we were able to really help kick start the bingo. It was a fantastic venture by both Kevin and Betty.
Kevin put the Coconut Grove seniors first and rarely let his private life outside interfere with the running of this organisation during the four years he was chairman. He promised Betty there would be a life after the ‘Coconutties’ as he called them.
He said after the new constitution he was working on was in place, he would resign. Alas, he left it too late and passed away two months after his resignation. Kevin can be proud that he left the organisation in a much healthier situation than when he took it over. He wanted to open the hall several mornings a week for socialising for the members but the committee would not roster on for this and, as he worked, he could not do it himself. At least the bingo and the lunches he and Betty ran kept them busy.
Kevin said: ‘If you took on a job, you had to give it 100%’. That is what he did and always with a joke and a smile. Kevin loved politics. It could have been because his parents were members of the Labour Party in the United Kingdom before coming to Australia. This must have rubbed off on him as he was Secretary of the Australian Labor Party in Port Augusta. He listened to Radio National all day so he could keep up with world and Australian affairs. When Fred McCue ran Talkback, Kevin would use his acting skills and call in under different names. Everyone knew his usual voice but not the others! This gave him a good laugh.
Kevin gave 120% to whatever he took on: church for the seventeen years with the Saint Pat’s Race Club or the four years at the Coconut Grove Seniors. He loved the stage work he did for 28 years and gave enjoyment to many who would not miss a show he was in. In his every day life, he had a laugh and a joke for everyone, and hummed and whistled most of the time. His happy mood was infectious.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, the final words I would like to say about Kevin are that he was a very good, kind, hard working man. He obviously spent a lot of time with his family and his family was first, second and third. He will be sadly missed by Paula, Helen and Patrick, his children. I know that they make Betty and Kevin proud.
Kevin showed me that there is life in retirement, even though he was only semi-retired. He had fantastic skills as an organiser and he used those as best he could for the benefit of his community. Kevin will be sorely missed by all of the residents of the Millner electorate and definitely by all the Coconut Grove Seniors members. So, Kevin Gould, mate, no doubt one day I will meet you. I will see you upstairs. Take care.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, today I asked a series of questions of the Minister for Health and I was most disappointed with his answers. For the first question I asked about the Royal Darwin Hospital, the minister obviously did not have any idea what was going on at the hospital until someone rushed him a hand-written note, it came from upstairs, to advise him that several areas of the hospital had been questioned by the accrediters as not measuring up to standard. I understand that the maintenance area, X-ray, the children’s ward and the laboratory were all brought under question. I am not sure what the real difficulties are. I will wait to read the response from the minister after he received the report that was brought down to him.
The minister needs to be more across what is going on. If the opposition is able to obtain information about the dropping of standards, then the minister ought to know and the minister should be able to prevent that from happening. To wait until an accrediter to come along and say: ‘Look, sorry, your hospital is not up to standard. You have to fix it’, yes, it is within the four year accreditation period and that is fine, it is not removing the accreditation, but it has been subject to some questions.
I have said to the minister before: the accreditation process is a snapshot in time. You now need to put processes in place if you want to maintain the standards right through the whole period of accreditation. Only then can you say that our hospitals are up to scratch. I am glad to see that the other hospitals have not been brought into question at this time. Perhaps it is because the accrediters have not done their review of those hospitals and if they have, I would like to hear that from the minister.
I will be loath to think that the Alice Springs Hospital, Tennant Creek Hospital, Katherine Hospital and even Gove would be called into question. I know the minister is probably not particularly interested any more; he has another day to go and that is the end of his career in this Chamber. Whoever is the new minister, I request that you get up to speed on that.
When I asked about nursing numbers, the minister said he signed off on a letter. I am still waiting to receive it. It would be good to know what the nursing numbers are, where they have been allocated, to which hospitals, and to what areas within each hospital.
When I tried to source the information from the Nursing Federation, they could not tell me either. They said: ‘We do not know where they are, but whenever we talk to our member nurses in the ANF, those nurses will roll their eyes and say, “Well, we don’t where they are either”. There are more nurses leaving than we see new nurses’,
The ones who were recruited from overseas, nurses who came from the Philippines, some were Filipino nurses who came from Ireland, there are nurses from India, who are now all working in our hospitals. I am very interested to know what the attrition rate is. How many of them have left? I know a whole swag of Filipino nurses have left Alice Springs Hospital. It is well and good for the minister to get up and say: ‘We have 100 new nurses’. Tell us how many you have lost because that has a huge bearing on the staffing in our hospitals.
When it came to the EBA negotiations with the ANF, the minister said, ‘It is not my responsibility’. That is funny because the negotiations were being carried out by the OCPE and are obviously done on behalf of the Department of Health and Community Services, so the minister would have some responsibility for what is going on.
When I went into the ANF website, many things came to light. For instance, when the minister said, ‘We are offering the nurses an 11.34% increase in salaries’, that is not true, and the ANF said that is not true. It was 11.34% over 18 months, as described by the minister today. I will read from the media release by the ANF on 10 August: Yvonne Falckh, Branch Secretary of ANFNT, said:
- The offer made to the NTPS nurses was disappointing, to say the least. The OCPE claim that the offer amounted to 11.34% over 18 months was woefully misleading.
I will jump a paragraph and continue:
- The actual offer for nurses is 6% over two years, with the first increase of 2% to occur in February 2007, six months into the new agreement.
That is how the nurses perceive it and, because of the persistent way that the government continues to negotiate with the nurses, not giving them what appears to be adequate increments in their salaries over the next few years, their salary scale will actually degrade from their current third highest in the country out of eight states down to about the fifth position in about two years’ time.
The government was out there promising nurses that they will be the best paid in the country - never mind that they are not the best paid in the country, they are the third best paid - over the next two years, if they accept the government’s current offer, they will degrade to the fifth highest out of eight states. Obviously, from the nurses’ point of view, it is not good enough. It is not good enough.
In the negotiations, many other issues have come to light. For instance, remote nurses are facing quite a significant loss of conditions within their EBA. On Sunday, their on-call allowances will be cut right back to something like $1.70 or $1.50 per hour. If you are on call anywhere, if you want to relax and have a glass of wine, you are not able to do that. You have to be within calling distance so that you can get to the clinic fairly quickly if someone comes in for emergency help. To have to sit around, waiting all night for maybe nothing, you get paid $1.50 or $1.70 and for a whole night, being unable to go anywhere, confined to home or near the clinic, for a few measly dollars is most inappropriate.
Worst of all is the way the government has decided to define what are normal or ordinary hours of work. Most businesses would consider that normal hours of work are between 8 am and 5 pm. In health, there is a bit of a leeway, and normally we consider 6 am to approximately 6 pm as normal working hours. That is a 12-hour period. The government, wants to now change it to make it as late as 8 pm. Yes, it is true; a 12-hour period from 8 am to 8 pm. However, most shifts in hospitals start earlier than 8 am. How are you going to define a person working overtime or out of hours? They have to work to past 8 pm before they are defined to be working out of hours? How many of us in normal employment would accept that? The minister needs to really get his head around it and talk to the OCPE to ensure that the conditions are more conducive to good staff loyalty and commitment to work.
The other thing is rental concessions. If you are a nurse recruited from elsewhere to work in a remote community, usually it is rent free. I am not sure, but I understand that the government is now going to only provide a $40 flat rate per fortnight rental subsidy instead of the rental concession they had before. That is another degradation of conditions. There are many issues there the minister needs to address, and address quickly, so that he can ensure that our nurses have good conditions that will encourage them to stay on to work in the Territory.
I then raised the question about what has happened with St John Ambulance. I know that the contract ran out on 31 July. I also know that the government has given a temporary reprieve to extend the contract to September, and then it runs out. That is only a month away; not very long. To date, we have not heard any indication that a new contract will be signed. The government has also sought a review of St John’s operations. We know that report was completed a long while ago - the Bernie McKay report was done, I think, in November 2005. It is not available. The government’s comment about why it would not release the document is that it is not in the public interest. What does that mean? It was done with public funds to assess the operations of the St John Ambulance service and what costs have been incurred by the service and how the government could adequately resource the service or not. The report is not to be released because it is not in the public interest? What a load of rubbish.
We know that the greater Darwin and Alice Springs areas, while served with a 24-hour ambulance service, are under-serviced. In Darwin, they need a fourth vehicle and crew to ensure there is adequate cover after hours. It is similar in Alice Springs. Essentially, it is only one vehicle and crew that looks after the whole of Alice Springs. The whole of Alice Springs is quite large, too. It is not a little town like Tennant Creek or Katherine. It is quite a large town with nearly 30 000 people and others living on the periphery of Alice Springs. They need at least two full crews and vehicles after hours to ensure there is adequate cover in Alice Springs.
At the moment, the Territory has the best paramedic training course in the country and many people choose to have their paramedics training here, but once they graduate, the salary offered to them to work in the Territory is not as good as interstate. Once they have the experience, they are head-hunted by interstate ambulance services and away they go. We lose our paramedics. The government needs to address that, and address it soon, so that we not only train our paramedics, but retain them.
Finally, when I asked the minister to give us an undertaking that once the radiation oncology service is ready in Darwin and operational, patients in Alice Springs have the choice to seek treatment interstate and that PATS assistance will be provided to these patients so that they can travel interstate to seek cancer treatment. At the moment, the fear is that if this service is available in Darwin, patients will have to come to Darwin for treatment. That is not on. They have developed strong relationships with Adelaide. They should be allowed to continue to go there.
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I will make a short but very important statement this evening in relation to a former constituent. Her name is Kiya Gill. Kiya has just left employment with the Coomalie Community Government Council and joined the Red Cross.
Kiya has been a member of the staff at the Coomalie Community Government Council since January 2003. She started as a clerical trainee and ended up in the position titled Council Secretary/Senior Administration Officer, but it really was a jack of all trades. Kiya did anything that was asked of her and she really threw herself into her job.
I became aware of Kiya during my activities as both a candidate and after that as a member. Kiya had the responsibility of organising a great deal of the council’s functions, including Australia Day celebrations, the nationally famous Anzac Day Dawn Service at Adelaide River, Territory Day celebrations, other events like the seniors’ outings which are very well attended, and many other events the council ran or community-run events for which she would give up her time.
Kiya was able to instil a great deal of enthusiasm in other volunteers within the community. She did a very professional job, well above what was asked, and I want to acknowledge her efforts. She will be very sadly missed. I met Kiya on the Seniors’ Mystery Bus Tour as it came into Palmerston. Many of the seniors are very upset that she has left. They are very thankful for all her efforts. She was a lovely young lady. They and I wish her all the best.
As I said, she has moved on to the Australian Red Cross as their Fundraising Coordinator, and she will do an absolutely fabulous job with them. She has the capacity of organisation, honesty and enthusiasm which will bode well with her work for the Red Cross.
I have been approached by citizens of the town and by the council to wish her every success. They hope she comes back at some time in the future. She is growing as a person and her abilities will continue to grow and she will hopefully come back to the region in a more responsible role. I wish her all the best. In the Territory, paths always cross, but thanks for all your work, Kiya, and good luck in your future endeavours.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, it is with great pleasure tonight that I once again recognise the important work of Elva Whitbread and her work on Palmerston Seniors’ Week. Elva and the committee do a fantastic job organising events for seniors in Palmerston, all on a volunteer basis, and they put together some great activities.
I was present at the launch of Palmerston Seniors’ Week, which was a function at Woodroffe Primary School. There was a good turn out, down a little on last year, but quite a few of Palmerston seniors made it to the day. There was some great food and some excellent entertainment, as always, by the Senior Songsters. The people who are part of the Senior Songsters really ought to be congratulated on the number of productions that they put on.
I would also like make mention of Gray Primary School and Good Shepherd Lutheran School in Palmerston. I went to both schools to do book readings as part of Literacy Week, an important week to encourage children to enjoy stories and reading. Reading really does open up a whole realm for the imagination. The book I read was called Run, Hare, Run, which is all about a picture of a hare. It is a fascinating story and a fascinating concept. The author wrote the book on the basis of having seen a picture of a hare in an art gallery in Vienna and decided that he would write a story about how the artist came to paint such a picture.
I was very privileged today to be at Wanguri Primary School for its 30 year anniversary celebration. As someone who attended Wanguri Primary from 1977 until 1982, it was great to go back to the school and see the children who are there now, and the teachers. The reunion is tonight, unfortunately, and I have not been able to get there, but I caught up with some parents of people with whom I went to school - Mrs Hillis, a great long time resident of Wanguri - and I took the opportunity to go through the school and have a look at the photos of days gone by. It really shows the great history that Wanguri Primary School has. It has always had strong support from the community and parents of the student body who are going to the school. Congratulations to everyone on the 30 years celebration.
They had a choir perform as part of the Assembly this morning and that was conducted or directed, I am not sure what the correct term is, by Ms Judy Weepers, who we all know puts so much work into the community and young people, and will again be part of this year’s Beat which is, if my memory serves me correct, on the 8th of the coming month, so I encourage everyone to get there if possible. The Beat is a great institution of the Northern Territory, great to encourage children to get out and not be afraid of expressing themselves, which is extremely important. We encourage our sports greatly and we need to also encourage the expression that comes from the arts, whether it be performance, drawing, singing or what have you.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, there is one serious matter I would like to deal with and that, of course, is the announcement that was made regarding health services in Palmerston. I understand that there may be a petition going around Palmerston, and I am not sure who is the organiser of the petition, but I am concerned that there is some inaccuracy in it. It needs to be plainly stated that, as the minister said in his statement, the subsidy that was being provided to one medical service has not been continued, and one of the reasons for that is that there are now a number of providers - I believe four, the minister said - who provide an after hours bulk billing service, so it is unfair to have them try to compete on a commercial level with a service funded by government to some level.
Further, it is the Commonwealth government’s responsibility to look after general practitioner services and bulk billing services. The federal government really needs to do a lot more in this area to ensure that people have access, wherever they may live, to a GP and GP services and bulk billing services. The after hours service that all the providers have given is important and people should have those there, but if a service decides to no longer operate for commercial reasons, then people should really be directing their anger towards the federal government, and perhaps getting on the phone to Dave Tollner or Nigel Scullion, and really hitting them up about what they are doing to advance the cause of the Northern Territory within the federal government, although I do not hold out any great hopes for the response they may get or the activity that may result.
The people of Palmerston need to know that services have been increased by the Northern Territory government. The money that was being used to subsidise one particular after hours service is not being removed; it is going into other services in addition to extra resources and extra funds to provide greater services for people in Palmerston, both in the Health area and in the Family and Community Services area.
One of those extra services is in relation to Alcohol and Other Drugs and counselling services around that. That is something that a number of constituents have raised with me, and I am very happy to see that it is a service which is being picked up and provided by this government, and extended in terms of the total amount and the broad range of services that are being provided properly by the Northern Territory instead of having to divert resources to pick up a responsibility that is being ignored by the federal government. Palmerston has a very young population and some of these extra services deal with antenatal health and areas of school dental health, that sort of thing.
The home visit program will see an improvement with more home visits being able to be provided. This is a great win for Palmerston. I urge people to read very carefully any petition that might be presented to them, because this government has done nothing to reduce any services whatsoever. It is, in fact, increasing the health services available.
On health services, I cannot help but pick up on the member for Greatorex’s sudden concern for nurses and their working conditions. When he was a minister, I do not know if anyone could recall him advocating better wages and conditions for nurses. It was with some interest I listened to him do so tonight. I hope that he will continue to champion the cause of nurses because they do provide a necessary, fundamental service to the community. Government should be negotiating with them, as they are. The minister mentioned today ongoing negotiations for the enterprise bargaining agreement. I encourage the government to keep negotiating with all public servants in the variety of fields that we employ people in, to ensure that people get a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work.
It is interesting, however, that the member for Greatorex is not so concerned about the people who work at Palmerston City Council who are engaged under Australian Workplace Agreements. There is no EBA there at all. I would like to see the member call on the Palmerston Council to engage in EBA negotiations with their workforce and provide them with fair conditions.
I know Lucio Matarazzo at the ASU will continue to try to push for an EBA for his members, as will the Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Union, which has members in local government as well. It is one thing that the Darwin City Council has over the Palmerston Council. Darwin City Council has an EBA with its staff and is committed to continuing to engage with its workforce through the enterprise bargaining process. I hope, having said that, they do not suddenly change their approach because there can be no doubt workplace agreements remove the working conditions of employees. They slowly erode over time what many people have come to accept as normal working conditions such as, for example, penalty rates for working on weekends or outside the ordinary hours of work, whatever those hours may be in their particular profession.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, there have been a number of federal colleagues coming to the Territory. It has been good for the Territory to be able to hear their views and have people visit. Martin Ferguson has recently visited and met with people. A number of other shadow ministers have also been in the Top End. Tonight, Julia Gillard is at a function and will be out meeting many Territorians. It is great to have those visits from our federal colleagues.
The events just keep rolling into one another in Palmerston. It is a vibrant, growing place and has many great people. I mentioned the seniors, I previously mentioned the young people who have been involved in events right the way through the community. There is a fantastic community feel. Once again, I have to say it is a great privilege to be representing the seat of Brennan and the people of Palmerston.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016