2007-02-20
Madam Speaker Aagaard took the Chair at 10 am.
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members that a response to petition No 43 has been received and circulated to honourable members.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to inform the House that Community Cabinet has just celebrated its fifth birthday. The Community Cabinet concept was a significant part of our Good Governance reform package when we came to government in 2001. The first two-day meeting was held in Nhulunbuy in February 2002 and, since then, Community Cabinet has given Territorians the opportunity to meet with government ministers and talk about the issues that are important to them.
In the past five years, we have visited regional centres like Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs, Nhulunbuy, urban communities in Parap, Marrara, Coolalinga, Palmerston and, of course, we have met with many people in some of our remoter communities: Ti Tree, Yulara, the Tiwi Islands, Timber Creek, Groote Eylandt, and Wadeye, just to name a few. We are now gearing up for our 48th Community Cabinet in the East Arnhem region and, before the year is out, we will have hit the half century mark.
Community Cabinet is extremely important, especially when it comes to effective policy formulation. It is only by getting to our communities and talking to residents that we get a handle on local issues and fully appreciate the complexities of service delivery. There is rarely a one-fix-all solution for issues affecting our communities. For example, what works at Belyuen may not necessarily be appropriate for Yuendumu. Our visits help us pinpoint the specific needs of different communities; information that is fed back to policy areas across government.
An integral part of the Community Cabinet process, and one I look forward to, is the women’s forum. The forums are an ideal opportunity for minister Scrymgour, in her role as Minister for Women’s Policy, and minister Lawrie, as the Minister for Family and Community Services, and me to talk to Territory women about the issues that affect them and their lives. They are particularly important to people who live in remote areas, giving them a rare opportunity to discuss policies and talk about our decision-making and how it affects them.
The importance of Community Cabinet cannot be over emphasised. It gives us the chance to see how existing policies and programs are working on the ground where it matters. We get to hear firsthand what the issues are, and whether service delivery is effective. Given the distances involved and the significant challenges we face, bringing Cabinets to Territorians can involve some expense but, wherever possible, we try to ensure that the local community benefits by outsourcing services such as catering, accommodation and transport.
As you would expect, a typical Community Cabinet involves much planning. Our aim is to make the most of the visits, which is why staff from my office visit the communities beforehand and identify the key areas of concern. That way, where possible, we can address issues on the spot during visits. In the weeks leading up to Community Cabinet, flyers are sent out inviting residents to come along, and all key organisations at the local level are contacted. Information is also broadcast on local radio and in local papers. After the Cabinet visit and the women’s forum, all queries and questions that need to be followed up are forwarded to the appropriate departments for action.
Newsletters are a fundamental communication tool of the Community Cabinet program. They are prepared on our return and often include updates of the issues raised, as well as photographs from the visits. So far, 32 separate newsletters have been produced. These have been circulated widely, not only back to the community, but also to many businesses and organisations across the Territory.
Madam Speaker, Community Cabinet brings government to all Territorians, no matter where they live or work. It allows people to talk about the things that matter to them and, importantly, gives us the opportunity to hear their concerns and aspirations firsthand and follow them through. I take this opportunity to thank everyone involved in making our Community Cabinet program the success it is today.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for her report. It is a fairly strange report to start the second week of parliament. I would have thought given what is a crisis at Royal Darwin Hospital, we might have seen the Minister for Health come into this parliament at the first opportunity and give an account of himself.
One would have thought, given the difficulties with police and law and order and the government’s failure to deliver its own promise of providing 200 extra police on the beat, that the minister for Police - not the former one who was so spectacularly demoted late last year but the present Police minister - might well have stood up and given an account of himself.
In relation to the contents of the Chief Minister’s report, we agree. Community Cabinets are a good thing. There is an underlying inference that the previous CLP government did not meet anywhere other than Darwin. I hope that is not the inference because that would be incorrect.
One wonders why, if, as the Chief Minister is suggesting, Community Cabinets are such a success that this government is so famously out of touch. One wonders how effective the Community Cabinets are in getting the message from the community to government, given the crisis in our health system and the ongoing difficulties in relation to law and order. One wonders, in Alice Springs for instance, why it is that the government refuses to go near a community-based plea for CCTV cameras in the mall. One wonders why it is that the government has rejected out of hand anything that vaguely resembles a youth curfew. These are not the things that speak of a government that is well informed and, as the Chief Minister would have us believe, in touch with the community.
In relation to the women’s forums, this is the government, after all, that abandoned the Business Women’s Consultative Council and abandoned the Women’s Advisory Council. One wonders whether the 32 separate newsletters of which the Chief Minister spoke came out of the Ministerial Support Unit. It is a mystery to all of us what the Ministerial Support Unit does. I ask the Chief Minister to advise whether the Ministerial Support Unit issued these newsletters.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for her report. I could probably say I thank the Chief Minister for borrowing the concept of the mobile electorate office and transferring it to a Community Cabinet, but being a humble person I can put it back to Litchfield Shire Council. When it first started, it actually had meetings that rotated around the shire. Sadly, that does not occur at the moment. It is an important way for governments of all types to get out to the people to find out what they have to say.
I should make a note on the local government aspects. With the proposals that the government is putting forward with some very large councils, part of the conditions of those councils should be that they rotate their meetings around those very large areas, not rely on electronic equipment to hold their meetings. They may have to, at times, because of weather or circumstances which makes that unavoidable. It is important that both the Territory government and local government get out and meet the people.
The Community Cabinets should get out when there are fairly controversial issues at hand. One time would be the case of the changes to local government. Another time might have been when the Road Safety Taskforce report was released. The Community Cabinet could then have received direct feedback from the community.
I support the government’s idea of Community Cabinet. It supports a very important part of the democratic process, especially in an area as big as the Northern Territory.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I am in two minds whether to reply. The diatribe from the Opposition Leader about an initiative that is an excellent one for the Territory - you wondered where it came from. The Community Cabinet is a successful operation of this government. There was no discussion of what previous governments had done. This was talking about five years of action from this Labor government. All we hear from the Opposition Leader is carping and whingeing and whining. All the Opposition Leader has to do is pick up a newsletter from the Community Cabinets to see that they are produced by the Community Cabinet in the Cabinet Office. This is an appropriate activity for the Cabinet Office. It is an interesting whinge and whine from the Leader of the Opposition …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms MARTIN: I thank the member for Nelson for putting some constructive ideas forward - excellent. You cannot say the same thing for the opposition.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Young Territorians): Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to advise the House today that I have recently appointed the 2007 Youth Minister’s Round Table of Young Territorians. As members would know, the youth round table is a program that gives young Territorians the opportunity to speak directly with the Northern Territory government about the issues that impact upon them. More importantly, it enables government to really understand the issues affecting young Territorians in their communities and to work towards achievable solutions.
The 2007 members were selected from all over the Territory and from all walks of life. They are: Shahank Ramakrishna, Darby Bicheno, Jacob Andreae, Siana Cork, Sarah Morris, Lauren Jew, Nicolette Pearce, Karlie James, Tara Alexander, Lyndon Duncan and Katrina Halse from Darwin; from Palmerston, Shamim Kholosi and Clare Paynter; from Darwin rural, John-Paul Thorbjornsen; from Tennant Creek, Rosalind Beadle; from Alice Springs, Claire Ryan; and from Nhulunbuy, Nathan Frick. The members represent a diverse mix of young students, workers, carers, parents, volunteers and entrepreneurs - all leaders in their own right with the capacity to offer different and unique insights into issues.
Over the years, the youth round table has developed a standing in the community as an exceptional youth development program that is based on the principles of inclusiveness, diversity, respect and participation. The youth round table is useful across government in providing their views directly to agencies on particular issues. For example, last year the youth round table had an information and feedback session with the Sessional Committee on Sport and Youth. They spoke with the Commissioner for Public Employment regarding WorkChoices, they discussed middle years schooling with the Department of Employment, Education and Training, and they met with the Department of Health and Community Services and public health physicians regarding the Road Safety Taskforce.
Members are also frequently called upon during the year to make a contribution to the development of government policy and programs. As well as attending formal meetings of the youth round table, members are very active in their communities by engaging with their peers.
As well as welcoming the new youth round table, I place on the record my appreciation for the hard work undertaken by the outgoing 2006 members. I take this opportunity to thank those members. Their dedication to their peers and to making a difference to the lives of young Territorians is admirable. I encourage them to continue to be active in their community to create positive change. I am always heartened to see young people focused on finding solutions and developing positive outcomes.
The first meeting of the 2007 round table will be held this weekend in Darwin where I will have the pleasure of meeting the new members for the first time. The members will be consulting with other young people in their communities throughout the year on issues of importance to them, and conveying these issues to government. I look forward to working closely with those members throughout the year and I encourage all young people to contact their members to ensure that they have their views heard.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, it is very important that we provide quality leadership for our young people and encourage them. The report given is fine and does all the right things, says all the right things, and that is great. It has the support of opposition, of course. Who would not support that?
However, we need to reflect, as parliamentarians, on the use of the parliament for the practice of reading media releases. I find it a little demeaning. We have so many serious issues to attend to. Maybe there are only four opposition and 19 of you guys, but you stand up and read a prepared script and the opposition, without any notice, has a bit of a talk about it.
We have very little legislation on the Notice Paper from a government that has said it is raring to go. To read out statements and media releases like this is really an unparliamentary practice. It does not really happen in other parliaments, nor does it support any element of debate.
I put it to the Territory government, which I believe is misusing parliament, that, first, if you are genuine about addressing serious issues, at least give the courtesy to the opposition of advising it of the issues that you want to promote so that we can give some more considered response to satisfy those we are elected to serve. If you cannot do that, why do you not just stand up and have a talk without the script and see whether you actually know the issues upon which you are reflecting?
What I am saying is in no way a reflection on the quality of our young people …
Ms Martin: Well, it sounds like it.
Mr MILLS: … or the appropriateness …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Mr MILLS: … of the statement that is being made. It is quite adequate, but there is another issue that I have just raised. If you cannot hear it, you have cloth ears.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Blain, I ask you to withdraw, please.
Mr MILLS: What? Cloth ears?
Madam SPEAKER: It was the tone and the manner in which you presented that. It is a matter of order.
Mr MILLS: Honestly, Madam Speaker, I am asked to withdraw what?
Madam SPEAKER: In commenting on members – in asking a member to withdraw, it is a matter of the way in which you say things, the tone as well as the actual words.
Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker, I …
Madam SPEAKER: There can be no dissent from a matter of order.
Mr MILLS: I find that a little difficult, Madam Speaker, on this issue. If this is to apply here because of an unpleasant tone in my voice, I would trust that it also applies to honourable members who made …
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Blain, I have asked you to withdraw. Will you withdraw?
Mr MILLS: I …
Madam SPEAKER: There is no …
Ms CARNEY: Madam Speaker, may I speak to you about this issue?
It seems to me, Madam Speaker, that you are asking members of the Assembly to withdraw a tone. My question is, how does one withdraw a tone, and secondly …
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, this is a matter of order, it is not a ruling.
Mr MILLS: All right. I will withdraw the tone.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you. The words themselves, member for Blain, it is the actual words.
Mr MILLS: What? Cloth ears?
Madam SPEAKER: I have asked you to withdraw. Thank you.
Mr MILLS: The tone or ‘cloth ears’?
Madam SPEAKER: I am saying to you that, in asking a member to withdraw a comment, it is not simply about the words, it is about the tone and the manner in which someone delivers it, and so …
Mr MILLS: Yes, I withdraw the tone, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: And the words.
Mr MILLS: And the words?
Madam SPEAKER: And the words. I am asking you to withdraw.
Mr MILLS: The words and tone?
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you.
Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker, I withdraw the words and the tone.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Blain.
Mr Mills: Cloth ears.
Ms Carney: We cannot use cloth ears.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I need to be very careful, don’t I, in what I say and how I say it?
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mrs BRAHAM: Let us hope the same applies to all members in this House then for that particular ruling, even government.
Minister, yes, good, we need to hear our young people and what they have to say. The fact is, I would like you to talk to them about curfews, from what has been happening in Alice Springs. The Alice Springs Town Council does not have a youth advisory council at all, and it would be interesting to hear their point of view, and how the young people in Alice Springs would come to grips with the problems that the town council sees.
I believe it is important that you do listen to young people, hear their points of view, and perhaps even do something to show them that you appreciate it by introducing something in this parliament.
However, I just hope this is not a token committee, as you did with the Seniors Advisory Council that did not meet for so long that people on it thought they were there for goodness knows what. It was an absolute disgrace that you treated the seniors in the way you did. I hope that you are not going to say to the young people, ‘Yes, we are going to have this wonderful meeting in Darwin. We will have a good time’, and then forget them for another nine months or 12 months.
Ms Martin: It has been in place for a decade, Loraine.
Mrs BRAHAM: Well, it has happened in the past with this minister and her Seniors Advisory Council. It could happen again.
Remember: do not meet just in Darwin. Try the other regional centres as well, and when you do come to those centres, invite a broad range of young people to talk to the round table people you have chosen. Let us really make it democratic. Let us really hear the voice of young people and not stifle them.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Young Territorians): Madam Speaker, in response, firstly, to the member for Blain. It was interesting to hear the shadow minister not think that the issues affecting and impacting on our youth are worthy of a report in the parliament first thing in the morning.
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: What is your point of order, Leader of the Opposition?
Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker, that is actually incorrect. The Hansard clearly states that I had no comment whatsoever disparaging of young people or the purpose of giving such a statement. There was another issue that was being addressed. That is incorrect, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Member for Blain, if you wish to, you can approach me later about making a personal explanation.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Madam Speaker, I will just qualify. The member for Blain did say that are other more important issues, and actually objected to a report on the youth round table and the issues affecting young people. Last year, there was a comprehensive youth statement tabled in this parliament outlining a number of programs and issues across all agencies, and what we work towards for youth.
Member for Braitling, the Senior Advisory Council is fantastic. They are working well. I have …
Mrs Braham: Oh, they are back again, are they? They were not there for a long time, as you know.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: … been working quite well with the chairperson …
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, your time has expired.
Illegal Foreign Fishing Prosecutions – Pressure on Legal System
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, illegal foreign fishing has a serious environmental and economic impact on Australia. We in the Northern Territory are on the frontline of this battle to protect our natural resources and maintain our marine biodiversity. Apart from the long-term effect on fish and shark stocks, illegal fishing boats also pose an extreme risk from noxious marine pests and other biohazards.
The Martin Labor government, therefore, strongly supports the Australian government’s expanded funding commitment for detection and apprehension of illegal fishing vessels. Increased coordination between Australian and Northern Territory agencies will also improve apprehension rates, and is intended to act as a strong deterrent to illegal fishing activities.
I wish to report to the Assembly that we recognise this effort to protect Australia’s northern waters will have an inevitable flow-on effect for the Northern Territory’s criminal justice system. The expected increase in the number of fishers prosected and imprisoned will put extreme pressure on courts and gaols. Based on data provided by the Australian government, by 2009 up to 30% of the Northern Territory’s total prison population capacity will be required to house illegal foreign fishers - that means up to 250 additional prison places. Even larger numbers will flow through courts. It is estimated approximately 1500 illegal fishing prosecutions will be brought to the court each year in 2007-08 and 2008-09.
The Territory government has been moving quickly to address the anticipated influx. I have been working closely with my federal counterparts at each step of the way because we will not be able to overcome this challenge without the Commonwealth’s strong support. I discussed the matter with the federal Justice minister, Senator Chris Ellison in November last year. We agreed the Territory Department of Justice would serve as the lead agency to coordinate the Territory’s costs and submit them to the Attorney-General’s Department for federal consideration and action.
I also took the opportunity afforded by a meeting with the Attorney-General on statehood to raise the issue with the Attorney-General, Philip Ruddock. I gave him an advanced copy of the work that had been done quantifying the costs to the Territory if the situation goes on as it has been predicted. We have now formally sent that submission to him following the approval by Cabinet of the scope it sets. The Territory looks forward to receiving a favourable response to the submission.
Agreement on funding will allow for the rapid expansion of judicial officer numbers, support staff, and infrastructure. In the meantime, the government will closely monitor illegal fisher numbers going through our system. The Department of Justice will also continue preparations to ensure Courts Administration and Corrections are operating as efficiently and cost-effectively as possible.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, in response, the minister’s comments traverse a number of portfolios, and I understand why that is the case. Thank you, minister, for your report.
We go back to my colleague, the member for Blain’s comments that if you are fair dinkum about an issue like this why you do not bring it on in a ministerial statement. You not only traversed a number of portfolios, as is your right, but you traversed a number of very important issues to the Territory under the heading of illegal fishing. I would have thought that, given that government ministers, with hand on heart - and I am sorry; I need to watch my tone now and appreciate that - are saying how important illegal fishing is in the Territory and how they will be maxisimising and moblising all efforts to address it, one wonders why it was done in a five-minute statement - which was delivered, I think, within five minutes - to which the opposition only has two minutes to reply. I also note that the statement was delivered without any notice.
Madam Speaker, there are ample examples of why it is that this system of ministerial reports needs review; why it is that I wrote to the Leader of Government Business last week. I look forward to his response.
Thank you, minister, but with the information you provided to us I do not think either one of us can expect a serious debate. I am increasingly of the view that this government does not want a serious debate on anything. You are, as a group, hell-bent on spinning your way out of just about everything. You have an enormous spin machine. Your resources are apparently endless to promote yourselves and to retain that goal that you seek; that is, your return to government as opposed to dealing with the problems in the Territory.
Madam Speaker, the clock is having difficulties; I guess I could just keep talking. In fairness, I am sure that my time will be coming pretty much up to closing. So thanks, minister, but I urge you to do better next time. I will not bother going on because I know the clock is not working.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, the Deputy Clerk is away today and the Acting Deputy Clerk is just learning how to do this, so good luck.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I put on the record the rationale why ministerial reports were introduced in the first place. It was to mark the spot, to advise members of detail around a particular issue without going to lengthy statements. They are very much mini-statements. On each occasion recently that ministers have risen to give a ministerial report, the opposition clamours over the minister speaking: ‘It ought be a statement so that we can all contribute in full on the particular question’.
On the other hand, we have a media release from the Leader of the Opposition slagging the government, having one bill today and filling the paper with statements ...
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order! What is your point of order?
Ms CARNEY: Two points of order, Madam Speaker. One is that I ask that you direct the Deputy Chief Minister to withdraw the word ‘slagging’ on the basis that it is unparliamentary. And Madam Speaker, in accordance with your previous ruling, his tone is offensive and I ask you direct him to withdraw it.
Mr STIRLING: Madam Speaker, in deference to the sensitivity of the Leader of the Opposition, I withdraw the word ‘slagging’.
This government was criticised for having a number of statements on the paper today. You cannot have it both ways, Leader of the Opposition. You cannot have it both ways.
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I ask that you rule the Deputy Chief Minister to withdraw his tone in accordance with your previous ruling, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, when I was previously discussing the matter with the member for Blain, what I said is that it is a matter of tone, behaviour and manner in relation to points of order and matters of order. It is not a ruling. It is not something for which there is any debate. That was the grounds on which I called on the member for Blain to withdraw. It depends on many things, Leader of the Opposition. The Deputy Chief Minister has, in fact, withdrawn the comments.
Ms CARNEY: He certainly withdrew the word, Madam Speaker, but the issue about the tone obviously remains.
Madam SPEAKER: Obviously, Leader of the Opposition, you cannot actually withdraw a tone. This is fairly obvious.
Ms CARNEY: Well, Madam Speaker …
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, I ask you to resume your seat. You are actually reflecting on the Speaker. I ask you to resume your seat.
Dr LIM: Madam Speaker, may I seek indulgence and speak to the point of order?
Madam Speaker, you have always maintained a very impartial manner of presiding over the parliament. It appears to me, for some reason, that matters have changed and the opposition is constrained in full parliamentary debate from bringing in the colour and the intensity of debate into this Chamber. When we use words, we are told you cannot use them because of the tone, or of the nature of the word. However, when government members do, particularly the Deputy Chief Minister in his full flight, bright red face, yelling and arguing and slagging into the opposition, we are told to put up with that. I ask you to return to the impartiality of your previous judging.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Greatorex, as I have commented, this is actually a point of order, a matter of order. It is not a ruling which I have made here. I shall be maintaining my independence as the Speaker. I would prefer that you did not reflect on me in relation to being the Speaker. I am happy to discuss these matters with the opposition in my Chamber at a later hour.
Please continue, Deputy Chief Minister.
Mr STIRLING: I think I made my point, Madam Speaker, that if we are going to be prevailed upon to make every report a statement, then it ill behoves the Leader of the Opposition to criticise the government for the number of statements it has on the Notice Paper.
Mr HENDERSON (Tourism): Madam Speaker, I inform the House on the Australian Tourism Awards to be held in Sydney on Friday, 23 February this year. The Australian Tourism Awards recognise and promote excellence in tourism and are the pinnacle of achievement for the tourism industry in our nation.
Finalists are drawn from state and territory tourism award winners across a range of categories, where participants have undergone an extremely comprehensive application process to qualify as an entrant for their respective state or territory.
As you may well be aware, our local awards are called the Northern Territory Brolga Tourism Awards. This gala evening was held on Saturday, 2 December, at the Alice Springs Convention Centre, where I had the great pleasure of attending the 20th anniversary celebrations along with 340 industry delegates.
The Brolga Tourism Awards is an industry-based program that recognises all round business excellence in Northern Territory tourism businesses. It is a night where we celebrate and honour the tourism industry in the Territory and reward their achievements, their dedication and their commitment to excellence. This commitment to excellence has seen the Brolga Awards evolve over a 20-year time span to become our industry’s night of nights, while this same level of commitment to excellence has driven and motivated our tourism industry to enter the awards and be judged alongside their industry counterparts.
The awards are judged by a panel of 18 judges, who were, this year, under the stewardship of Mr Bob Woodward, whose long-term dedication and commitment I commend. Bob’s team of judges bought an abundance of insight, experience and knowledge to the panel, whilst their willingness in volunteering their time has been duly noted.
I also wish to formally acknowledge that this year’s management and coordination of the awards program was carried out in-house by Tourism NT. The agency worked tirelessly to ensure that the awards program delivered on expectations. The awards were supported by the offer of fantastic incentive prize packages, with the major prize of a specifically tailored sales trip to the value of $5000 offered by Tourism NT.
It seems that the agency’s solid efforts have been rewarded with a 20% increase in entries from 2005. This great result was also bolstered further by the agency’s offer of assistance to the tourism industry through free workshops and mentoring to assist with the preparation of award submissions.
The Chairman of Judges, Bob Woodward, has openly praised the industry entrants in this year’s Brolga Awards. He has commented the quality of this year’s submissions was outstanding and, to quote Bob: ‘In fact, the best I have seen’. This is a great testament to our tourism industry which has spent a massive amount of time, effort and resources in preparing submissions.
It is also verification that Tourism NT’s free workshops and mentoring are a fantastic initiative that has successfully guided the industry through the lengthy submission process, a submission process that may undergo modification this year following intense state and territory lobbying for change to the process at national level. Whilst details of these changes are still to be finalised, as Tourism minister, I await the announcement to the changes when the 2007 awards program is launched in the coming months. Positive changes to the process will encourage more Territory operators to get involved, to seek recognition at the Territory level, driving the industry’s commitment to tourism excellence into the future.
I extend my congratulations to all as I inform you of the 2006 winners of the NT’s Brolga Tourism Awards. I table a list of the awardees and seek leave to have this list incorporated into the Parliamentary Record.
Leave granted.
Mr HENDERSON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Of the 31 Brolga categories, 24 feed directly into the national awards. The winners of these categories will go on to compete as finalists at the Australian Tourism Awards.
Each state and territory finalist’s entry is rejudged against strict rules and guidelines by a judging panel made up of representatives from each state and territory. The winners will be announced later this month during the awards evening, as previously mentioned, at the Star City Casino in Sydney on Friday, 23 February. I am sure all of members of this House wish our Northern Territory finalists the best of luck for this year’s Australian Tourism Awards.
Reports noted pursuant to standing orders.
Continued from 30 November 2006.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I advise the Attorney-General, as previously indicated, that the bill is supported. I have a couple of comments through on which I invite him to comment in reply.
In a surprisingly short second reading speech, you said that the main purpose of the bill is to make consequential amendments to various Northern Territory laws. You also said that the bill updates superseded references, corrects typographical and grammatical errors and omissions, and clarifies ambiguous terminology in the affected acts and subordinate legislation.
You then went through and touched on some, but not all, of the legislation to which the bill applies. In particular, you did not refer to the amendments and their consequences on the Northern Territory Firearms Act and the Private Security Act. My first question is: why was that? Second, you would be aware that the consequence of the changes to the Firearms Act is that it broadens the scope of the term ‘disqualifying offence’ to include offences committed elsewhere in Australia and, indeed, other countries.
The current situation, as I understand it, is that if you are convicted of an offence - that is the equivalent of an offence for which you can be disqualified in the Northern Territory - anywhere else in Australia, then you are deemed to have been disqualified in the Northern Territory. We have no problem with that because the issue is an important one. My question is: why did you not refer to the Firearms Act in your second reading speech, when it does represent a significant and important change to the Northern Territory Firearms Act? Secondly, did you consult and, if so, what was the outcome of any consultation with the Northern Territory Firearms Council? They are the two critical issues in relation to that. Why did you not mention it in your second reading speech and what was the effect, and did you consult with the Northern Territory Firearms Council?
Similarly, in relation to the effects on the Private Security Act, I note that you did not refer to that in your very short second reading speech. I ask why that was the case and, secondly, whether any consultation occurred with those working in the industry and, if so, what was the outcome of that consultation?
For the record, we do not oppose the effect of the amendments. However, it does seem that, again, there is an important change, important enough to have been worthy of at least a passing reference in the second reading speech. I am sure the Attorney-General wants to be seen to be transparent as, indeed, the government would when it brings legislation to this place. It really stood out as being odd that two of these quite significant changes were not referred to. So it begs the question: what, if any, consultation was there?
In relation to the changes to the Community Welfare Act, the Attorney-General might, in his reply, like to tell us when the new Community Welfare Act is going to appear. I believe it was promised in about 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005. Members opposite well know my views about amending the legislation. In fact, I probably even referred to it in my maiden speech. If the Attorney-General can give us any inside information as to whether this long overdue legislation is going to be amended, I would be very grateful.
With those comments, I will conclude; however, please make no mistake, the opposition supports the bill.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I also support the bill. I realise this is one of those bills that more or less tidies up matters. However, I would like the minister to clarify the section under the Animal Welfare Act being removed. My notes here say this removes the subsection concerning evidence for offences for not providing an animal with food, drink and shelter. If there is evidence the animal is not provided with clean water for 24 hours, the court can assume the offender failed to provide the animal with sufficient water.
It reminds me of a certain case by a certain minister in relation to a certain landowner of a large property in the Northern Territory. I am wondering whether this change to the act bears any relationship to matters arising from that particular case, or is it to do with something else? I would like to know whether I am right in what I said. Are the reasons for the removal of that section of the act? Does it have anything to do with that particular case that I am referring to?
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank the members for Araluen and Nelson for their contributions to debate. The member for Araluen spelt out the precise reasons why statute law revision bills are necessary from time to time. I will reiterate that they are to make necessary, but minor, consequential amendments; they are to fix errors and omissions and clarify potentially confusing terminology. She made the point that I did not touch on reference to the Firearms Act and Private Security Act. Nor did I in relation to a whole range of other bills that are touched on by their amendments.
The important thing is that there are no substantive changes to either policy or programs of government contained within these amendments. The primary purpose is to make consequential amendments following the enactment of the first tranche of the Criminal Code reforms which dealt with criminal responsibility. That act came into effect in late December 2006, so it is necessary to amend all related bills to correct the offence section references. Otherwise you have legislation across the board that does not correspond with each other. The bill makes minor amendments to acts, as I said, across various portfolios: the Cemeteries Act, the Swimming Pool Safety Act. These specific amendments and the reasons for them were set out in some detail in that second reading speech. While minor bills such as these demonstrate that legislation is not, and should not be, set in stone, we need to constantly review it and amend where necessary to ensure that the law operates efficiently and fairly for Territorians.
Does the member for Araluen really believe - let us take the private security that she raised – it is necessary to consult with the Miscellaneous Workers Union and the private security employees because we are renumbering the offences to coincide with the changes to the Criminal Code? I believe they would understand that if you have made changes to the Criminal Code Act and they flow through to other legislation, you consequently have to renumber the offences in the act and drop out references to a ‘dangerous act’ as in the firearms regulations where ‘dangerous act’ was omitted from the Criminal Code. Does she really think that we have to go and talk to the Firearms Council because we are changing references and corresponding references in different pieces of legislation? I think not. They would wonder why you are coming to talk with them.
That is essence of these changes: they stem from the initial changes to the Criminal Code and they flow through to these other pieces of legislation. I do not think it is necessary, in that sense, to talk to community groups: ‘Sorry, but that part of the act is now renumbered to take account of the changes to the Criminal Code itself’.
I take the point that, perhaps, the second reading speech in these bills ought to mention every piece of legislation. To do so would make it a much longer second reading speech. It is simply to say we are renumbering, we are deleting a word because it is spelt wrong, or something of that minor nature. The second reading speeches would be pretty dull.
If the member for Araluen was to go to the explanatory memorandum which accompanies the passage of the bill in the first place into the House it is all explained in that explanatory memorandum. I am not sure that it has to go into the second reading as well. We know that a court may, at a future time, have to go back to the second reading in relation to interpretation. I imagine they can also go to the explanatory memorandum which is tabled, as I said, at the time that the bill enters the House for its second reading. So I am not taken with the suggestion or the proposal that we should mention the purpose of every single amendment and where it goes to right through.
The Community Welfare Act is under development. I do not have a date; it is still to come to Cabinet. It is a body of work in progress.
In relation to the Animal Welfare Act, the section 8(2) in the explanatory memorandum being removed to remove evidentiary problems which may rise where food and/or water has been provided to an animal, the question from the member for Nelson was did it arise from a previous court case. I am told that, in part, it did.
I thank members opposite for their questions and their suggestions. I take on board what the member for Araluen said. I would not be taking, for example, where it is a simple renumbering, to have to put all of that in the second reading, but where it does touch across a bill perhaps there is a need just to mention that. The explanatory memorandum is the safeguard. It is the stop gap. If it is not in the second reading, it is certainly in the explanatory memorandum, both of which could be used by courts for future interpretation if there was ambiguity in coming to an understanding on interpretation of the bill.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Clause 1 agreed to.
Clause 2:
Ms CARNEY: Mr Chairman, I was not planning on going to committee in this area but, on the basis of the Attorney-General’s comments, I thought it appropriate to do so. I asked some specific questions and I wonder whether the Attorney-General will be good enough in the committee to provide me with specific answers. The questions were: did the government consult with the NT Firearms Council - yes or no? Did the government consult with those working in the private security industry - yes or no?
Mr STIRLING: Mr Chairman, I did answer it. If the member for Araluen had not been engaged in conversation and had been listening to my reply closing debate on the second reading she would have heard me say that the view was taken that it was not necessary to speak with the firearms association or the private security and Miscellaneous Workers Union when the bill goes to amending and replacing references to be renumbered following the changes to the Criminal Code.
If there was anything substantive here by way of change, the fact is the Criminal Code changed with the taking out of a ‘dangerous act’ and that meant consequential flow-ons through other legislation. If it was drastically changing the firearms regulations - what they might do with firearms or how they handle them, or how they secure them - of course, there would be a case for consultation and the same with private security. When you have major change to the Criminal Code, which was well known and well put about at the time that that amendment went through, and these are renumbering of the categories in those items of legislation, as I explained in my second reading, if the member for Araluen had been listening, no, there was no discussion.
Ms CARNEY: Attorney-General, I was listening. When you got up to reply before you said it was deemed unnecessary or it was not necessary. My question was: did you consult? They are two different questions and you should know the difference. So thank you, in the most long-winded way imaginable, for saying ‘no’ to both of those questions.
Attorney-General, is it the case that the consequential amendments to the Firearms Act are that if a person has been convicted of a disqualifying offence in another jurisdiction that that then applies to the Territory?
Mr STIRLING: Mr Chairman, the question posed by the member for Araluen does not go to the substance of these changes. I would need to seek further advice and I undertake to get that information to her.
Ms CARNEY: So, Attorney-General, whereas you have said in forceful tones that there was no consultation because these amendments were merely renumbering, you do not know whether the effect of the amendments change or broaden the scope of the term ‘disqualifying offence’ in the Northern Territory, but you undertake to provide that information to me. When will you provide that information?
Mr STIRLING: Let us be clear here. What is, is what is. These amendments do not change what is, and I will find out what is and get that back to you as quickly as I can. These amendments do not change what is. So do not put it to me that I do not know what these amendments are doing; they do not change the current situation.
Ms CARNEY: Then I am doubly confused, Attorney-General, by what you are saying. On the one hand, you say that these amendments amount merely to a renumbering. On the other hand, are you saying that the effect of the amendment does not have any implications in relation to a disqualifying offence in the Northern Territory?
Mr STIRLING: Mr Chairman, the member for Araluen is trying to read something into these amendments that simply is not there. There is no substantive change to the way that is now. In relation to the interstate disqualifying offence, as I said, I will get advice and relay that to the member for Araluen at the earliest opportunity. These amendments in themselves do not change the substantive practice now. I will clarify what that is for the member for Araluen at the first opportunity.
Ms CARNEY: Attorney-General, how can you, on the one hand, assert that the changes are numeric in effect, yet you do not know - because you will have to get me the information - about its effects in terms of the disqualifying offence and its consequences in the Northern Territory? How can you say the answer to the question the member for Araluen is asking is no, but that you will provide me with further information in relation to the very question I asked?
Mr STIRLING: I asked the member for Araluen to carefully read the explanatory memorandum around the Firearms Act and I will quote it:
The dangerous act or omission is now repealed, but it is still picked up around the definition of disqualifying offence and offence of violence to ensure that it is still in there in relation to firearms.
That is really ensuring that someone found guilty under dangerous act or omission previously does not get a clean record now, given that that is now a repealed law. So that does not change what is. As I said, in relation to the interstate question, I do not have that, but I will get it to you.
Ms CARNEY: Would you be able to provide me with that information by late afternoon, five or six o’clock tonight? I imagine you have it somewhere.
Mr STIRLING: I have no doubt. Staff are listening, beyond the staff I have here now. I would have thought within the hour.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you. I guess it follows - well it does follow - that the issues I raised in relation to the Private Security Act should be dealt with between us in the same way and not repeated. So, to streamline things and, I suspect, to make your life a little easier, would you undertake to provide, in a timely fashion as you indicated in your previous answer, the answer to the earlier question I asked in relation to the Private Security Act regarding the effects of this amendment on the disqualifying offence provisions in the act? I am sorry, that question could have come out significantly better, but will you provide me with the same information that you have undertaken to do so in relation to the Firearms Act for the Private Security Act?
Mr STIRLING: I certainly would do so, Mr Chairman, when I understand the nature of the question.
Ms CARNEY: Okay. I was trying to make it easier. You are obviously having difficulty listening and maybe understanding. You will recall that, in relation to the Firearms Act, whereas you were saying that the amendments were, in essence, numeric amendments, I was suggesting to you that, in fact, the definition of ‘disqualifying offence’ has been broadened to include offences committed in other jurisdictions. I repeated that in relation to the Private Security Act because, in that legislation, there is also reference to disqualifying offences. You have undertaken, in relation to the Firearms Act, to get some information to me.
Mr STIRLING: Yes, I do not have a problem with that. It may be, Mr Chairman, if the member for Araluen is able to do so, that we get someone from Justice up here to go through this with her, or they give me the information.
Ms CARNEY: No, I would prefer it in writing, thanks.
Mr STIRLING: Fine. Either way, we will get the information - I have undertaken an hour. I hope I am not crucified if it is two.
Ms CARNEY: Mr Chairman, the minister answered a question that the member for Nelson asked in relation to the Animal Welfare Act. His question was – and I am rewording and providing a bit more information – in essence whether it had anything to do with the legal proceedings between Jack Ah Kit and Warren Anderson. Your answer was, yes, in part it did. Could you outline please which parts of that proceeding effected the changes to the Animal Welfare Act?
Mr STIRLING: It was not the Anderson case. It was another case that was brought to the attention of Justice. I can get the background to that, but it was not the Anderson case, I am advised.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Attorney-General, my apologies. Another question I have which I omitted to mention in my response to your second reading speech was that, in the third paragraph of your second reading speech, you said:
There has been a lot of legislation, but could you clarify my understanding that it is the case that the Criminal Code Amendment (Criminal Responsibility Reform) Bill is not operating in the Northern Territory at present? If so, why?
Mr STIRLING: Mr Chairman, I am advised it commenced on 21 December 2006.
Ms CARNEY: I see. Therefore, at that time when you made your second reading speech on 30 November 2006 – a couple of weeks before - that would explain the reference to the coming into effect? Okay, thank you. I have no further questions. I thank the Attorney-General for his assistance.
Clause 2 agreed to.
Remainder of the bill, by leave, taken as a whole and agreed to.
Bill reported; report adopted.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Continued from 19 October 2006.
Mr VATSKALIS (Business and Economic Development): Madam Speaker, I commend minister Henderson on his statement Tourism Industry and Priorities for Moving Forward delivered during the October sittings.
I agree that the tourism industry plays an integral role in the Territory’s current and future economic development. I have been involved in the tourism industry in the past. Before I migrated to Australia, my first job was in a hotel when I was 15 years old during the summer holidays. In 1974, after I finished high school, I worked for year in a travel bureau and after, every summer holidays, then, full-time in a hotel until 1982. The hotel I worked in was one of the largest hotels in Greece – 400 rooms - and I worked in every area from the roof garden, down to the storeroom, to the night shift as a porter, and at reception.
Of course, Greece is a favourite destination for tourism - not only Greece, but most of the Mediterranean. In my mother country, every year the population would double. They have about 10 million tourists coming to the Greek Islands or to the mainland for holidays.
Tourism was a significant industry in Greece and also provided significant opportunities for people, for business development, for employment. It was very important as an entry level employment for young people who were finishing high school and wanting to get a job, or were between jobs. The flow-on effects from tourism were significant. We see the same things happening here in the Territory.
The figures released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics since minister Henderson’s statement in October confirmed the ongoing strong contribution that tourism makes to the Northern Territory economy. In 2005-06, the value-added contribution of the tourism industry grew by around 7% from $443m in 2004-05 to $474m in 2005-06. It is a very significant and growing industry, one that we are all part of, with benefits that flow-on to all Territorians.
Tourism, in particular, is very important in achieving Territory-wide regional economic development. Along with agriculture and mining, the tourism industry continues to underpin economic development in the Territory regions. If you go to other states, in some of our competitors like Western Australia tourism not only benefits big business and big hotel chains but also cottage industries such as bed and breakfast. People manufacture and produce in their own home produce that they advertise locally, and most of this produce is sold for tourism. On my recent holiday in Western Australia visiting family, we all took a trip south to Capel. Along every single kilometre of road we saw signs selling everything from strawberry marmalade to honey to local produce. That was not sold to the local people; it was mainly sold to tourists. That has contributed to the rural economy in the south-west of Western Australia.
The Territory’s iconic nature-based tourism attractions such as Uluru-Kata Tjuta, Kakadu and Litchfield attract hundreds of thousands of visitors to our region. Yesterday, I met with the American Ambassador and his wife and they were telling me how impressed they were with Uluru, how fantastic they found it. They also told me what they really liked most was Kata Tjuta. Kata Tjuta is a different environment with many microclimates in the crevices of the rocks. They found it unbelievable that these areas would have rich vegetation in a very dry environment. I have to admit that Kata Tjuta is a very special place because it is so different from what you see anywhere else in the world, anywhere else in Australia.
At the Chief Minister’s Business Round Table in Alice Springs last year there was definitely a feeling that this year’s tourist season has been a busy one, especially in the Centre. There is much to be done. We have markets. We know very well where our markets are - England, Europe, and northern Europe – but we have to evaluate these markets and explore emerging markets. Today, the European Union is expanding; from 10 members it has gone to 15. People who live in European Union member countries have significant disposable income. These people now travel and they do not travel to the next village, the next town, not even to the next country - they travel across the world.
I was with my wife in Bali a few years ago and we were sitting in a restaurant. I heard two people at the next table talking to each other in Greek. I asked them if they were from Melbourne. They told me that they were not from Melbourne. They had flown into Bali from Salonika. Now, if people can travel from one side of the world to the other to spend their dollar, it is very important for us to promote our Territory to overseas markets even further out from the existing markets and try to attract more tourists.
New Territory tourism products are appearing all the time with an increasing number of indigenous communities looking to provide quality cultural experiences for our visitors and securing a prosperous future for themselves and their children. My Department of Business, Economic and Regional Development works closely with officers in Tourism NT to ensure that these businesses are provided with the necessary support and guidance to maximise their success. DBERD has a dedicated team of officers across the regions providing valuable advice on the ground to many new and existing tourism ventures. This includes access to business skill training, grants funding, and business development programs.
DBERD’s Indigenous Business and Industry Services program, known as IBIS, plays a hands-on role in assisting indigenous tourism businesses. IBIS works with business operators to help identify opportunities for jobs and businesses, and provides ongoing support for indigenous people who take up business opportunities. IBIS also manages the very successful Indigenous Business Development Grant program. In the last financial year, almost $100 000 of funding was provided directly to indigenous tourism and related business through this program.
Cultural tourism and a cultural experience is something that tourists, if they come from developed countries, want. When I travel away most of the questions I get are about indigenous people and indigenous culture. The last time Turkish Prime Minister’s wife flew to Australia she had a stopover in Darwin. In the four hours they stayed in Darwin to refuel and service the plane, she was constantly asking about indigenous Australia, about the culture of indigenous people and about their paintings. This is not something that our neighbours know; it is well known all over the world as one of the most significant attractions: the traditional dances, the traditional painting, the traditional lifestyle, the bush tucker. All these are very appealing to tourists, whether they come from America or the Netherlands or from Scandinavian countries, or even from Asia. Cultural tourism and experiencing something different, not only the hotel and the resort, is very important. We should exploit it, and we can exploit it successfully.
We have examples of cultural tourism. Biliru Tours and Cultural Experiences was successful in receiving a grant that enabled them to purchase a second-hand tour bus, which made it possible for Biliru Tours to expand the range of experiences on offer to now include bushwalking and bird spotting. That is exactly what the tourists want.
Another example is the Kakadu Culture Camp, which received funding for the setting up of a camp kitchen at the Muirella Park campground and adjacent safari camp. The directors of Kakadu Culture Camp, brother and sister, Fred and Jennifer Hunter, are both experienced rangers and will be operating night wildlife cruises in association with the accommodation ventures.
In addition to this initiative by small business operators, there is increasing private sector investment in major regional tourism infrastructure projects. Such examples include the Dugong Beach Resort at Groote Eylandt, Gilligan’s Backpackers in Alice Springs, the Mandorah Resort and the All Suites Serviced Apartments in Alice Springs.
As the minister noted in his statement, Territory tourism is very positive. It is driving economic development in the regions and providing a solid foundation for increased investment and new business development across a range of industries, as well as providing real jobs for Territorians.
Tourism is an emerging industry in the region and, of course, with the advent of budget airlines like Tiger and Jetstar, it becomes more attractive and cheaper to fly from anywhere in the world to Australia. With the $49 one-way fare from Darwin to Singapore, which was advertised in Singapore while I was there, it becomes very attractive for backpackers who have a limited budget, but who want a totally different cultural tourism experience. It makes it easier to land in Singapore from Europe on very cheap flights - because Singapore is serviced by many budget airlines - and hop on to either Tiger Airlines or Jetstar and come to Darwin and then experience the real Territory.
Madam Speaker, I am looking forward to the positive outcomes of any initiative of Tourism NT and the tourism industry because every single dollar we spend on advertising has a multiplier factor that brings hundreds of dollars to the Territory. As I said before, one way to supply jobs and business development in regional areas of the Territory, in addition to mining and the pastoral industry, is tourism. Tourism is a very important. We welcome tourists in the Territory, but we have to make their stay here an experience that they will take back with them so that they will become real ambassadors for the Territory.
I welcome the minister’s statement. I wholeheartedly endorse it and strongly support him in Tourism Industry and Priorities for Moving Forward.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Madam Speaker, today I respond to the Minister for Tourism’s statement, delivered during the October sittings. I did not get an opportunity at that time to respond as I was in Ceduna with my family, spending some precious time with my brother.
I thank the Leader of the Opposition for responding, not only to this statement, but to all the others for which I would normally have responsibility at that time. I very much appreciate her support. It just goes to show we can take on any portfolio responsibility when we need to.
I have read the transcripts of the minister’s statement and the responses so far. I have listened this morning as well. It makes interesting reading, with each speaker highlighting positive tourism activities in their electorates, which is good.
Tourism, by and large, is very a friendly, people-friendly and people-intensive industry, with a huge diversity of tourism products and experiences. There is something for everyone. Tourism is also the single biggest employer in regional Northern Territory and without a doubt plays a vital part in the economy of the whole of the Territory.
Each of my last three sentences could have been taken from any statement on tourism from any speaker inside or outside this Assembly for at least the past 17 years that I have lived in the Territory. We all know that and we all accept those facts.
We also know that, back around 1990, while the population numbers were not as high as they are today, travel for tourists and locals through the major regional centres in the Territory was easier. For example, in my own electorate of Katherine, my mother flew into Katherine Airport in 1990 on an Ansett passenger service which ran daily from Darwin through to Alice Springs. In Katherine, there was the choice of passenger bus travel with Pioneer, Greyhound and McCafferty’s. When I was chairman of the Katherine Region Tourist Association, I could fly to Darwin on a small aircraft in the morning and return to Katherine that evening and arriving home before 8.30 pm. It made business easier to attend to for regional people.
The difference today with our so-called ‘in our booming economy’ is that there is no passenger airline service for regional towns like Katherine and Tennant Creek, and one bus company serving both the towns. Darwin and Alice Springs have significantly reduced airline capacity which makes the challenge to encourage increased tourism numbers even more difficult.
Over recent months, there has been plenty of concern expressed that Qantas may even pull out of the Territory. Heaven forbid that they do, because the Territory, with the addition of the convention centre coming on and, hopefully, encouraging major conventions and events to the Territory, will certainly need the services of Qantas to remain. Jetstar provides a good service for the budget traveller, but not everyone wishes to travel budget. There are many passengers who are quite happy to pay for the extra airline comfort of Qantas business class. I hope that government, and especially the Minister for Tourism, is in there batting persistently and consistently to ensure that Qantas retains their service to Alice Springs and Darwin.
Many business travellers have expressed their bitter disappointment that Qantas no longer has a red eye flight to Melbourne and that budget airline travel is the only option for this direct route. This disadvantages business for Territorians. You need a clear mind to make sound business decisions, and I can hardly call boarding a flight in the middle of the night in Darwin on a budget airline, arriving at Melbourne, say, around dawn, having the choice of either booking into accommodation right away and paying for a full night’s stay when you have only just arrived, or waiting somewhere in a coffee shop trying to clear your mind before you begin your business transactions. Not altogether the ideal situation, is it? I trust that the minister is in there constantly talking with Qantas about what Territorians need to support them in their business connections and, of course, that involves the tourism industry.
While business people prefer to travel in comfort to go about their affairs, many travellers are encouraged to visit a country if there is budget airline travel offering and, in this area, Tiger Airways has certainly been a breath of fresh air with their new services to Darwin. Tiger is very welcome because it offers budget airfares between Singapore and Darwin. That is a great enticement for travellers to not only begin their journey through Australia via Darwin, but to also spend time in the Northern Territory before continuing on with their travels. Darwin’s proximity to Singapore makes it very attractive for the budget traveller coming into Australia, and likewise for Territorians to also have the opportunity to enjoy a trip to Singapore. With the media focusing attention on Tiger Airlines, highlights to the travelling public that Darwin departures offer the cheapest flights to Singapore. I hope that travellers use this opportunity and support the intention of Tiger Airways’ commitment to the Northern Territory. I hope the minister is also in their batting for Darwin to be the hub for any future domestic travel that Tiger Airways may commit to.
Looking at a little slower and more leisurely pace of travel, Madam Speaker: The Ghan! The Ghan now provides some rail travel through the centre of the Territory, but it is not conducive for business people to utilise because of its schedule and the time it takes to travel from one end of the Territory to other. Hopefully, I will not be too long in the tooth, so to speak, before I can again have a relaxing ride in The Ghan as a holidaymaker. It was a great experience, but only if you have the time to enjoy it.
The statement about how wonderful tourism is really the same, as I have said, and, hopefully, will always remain the same. However, the challenge is how to deal with the changes, both globally and locally, that have occurred and will continue to evolve as time goes by. There is no doubt that our climate and our lifestyle - and there goes that famous catch word again - lifestyle - are the most attractive features for the majority of tourists wanting to come to the Territory. That has been mainly in the regional areas with grey nomads, as my age group is so loving referred to.
The caravan tourism industry operators have had a significant increase over the past 15 years and, thankfully, I can say that many operators have stepped up to the benchmark and have improved their accommodation facilities to the highest standards through accreditation. The accreditation process was important to ensure that the standard of caravan parks in the Territory was equivalent to those interstate to encourage even more tourist to come here.
Caravan designs have certainly changed over the years as well, with most modern vans being fully self-contained with showers and chemical toilets. This has resulted in another sea change for caravan park operators, with many travellers preferring not to stay in designated caravan parks and opting to spend the night along the road somewhere, either at a roadside stop or out in the bush. Unfortunately, there were many instances of chemical toilets being emptied out into the bush and, in some instances, the bushland around some of these roadside stops was being used as a toilet. So much for going for a nature walk. Of course, drastic measures had to be taken with some roadside stops made inaccessible to the caravaners. The preservation of the environment around these areas was becoming a serious problem and, as a result, there have been several dumpsters put in, in different locations across the Territory. However, there are still some travellers who do not utilise them correctly.
With that challenge over, the government now has another one; that is, with the introduction of speed restrictions on the open highways more travellers are going to be fatigued and will need to stop more often on their journey. What are you going to do now to provide more rest areas? Are you going to have tables, chairs, toilets and water at these stops? Where are you going to locate them, and at what distance from each one? How are you going to maintain the rubbish removal at these rest areas? These are all serious questions many people have been asking for some time. It does take a lot to maintain because of the distances that the people who would be required to attend to those rest areas have to travel to get to them. I hope the minister will answer those questions in his reply. I have no doubt that the issue of rest bays has been raised many times, and highly likely when you where Tourism Minister before.
Some previous speakers have mentioned the importance of indigenous tourism to the Territory. Many of our tourists are eager to experience authentic indigenous culture, and only too willing to travel to do so. I am pleased to see that Tourism NT has two programs - What is Tourism? and Stepping Stones - to assist indigenous communities in assessing their viability for any tourism venture. It takes strong and committed leadership to ensure the success of indigenous tourism ventures which, I might add, is no different to running any business anywhere. However, I believe that in some indigenous communities, while the intension and the motivation is there and certainly the capability, it does not matter how good the venture is, it will fall in a hole if there is no ongoing dedication and commitment.
I will use the example of Travel North in Katherine, which ran a very popular corroboree at Springvale for years that attracted tourists from all around the world. It eventually had to stop because of lack of dancers. Well-known indigenous actor and artist, Tommy Lee, also worked his heart out to establish a corroboree more centralised in Katherine, which only lasted a couple of years because he could not rely on constancy of attendance from dancers. I have no doubt that similar stories can be told right throughout the Territory.
A real success story for indigenous tourism, though, has been Manyallaluk which is situated in the Katherine Region Tourist Association area, but is also in the member for Arnhem’s electorate. Manyallaluk received three Brolga Awards for Tourism Excellence in the 1990s, and went onto win the national title three times, which automatically put them in the national Hall of Fame.
Another great and well-deserved success story has been the recognition of Anangu Tours based in Central Australia, which has also been recognised nationally for its outstanding tourism operation. Only just this week, Anangu Tours also received another award for best NT tour operator. I will read what was printed in the Northern Territory News yesterday which says that they received a national tourism award:
I do not consider Anangu Tours a ‘relatively unknown’, but it is also pleasing to see that they have other tours that have been recognised as being worthy to be named the best NT tour operator, and good on them.
There is plenty of opportunity for more indigenous tourism to join Anangu Tours and the likes of Manyallaluk, but it is the commitment that is going to make the difference. The Minister for Arts and Museums last week delivered a statement which included the Territory’s submission to the development of a national framework for indigenous art and craft, and was one of 72 submissions. This shows how much interest there is in indigenous art nationally. This national framework will ensure the continued growth and development of indigenous art and craft for which the Northern Territory already holds a significant place. International tourists are very much attracted to indigenous art, so the potential is there. The potential for the future is very promising.
We also have great potential to increase our marketing in the areas that no other state or territory in Australia has the opportunity to do. This is where we need to stand out as different from the rest. I am fully supportive of croc safaris in the Territory, and I know that my colleagues also support this view. The economic benefit to remote communities to be able to run crocodile safaris is huge. It seems quite ridiculous to me that those communities which are willing to be skilled for this are not given the opportunity to run a very lucrative business. I do not believe for a moment that every man and his dog should be allowed to run croc safaris. The people who elect to be involved would have to be highly skilled and the operations heavily regulated. But it can and should be allowed to happen. Imagine the benefit to those communities which were willing to participate. Many international visitors would be very willing to pay the high sums of money to be part of a croc safari hunt.
I wrote to the federal minister last year stating my support for the safaris and was and still am quite willing to have a bipartisan effort to support government in a further push to the federal minister to allow croc safari hunting in the Northern Territory.
Another great attraction for the Territory, and one that would put us leaps ahead of other states and territories and in the international market is - heaven forbid – to stage a Cannonball Run. I know government ministers have had to toe the line behind the Chief Minister’s comments that there is no way there will be a Cannonball Run, but, as per usual, no talking and no research into how international Cannonball Runs are staged. And they have taken place. The door is shut by the Chief Minister and I guess …
A member: Four died.
Mrs MILLER: … she feels she would look pretty stupid if she backed down on that one.
There is no doubting that the tragedy of the loss of four lives in the initial Cannonball Run has strengthened the Chief Minister’s resolve. There is no question that it was a dreadful and a tragic accident. We may as well pack everything up and stay at home, though, if we say no to everything that causes an accident. I encourage government to have a look at the regulations of international Cannonball Runs and keep an open mind.
I compare this with the minister for Police, who late last year had a bruising experience with paintball while he was in South Australia. He is not keen on allowing paintball in the Territory because he got a few bruises, but there are hundreds of others out there who would love to have this sport introduced here. We are way behind the other states on this one. We are a tough lot up here and we would like to make our own decisions about how we are challenged. I have to say I do not personally have any desire to play the game myself, not being very fond of guns at the best of times, but I know many people who are very keen, so let us give them the opportunity. I digress a little, but that could be included as part of our tourism attraction.
For as long as I can remember, we have talked about improving visitor numbers in the shoulder season or the green season, whatever people want to call it. While it is important to market this time of the year as any other time, we must remember that the experiences of the past few years during this time of natural disasters through flooding and the threat of cyclones and cyclone damage is also a deterrent to many people. Many people have spoken to me over the years of feeling threatened by those two factors and it is a pretty important aspect to consider. For me, the Wet Season is fabulous, but it is not a great attraction for the majority of people down south who have found a fantastic beach where they can swim without threat of nasty jelly fish stings and being constantly sweaty.
Not only that, they are unable to access many of the fantastic park attractions because of Wet Season closures. Very clever marketing is the order of the day, and I will wait with bated breath, minister, and great anticipation, as I see in your statement that extending the shoulder season is a key priority for you. It is a noble goal, but do not forget our traditional Dry Season numbers are down in regional Northern Territory, and marketing dollars need to be spent on regional areas. Detractors to the development of business in regional areas include all-weather access and poor quality roads. I am sure that that is a debate for another time.
There is also plenty of opportunity to develop four-wheel drive tracks, station stays, heritage tourism, agricultural and horticultural tourism, amongst others throughout the Territory, and indigenous tourism is still far from reaching its potential. Again, access is a problem.
Our unique natural resources are by far the most appealing tourist attractions. While I could talk for lengthy periods about our icons, I would like to talk a little now of a different and unique natural resource that no amount of money could pay for the marketing of the Territory, and that was late last year with the recent national fame of Jessica Mauboy in Australian Idol. I am unashamedly a fan and my telephone account will obviously attest to that. I want to say that Jessica …
Mr HENDERSON: Madam Speaker, I move an extension of time for the member for Katherine - whose support of Jessica Mauboy is absolutely laudable - to allow the member to conclude her remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mrs MILLER: Thank you, Leader of Government Business. As I said, Madam Speaker, I am unashamedly a fan of Jessica Mauboy. Jessica has done more to promote the Territory with her wonderful skills and talents as a singer on Australian Idol than people would possibly realise. Her amazing personality and poise for such a young lady is a credit to her and her family. I thank her for being such a great ambassador for the Northern Territory.
I want to finish off by talking about the major impediments to tourism in our Territory, one that is talked about constantly and remains, unfortunately, a major problem, where it is so obvious, especially in our regional towns; that is, antisocial behaviour. Whether we want to accept it or not, it is a huge impediment to our industry, yet the government constantly pussyfoots around the problem and tries to deflect from it time and time again. Nowhere in the minister’s statement did he refer to how detrimental drunken behaviour, fighting, yelling and spitting in our streets is for tourism.
When the fifth minister for Tourism in the Labor government was Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services in 2004, he had no problem criticising my concerns about the problems Katherine was having and, since that time, it has been highlighted in other regional towns. His response at that time was that government’s $75m Building our Police Force was increasing the number of police in Katherine and that I was grandstanding. Well, guess what, minister? You were the one grandstanding then and you have not delivered. Katherine is still suffering at the hands of drunken, antisocial behaviour - you did not fix it at all. All the marketing dollars that are so willingly being spent promoting tourism – and need to be spent on promoting it –need a significant helping hand in tidying up the town, and we really do have to forget the softly, softly approach. The residents of Katherine, and I have no doubt, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs, are sick and tired of hearing the same old story.
Madam Speaker, generally I approve of everything that is in the minister’s tourism statement. Tourism is, as I said at the beginning of this statement, a pretty nice portfolio to have. Everybody is trying their best to make visitors to the Territory feel as welcome as possible. We just need to try a bit harder. I support the minister’s statement.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Madam Speaker, I support the minister’s statement on tourism, Tourism Moving Forward. First of all, I would like to thank the member for Katherine for her overwhelming positive remarks about tourism within the Northern Territory. I believe every member in this House realises the importance of tourism to the general economy. That is why it was very disappointing, at the last sittings, to listen to the Leader of the Opposition’s comments about tourism. Over her time as shadow minister for tourism - and I will go back to the last term between 2001and 2005 - we witnessed her constant negative attacks and some of her famous media releases and stunts in criticising the Northern Territory’s approach to tourism.
We have seen, with the Chief Minister, and now with the new Tourism Minister, that this government takes tourism very seriously. If you read through the statement, some of the initiatives that we are currently conducting and have enforced of putting money where our mouths are, show that we value tourism. It is unfortunate that the Leader of the Opposition takes a negative view on our efforts. It just goes to show me that, when she has an opportunity to contribute positively to a statement, through members of the opposition such as the member for Katherine, she has the inability to show a plan.
Let us face it, this government supports tourism because we support the famous lifestyle that we take for granted in the Northern Territory. We need to fight for that lifestyle; that is, the fishing, the swimming in national parks, visiting Aboriginal communities, sights and participating in our famous diversity of culture. The Leader of the Opposition’s past track record shows that she talks down our economy and our lifestyle; that we are under threat. I would say that the majority of CLP members and the Independents understand that the tourism benefits to our economy, not only in terms of purely monetary, but our lifestyle, is vitally important to the future of all Territorians.
The one point the member for Katherine picked up on is Jessica Mauboy. It is appreciated by Jessica’s family. I know, because I have spoken to them, during the time she was running for Australian Idol, about the support that this government, particularly the Chief Minister, gave her, both publicly, privately and within this House. It was unfortunate that the Leader of the Opposition put the view that we were politically grandstanding, and that it was a negative thing that the Chief Minister was doing.
In reality, like the member for Katherine has stated, Jessica Mauboy did a fantastic job of promoting the Territory to the whole of Australia. Her photo in the paper a couple of days ago is a classic example of how she has been able to galvanise people’s opinions, not only in the Northern Territory but throughout Australia. Knowing her family, and her parents, they will be great advocates and ambassadors for the Territory in tourism.
There are a number of issues I enjoy talking about regarding tourism. As a first time member, I took the opportunity to travel to Cairns to look at the Esplanade in Cairns when it was recently redeveloped, the access to the Great Barrier Reef, and the natural resources and sights around Cairns. What I realised was that the Queensland government had been running a campaign in tropical northern Queensland similar to what we are doing now with the Tourism Minister; that is, trying to lift the shoulder of what people consider is a great time to visit the north of Queensland. They have been doing it for 10 to 15 years.
It took us, as a government, to come on board to realise this. I visited and spoke to tourism industry leaders there, tourism members, the general public such as shop owners, hotel owners and managers. I came back and spoke to caucus in general. At the time, the Chief Minister was the Tourism Minister and we had some great conversations about the idea of selling the Territory as the Queensland government does in north Queensland. I believe we can do this. The reality is that it is a great time to visit the Northern Territory; to see the Territory in the Wet Season. The reality is that I enjoy thunderstorms such as we had last night in Millner. We can enjoy that through our national parks and our general green areas around Darwin, Kakadu, Litchfield, etcetera.
While I congratulate the member for Katherine’s positive contribution - and I know she has a background in the tourism industry - I am very disappointed with the Leader of the Opposition’s negative attitude towards our plan.
We have a plan for tourism, in getting people to visit, not only from overseas but from interstate. The former Tourism Minister, the Chief Minister, and the current Minister for Tourism fully understand that one of our major industries is tourism, and we need to support this. I am disappointed with the Leader of the Opposition talking down our economy and our lifestyle because, at the end of the day, any detrimental effect to our economy and lifestyle has a negative effect on our families - on family values that we hold dear to our hearts. That is employment for both mother and father and, of course, of the children of generations to come in the Territory. I am most disappointed with this constant attack on our family values by the Leader of the Opposition.
In my electorate, there are a number of tourism initiatives, one of which is the Darwin Airport. Many people may be aware that the Darwin Airport comes within my electorate boundaries. As the local member over the last few years, I have had many dealings with the management of the Darwin Airport and the developers in the Darwin Airport area, one of whom is famously known as ‘Foxy’ Robinson who runs the Darwin Airport Resort. This is located in my electorate. It is my understanding that this has been a fabulous success. It has enjoyed a strong occupancy rate of about 90% since it opened. That is fantastic. I remember speaking to ‘Foxy’ during the planning, as the Chairperson of the Rapid Creek Catchment Committee and dealing with the environmental effects on Rapid Creek, which is the only freshwater source in the Darwin region that continually runs all year round. We walked through with committee members and members of Landcare, Greening Australia, the local Larrakia people, the Darwin Management Group and ‘Foxy’.
He talked about his plan, which was that in other resorts based near airports they try to do a two-in-one day occupancy. If someone comes in they might have an eight- or 10-hour stopover, Instead of hanging around the airport, they will book into the local hotel, have a shower and a sleep, and catch their plane out. The hotel then turns over the room and puts somebody else in. That was his general plan and he was hoping for occupancies for between 60% and 80%. I am sure 90% is beyond his wildest dreams. I know he and his partners have been very happy with the outcome. From the flow-on of this tourism effect, the Darwin Airport Resort has also shown that they have been good corporate citizens in terms of the environmental awareness of the issues surrounding Rapid Creek and the ecosystem there. They respected the 75 m corridor along Rapid Creek and I commend them for that.
Ian Skewes from the Darwin Airport Management Group, whom I know a number of ministers have had to deal with in the development at Bunnings, has been very aware of the need to be a good corporate citizen. He has often said to me that the work the government is doing has had a positive effective on promoting passengers coming through the Darwin Airport.
I will touch on that because, since 2000-01, there has been a number of situations which have affected our tourism visitors. This government is well aware of that, and I know the Tourism Minister is well aware of that. I think, deep down, the opposition and Independents are well aware of that. It would be, however, more beneficial to the general overall picture if the Leader of the Opposition was more positive about the future of our economy based on tourism numbers. The reality is, I know, that the Opposition Leader is in an adversarial relationship with the government, but she needs to realise where to pick her fights.
What we have been able to achieve - and I will go through some of the numbers - has had fantastic results. As the Minister for Tourism has outlined in his ministerial statement, one of the government’s key priorities is to extend the shoulder season which provides the greatest opportunity for growth. I fully support that. It is a common story from all businesses. In the past, governments have focused - and even industries and locals - on talking up the Dry Season, which is a magnificent time to visit Darwin, Alice Springs and the wider Territory. However, we also need locals, our small business owners and big business owners, and governments and oppositions to promote the fact that there is a wonderful time to also visit the Territory; during the Wet Season. I thank the minister for his efforts in trying to expand the shoulder season. I understand that there are some fabulous statistics within the statement which showed that this is starting to work.
The Tropical Summer marketing campaign launched by the Minister for Tourism last November is aimed at building awareness of travel experiences on offer during the traditional low season and increasing visitations over the summer months. The minister has touched on those increased visitations, focusing on attractions of the Top End including Litchfield and Kakadu which are bursting with wildlife, or travel to Katherine to explore the sandstone country. Litchfield and Kakadu are magnificent sites to visit any time of the year with great fishing areas, great swimming holes, and great ecologies to have a look at. I sincerely encourage all visitors interstate and overseas to visit during these times of the year.
Traditionally, the tropical summer or Green Season, as some call it, has been perceived as the time to avoid the Top End. As long-time, born and bred Territorians, we often do say to visitors: ‘You should wait until the Dry Season’, but what we need to realise is that there are great places to visit during the Wet Season. We need to promote it as a place to come. We need to change the language that we use.
This period presents a viable alternative to the peak season as there are many great accommodation and travel deals on offer. The tropical summer is a great time of year to invite friends and family to visit us and experience another aspect of the Territory season. This time of year you can witness some fantastic lightning storms, magnificently flowing waterfalls, rejuvenated floodplains, smell the lush green tropical gardens, and listen to the sound of monsoon rains. I know there is not a greater feeling in the Territory than when, in the monsoon, it is raining and you are about to go to bed and you open up your windows and the full breeze is flowing through …
Mr Henderson: Yes, last night was a doozie.
Mr BONSON: Last night was an absolute ripper, as the Tourism Minister said. It is one of the fantastic times to visit the NT.
The domestic campaign commenced in November and runs through to March. The legendary Ghan is an example of a year-round tourism product delivering visitors to the Territory during our Wet Season and extending our shoulder season. It has been an outstanding success for the Territory since its commencement. To date, over 203 000 have been carried by The Ghan. Although The Ghan suffered a setback from its derailment in mid-December at Ban Ban Springs, rail services are continuing, although impacted somewhat, with an estimated 10 carriages out of action until mid-year.
Cruise ship visits are an important sector of the tourism market, with the majority of visits arriving during our Wet Season. This cruise season, we expect 46 cruise visits, which is a slight increase on last year. The value of this sector to the Territory economy cannot be underestimated. Cruise shipping is estimated to have generated approximately $12.3m of expenditure in 2005-06 for the Territory, including $7.5m in direct expenditure. The source is the Economic Impact of the Cruise Shipping Industry in Australia 2005 by Cruise Down Under and the federal government. I will touch on statistics and sources in a minute.
Tourism as a major industry in the Territory is one of the largest employment sectors and key revenue earners for the economy. We have seen good sustained visitor growth to the Territory. In fact, as the minister has previously mentioned, the Territory is performing ahead of the rest of the country.
International holiday visitors increased by 5.7%, representing an extra 17 000 visitors for the year ending September 2006, compared with September 2005. The source of this is the International Visitor Survey. For the same period, interstate holiday visitors increased by 15.8%, representing an extra 23 200 visitors, which is an amazing figure. For the same period, the international backpacker sector - which had been in decline for a number of years, not just here in the Territory but throughout Australia and, arguably, throughout the world - increased by 12.8%, which is great news for the Territory.
I have done a bit of research in preparing for my contribution. I went on to the Tourism NT site, which contains commentary on the need for research and how, through the research that we, as government, are conducting, we will be able to develop a plan forward. Some issues have come out in plans like the NT Backpacker Development Plan, released in May 2006, which provided a framework for the industry to work cooperatively to position the NT as a competitive backpacker destination and identified opportunities to ensure the continued growth of the sector. Feedback on the plan has been favourable by industry partners – this is in the executive summary – the Tourism NT Advisory Board and the Backpacker Tourism Advisory Panel, a national subcommittee of the Australian Tourism Export Council. It goes on to give a brief summary of key outcomes and achievements to date.
It deals with the state of the market, and I will not go through the figures in toto. However, if you have a look at page 1 of the executive summary, it says that the International Visitor Survey reported international backpacker numbers to the NT improved 11.3% for the year ending June 2006 compared with the year ending 2005; market share improved by 1.2% to 23.4%; and backpacker nights in the NT improved by 10% for the same period. Market share remained steady at 3.5%. The same trend has continued with the most recent figures reported by the IVS, suggesting international backpacker numbers and nights improved by 12.8% and 21.2% respectively for the year ending September 2006 compared with the year ending 2005, with market share improving from 22.2% to 23.5% for numbers, and from 3.5% to 3.6% per night. This is in the Northern Territory. While still not back to the levels experienced in the peak period around 2000 and 2001, we have started to see an improvement in international backpacker activity. You just have to walk around the Territory, particularly Darwin, and see the amount of construction of serviced apartments.
I did intend to talk on issues to do with indigenous business in terms of tourism, and I refer people to some sites and where they can confirm it for them themselves: the DBERD Internet site to do with indigenous tourism and industry surveys. I encourage all indigenous people to participate in creating small business opportunities through tourism. Also, if you go to the Commonwealth site, which is Indigenous Business Australia, it talks about enterprises there.
Madam Speaker, I thank the Tourism Minister for his contribution to this House, the economy, to our great lifestyle, to family values that we uphold. I look forward to further updates into the future.
Debate suspended.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of visitors who are here as part of the public tour program. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I would like to place on the record a response to the Minister for Tourism’s statement made last year. I might say that sometimes these statements go on a bit too long – it is nearly four months since this statement originally was made to parliament. We need to make an effort to get these statements completed within the life of each sittings. Be that as it may, it is an important statement by the government.
I would like to concentrate on matters in relation to local tourism. I have spoken at other times about what I think is a niche part of our tourism market. Many speakers talk about the big picture such as The Ghan, overseas visitors, interstate visitors and the bigger picture generally. However, within the Litchfield Shire and the rural area, there is a lot to be advertised about many tourist opportunities in our area.
The Litchfield Shire and rural area are well endowed with natural beauty and features. We may not have the mountains of some other places in Australia, but we have the wetlands such as the Knuckey Lagoon wetlands. It is amazing how many people drive past Knuckey Lagoon and do not realise what a beautiful area it is. It is the headwaters, I think, of Mickett Creek which comes out near the barracks, feeds around the back of the 11 Mile and heads out to sea through there.
People also do not realise you can catch a barramundi on Thorak Road culverts where the water, when it is overflowing from Knuckey Lagoon, heads out towards the lagoons near the barracks. It is a favourite place for geese. This year, you will literally see thousands and thousands of geese arriving at Knuckey Lagoon as the water starts to recede. People who live around that lagoon tell you how lucky they are when the sun is setting over Darwin and all the geese fly over that area. It is right next to Darwin and that is why I believe it is just one of those great places that we should treasure. I suppose there is always the danger of telling people how wonderful it is, and they overcrowd it, but I do not think that is going to be the case. Knuckey Lagoon is a really wonderful area.
If you go further, you have the Howard Springs Reserve which, although it is a nature reserve, was set up originally as a reservoir for Darwin and then it became a recreation area. Much has been said about Howard Springs Reserve, but if anyone looked at the visitor figures over the last three years, they will notice they coincided with the closure of the Howard Springs for swimming. I believe it is important that the government does not drop the ball on making sure that the park stays open for swimming because it is certainly a major reason why people go to that park. The figures showed that, when it is not open, the numbers seem to drop off. I know the management plan is being looked at, at the moment. I must admit, the government has done a great job in getting that management plan out to the community, advertising at the local supermarket and putting advertisements in the paper and asking for people to comment.
Girraween Lagoon is one of the biggest lagoons in the rural area and is often used by people for boating. It is an all-year-round lagoon and is very popular with local people. The facts are that as the subdivisions start to encroach closer and closer on this area, more effort will be required to ensure the lagoon is not polluted from that sort of development. It is certainly a great jewel in the crown of the wetlands in the rural area. I have mentioned before, it was the place where some of Crocodile Dundee was filmed.
McMinns Lagoon is another great lagoon, and Benjamin Lagoon. These are all lagoons around the rural area which local people certainly enjoy. McMinns Lagoon is a very popular place for birdwatchers, people having weddings or anniversaries; there are nice barbecue facilities there. It is a wonderful place. It does not dry out and you can see all sorts of wildlife. Places like McMinns Lagoon are looked after by a dedicated group of volunteers who regularly have meetings and do work around the park.
There are some of our other great beauty spots: the Wildlife Park, Berry Springs Nature Park, and the beauty of the Darwin Harbour. I believe we forget that the harbour is a beautiful place. If you hear me whinge every now and then about digging up the centre of the harbour, it is because I believe the harbour, as a unit, needs to be protected to keep that beauty. Unfortunately, when you fly over it, you can see that some of the inappropriate development which has now occurred which tends to have spoiled that.
Mr Henderson: Where?
Mr WOOD: Well, in the form of gravel pits, which could have been put anywhere, I am afraid. I would like the government to rethink whether that land should be industrial, or whether we should have a levy on the amount of gravel that is pulled out of, and perhaps use that levy to rehabilitate the centre of the harbour. I believe the harbour is a world-class attraction.
We have other areas in the rural area such as the Windows on the Wetlands, sometimes called ‘windows on the weedlands’, because you do see quite a bit of the old mimosa from up on top of the hill there. As well as that, you have the jumping crocodiles. There are three of those businesses operating from there and they certainly encourage people to come out to that area.
One of the areas I believe we probably could do more in developing for tourism is the new park called the Shoal Bay Coastal Reserve. That, in combination with the Howard Springs Hunting Reserve and the Tree Point Conservation Area, could all become part of a move to encourage tourists to enjoy those areas. What will happen to Shoal Bay or the area to the north, I do not know. However, I believe the government has to look at putting in policies that will protect Shoal Bay or the Murrumujuk beaches. If there is not some form of control, it is likely that there will be overuse of those areas.
When we are talking about tourism - and the member for Katherine might have mentioned about helping some of these tourism operators with infrastructure - there are two fishing businesses in the rural area; one at the Shoal Bay Boat Hire and the other at Leeders Creek. Leeders Creek is accessible by road but, at times, the road does get cut up. However, it does not have power, even though power goes to Gunn Point. If we were to make Leeders Creek a more popular place for people to stay, I ask the government to at least consider either subsidising or setting up a plan where the owners of Leeders Creek could get power from what was the old Gunn Point Prison Farm - that is a town supply to there. That would certainly encourage that particular business to expand.
Shoal Bay Boat Hire has been an issue I have raised here before. It is very popular with people. Tourists can hire a boat and go fishing for the day to catch that lure of the Territory, the barramundi. However, the lure of the Territory, unfortunately, is at a place that does not have town power. I realise that is a fair way to get power out there, but the government should at least look at the possibilities of bringing power from or near the Defence Force facilities. Somewhere, sometime, the government has to consider building or gazetting a road into that area. The land that Shoal Bay Boat Hire is on, and the other block of land owned by Billy Boustead where he has his fish farm, was sold without any, you might say, formal land connection. The intention was to go in there by boat and go out by boat.
However, the reality is many people like to use the Shoal Bay Boat Hire. Again, to encourage local industry and to help with the tourism industry, the government has to say that it might have been all right 20 years ago. The reality is that many people go out there and we do not have a gazetted road. No one is willing to do up the road because it is neither council’s nor government’s. They just sit there and nothing happens. I encourage the government to look at it. If you are looking at putting a regional waste facility on what they call the Howard Peninsula, perhaps you should be building that road to where you think that might go, and continue that road through to the Shoal Bay Boat Hire area.
I have mentioned before that history is very important, and the government is now moving in the right direction. I said years ago that we were losing one of our great opportunities to encourage tourism; that is, by developing our World War II history. The classic example is that, in 1988, I think it was, when the Sattler Airstrip was closed down and, not long after, Power and Water decided to put the main pipeline from Darwin River Dam smack through the middle of a World War II airstrip. That is why Sattler is nowhere near as good as it should have been. When I came to the Territory, it was marked out as an emergency strip for the Darwin Airstrip. It was controlled by the RAAF at that time. When they decided to close it down, instead of it being maintained as a World War II airstrip, it is was, unfortunately, used for the major pipeline and a weighbridge site. It is not that far back. Members will remember when we had the debate about the future of Strauss Airstrip. Strauss Airstrip, only about three years ago, was designated as the route for the duplication of the Stuart Highway. Fortunately, after a lot of debate and effort, the government, together with the federal government, moved that the highway be duplicated on the other side away from Strauss Airstrip, and now we have wonderful interpretative signs and people stop there.
When you look at that new book that I spoke about in the adjournment debate the other night, called A Wartime Journey - Stuart Highway Heritage Guide, it discusses much of the World War II history that you can find if you travel from Alice Springs to Darwin. It is a fantastic book with two CDs and great photographs, great articles, great maps. It is a top book put out by Bob Alford in conjunction with the Tourism department. That is the sort of encouragement we need to help people come and enjoy what is unique in the Territory.
Our World War II history is something you will not get anywhere else. We have all these airstrips, the old railway line - we celebrated all those workers who worked on the railway line. There is a memorial near the Wishart Siding on the corner of the Arnhem and Stuart Highways. There used to be a locomotive there which has moved to Adelaide River Railway Station, but there is a memorial there to all the people who worked on the railway line during the war. We have a great amount of history and we should do our darnedest to preserve as much of it as possible.
I know there is talk about having a World War II museum in Darwin. Personally, even though there is some talk about having it here on the lawn or somewhere near here, I think it should go to East Point. That is where you have the gun emplacements and the museum, and you are looking across the harbour where the chain was put across to stop the submarines from coming through. The government should consider using some of the areas that are already well known as World War II sites for the museum.
The rural area is developing and the service industry is well served by tourism. There are quite a number of hotels and coffee shops; the service industry supports the tourism industry. There are a number of fishing outlets. There is one at Coolalinga, and one at the 11 Mile. Reidy’s Lures not only sells lures but manufactures them, and his block of land is next to Wishart Siding. The Didgeridoo Hut has become a bit of an institution now. It started off, literally, as a hut on the side of the highway and has now developed correctly, as it probably should have been in the first place, and has become a very popular place. It is also a great place for indigenous people to do paintings and other artwork and sell them.
Horticulture is still an important part. We have a number of orchid and cut flower farms in the rural area. People visit these areas because we have unique flowers. We have some wonderful orchid establishments. One area the government needs to look at is to ensure we release enough land, or have enough land available for caravan parks. I am not talking here so much about permanent caravan parks because that is an issue we need to look at. There was land near the Litchfield Shire Council set aside some years ago for caravan parks. I know a number of people - in fact, I know three people - who would like to purchase that land; the government has said no. Caravan parks are fairly difficult to site, yet here is a block of land which is close to the highway, away from residences, and the government seems to be a little reluctant to sell this land. If we have people saying that they would like to develop, the government should not be holding back that development. They should be putting that land up to the highest bidder.
Good quality tourist parks are essential and there is a need. As Darwin develops, some of the inner parks, as has happened to Sundowner, will be redeveloped into something the owners regard as more valuable than the caravan park. If we are going to encourage tourists then we need good quality tourist facilities.
I might say a little about our famous bicycle path along the railway line. I have been pushing this for I do not know how many years now – a long time. The member for Drysdale might pull me up if I am incorrect, but I believe the government has now made a promise to have it done in this term of office. I am stilling waiting for the letter which says that. It is not just about the locals, although it is very important to the locals. The development of a tourist park down the old railway line which could hook up to the bicycle path along the Arnhem Highway and go right up to the pub will be great for tourists. People are looking for that kind of tourist attraction; they want to get on a bike and experience the rural area along an adventure trail, if we call it that.
The old railway line has plenty of history. It goes through some beautiful areas and it has a lot of potential to help with tourism and to help locals who might like to ride their bikes to Coolalinga, or Palmerston, or Humpty Doo, safely off the main highway. The government should have a program to put a bicycle path in along the old railway line at least as far as the Arnhem Highway and, in time, take it out as far as Noonamah.
All those little things are part of what I call a local tourism economy. Many people can talk about the bigger picture, and I welcome that, but there are times when we forget that it is the local tourism that keeps the economy going. It is that little mix that helps people set up businesses in the area. The rural area is developing more and more and there are more opportunities for tourism to be encouraged in that area.
The member for Wanguri spoke some time ago, and I also have, about the possibility of using the Litchfield Shire area as part of the quick tour, the one-day tour. People who do not have much time can go out to look at the wetlands, see the history, have a nice meal and be back in the same day without having to go all the way out to Kakadu or even to Litchfield. There are many sites they can see without going further out. For anyone who does not believe me, visit Knuckey Lagoon in October at sunset and see the amount of wildlife there, which makes it a special place.
Madam Speaker, I thank the Minister for Tourism for the statement.
Mr HENDERSON (Tourism): Madam Speaker, I thank all members who contributed to this debate. As we all know, tourism is everyone’s business, and all of us have our own experiences as tourists in our own right. We all have our electorates to represent, the vast majority of which have tourism opportunities. Everyone would have people who work in tourism as their constituents. It is a significant economic driver for the Northern Territory which employs thousands of Territorians.
I will go through the contributions and answer some of the questions or issues that were raised. The Opposition Leader sought an assurance that this government will do whatever it can to ensure that Qantas remains in the Territory. That is absolutely imperative to our industry. When the announcement of the takeover bid by airline partners Australian was made, I immediately put a call in to Geoff Dixon, the CEO of Qantas, to clearly state that the Territory government did not want to see any dilution of Qantas scheduling to the Northern Territory, and Darwin and Alice Springs in particular. Mr Dixon assured me that under the proposed ownership, the two-brand strategy - that is Qantas and Jetstar - will be retained, existing management was to stay in place and, for the Qantas Group operations, it will be business as usual.
As Territorians we all have significant concerns about this takeover offer. It is disappointing that the federal government refused to allow a Senate inquiry to scrutinise the details of that offer, and to compel and require the proponents of the offer to front the Senate committee. However, I urge the federal government to look at the national interest argument before making a decision about whether this bid should go ahead. As far as the Territory government is concerned, we have sought reassurance from the CEO of Qantas, and that is the advice he provided to me.
The Opposition Leader talked about business travel to the Northern Territory being down 17%. Again, facts and figures; to try to pull one figure out of a whole heap of figures to show things are not as good as usual. My advice is that visitor numbers travelling on business, not just those going to conferences or conventions, are certainly up. A similar survey also showed that interstate business visitors were up 12% and visitor nights up 44%. You only have to talk to people in the hotel industry to know that business is certainly up and, of course, that is the reason why we are building the Darwin convention centre - to continue to grow that market.
The Opposition Leader pointed out that intrastate travel is down; that is, travelling within the Northern Territory. Again, there is no clear reason for this; however, it is likely to be a side effect of the new low-cost air services to Darwin. Many Territorians - and I have heard a number, 30 000 - took the opportunity to go interstate or overseas at Christmas time. Certainly, with the economy strong, people with money in their pockets in the Territory are choosing to take holidays outside of the Territory, and take advantage of those low-cost airlines, which is a win/win because we bring those carriers to the Territory as a result of the increased demand.
Regional tourism is very important. Many people spoke about regional tourism. Tourism NT proactively markets six priority destinations and their surrounding areas - Darwin, Katherine, Alice Springs, Barkly, Kakadu and Arnhem Land, and Uluru Kata-Tjuta. A $300 000 campaign for the Katherine region is planned for April/June this year. In the last sittings of parliament, I released the Barkly Regional Tourism Action Plan, and visited the regional tourism association on a visit to Tennant Creek with the member for Barkly just a couple of weeks ago. Certainly, the government, through Tourism NT, is focused on dispersing our tourists to the Territory through the region.
The Opposition Leader also made some comments about the Cannonball Run. I make it very clear that I support, and this government supports, that there will be no rerun of the Cannonball Run in the Northern Territory. I point out, in regard to responsibilities that we all have, that four people died the last time that event was run. Two of those people were overseas visitors from Japan. It was very disturbing to hear the totally insensitive and quite offensive comments that were made at the Opposition Leader’s rally that was organised to protest about the introduction of a speed limit on the Stuart Highway; that it did not matter because these people – ‘it was only one Jap’. I found that offensive, insensitive and just outrageous that the opposition would seek to align themselves with people with those views of wanting to reinstate the Cannonball Run. I also remind the Leader of the Opposition that two Territorians were killed as well. We believe there are better ways to grow tourism in the Northern Territory than to appeal to the types of people who were on the steps of Parliament House making those sorts of comments the other day.
Other members spoke in debate today. My colleague, the member for Casuarina, as Economic Development and Regional Development minister, talked about the cooperation between his agency and my agency. As the previous minister, I know there are some fantastic people in DBERD looking at helping to development regional indigenous tourism development products. They are doing a fantastic job, and the Stepping Stones tool that is being used is being distributed very widely. There is a lot of interest across the Northern Territory in new products. I put on the record my thanks to people in DBERD and Tourism NT who are on the ground in our regions helping develop those initiatives and aspirations.
I thank the member for Katherine for her contribution. She has, obviously, had personal experience in the industry. It is just nonsense about the speed restrictions, and we are going to have to introduce all these additional facilities up and down the highway. I am not going to go through the numbers again. However, I urge members to go to the Parliamentary Record for Wednesday, 29 November 2006, page 3609 where calculations were done in regard to the difference between the time taken from various points around the Northern Territory at 160 km/h and 130 km/h. For example, the increase in time to drive from Darwin to Katherine is about eight minutes. Therefore, regarding this nonsense that people are going to be on the roads for much longer periods of time, when you do the maths its absolute patent nonsense. I urge people to revisit those pages. If you do not believe the sums, do them yourself.
Thank you, member for Katherine, for the comments about Jessica Mauboy. I concur; she is a fantastic ambassador for the Northern Territory. I advise members of the House that Jessica’s music teacher, Judy Weepers, is retiring on Friday this week after 33 years of fantastic teaching service in the Northern Territory. She is a wonderful lady who has inspired and taught many thousands of Territorians; given them the gift and joy of music for the rest of their lives. Judy, on behalf of all members of this House, I wish you all the best in your retirement.
I agree with the member for Nelson; the rural area is a fantastic area. It is great that members can come in here and talk about the tourism potential of their electorates. I am sure the member does this, but it is beholden on all of us to encourage our constituents in their endeavours. I wish him all the best in working with his constituents to promote the great attractions of the rural area to visitors of the Northern Territory.
The World War II history museum is going to be a good debate to have, as part of the Chief Minister’s vision for Darwin. It was fantastic yesterday to see over 2000 people attend the commemoration of the bombing of Darwin. It certainly is a history that is not well known throughout Australia. It should be, and a museum in Darwin will contribute to spreading that knowledge. I certainly take those points from the member for Nelson.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I will continue to bring updates on the progress of the tourism industry in the Northern Territory to this House. I thank all honourable members for their comments.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Local Government Reform
Mr McADAM (Local Government): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, on 11 October 2006, I addressed the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory’s annual conference in Alice Springs. In my speech, I addressed the issue of the current state of local governments in the Northern Territory. I noted the success stories of local government, but also the failures, the pressing need for change, and the measures the Martin government was proposing to take in relation to a broad-based reform of local government throughout the Northern Territory. It is worthwhile re-examining the sobering facts which I laid on the table at the October LGANT conference.
In March 2006, my department conducted a risk assessment of 56 remote councils. This risk assessment classified 50% of these councils as either unsustainable or, at the very best, at high risk. From March to October 2006, 22 councils, or 38% of all community government and association councils, advertised for a chief executive officer. In addition, eight CEO positions were re-advertised in the past 12 months. This turnover of staff is having a very negative impact on the sustainability of basic service programs on communities as well as on residents.
The situation with finances of many small remote councils is not any rosier. The NT Grants Commission has advised me that about 20 of these councils could end up on the minimum grant by 2008-09 financial year. What this means, in effect, is that these councils, strongly reliant as they are on grant revenue, would have barely enough funds to pay a CEO and a limited number of staff, let alone providing services to residents. The reality is that even those councils not flagged to be in the above situation have basic structural problems where they spend a large proportion of their limited funds on administration rather than service delivery to their communities. In addition, they have limited capacity to raise non-grant revenue and to improve ageing infrastructure.
Last year, my department undertook 17 interventions in remote councils. Indeed, at this very moment, my department is intervening in the affairs of 11 remote councils. Unsustainable systems of local government has a broader impact than just poor local government service provision. It restricts employment, stymies environment health outcomes, slows economic development, and it perpetuates the perception that second best is good enough for Territorians in regional and remote areas of the Northern Territory.
Why should Territorians in remote areas not enjoy the same functionality and sustainability of local government enjoyed in other parts of regional Australia? For too long, the Northern Territory has not been given equal status in our discussions with the Commonwealth. For example, with less than 5% of our land unincorporated under local government we have not been able to achieve equitable access to roads funding. This reform is not simply about the fractured nature of small councils; this is about creating a professional third tier of government across the Northern Territory, a tier capable of delivering local government and other services in partnership and with the full confidence of the Territory and Australia governments. It is about providing a springboard for greater opportunity for everyone living outside our major towns, and a level of confidence and certainty that services will be provided at a standard we would expect in Australia.
The time has come to show strong leadership and to take decisive action to ensure a sustainable local government sector for the Northern Territory into the future. To this end, on 30 January, I announced details of a major local government reform package. The details include indicative boundaries for a new framework of local government based on four municipal and nine shire councils. In addition, as part of this framework, the whole of the Northern Territory will be incorporated under local government. These new shires will commence operation on 1 July 2008.
For the residents of Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine and Alice Springs there will be little change. However, these municipal councils will be encouraged to enter into strategic resource sharing arrangements with the new shires. Each shire will be divided into wards, based on geographic areas and population centres. Each ward will elect local representatives to the shire council. The local ward councillor will represent the people living in the area of the ward, be an advocate for local issues on the shire council, and keep local residents informed about all important decisions and activities of the council. Furthermore, a local community will be able to request its shire council to establish a local board for its local area.
The local board will be given delegations to perform certain functions on behalf of the shire such as participation and planning and delivery of community projects. The local boards will not be tied down with red tape and will be able to adopt culturally appropriate protocols in the way that they work. These boards will comprise local people who want to help make their community stronger, healthier and safer. The shire councils will provide staff and development support for local boards.
On 30 January, I was pleased to announce the appointment of Mr Patrick Dodson as the independent Chair of the Local Government Advisory Board. Mr Dodson has a wealth of experience working in administration, policy and indigenous affairs, and his role as chair will be a challenging one. The Local Government Advisory Board is made up of nominees of key stakeholders including the Local Government Association, the Local Government Managers Association, the Chamber of Commerce, the NT Cattlemen’s Association, the land councils, the unions, the Northern Territory and Australian governments, and representatives from regions right across the Northern Territory including north and south.
I announced the board membership in mid-December 2006, and the advisory board held its first meeting on 8 and 9 February 2007 in Alice Springs. I attended the first meeting, and can advise the House that the meeting achieved positive outcomes and that members of the board look forward to continuing to meet monthly, alternating between Alice Springs and Darwin.
The advisory board will oversee the development of regional management plans and legislative requirements to ensure a smooth transition to the new local government arrangements. My department is providing a secretariat to support the Local Government Advisory Board. Shire transition committees are being established for each of the new shire councils to develop shire plans, and to consider a range of administrative and representation issues. My department has put in place a dedicated project management team to manage the transition, implementation and post-implementation support phases of the reforms.
Local government regional management plans will be developed with councils and transition committees. These committees will examine relevant issues specific to each community and to ensure smooth transition of council operations. The regional plans will outline the administrative arrangements, development opportunities, representation and service delivery issues within and between councils and the Northern Territory and Australian governments in each administrative region. I will continue to meet regularly with the LGANT executive and community representatives to discuss these changes.
Communities throughout the Northern Territory will be engaged in consultations regarding what local government will look like and how to amend the Local Government Act.
In addition to community visits, the advisory board will hold public forums in each of the regions in June 2007. The advisory board will be particularly keen to hear from communities on matters of representation and services to local communities.
All communities across the Territory will be included in a municipal or shire council. The minimum core local government service standards will be negotiated depending on the size and the location of the communities. Non-core service delivery will be determined by community needs and the capacity of the shire to secure ongoing resources to provide the service. New shires will have a strong focus on a back-to-basics approach to delivering core services such as roads and infrastructure, waste management, environmental health and community facilities.
Improvement in core services will help create jobs for locals. Local government will continue to be involved in the delivery of a range of non-core services, and my department will work closely with LGANT and government agencies to negotiate better and fairer arrangements for local government to deliver non-core services such as Centrelink, primary health care and CDEP. These negotiations have already commenced. I applaud the positive attitude and commitment that senior officials of the Northern Territory and Australian governments have brought to the negotiating table. I also take this opportunity to express my gratitude to minister Brough, who has played a key role in this reform.
The proposed transitional arrangements for each of the new shire councils will be known by late 2007. My department will work with the shire transition committees to develop strategic operational transition and governance plans in 2007.
My department and LGANT will assist the new shires with transitional arrangements and begin the recruitment of new staff. A major focus of the new local government arrangements will be the creation of jobs for local people. My department, with support from other NT agencies such as DBERD, and the Australian government, will assist councils to provide on-the-job skills development for new local government employees. This approach is consistent with that being developed through the Indigenous Economic Development Task Force. Throughout the transition phase and beyond, my department will continue to provide advice, governance training, facilitate employment for locals, and help develop local plans to improve services and life on communities.
Development coordinators jointly funded by the Australian and NT governments will work with the new shire councils. They will ensure that elected members are able to effectively represent their ward constituents, that government processes are well understood, and that shire plans are delivering results, including good services and community engagement across all communities in the shire. Development coordinators will also help the new councils to form strategic partnerships and undertake new social and economic projects with other levels of government and the private sector.
The Australian government has indicated strong support for the proposed new local government arrangements and has shown its willingness to work with the Northern Territory government and new, strong shires to improve opportunities for regional communities. New shires will be able to share administrative systems and services, make better use of by-laws, contracts to local service providers, and strengthen local economies. The new shires will be stronger and will be able to leverage more funding on a per capita basis from the Australian government. There will be greater opportunity for small business development that can also support regional businesses such as in the pastoral industry.
Approximately 200 people, representing large and small councils and communities, are being included in the transitional arrangements to create the new local government. I commend the President of LGANT and her members for joining us on this important journey to create a strong local government sector. These reforms will provide the foundation for ongoing improvement to services governments deliver to bush communities. Local government will be positioned to lead the way, to work with communities to overcome disadvantage, and to build prosperity through jobs, small business and a viable community lifestyle.
The benefits of these reforms are considerable and I will summarise them for the House:
I will not pretend that the local government reform process will be easy. There will be a substantial expenditure of time and money to make it happen, but the costs of not proceeding are much greater. Failure to seize this opportunity will mean more of the same - more crises and more unsustainable councils - which will perpetuate disadvantage for another generation in remote parts of the Northern Territory.
It is human nature to be apprehensive when faced with change. In the past few weeks, following my 30 January announcement on the reforms, I have been heartened by the many expressions of support for the government’s reforms from the local government sector. I have also personally responded to a number of concerns raised.
The member for Nelson, whilst supporting the local government reforms in principle, has expressed concern that Territorians are being presented as a fait accompli with the release of these indicative boundaries. Perhaps understandably, the member for Nelson has suggested that these boundaries should be a starting point for further deliberations in the framework for new local government in the Northern Territory.
This government has worked extensively with LGANT, and has drawn extensively on the research and experience of previous regionalisation discussions. Government has also taken into account demographic, financial and community-of-interest factors in arriving at these indicative boundaries. The fact is, there is an optimal size for remote local government in the NT context: too small and we risk unsustainability; too large and servicing over a great distance becomes a real problem. Without decisive action now, local government reform could be bogged down in a talkfest for the next decade.
The current situation of plugging holes in a leaky hull of small community government councils would continue to the detriment of the wellbeing of both indigenous and non-indigenous Territorians. Such a situation is unacceptable to me and to government.
These are indicative boundaries and, clearly, I will be taking advice from the Local Government Advisory Board and Shire Transitional Committees. However, I do not envisage major changes to the indicative boundaries I released on 30 January. There is, nevertheless, a great deal of scope for public input into the make-up of ward boundaries within shires. This input will generally occur, as I mentioned previously, through the Shire Transitional Committees, written submissions and through the Local Government Advisory Board’s public forums.
I also noted comments from the President of the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association concerning full incorporation of the Territory and rating of pastoral leases. Clearly, everybody will contribute to the cost of local government. Some people will pay rates, others service charges. We all pay taxes and some of our taxes are used by the NT and the Australian government to fund local government to provide services and good leadership to local regional communities. In the case of pastoral leases, any rating or service charges will accord with the level of service provision. Roads are an issue, close to the heart of the cattlemen, and it is my belief that full incorporation will improve remote road infrastructure. These are the same roads the communities use, so all users will benefit.
My department and I are working very closely with the NT Cattlemen’s Association. They have a representative on the Local Government Advisory Board. My government has provided assistance to the NTCA, for a consultancy examining factors to be considered with regard to the pastoral industry and other local government reforms in the Northern Territory. I do not think anyone could argue against a proposal that having better functioning shire councils creates the opportunity for better functioning communities and enterprises which can support growth in industries such as the pastoral, horticulture, ICT, tourism and small business developments.
The mining communities of Alyangula, Nhulunbuy, Yulara - which stands on Commonwealth land, the East Arnhem strategic zone and the East Arnhem port will continue to have local government-type services provided by non-local government organisations. These arrangements are working well and there are compelling strategic and contractual reasons for continuing with these existing arrangements.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, it is my firm belief that the reform of local government in the Northern Territory will provide a foundation of good governance, sustainable infrastructure and service delivery which will contribute to the long-term development, employment and health outcomes for all Territorians.
I express my appreciation to the Northern Territory Local Government Association for their support, for their vision, and also to the community councils – the shire councils and the community government councils - for their patience and forbearance, and also to officers from my department, the Department of Local Government, who have worked assiduously, and very hard to put in place a model which I believe is going to serve the best interests of Territorians into the future.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Mr Deputy Speaker, at the outset, let me say that the opposition welcomes the minister’s statement, and understands that reforms in local government are necessary. Nobody in his right mind will dispute the fact that community local government as we know it is not working for the Territory and for many of the indigenous Territorians who live in those areas. Therefore, reforms are necessary.
However, how these reforms take place may be up for argument or discussion or negotiation. First of all, let me thank the minister for organising a fairly quick briefing for me with officers of his department last week. However, the maps, tables and matrices that I asked for at the briefing, and which were promised, have not yet arrived for me to consider in due time before this statement was provided today. I ask the minister if he could kindly seek some redress on that and get the material to me as quickly as possible so I can have a look at them – at a more leisurely pace now the statement is up and will be over shortly.
Minister, you have said that many of the local community government councils are dysfunctional. Your audit of the 56 councils has found that - at one stage you said - over 50% of these councils were on the verge of collapse. What surprised me is that it was not as bad as this when I was Minister for Local Government. I have also been in this Chamber long enough to recall the speech made by the then Minister assisting the Chief Minister on Indigenous Affairs, John Ah Kit, who made a so-called landmark statement about indigenous affairs. He talked about the capacity building that he and his department was going to provide to indigenous communities across the Territory to enable them to govern themselves better.
I need to hear an explanation as to what failed in this last five years under the Martin Labor government; why capacity building had not occurred. It had to be the case that capacity building was not provided in a way that enabled these community government councils to manage themselves properly, otherwise he would not have over 50% of these community government councils at risk of total failure. Obviously capacity building has not occurred and now, in this endeavour to rationalise local government in the Territory, you are going to have the same people who do not have the capacity to govern themselves join into shire councils and govern a larger area with larger amounts of money and have greater responsibilities than they ever had when they were only running small, local community government councils. Time will tell as to how you propose to do that and what sort of success we can expect from the same individuals or personalities who have not been able to govern themselves previously.
When you say that the Northern Territory Grants Commission advised you that some 20 councils would end up getting only minimum grants by 2008-09, the only rationale I can think of that would cause such a ‘shrinkage’ of grants would be because of population decrease. If there is urban drift, as we see in Alice Springs, occurring around the Territory as well, are we likely to see a shrinkage of population across the Territory in the bush with these people moving into urban areas? If that is the case, then your shire base will shrink also …
Mr McAdam: No, no.
Dr LIM: I hear an interjection saying ‘no’. There is no reason given that there will be no shrinkage. I suggest to you that it is very likely that there will be shrinkage. We all know for certain that places like Yuendumu and Papunya, both in Central Australia, both with local members who sit in this Chamber with government, have lost a significant proportion of their population. They are all living in Alice Springs. When some 75% of Yuendumu is described as being empty and over 50% of Papunya is described as being empty, you have to ask the question: what is going on?
The minister said that the boundaries he has proposed for the Northern Territory with these nine shires are only indicative. Later in his statement he is saying he is prepared to let the advisory board advise on how to bring about this reform, and that he envisages no major changes. You are really saying that they might be indicative, but they are really fixed, aren’t they? They might be moved a little here and little there, adjust the lines of the boundaries, but the reality is that is what you want.
You have an expert body appointed with two subcommittees with other experts and tell them to talk to people and to come back to advise what they think is the best way to do this. Then you say: ‘By the way, you have use these boundaries. They are indicative, but they are pretty well locked in. We are not going to shift them very much’. Then you went on to whole series of ‘this is what I want; this is what I want to see happen’. Really, your advisory board is not going to do very much except to window dress what you propose to do. Some will call that leadership; some will call it by another name. It may be foolhardy to pursue this line.
You know very well, probably better than I will ever know, the conflicts that you will have by shoehorning different indigenous groups into a single governance area. Port Keats is a great example of that: where you have different groups of indigenous people living under one governance you see the huge amount of conflict that arises out of that powder keg of communities.
Look at the size of the shires that you propose. At least one goes all the way from the Queensland border to the Western Australian border. I do not have the map with me because I am still waiting for the map to come from the minister’s office. There are two shires that extend all the way from the Queensland border to the Western Australian border, which takes up the electorate of Macdonnell and part of the electorate of Stuart.
At the briefing I was told that the way these shires were worked out was based on aggregated monies from the Grants Commission and, in part, population size. With the shrinking of populations, the population size might become non-significant in how you designate which area or which shire one belongs to. But then, with the shrinkage of population, so would Grants Commission monies, so the imbalance will then start to creep into your structure of trying to rationalise these number of shires.
Would it not be better, I ask, that you say to your expert committee: ‘Here is the whole of the Territory, these are the government councils, this is the quantum money that each council receives from the Grants Commission, these are the population figures, these are the different indigenous groups - language groups, skin groups, call them what you like - go away and consider the totality of the problem and come back to me with good advice that I can use to construct the shire local government reform’. Instead, you took the advice of one or two public servants - some with very little experience in shires, others not even formalised in any level of seniority that they understood the issue of shire development in lands where Aboriginal people reside – and you come up with this model that may or may not work. I wish you well, that you get it to work, but I just wonder.
When you spoke about developing the shire model of government, you also reflected that it is very likely that you will have wards within the shires. Within the wards, you will have another level of governance - I suppose that is what you call it - local governance which will bring information about local issues to the shire council, which would also be able to provide information the other way from the shire councils to the local residents. Well, you have the Northern Territory government, you then have the shire council, then you are going to have a local ward or group or council – call it what you like. Are you not now creating more levels of governance than we have at this moment in time?
Again, I draw your attention to the fact that many of these people who are likely to be on the wards and the shire councils are currently the people who have failed to manage their own local government councils. If you have failed to provide capacity building in the last six years to ensure that these individuals are able to provide good governance, tell us what you are going to do to ensure that capacity building will occur in the next, less than 18 months now, to enable these individuals to have the skills to govern. How are you going to prevent the levels of quasi-bureaucracy occurring at the ward level and at the shire level?
You spoke about the organisations and groups that are represented on your advisory board, as well as your area advisory boards. The Local Government Association is represented by its president. I would have thought that the director of LGANT would be on it as well, but he is not there in his capacity as the director of LGANT. He is there in another capacity. I have spoken to the director of LGANT, and I find him to be very knowledgeable in this, and have a lot of faith in that man. I am not so sure that your expert group will have much scope – and there is the whole issue that you have already provided such strict guidelines for them.
The way I see it, you are not really seeking advice from the advisory board. You are not; you are saying: ‘This is what I want. Now tell me how I can go about doing it without getting too much political ruckus’. You know as well as I know that we cannot shoehorn communities that do not have commonality of interest. They are not communities of interest. In fact, they have diverging interests, views and cultural expectations. I hope that you will have a lot of direct input yourself; that you will actually go out there and speak to the community leaders and ensure that you can get their cooperation. Without that, you are not going to get very far.
I recall, back in the days when there was an attempt to form the Western MacDonnell’s model. In fact, that was raised by individuals such as the current member for Macdonnell. There was clear anger in Kintore; there were expressions of disinterest. In fact, not only disinterest, but rejection of the model. People in Hermannsburg said: ‘We are not going to be a part of this. I would rather do without the extra money than lose the autonomy’. Those things were said, in those days when the Western Mac’s model was attempted. Minister, I am saying to you: do not shoehorn people into it when they are not ready for it. You set a time line of less than 18 months, and you might be making a rod for your own back. I said before you have very strict things that you want: shire plans and regional management plans. All these things are going to be done and your advisory board has no input into those.
If all communities across the Northern Territory, as you say, will be included in the municipal or shire council, and there will be minimum call of the local government stance negotiated, depending on size and location of communities, then why do you need a board? What is the advisory board going to do for you? I look forward to listening to Pat Dodson shortly when he has the meeting upstairs. I am interested to hear what he has to say.
At the briefing, minister, I drew your officers’ attention to the fact that very often - particularly in local government but also in many other indigenous industries - white fellows take on jobs that they make into their sinecure; a job that they have for life. What would be more important, more relevant, and more useful is for conditions of employment to include five-year succession plans; that every white fellow employee will have, as part of his work conditions, a five-year plan to ensure an indigenous person takes over his or her job. That way, you can definitely indigenise local government jobs out in the bush. Sadly, what happened for many years - for decades, including time under the CLP - was that white fellows went into a community, ensured that the job was theirs for life or for as long as they could rip off the system, and then they nicked off. I am glad to see that there are many others who have done the right thing and ensured that there is continuity under local indigenous involvement, and also indigenous people taking their jobs when they make plans to move away.
We lament about the way local government has gone in the Northern Territory. Six years ago, the former minister, John Ah Kit, made this landmark statement saying what he needed and intended to do. What has failed in the last six years to allow over 50% of communities to fail so badly? Did government or the Office of Local Government take its eye off the ball? I do not want to see that the development of shire councils is all about a grab for money from the federal government. You say, okay, all these roads that are currently in unincorporated areas will now be coming under the jurisdiction of shires and, therefore, they require more funding. Remember the day when Warren Snowdon, the member for Lingiari, convinced the government that the way to fund roads in the bush was to make sure that every small community got a portion of the money?
Mr Stirling: At least they got their share.
Dr LIM: ‘Got their share’, the Treasurer said. But their share in that money has been for nought. What have we seen for that money? Very, very little. I hope it is not just the Treasurer’s intent through local government to try to grab some money from the federal government, to try to get some money for the bush roads. The bush roads need to be fixed without a doubt, but I hope it is not just for that intention; that would be unfortunate.
Before the last election, the Country Liberal Party had a different model of local government. I suppose it is a philosophical approach. You are now being very paternalistic. You even tell them this is the way we are going to do it: you have nine shires and four municipalities. That is what you say: this is how you are going to do it. You are going to be very directive, and people are going to be told to do it this way or no way.
What did the CLP want to do? We thought it was worthwhile pursuing an alternative. The CLP policy leading up to the last election was, and remains, that the role of local government administration should be seconded to the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory under any other name it wants to call it. Remember, LGANT is an elected association and would, therefore, deliver great accountability to its members. The minister could operate a liaison office, a single office under the Minister for Local Government, to liaise with - call it the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory - to maintain an overseeing role, but the decision-making process is handed lock, stock and barrel to LGANT and its constitutional members. It would then fall upon LGANT to make certain that standards were maintained and, where this was not occurring, to commence appropriate action. If appropriate action meant charges or winding up of a council, the minister’s office would conduct whatever investigations were needed after LGANT had referred the matter to the minister.
However, this is not what you have done, and it might be just a philosophical approach. You can hand over local government management to the elected body called LGANT. You provide the funding to them to run. You have an office that will liaise, supervise, oversee that elected body that you funded, and let them run with it. That way, you are not seen as a centralist government, otherwise that is what you are doing. What you are doing is being very paternalistic. You may not like the word, but that is what it is. We need this local government reform and I commend you for going down this path, but I also voice caution.
Your prescriptive methods may be more cumbersome than you anticipate. Your prescriptive methods may constrain advisory boards and, therefore, you may not be able to do what you want to do. I do not want to see your method become too dictatorial because it would leave very little room for negotiation.
Minister, I am sure you understand that when you get shire councils made up of elected representatives you will probably only be able to have one person per current community or ward on the shire council. That one voice is going to be speaking on behalf of the whole of the community. I suggest that is going to be very difficult, as it is now in a local community government council. Where you have 10 or more bodies representing a community, you have conflicting voices. How are you going to find that one voice to represent that ward? How are you going to find it? The minister shakes his head, but how are you going to find that one person who will not be so deeply obligated through family or land connections? How do you expect that person to sit on the shire council and make unbiased decisions for the betterment of the shire and not just his or her local community? I worry about that.
It is going to be a long and difficult road. While I wish to see better governance for the whole of the Northern Territory, and to see that there is some success for indigenous people to be able to take part in governance, I fear that this process may not be such a good way to go. I say that without saying to you, minister, that you should not do it. I wish you well in the exercise and hope that it will work for you.
I will be watching very closely and we will see where this process takes us. You have approached this business with reasonable credibility and sincerity in what you want to do, and I commend you on that, but that might not be enough on its own. You have to ensure that the people out there are given the capacity to do it in the way that you have envisaged.
I do not want to finish without speaking about the pastoral properties and what they are going to be faced with. They are concerned, minister. You know that; you have heard about it. They are screaming quite loudly about these shires and what it is going to do to them. It is unfortunate that prior to your announcement there was very little discussion with them so that they knew what they are in for. While you might have Stuart Kenny from the Cattlemen’s Association on your advisory board, pastoralists should have been consulted directly. We have to recognise that pastoral properties provide their own local government services. They also provide their own power and water. They provide much of their own roads. I concede that the Northern Territory government has provided some operational expenditure into pastoral property roads. The pastoral properties provide their own septic facilities and waste disposal. Many things that local government does are now done by pastoralist for themselves, at their own cost.
When you start to propose a rating for pastoral properties, you need to then say: ‘How are you going to offset your ratings against what they are spending?’ You need to explain that, and explain it clearly so they know what they are up for. Then you have to tell them: ‘We are going to rate your pastoral properties’. It is easy enough to rate because it is encapsulated fairly well within defined boundaries. How are you going to rate Aboriginal inalienable land where indigenous people live in homes that are owned by the community and not by themselves individually? Are you going to charge them?
Ms CARNEY: Madam Speaker, I move an extension of time to allow the member to continue, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Dr LIM: Madam Speaker, I will not be long. If you are going to have some form of rating for Aboriginal inalienable land, each householder needs to be repaid something that the community representative body can collect, and collect regularly, and have a rate that is commensurable to what the pastoral property will be paying for itself. I believe those issues have not yet been considered. I assume that the advisory committee might come up with some sort of model. The minister has been quite silent on it in his statement regarding these reforms. At the briefing, very little could be explained of how the pastoralists should be rated. I believe to allow the shire council to set the rating is problematical. If you look at the shire councils and how they are going to be elected, I would assume that, at best, the pastoralists within the shire will be represented by perhaps one of them. It is going to be a very difficult task for that single representative from a pastoral background to argue the case that his colleagues and he are not being rated excessively. He would be in the minority of the votes within the shire council.
There are many issues that are very much unanswered. So far, your prescription to the advisory board is tight, and I do not see how the advisory board has much flexibility in determining what it is going to do. However, I sit back and wait in great anticipation that something good will come out of this. I am not sure what it is going to be yet, but if it does, I will be here ready to congratulate you on your efforts.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, this government has demonstrated a willingness and capacity to tackle difficult areas right across the face of government and those areas needing reforms. Since the election of 2005, we have undertaken considerable reform of the education system, a matter which the minister will expand on later in the sittings - a massive program of tackling housing backlogs and continuing law reform aimed at providing the community and police with the tools to fight crime. Now, the Minister for Local Government is undertaking what is, without doubt, the most comprehensive root and branch change to the whole system of local government in the Northern Territory. I do not believe you will find too many - if you could find any at all - who will disagree that it is a system of government in desperate need of reform.
It was interesting to listen to the member for Greatorex, because he had a real opportunity when he was a minister in the former CLP administration to undertake that reform. He and the CLP also certainly had the knowledge of the need to undertake that reform. He failed the test and the CLP failed the test of absolutely failing to deliver meaningful improvement across local government.
There were two ministers for Local Government that spring to mind. One was the member for the old Victoria River electorate, Tim Baldwin, whose first act on becoming Minister for Local Government was to summarily dismiss the Yulara council on the same day that he took office. The closest the member for Greatorex came to reform was, similarly, sacking a council while speaking at a Local Government Association conference, with the council members not knowing they were sacked until they heard his speech.
Local government plays an absolutely critical role in the Northern Territory, and this government - and I do not doubt the CLP before us - has valued that role. However, our concerns have centred around the viability of many of our local governments and their structures. What we have seen created over about 20 to 25 years was a system that simply guaranteed failure, particularly for the smaller councils, and for a number of reasons. If you look at the population of many of our remote communities and the councils elected to run them, they are simply not large enough to be viable enough to sustain proper local government. We had many small councils unable to attract sufficient financial expertise in the first place to administer them and, often, subject as a result to either poor quality advice - and two of them toward corrupt advice.
In addition to the inability to attract people of sufficient skill and calibre to manage the financial side, the lack of critical mass of the small population meant the function of local government, maintenance and repairs to roads, dogs and drains issues simply could not be achieved because of the lack of favourable scale of economies, because the population is not large enough to attract a large enough per capita grant in order to run those sorts of services. And the list goes on. Having set up many unviable councils, it should not be a surprise to anyone that, despite the best efforts of many well-intentioned people in many communities, many of these councils have failed - and they have failed in spectacular fashion from time to time, with many hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt built up.
The minister listed the number of interventions he has had to make, and they are ongoing. We have seen regular dismissal of councils on numerous occasions. That background simply informed government that reform - and quite major and radical reform - was needed sooner rather than later. The reform is all about strengthening that third tier of government, local government. It is aimed, most particularly, at increasing the capacity of those councils to deliver proper quality services for their people. It is easy for us, living in urban areas with pretty reasonable rates some of us pay - particularly in Nhulunbuy - to get used to a certain standard of services. That is what we have grown up to expect and pay for. People in bush communities, by and large, frequently do not receive anything like those same service standards that we in the urban areas are used to and expect and, in fact, demand.
If a council fails the expectations of the ratepayers in an urban area, the ratepayers simply have the opportunity, next local government election, to vote them out of office and get in a new council to do the job. In small, remote communities, it is simply not as available an option as it is in urban areas. The size of the council, the number of people they have to draw on with expertise and management skill, make it almost impossible to elect a new council easily at all. The drawing power of the councils, in financial terms, is so limited that it often does not matter who really runs the council if they do not have the income capacity to provide decent basic level services in the first place. If you cannot provide those basic level services, you are unviable and your future must be questioned. That is what government has done.
There has been criticism - and I note that the member for Nelson so questioned - around consultation on the shire boundaries. It could have gone through a process of asking every Territorian in every local council area about their views and how they would be affected by their decisions. You would be there for a very long time doing that. Frankly, the need for reform, in the sense of the need for councils to be doing the job and providing services, is far more urgent than embarking on a talkfest Territory-wide.
The former government, the Country Liberal Party, did have a merger model in their last couple of terms in office where they were trying to bring about amalgamation of smaller councils into more viable-sized operations by a process of consensus. The exercise proved, I think, enormously difficult regarding the numbers they got to agree. It was certainly time consuming and it was extremely expensive, because when they did achieve anything like an amalgamation, there were very large and generous set-up packages on offer. So, in that sense, whilst that money was being spent that was, I guess, a sign for other councils to say: ‘Go this way, amalgamate with your neighbour, or draw up a sensible amalgamation plan and you will be resourced accordingly’. Even though that was on the table, they were not coming forward in droves in order to say: ‘Yes, we have to get bigger in order to get better and will take advantage of the establishment grants and the money on offer’.
At heart, I suppose I will always agree in principle with the need to include everybody in decision-making along the way. Sometimes, matters become so urgent - and it is such a good question that I think the bullet has to be bitten and this is one of those occasions. It is not optional in this reform; it is critical. It is critical that it be done and it is urgent because we, as the Territory government at the second level, have an obligation to ensure that our people and Territorians get services that are of a quality that they can rely on. When those services are not being delivered, quite properly something has to be done.
The minister has in place a very good advisory group. I am impressed by the fact that it is being led by Patrick Dodson. He is a first-class communicator across all levels of society. If anyone can get to the nub of real concerns and criticisms in the process of dialogue on the way forward, certainly Patrick Dodson is that person, and this government and that advisory group will be very well led and serviced by Patrick Dodson.
In addition, there are people with great experience in local government matters from around the Territory on that advisory group. I believe that they will have, on the one hand, an ear to the ground in their own patch of the Northern Territory and, on the other, be able to provide that advice to the minister and the minister’s office on intractable-type issues that are bound to pop up along the way. Therefore, at the end of that dialogue and the input from those people on the advisory group and from their constituents in that sense, we will have a very good system in place which will do what it is meant to do in the first place in local government; that is, deliver quality services to people. That is why the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory is backing these reforms and, of course, it is incumbent on us as members to get in and back them as well.
I understand the concerns from the member for Nelson as a former chair of a shire council. He probably is best suited as anyone in this House in his background experience in local government and the issues they deal with, the funding problems, and all the sorts of difficulties that local governments have. I ask him to come aboard in this process and support the minister on the way forward.
I do not pretend, and certainly the minister does not pretend, that it is a walk in the park going forward, but the time for reform is well past. I believe we will get through the bumpy road ahead in the dialogue and the way forward. Every Territorian will be better served by a stronger system of local government in place, a system that can be relied upon to deliver, that government can fund with some greater confidence than government does now - where we have seen councils, for any number of reasons, get caught up in financial concerns that perhaps they should not have gone near in the first place. Of course, the Territory taxpayer is overall bound to get that council out of trouble because of the possibility of running up potentially any number of debts, often to small business, along the way.
I listened with interest to the contribution from the member for Nelson because I respect his views. I respect the fact that he has a great deal of experience in this area and I have no doubt that he will be knocking on the door, picking up the phone, and writing to the Minister for Local Government at any time that issues come before him. In fact, he has a responsibility to do that, as we all do. I hope he does, but I look forward with some interest to his views.
Mr VATSKALIS (Business and Economic Development): Madam Speaker, I support the Minister for Local Government on the local government reform statement. At last, local government arrives in the Northern Territory. The 21st century has arrived in the Northern Territory. I say that because when I came here in 1993 and found that the Northern Territory was largely unincorporated with only a very small number of local governments, I was surprised.
I came from Western Australia in which local government has been the third tier of government since the end of the 19th century. I spent many of my working years working for local government, firstly for the city of Wanneroo and then, for a time, for Port Headland. I know the opposition raises many issues about local government and why and how it is happening, and lack of consultation, or the disastrous reform of local government, but local government will benefit the Territory, Territorians, people living in urban areas, and people who live in communities.
How many times have we read in the newspapers about communities being bankrupted? How many times have we seen so-called town clerks arrested by police for embezzlement? How many times have we seen people running away from one community after they use that community as a personal cashier only to find a job at the next community and do exactly the same? How many times do we go to communities and not find services? How many times do we go to communities and find the services are not provided and everybody expects the government from Darwin to provide services, which are the core services of local government?
I have to say to my colleague, the Minister for Local Government, is congratulations and it is about time. It is about time the 21st century arrived in the Territory. It is about time that every Territorian enjoys what people in Darwin, Katherine, Alice Springs and some of the local government bodies enjoy. It means by-laws that control dogs and local activities, and enjoyment of the service provided by the City of Darwin or the City of Palmerston or the Town of Katherine.
Let me describe to you local government when I worked for the City of Wanneroo. The City of Wanneroo was one of the biggest local governments in Western Australia. It was the fastest-growing local government in Western Australia. The City of Wanneroo had a population of about 40 000 people which increased to 150 000 people within 10 years. It had to be split in two: the City of Joondalup and the City of Wanneroo. It had a mix of urban, industrial and rural areas. However, the City of Wanneroo was an organisation that provided services to its ratepayers. The City of Wanneroo had an Environmental Health Branch, a Building Branch, a Town Planning Branch, a Welfare Branch, it ran its own childcare centres, it ran immunisation campaigns, it ran Meals on Wheels, and a number of other services that people in those cities are taking for granted.
These are services that do not exist in the Territory. If they do not exist even in the cities, you can imagine what happens out in the bush. I have been to many communities in the Northern Territory and was appalled by the conditions. However, what really struck me was that the previous government, for 26 years, did not see it fit enough for those people to receive services, did not see that it was proper for these people to have a proper system of governance in the form of local government.
Local government is not only roads, rates and rubbish. Local government can be a vehicle for economic development in the regions. The Port Hedland Town Council has about 12 000 people …
Mr Wood: Western Australia gets heaps more money from the Commonwealth than the Northern Territory – heaps!
Mr VATSKALIS: I will come to the member for Nelson. The town of Port Hedland has 12 000 people. The town of Port Hedland provides services to indigenous and non-indigenous people in the town, irrespective of whether they have paid rates or not. As a matter of fact, in Western Australia, some of the land that is actually indigenous land does not pay rates. The town of Port Hedland provided rubbish removal, fixed the roads, mowed the lawns on the verges, and provided any service that anybody else would get in the town. The town of Port Hedland also had a number of stations within its boundaries. These pastoralists pay rates. These pastoralists maintained the roads within their own pastoral lease, they have their own rubbish tips, their own water supply, but they pay rates because these pastoralists were …
Mr Wood: What is funding from the Grants Commission for Western Australia?
Mr VATSKALIS: … receiving the service of having built roads to their gate. These pastoralists have received services. To give you an example, the pastoralists communicated to my department, to the head of Environmental Health, that the water supply had some problems because people were getting sick ...
Mr Wood: Comparing apples with oranges.
Mr VATSKALIS: I had to travel 100 km to this pastoral property to inspect their water supply, and provide solutions in order to fix it. Then I had to go back another 100 km. The shire council in Port Hedland provided the service where I would go and sample the water …
Mr Wood: More funding that what we get here …
Mr VATSKALIS: I would take the samples, send them for analysis, at cost to the council, provide the result. The local government has a role to play, and the role to play with local government, irrespective of where you are and how big it is, is to provide service to all people.
Mr Wood: Extra funding. That is the problem. Commonwealth funding is not given …
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Nelson.
Mr Wood: Well, I believe he is talking …
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr VATSKALIS: Madam Speaker, the member for Nelson has his own idea about local government. Well, I do not agree with that.
Mr Wood: Of course you do not. You come from Port Hedland.
Mr VATSKALIS: To give you an example, if Litchfield Shire Council was in Western Australia now it would be forced to provide by-laws for dogs, it would be forced to provide services that they choose not to provide, and …
Mr Wood: And you want a bureaucracy.
Mr VATSKALIS: I remind you again, that I had to force Litchfield Shire Council not to pollute the environment. I had to issue a health order to Litchfield Shire Council to stop using an area as a rubbish tip and also to create a transfer station.
Now, about the size of the local government. Let me tell you the size: the Shire of East Pilbara is bigger than France. However, at the same time, the Shire of East Pilbara is administered in Newman, but they have another branch in Marble Bar, and when Wittenoom was opened, they had another office in Wittenoom. They had work gangs in these areas to provide for the ratepayers ...
Mr Wood: You will give funding to local government, minister?
Mr VATSKALIS: The member for Nelson says that Western Australia has a lot of money. Well, let me tell you, that a lot of that money and the funding to the local government of Western Australia did not only come from the state government, it was coming from the federal government ...
Mr Wood: That is right.
Mr VATSKALIS: And here is where we are missing out, member for Nelson. Say we were elected to this parliament and I was the minister for transport and works, I have to argue every time - every time - with the federal government about money through Roads to Recovery. Local government in any other state in Australia gets significant funding for the roads through the local government. Local governments get funded to maintain roads. Here we do not. Why? Because we do not have local government, and they did not believe that we performed the role of a local government. I am very pleased that this minister has actually realised it is about time to bring the 21st century to the Northern Territory.
It is not only the issue of providing services. It is a fundamental principle of democracy. Local government is the third tier of government. It is the closest part of government to the people. It is directly responsible to the people, and certainly the easiest form of government to respond quickly to the demands of the people. I know there are people on the other side who are afraid that if we establish local government it means that all the shires are going to be indigenous; Aboriginal people are going to have control of the shires. Well, that is rubbish.
The Shire of Wiluna is a typical example of how a shire can have a majority of councillors of indigenous descent and maintain its function as a normal council, like the City of Perth, or the Town of Port Hedland, or the City of Bunbury. In Western Australia, you could not vote for local government elections if you did not own property in the local government area. Then the first Labor government, when I came to Western Australia, changed the legislation. Everyone who was on the Commonwealth electoral roll could vote. Immediately, the Shire of Wiluna found out that, from the 400 people who were allowed to vote in the previous election, it now had 2500 people, the majority indigenous people, who could vote.
Guess what the catch was? The majority of the council were black fellas, indigenous people. However, these people did not care if they were white or black. They maintained the same system. They did not care about this because they were struggling to get the local government to maintain the function of the local government, because properly established local government has the structures in place to operate successfully.
In local government, councillors do not run the council; councillors do not dictate what is going to be done and how it is going to be done. The council determines the policy, the future directions. The people who run the council are the professionals: the town clerks, under the instruction and guidance of the council; people like the town engineer, the environmental health officer, the building inspector, and the welfare officer. These are the people who make the decisions on how things are run, and these are the people who provide the council the proper information about what should be done, why it should be done, and where it should be done …
Mr Wood: Yes, but we do not have planning, minister. You are talking Western Australia.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Nelson, you will get your chance.
Mr Wood: Yes, I know that, but I have to tell people the fairytale …
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Nelson, please stop interjecting. Minister, please direct your comments through the Chair.
Mr VATSKALIS: Mr Deputy Speaker, the member for Nelson said: ‘But we do not have planning’. Thank God for that ...
Mr Wood: Well, you cannot have building inspectors.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Nelson!
Mr VATSKALIS: The reason we do not have planning is because I do not think any of the councils - from the seven councils here - is mature enough to handle planning. We have seen some of the proposals, some of the recommendations about certain planning issues, and they are appalling.
The member also said there is no building inspection. I cannot recall any council since I came here in 1993 when the previous government decided, somehow, to change the situation with the building inspections - that is, sack the building inspectors and allow them to become private practitioners who can charge anything they like - say: ‘We will take over the building inspection’. Any other council in Australia has building inspectors - no previous Northern Territory council actually put their hand up and said: ‘We will take the building inspections, we can perform that function’.
As a matter of fact, they refused to take over environmental health because they said it cost money. ‘We do not want to pay money; that is the government’s role’. Anywhere else in Australia, environmental health services are provided by local government, but not in the Northern Territory. As a result, the government had to employ Environmental Health Officers in Darwin and the rural area, and these people had to travel from Darwin to places like Ngukurr, or Nhulunbuy or some of the other areas outside Darwin. They spent more time on the road than in the community, because the local government either did not want them or did not exist. It is about time this changed.
Let me tell you about the issue that is really important for me. The governance, I believe, is very important. We are not going to have proper development or proper economic growth in the regions if there is no confidence about the governance of local government. What the Minister for Local Government is proposing is just that: good governance. I believe this will enable the communities and the regions as a whole to create strong social and economic opportunities for all Territorians.
The Minister for Local Government has mentioned the never ending story of council recruiting chief executive officers and designated specific officers for their council, plus the growing reality of the troubled financial outlook of our councils, and increasing pressures from within and internal factors. We have all these community councils. Every single area has a community council and the money they get from us and the Commonwealth government is very limited, so their ability to service the communities effectively is very limited. I will give you an example. You give money to a council, probably about $30 000 for maintaining the roads - how much road can you maintain with $20 000 or $30 000? Not much. However, when you have a shire council that has a good financial base through rates, and money that they get from the Commonwealth, you have an increased ability to maintain roads and provide effective services.
The Good Governance model will have a positive flow-on effect into my sports portfolio. The restructure will allow Sport and Recreation to have a reduced number of regional bodies that can be funded according to the need and population, not simply the presence of an incorporated association. Every community that is incorporated comes to us and wants money. At the moment we have 50, 60, 100, with so much money to go around. That is not effective. However, this money can be better allocated if you have properly established local government that can cater for a larger area, and that can have a bigger cut of the cake.
People think that it is wrong, but I say again, it is about time we have local government in the Northern Territory. Local government provides opportunities for development and for jobs. Most of the jobs in the regions will be provided by people living in the regions. The local government will have the ability and the effective governance to establish a workforce in their own local government jurisdiction. This workforce can be utilised by council in other areas – let us say road gangs, maintaining roads, maintaining parks, rubbish removal, control of dogs and other functions that currently are not provided, or provided intermittently, or not at all.
People have told me that the best roads in the Territory were in the 1960s and 1970s when there were road gangs employed by the then government, and which provided them with direction to maintain roads. They were provided with equipment and they were doing the roads. Most of these road gangs employed indigenous people. They were quite happy to work out there, with what they used to call in the old time the mixed race people, and they were very keen to work on the dozer, or the trailer, or the grader, and they were travelling for miles maintaining the roads. My aspiration is to utilise the new model of local government to bring back this kind of structure in local government to provide training for indigenous people and employment with real salaries and real prospects.
The local government reform provides a clear channel for the voice of people in remote regions wishing to include the Territory in national policies. Strong local government provides a forum for community leadership. I know there are many people who will champion this reform and they will be the ones who want to provide a better quality of life for the children, their children’s children and, importantly, the maintenance of their identity.
As the Minister for Business and Economic Development, and Regional Development, these reforms will enable the creation of new networks for social and economic development at local and regional levels. Through this new local government structure, information will be provided on demand supply issues to government, private industry and other stakeholders. I know that there is a lot of concern; the member for Greatorex was going on about the pastoralists. Well, let me tell you, some of the pastoralists here in the Territory have properties in other states in Australia. Some of them have properties in New South Wales, in Victoria and in Western Australia. You never hear them complaining about paying rates in those states.
One of the Holmes Court family properties is in Halls Creek. I know very well that they pay rates that come up to millions of dollars. You never hear them complaining about the rates they pay in Halls Creek. I know some of the pastoralists in Central Australia have properties in other states. You never hear them complaining about the rates they have to pay there. Why are they complaining about the rates here? The local government will provide services to their doorstep. They provide services to the gate of their farms. What they are doing inside their farms and their pastoral properties is exactly what I am doing with inside my house. I mow my own lawn. I clean my own yard. I put my rubbish away myself, but I expect the council to maintain the road outside my house, the footpaths, to provide the rubbish services, and provide the services that local government is supposed to provide. That is what I expect these shires to provide to indigenous communities, to people in towns and communities, and pastoralists.
As I said before, I am a strong supporter of local government. It is the most democratic form of government, the third tier of government, the closest to the people, and the one that can provide jobs, services, opportunities and real democratic change, not only in the city but also in the bush.
I commend the minister for his statement. He has my full support bringing local government to the Northern Territory.
Mr HAMPTON (Stuart): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Minister for Local Government’s statement on local government reform. Local government has played, and will continue to play, an important and essential role in the Northern Territory, particularly in our rural and remote areas. I congratulate the minister, not only on his speech, but also on his courage and leadership in taking local government in the Northern Territory to a new and innovative approach. I acknowledge the support the minister has indicated in his speech from the Australian government and the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory.
It is very important for all levels of government to get behind and support this reform for the benefits to eventuate. It is important to be open and frank about the facts the minister has brought to our attention, because it demonstrates very clearly the need for members of the Legislative Assembly to support these reforms as well, and for a whole-of-community engagement process that the minister has outlined.
In my electorate of Stuart, as with most bush electorates, the disturbing results of the risk assessments conducted by the Department of Local Government in March 2006 are not surprising.
Whilst I am only relatively new to this Assembly, I am pleased to able to contribute to this statement because I have experienced for a long time much of the anguish the minister talked about in his statement. These reforms are not in any way trying to undermine or criticise the commitment and work many elected members in the bush over many years have demonstrated. It is equally important to recognise the efforts of many of the public servants and local government association members and officers who have worked tirelessly over the years supporting community government councils and associations.
Looking around the country, I was surprised to see how long local government and shires have existed in Australia. For example, the Municipal Associations of New South Wales was established in 1883 and the Shires Association of New South Wales established 1908. The Municipal Association of Victoria, with some 79 councils, was formed in 1879. From the beginning of the local government and shire council system in this country, the role of what they are responsible for has changed significantly. However, it is the fundamental role of local government councils that we must remember in this debate. Non-core responsibilities of councils will come as these shires strengthen and develop over the years.
I would like to read out the key principles underpinning the reform process because they best describe what the process is all about: a focus on delivering a fair standard of local government services to all communities; integrated planning between the three levels of government to ensure the delivery of better services in the bush; consultation across all communities throughout the transition and implementation process allowing for flexibility; existing municipalities and new shires working together and sharing resources through regional agreements; and ongoing cooperative partnership between the Northern Territory government, the Australian government and the local government sector to ensure a seamless transition to the new arrangements.
In the Northern Territory, local government has seen a number of changes over the past 29 years. In fact, I can recall the previous government’s attempts in introducing the local government reform agenda in the late 1990s. The CLP’s approach of endless talk and failure to show leadership and get the job done is a regular sore point that people in my electorate talk to me about. We heard in the debate earlier the member for Greatorex’s contribution when he called for more consultation, more talk. We know where that will get us: nowhere. I applaud the minister on his direction and leadership in this matter.
As the member for Casuarina said, it is about time. This is something that people out there are saying to me. They are not against these changes or the reform. They want to see it happen - soon. We must also remember two periods in the history of Northern Territory that have shaped the local government system that we have today and will continue to play a key role in what systems and reforms will be implemented into the future.
Self-government of the Northern Territory in 1978 and the Aboriginal land rights movement have both been significant events in our history that have contributed to both the development and governance of our rural and remote regions. Added to this was the introduction of the self-determination era that saw the management and control of former reserves and missions shifted to indigenous people.
While local government has a long history in Australia, in the Northern Territory it has a relatively short history, covering the past 29 years, as I have said. During this period, indigenous Territorians have been required to adapt to this form of governance and system from a very traditional system of living. Realising how old some of these local government associations are in other states puts into perspective the challenges we face in the Northern Territory. These reforms have the potential to move outside of these core service areas, highlighting the importance of the advisory boards and transitional committees established by the minister. It is clear the role of these advisory boards is critical because, as the minister has correctly stated, they are there to provide advice to him.
The detail we heard the member for Nelson talking about is the role and the issues that the advisory committees will, no doubt, take up. All of us in this House have talked about the issues of local government in the bush over time, and we are all aware of what the price of doing nothing has had on the Northern Territory. People out there in the bush deserve good local governance. If there is not a system in place, people will move backwards and forwards to where they can access these services.
Since the minister’s speech to the Local Government Association on 11 October 2006, I have had the opportunity to discuss the regional shire model with many of my constituents. The model, a framework based on four municipal councils and nine shire councils, all incorporated under the Local Government Act, will provide communities with certainty and direction. Obviously, like many of us, particularly the bush members, there are many issues that we regularly hear out and, having many relatives and friends living in remote communities throughout the Territory, I have heard my fair share of them.
Obviously, having to continuously recruit for new CEOs and the repetition community councillors have to go through when a new CEO starts is upsetting for many. I have seen firsthand the impact this cycle of continuous recruiting on remote communities is having, and let me tell you, the people out there are also very worried about it. For some of my communities, the result is that it has made it virtually impossible to establish and maintain basic services.
One area that I still do not quite understand is how the Grants Commission formulas work. They should be based on needs, not size or per capita. Work needs to continue to ensure this formula is more equitable to the needs of Territorians living in the bush. It is essential that all sectors of the bush community most affected by this reform, such as the Cattlemen’s Association, the land councils, the Chamber of Commerce, the Local Government Association and the indigenous communities work together because, as neighbours, they are the ones that will benefit most from this reform.
Pastoralists are key stakeholders in the regions of the Northern Territory. They are also neighbours to the many indigenous communities in these remote areas and, in many ways, are working alongside and sharing resources and services with the many communities in the regions. Key services, including maintaining roads and airstrips and the delivery of essential services, are just a number of areas that they are working together on. That is why they are important players in this whole process. I look forward to catching up with many of the pastoralists in my electorate over the coming months to discuss the local government reforms with them.
Mining, horticulture and other industries are also critical industries providing economic and employment opportunities in our remote regions and, through this government’s economic development strategies, will be significant players in developing our regions as well. I certainly appreciate the benefits the minister indicated during his speech, in the ability of the shires to share administrative systems and services, make better use of by-laws, contract to local service providers and strengthen local economies. I would add in there, that the cooperation between the municipal councils with shire councils is also a big benefit and a positive move.
I can give one small example to the Assembly on how this can be a positive; that is, the relationship between the Indigenous Knowledge Centre at Ti Tree and their relationship with the Alice Springs Town Council Library. The Alice Springs Town Council Library offers support, training and mentoring to the local indigenous officer working at the Ti Tree Knowledge Centre, which has been fantastic and provided great results for the community.
While the focus of the shires will be delivering core services, there will, no doubt, be other opportunities to venture into non-core service areas, particularly through the regional economic development process.
The current situation in my electorate, where we have a combination of outstation resource centres, incorporations or associations, and community government councils all working in isolation in a region, all competing for funding, sometimes against each other, is unsustainable. One of the biggest challenges the remote regions of the Territory face is that of raising non-grant revenue, as the minister has rightly pointed out in his speech. In the municipal councils, we have the rate system that allows revenue to be raised to assist with the delivery of municipal services and improving infrastructure in the community. However, whilst many of those people living in remote communities have been paying into some form of rental collection and rates for many years, it has not been enough to meet the growing demand on these services and infrastructure.
We must also remember that many of the people we are talking about who are most impacted upon by the regional shire reforms are those people living in remote areas who are on the lowest income levels in Australia. There needs to be a continuing acceptance by other levels of government that our remote communities and people will continue to need assistance through grants and programs from both the Northern Territory and federal governments. I have confidence in the minister to deliver this reform because he has a wealth of knowledge and experience from living and working in the Territory.
I also attended the first meeting of the advisory board on 8 and 9 March in Alice Springs with the minister. Whilst the talks were robust and direct, the mood was positive. I acknowledge the appointment to the advisory board in mid-December last year of a few men from my electorate: Maurie Ryan from the Daguragu Community Government Council, Tony Scrutton from the Anmatjere Council, and Geoffrey Barnes from the Lajamanu Community Government Council. Each of these members of the advisory board bring with them a wealth of experience but, most importantly, they are all community-based members so they know what living in remote communities is all about, which is what we often forget about in this House.
We must remember that by saying our communities are dysfunctional we are not having a shot at individual communities or people, but it is purely a description of the state that they are in. Perhaps a more appropriate word would be ‘unmanageable’.
Our regional centres such as Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Katherine are important and vital access points for remote Territorians. The minister has demonstrated through the work of the Town Camp Taskforce in Alice Springs that there is a genuine need for change - and the time is right. The normalisation of town camps and the work undertaken by the task force will deliver equitable and appropriate levels of municipal services around the town camps in Alice Springs.
Good local government will bring about positive images and environments to attract future developments into our regions. Strong local government and the establishment of the Economic Development Committees will provide the right environment for business to flourish and job creation for locals.
I am genuinely excited about the direction in which this government is moving in relation to the bush, and improving the lives of Territorians living in the bush. We, as members of parliament, need to get away from the blame game and bring on changes that are going to improve the living conditions and service delivery to those living in rural and remote Northern Territory. We must not forget the past, because the past is something that we are stuck with today, and it has its fair share of challenges that we need to address - things such as lack of education. The poor planning for the bush in the past has presented the problems we have today.
As I said, I am excited about the future. The minister’s statement today is just one example of how this government is working to improve the lives of all Territorians. We heard in the past week the Chief Minister’s statement on the challenges ahead for us all in this House and as Territorians - challenges in health, education, and for remote Territorians. I am proud to be a member of this government because I genuinely believe it is governing for all Territorians.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Mr Deputy Speaker, like many of us in this House, I certainly hope there is success for the minister in this big undertaking.
The Territory is unique and has a unique form of local and community government. In the past, I believe that community councils and associations have been useful in introducing people in remote communities to taking responsibility for their people, no matter how small or remote they are. However, as the minister said, it is probably now time to make changes - changes that in the past have failed and not brought about much major reform. I say that looking back to what the CLP did when I was minister. We did it on a voluntary basis, the reform agenda, but it obviously failed, and there is no doubt about it. I guess what the minister is saying is let us not make it voluntary; let us just tell them what is going to happen. That may seem a rather harsh way to go about things but it is probably at a stage when ...
Mr Wood: It is normal. That is how they have been treated all this time.
Mrs BRAHAM: Stop muttering; let me talk and then you can have your turn.
We had good faith when we looked at voluntary reform, but it did not work. The only thing I will say to the minister is that this should not be the final package. If, during the transition period and the consultation period, there needs to be fine-tuning and changes made again, then you should take it on board. It will not be a reflection of failure or anything like that if some changes have to be made to the boundaries or to the proposals to date.
We all know that any change must be managed with care and not disadvantage the people it was meant to help. That is what I am hearing from other members: do not take away the autonomy that some of those small local councils have enjoyed. Some have done well. There are some successful local councils out there, and we do not need to disadvantage them or make them feel as though they are failures because some other councils have failed. Do not let us take away their autonomy when they have proven that they have good employment, and good governance. That is important. Let us most of all still see some strong representation. That is going to be the hardest thing of all: to make sure that the small communities have as much representation to get their points of view as the large communities. That is going to be a challenge within itself, minister, to make sure that good representation does occur.
We also talk about services. We are hoping these changes will bring about better efficiency, better effective services, better accountability in the way we go about it, and better decision-making structures. All these are great words and great ideals but somehow or other you have to make sure that all these things are acceptable to all participants and that all participants get their fair share of the slice; that some do not get more than others because they are stronger and bigger.
I am not sure about the boundaries, and I know the member for Nelson will talk about this. I think it is huge. The area the member for Stuart was talking about, that is going to be serviced by this particular shire, is huge. It goes from the Queensland border to the Western Australian border. And it is not just communities in between; it is also small outstations that are being affected by this. Geographically, the Territory has always been hard to manage. Members in this House who have large bush electorates will say it is very hard to see everyone in the electorate because of the isolation and massive geographical distances in between centres. This is one of the disadvantages we are faced with in the Territory. We have to ensure the people on that side are not disadvantaged by the people in the middle who forget also the people on the other side. I believe, minister, that is going to be the greatest challenge for this particular reform agenda that you are embarking on.
I am still not quite sure whether your break-up for the Territory into shires based on population is the way to go because I believe the geographics come to play quite strongly in it. We must remember that many of our communities were based on missions, pastoral properties, and settlements. They often brought together many people from different clans and groups. We are now asking an even wider range of people to work together as one, when we know that many of the missions and settlements have not worked in the current form because of the disadvantage of having so many different clans brought together.
Just as it has been difficult to get people to work because they have family squabbles and what have you, how much harder is it going to be when you are bringing together an even wider range of people? We must bear that in mind. There is difficulty now in the administration of communities – which were set up from the missions and settlements - without looking at a wider range of people coming together.
We all know stories of dysfunctional councils in the bush. We all know that they find it difficult to retain good, qualified, competent staff. We know that not enough training goes on in the communities for the local people to take over. We also know that many councils will not take any notice of the advice given to them by their staff, and they prefer to make their decisions without thinking about the community as a whole. Sometimes it is family-based decision-making, which is not always the best thing to do. This is going to be the huge challenge for these decision-makers to appease all people. You cannot be God to everyone and make them all happy. There has to be some rationalisation and you have to get that across to them very strongly.
There has always been that strong relationship between traditional decision-making and local decision-making, which has often been a disadvantage for sensible decisions to be made at the community council level. Quite often, I hear of contracts that should be let that have been held up because people in the community cannot decide where the house is going to go, and who was going to get the house, so the house just has not been built. That is one of the frustrations of the system as it is now. Hopefully, the system you are talking about implementing will feature stronger decision-making.
There has been a comment by the CEO of Alice Springs Town Council that he was quite willing to help, and larger councils can do that. They have the expertise of the payroll people and the finance department. It is important to tap into expertise that is already there. If people like him are willing to share that expertise - going out to train or bringing people in to train - we should be taking that opportunity. Hopefully, there will be some good things that do come of it.
I am interested in by-laws. I wrote to you, minister, and you gave me a list of councils that had by-laws but they were mainly litter or dog by-laws, and many of them were not enforced. It is good if we can say: ‘These are examples of by-laws’. We could take some of them to communities in Western Australia or Queensland where the councils do have by-laws up on signs and they make people abide by them. Perhaps make them understand that you can get better living conditions for people if you do have these by-laws. Even now, we grizzle about the Alice Springs Town Council not enforcing their by-laws on camping and litter and dogs, and what have you. It is not just a remote community that might difficulty with enforcing by-laws; it happens in all our towns and municipal councils. It is just one of those things: if you do have rules, you can fall back on them.
I am not sure how you are going to get more funding. That is something, I suppose, because I did not have a briefing, I missed out on it. However, it would be interesting to know how …
Mr Wood: You did not get up.
Mrs BRAHAM: Yes, I did not get up at 7.30 am. It was offered to me last night for 7.30 this morning, and I have to admit, minister, I just did not make it, not being an early morning riser. I do get here by 10 am; that is the main thing.
Funding is important. The spread of funding and how to make sure small communities are not disadvantaged again is important. It is a bit like road funding. If you can tap into the federal budget for roads, we have so many roads in the Territory that need attention. There is no doubt about it. When you think back over history, many of them were just graded for cattle trucks. Now we need formed, well made roads because of the population and the movement of people. I would like to see how you are going to do that. Perhaps you can give us a bit more of that information as time goes by.
Can I give a little plug for outstations? There are good outstations. I know there is criticism that outstations have been spread out and almost deserted at times, and perhaps it was not wise to put a little cluster of houses here, and then have to provide them with power and all those services that you do. However, there are also some outstations that operate well. Someone who lived on an outstation said to me the other day: ‘It is the best way for us to live because it takes us away from all the humbug of big communities. We really love living out here in the bush. We have a good lifestyle. We can do the things we want to do without interference, and we can still enjoy the fun things that we have as people’. I believe, in some cases, some of these outstations have given a better life to many of the people. I understand that the federal government said at one stage that we should not be funding outstations; we should be making those people move in together. I just say that there are good outstations. We should support them and we should retain them, because I do believe there is an advantage in allowing people to live that type of life if that is what they want.
You also need to acknowledge those successful councils. I have said this a bit earlier, but there is a feeling that they are being put down, that because they are successful they are not getting the recognition they should. I can understand why the member for Nelson is concerned about Litchfield, but there are other councils that have also done well. I can understand their concerns. It is a bit like the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association - you have to win their hearts and their souls before they really take it on board because, obviously for them, what financial burden are they going to be asked to carry and will there be any benefits for them? I believe the benefit of them being involved in the shire is that they also have expertise that they can give to councils. I would like to think that they can use their expertise to guide some of the decision-making within their area, rather than just sitting on the outside looking in. Bring them in and make them part of the whole decision-making process. There are some excellent pastoralists out there who do good work, look after their people well, provide all the right sort of things for the people who work for them and, obviously, have a lot of knowledge. So let us not keep them on the fringes. Let us embrace them and say: ‘Come in and help us make this work’. We need to tap into their expertise without disadvantaging them.
On the whole, what can you say, except we hope it works. We hope at the end of the day it provides better services. However, if there need to be changes along the way, then let us do it. Let us ensure that we are flexible enough to change as it is needed, to review if necessary, and not just to come down with a big stick and say, ‘This is what will happen no matter what’, because if we do not take the people with them, then they will not be with us. They will scatter everywhere. It is all a case of cooperation, belief in what you are doing, having a fair go, and ensuring voices are heard. Good luck to the minister on this. I hope it succeeds. I hope he really does listen as he goes along.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the minister’s statement on Local Government reform. All of us who have been around for a long time have heard of the successes of the small councils, and even some of the big councils, within the local government systems. However, we have also heard the stories of the failures and the frightening statistics in the minister’s speech - eight CEOs in the last 12 months; and risk assessments carried out on 56 remote communities with nearly 50% of these councils either dysfunctional or in the high risk category. They are very high statistics.
The state of dysfunction is not good enough. For too long, there has been an acceptance that substandard local government service delivery for remote communities is what should be. People accept that as normal, and we are saying it is not good enough. As a government, we have to strive to put in place a better system.
We have heard from the members whose electorates will be affected by this reform. I am waiting to hear from my other colleagues. We have heard the members for Stuart and Nhulunbuy talk about their electorates. I am looking forward to hearing from the member for Macdonnell as well. There are many different issues and we will see them through each of the regions.
I am going to focus on my region. We know from the Tiwi Island local government, which was one of the first three amalgamations that went through previously, there have been problems in the past, and they have taken some time. One of the issues is changing from a system where you had single councils and coming up with one local government with layers of bureaucracy. I have made representation to the minister and discussed with him my thoughts and experience of working through the Tiwi Island local government and the structures there, and how the reforms in the shires can actually be made. We can see better efficiencies and the issues of governance and building a totally different structure which we have not seen in our local or remote Aboriginal communities.
West Arnhem and the communities in my electorate - Warrawi, Minjilang, Gunbalanya, outstations around the Cobourg Peninsula and throughout West Arnhem - have been involved for some time. For about three years they have been talking about whether they move towards having a regional system, and whether those smaller councils - particularly Warrawi and Minjilang, which have had problems in the past and have not been viable enough to stand on their own two feet - can merge with a bigger council.
I welcome the concept and the reforms the minister has proposed. It will create great efficiency. Issues will surface, and they will be talked about and worked through with not just the local government, but the advisory council. Then you have the local implementation transition teams. As a local member making representation to the minister, one of my big concerns with much of this is that women in my electorate have not had an opportunity to participate in that; and that there is fairly good representation by women in my electorate. That is very important and I thank the minister for taking those concerns on board. I am not saying that our men are not any good. I just think there are many issues at the coalface in many of these communities that our women have been involved in and it is important that they are at the table having input into how the structure should work.
I welcome the reforms, minister, and I join with the member for Stuart. I was listening to what he was saying. We have a minister who certainly knows and understands. I know the many discussions that he and I - and I am sure other members - have had about where these reforms are going to happen, and he is aware of a number of those problems. As I said, we will work through them.
It is time. We have to change what is happening on the ground in those communities. We have to get better efficiency happening in our remote communities. I am not saying that some time in the future we are going to see these problems. The reality is that it is going to take a number of years. It has taken nearly four years and we are going onto our fifth year with Tiwi Islands local government. We are still working through some of those areas, but the light at the end of the tunnel is there, and with these shires we can see that.
I want to pick up on this report from the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory, about which I had discussions with the minister. I do not know whether many members have had access to this. It is an audit of employment opportunities in remote communities in the Northern Territory. It was from the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations which funded LGANT to look at 52 remote communities in the Northern Territory - at those employment opportunities, and at CDEP. The profiles they came up with are quite an interesting. I was saying to the minister that the only area that was missing was the link and the opportunities through the shire for employment and tying that with CDEP. Building that capacity over those shires will certainly create, with documents like this, a greater opportunity for those communities involved in those shires to better explore those employment options. With the regionalisation of CDEP the capacity will increase.
The member for Braitling raised the issue of outstations. I welcome these reforms for the simple reason that, for the first time, those outstations will get an opportunity to access local government services which has simply never been there. In West Arnhem there is a strong outstation movement, and I am sure other members have those strong outstations because outstations play a strong role. We know that people move from the main communities to those outstations because of problems in the major communities, and the outstations provide a safe haven. I know that in West Arnhem the outstation movement is applauding this minister and the reforms. They are looking forward to it because they will get access to services for the first time. It will increase the capacity of those shires to be able to access federal funding, especially roads funding.
Minister, I know that on the other side, people will pick holes. It was good to listen to the member for Braitling because, whilst she had some concerns, we know that there have been problems out in those communities for such a long time. We cannot say: ‘This is bad and it is not going to work’. How do we know it is not going to work if we are not going to try it? Sure, any system that is going to propose change is going to get resistance. I, like many local members, have had concerns about the concept of the shires and the reforms, but have been able to work through those with your department. I thank officers from the department who have been able to provide that information, as well as officers in your ministerial office who have been very open to …
A member: Accommodating.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Yes, accommodating. That is the right word. They have been accommodating on many of those issues.
I welcome Patrick Dodson. You have selected someone to be the chair whose integrity and credibility - not just amongst Aboriginal people but with non-indigenous people - is there. His reputation is before him and his selection as your chair is welcome.
I also welcome your acceptance of three very strong people from my electorate – Esther Djarrhurunga from Oenpelli, Ronald Lami Lami and Ralph Blyth – three people with very strong views who have had a lot of experience working across those areas, particularly Ralph Blyth. They will certainly bring their opinions from their regions to the table and will be fantastic representatives for the West Arnhem Shire as we move towards development of these new shire concepts.
Minister, I welcome your statement. I support it and look forward to working through the transitional plans with those local bodies.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the statement on local government reform by the Minister for Local Government. This is a bold step, minister, but it is something that is required. This is required so that it gives our people hope, so that it gets them out of the box of just thinking about their communities and allows them to think in the shire model and a regional structure so that they are thinking about their neighbours, say at Hermannsburg, Areyonga, Mt Liebig and at Kintore, because we are all one people living in the one area.
From its inception, local government has had a troubled history in the Northern Territory and, as a result, community government processes have failed to improve the lives of people on remote communities. The situation is continuing to deteriorate because local government needs to spend an increasing proportion of their limited funds on administration rather than service delivery in communities. Compounding this problem is the difficulty of attracting and retaining skilled staff.
There is a pressing need for change, and I congratulate the minister for the comprehensiveness and detail of local government reform that has been developed. I particularly welcome the standardisation of services across all communities with the introduction of minimum, core local government service standards that will be developed on the basis of size and location of communities. Establishing a clear set of standards and targets for the provision of amenities in Aboriginal communities that reflect the Australian average will significantly improve the quality of life for Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory.
Standardisation of service delivery also means equity. Treating communities fairly and equitably will be a prime factor in ensuring the success of this local government reform, as it will lessen the reason for conflict between communities, and communities and the shire council. Standardisation will also mean that those communities located on the borders of South Australia and Western Australia, like Kintore, Docker River and Finke can be sure that they will enjoy equitable services with other communities in the shire, despite the tyranny of distance. Being part of a larger shire will also mean that they will attract other services despite their location. At present, such communities feel that their distant locations mean that they miss out on programs and opportunities because they are not on any radar screen and are too far away for people to visit. As members of larger shires, they will necessarily be included in the new developments and opportunities.
I will divert from my speech and talk about what I have heard at Finke. Finke is a classic example of what I am talking about. Because Finke is so far away, they fall under the radar of service delivery and people visiting there. They feel that, under this new shire model, they will get the attention that is needed. Also, the people in Kintore. I raised this with the minister on our travels about a month ago. I was very concerned when I went with Nigel Adlam into Western Australia and visited Kiwirrkurra, which is under the shire model in Western Australia. Kiwirrkurra has been left out of service delivery in Western Australia. I do not want to see that happening in the Northern Territory. I know we have spoken at length about those issues to ensure that communities like Kintore, Finke and Bonya keep within our eyesight; that people visit there, people talk to them and we ensure that the services are there so that all Territorians benefit.
I will be interested to see how the additional costs will be imposed on shire councils - because of the relatively isolated nature of most communities when compared with the municipal councils, it will be calculated through the grants process - and how the disabilities imposed, because of the fragmented nature of settlement on outstations, will be resolved. We have also spoken about that as well, minister. As the member for Arafura said, this will be the first time that outstations will get the local government services that communities have. In communities it is about unity, about ensuring that people feel they are part of the Territory, getting the same service, and about equity.
Permanent outstation residents in Central Australia who are becoming increasingly concerned about their future viability since the demise of ATSIC will also welcome standardisation and the security of service delivery that being members of the shire council will provide. An important initiative of the reform is the negotiation for better and fairer arrangements for local government to deliver non-core services like Centrelink, primary health and CDEP. Too often, the arrangement Centrelink has made with remote communities has resulted in community councils bearing the burden for providing the service. Communities that have entered into agency agreements with Centrelink have often found that the funds they receive are inadequate to cover the services they are required to provide.
A good example of this is the Arramwelke Resource Centre which services Bonya and outstations on the eastern Plenty to the Queensland border. It costs Arramwelke approximately $22 000 per month in phone and fax fees alone just to communicate with Centrelink to ensure that the residents can access their entitlements. In addition, resource centre staff need to devote a considerable number of hours each week to assist residents to complete the necessary paperwork. This is a large burden for small resource centres, one that they are required to undertake because, not only does the lack of income have enormous social and health consequences, the survival of the resource centre is vital. If people are not receiving income, they cannot pay rent, and the community would then not receive its R&M grant and houses would fall into disrepair.
Before the sittings, the member for Stuart and I had a meeting with Centrelink. This is exactly what we spoke about with the manager of Centrelink; that Centrelink services have become a burden on local government. The Northern Territory government and local government are delivering too many services to indigenous people that the Commonwealth should be providing.
For too long, communities across the Northern Territory have been caught in a catch-22 situation, so I am pleased that the local government reform is addressing these issues that have caused many people real hardship and grief. Ensuring that people receive their appropriate welfare income is important but, even more important, is moving people off welfare and giving local people the opportunity for real jobs with real incomes. I welcome the fact that the minister has made this a major focus of the new local government arrangements. It is crucial that local people will be provided with jobs and new skills. I have spoken on this issue many times in this House, but I express again that it is crucial to train local people for jobs rather than importing labour into communities where there is such high unemployment. Not only is this bad for communities and Aboriginal people economically, it is also has a devastating psychological effect which we all witness in such issues as violence and other forms of antisocial behaviour. The economic benefits for the Northern Territory of having a skilled indigenous workforce are enormous.
I also applaud the strategy of having development coordinators to assist elected ward councillors to undertake their representative functions. One of the challenges to being an effective advocate for their ward, as well as communicating important council decisions, is the ability of councillors to travel around their wards and communicate with people. I know from my experience with ATSIC that regional councillors become much more effective once our regional council implemented a system of regular ward visits and meetings supported by our staff. This helped councillors to further their understanding of needs within their wards, as well as communicating council decisions to community residents. This means that councillors were actually able to represent their wards and, as a result, I believe better and fairer decisions were made. The importance of ward councillors regularly visiting their wards to ensure that services are being delivered, and communicating council decisions in languages that residents of remote communities understand, is a powerful accountability tool that will ensure that the new local government reform is a success.
At present, councillors are meant to be accountable to their electorates as well as the Territory government. However, to date they have not been obliged to report in ways that are meaningful to their constituencies. This has meant that many people did not understand what their council was doing or even what their council was required to do, which resulted in much confusion and conflict. Putting in place a system that will ensure transparency is important to the ongoing success of the new councils.
Accountability would also be strengthened by ensuring that elected ward councillors are able to attend all local board meetings within their ward. This will be an important mechanism to avoid the development of a them-and-us mentality and, secondly, so that the shire council and the local boards continue to work to the same goals with the same information. This will support the ward councillors as representatives, as well as increasing accountability and transparency.
I also recommend that the minister also give consideration as to how to make the reporting by the department on performance of councils more public, accessible and readily understandable. Transparency is the best method of ensuring that the new system is working, and will also foil those who seek to undermine the new arrangements for their own purposes.
As to the matter of the indicative boundaries, I am aware that in Central Australia the communities along the Plenty Highway see their community of interest economically and culturally within the southern shire, and that this matter will be resolved through the regional consultation process. I had a long talk on my last visit before sittings, with Harts Range, Bonya and Alcoota, and explained to them that they were in a shire next to the southern shire. They wanted me to bring to you, minister, the fact that, culturally, they are not linked to those people and their service point is Alice Springs not Ti Tree. That is something that I hope you take on board.
The minister has appointed a good range of people on the Local Government Advisory Board, and I am confident that, in combination with the regional consultations, the shire council boundaries will be one that people are happy to support. I know that during our visit to Hermannsburg, Wallace Rockhole and Titjikala, people said to the minister: ‘Why 2008, minister? We want it now. We want it to start now’. As the minister said, without action now, local government reform could be bogged down in a talkfest for the next decade, as it has been over the past 20 years.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I look forward to the implementation of a local government system which will start to improve the lives of all people on remote communities in the Northern Territory. I commend the statement to the House.
Ms McCARTHY (Arnhem): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I support this courageous initiative by our colleague, the member for Barkly. It is courageous, because he is not afraid to tackle the deep-seated issues that affect the most impoverished people in the Northern Territory community: those who live in our remote regions and who are mostly Aboriginal Territorians. I have to stop here and just reflect on where we are in the history of the Northern Territory; to think that I can stand here, as indeed the previous speaker, the member for Macdonnell did, as one of six Aboriginal members in this parliament. I stand here to speak about one of the largest reforms in the history of the Northern Territory in regard to our remote regions, headed by the Local Government minister, who is also Aboriginal.
I would like to ask all members to have a good think about this particular statement before the House. Yes, there is a lot of anxiety, as the minister has said - anxiousness that comes with change, and not wanting to move from your comfort zone. I say to the minister that you are on the right path, that your care and concern for people of the Northern Territory is quite evident in the way you have gone about trying to establish the advisory board, and selecting the best person to head that advisory board.
I acknowledge, in particular, Pat Dodson, who is heading our advisory board. Let me just remind the House and give some background to Pat Dodson. Most people would be very well aware of Pat Dodson, but I would like to share something that I have not even told Pat Dodson, and that is perhaps the first time I met Pat. I was only a student at a boarding school in Alice Springs and I might have been in the third or fourth grade. I remember Pat working there and, at that time in his life, he was a Catholic priest at Our Lady of the Sacred Heart School. For someone as young as me, who had come from about 800 km away to go to boarding school there, to find a familiar and friendly face in this leader of the Aboriginal community, at that time; he provided a great insight and example to young Aboriginal people growing up in Alice Springs. They are the personal memories that I have of Pat Dodson as I was growing up in Alice Springs. To know that he could listen to our concerns as young people growing up and to know that he would be fair and just in whatever decisions he made in life.
This was clearly evident as he went along in his own life after leaving Alice Springs and moving into roles such as the Commissioner of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody. In 1989, I had the opportunity of running into him when I had started as a journalist with the ABC to cover the Aboriginal Deaths in Custody inquiry in the Northern Territory. I observed, at that particular time, Pat Dodson’s role in the wider community, adding to the respect and integrity that he had already gained in the indigenous community.
In 1991, he was appointed Chairman of the Reconciliation Council and I recall this event as a journalist with the ABC. He headed the Reconciliation Council at a time when white Australia and, indeed, all Australians, were dealing and struggling with the issue of the Mabo decision. All of a sudden, the legal system of this country had to recognise that Aboriginal people were here, that terra nullius did not exist in the legal term of the Westminster system. Pat Dodson had to carry through at that particular time the racism, bias and deep-seated prejudices in this country. I recall his disappointment and his own struggles in trying to walk a fair and just line between white and black Australia until he ended up retiring in 1997 from the Reconciliation Council, saying at the time that he ‘feared for the spirit of this country; this country we all love and know as Australia’.
To have him heading this advisory board, knowing that he will care and look out for the most impoverished people in the Northern Territory community, who happen to be Aboriginal, should be a fact that this House puts on notice with great encouragement and a huge welcome. We know that he will care for the people of the Northern Territory, for all people, and we also know that he will be fair and just in his deliberations and in his message. He will have plenty of messages to give to the Minister for Local Government as he observes what the staff of the Local Government department are doing as they travel around the Northern Territory over the next 18 months.
I would like to highlight that it is not the first time a minister of the Martin Labor government has stood in this House and spoken with great passion about the need to pave a far more effective future for people in our remote regions. I recall, with a great sense of pride, my predecessor, the former member for Arnhem, John Ah Kit, speaking about the need for Aboriginal Territorians to be a part of positive change for the future benefit of generations of Territorians to come. I quote a couple of paragraphs from minister Ah Kit’s statement to this House on 7 March 2002:
There you have it: good government, the cornerstone of our approach - equity, fairness, social justice, economic prosperity, the rights of every citizen of the Northern Territory. Here we have a minister, the member for Barkly, pursuing the cause that began when this government came to power. I know this for a fact because I have grown up in the Northern Territory. I am one of those people who grew up in the remote regions, who knows what it is like to feel disempowered in decision-making, who watched as my uncles and grandfathers had their rights stripped away from them in standing up in the local council in Borroloola, at that particular time in 1985. The council was dismissed, and I watched the sense of great disempowerment, wondering why people did not feel as though they were in charge of their own future. It is that thought that stays in my mind when I think of these reforms that we are looking at and the shire councils.
The minister has said in his statement that there are concerns, there are fears. People feel anxious about change. Yes, they have every right to. Let us not think that our fears and anxieties should overwhelm us in such a way that we not be courageous in pursuing what we can see will be a much better and improved future for all people here. It needs to be shaped, guided and directed, and we are going to do it under Pat Dodson. We are going to do it under Elliot McAdam, as the Local Government Minister. We are going to do it under Clare Martin, Chief Minister of the Northern Territory. We are going to do it with the goodwill of this parliament which, for once, will recognise that it is time - beyond time - that every single politician in this Assembly realises the urgency and the need to help the most impoverished people in the Northern Territory.
The minister is right when he asks: ‘Why should Territorians in remote areas not enjoy the same functionality and sustainability as local government enjoyed in other parts of regional Australia?’ It is a question that we in this House should all be asking, and that we should now get behind the Local Government Minister in answering. It is an absolute disgrace that, of the 56 remote councils assessed by our government, 50% of these councils are classified as either dysfunctional or high risk – 50%, right across the Northern Territory. Only half of our councils are working. What does it say then for those people who are living in those communities wanting a better life for their children, for their brother or sister to be able to go to school, to get an education, to work in the local council? What does it say for them? No sense of empowerment for their future, being able to speak about the things that they want.
The member for Greatorex taunts this government and asks: ‘Why, in the five years since my predecessor’s speech to this parliament, are there so many dysfunctional councils?’ Let me remind the member for Greatorex that we are all responsible, collectively, for ensuring an equitable and just future for all people of the Northern Territory. It is all very well to scoff and laugh at our government’s determined focus on improving the lives of the first Australians in our remote regions and, indeed, all who live there. I have to say to the member for Greatorex: you and your predecessors are not without blame. I do not want to go there, because that is going down a path that we do not want to go. There is no point blaming. There is no point looking at: ‘Oh, it is your fault. You did not do that, or while you were in government, you should have done this’. There is no point.
The people out there, the ones who matter, are sick and tired of hearing that. They want to hear and see action. They want to know that we mean what we say. Every time I go to Ngukurr, people ask me: ‘Barb, what is happening with the bridge? What is happening with our council? What is happening with the jobs? What about CDEP?’ When I go to Ramingining, the council wants to know what is happening to its building. They worry that the building is not good enough. They want to know what is happening to the services. They want to know what is happening to housing. They want to know what is happening for the women. These are the issues that are of deep concern to people in our remote areas. Sitting in here and blaming one another is not going to go anywhere.
It is about three years now, maybe four - I do not know, maybe someone can correct me - since the Howard government abolished ATSIC. I have mentioned this a few times in this parliament. I have to sincerely say that it has been since the abolition of ATSIC that we have seen a greater demise of a sense of empowerment, and a greater rise of absolute despair and hopelessness in our regions. For all its faults - and ATSIC had plenty of faults - at a national level, ATSIC was one of the strongest voices we had for grassroots people. ATSIC worked at a local level; it worked because people felt they had a voice straight to the halls of Canberra. It worked because people felt that their requests for funding and housing were being answered. With the abolition of ATSIC, there has been a huge vacuum - a vacuum so large it has lulled our communities into an even deeper sense of helplessness over their inability to govern their own affairs and future. That is a terrible feeling.
I say to the people of Alice Springs, Darwin and Katherine: you have a local council, but what if you did not have anything there? What if, all of a sudden, there was nothing there, and somewhere else was making a decision for you and, culturally, it was different because English is not your first language? Maybe English is your third language and, all of a sudden, the world is really strange. That is what it is like for many of my constituents in Arnhem. I have to learn Yolngu Matha so I can dialogue strongly with my constituents. Why cannot people in local government, in other government services, do the same? Why cannot members of this House choose to speak in Aboriginal language?
One of the greatest things we have to look at within this reform is the issue of information, and information flow. I have spoken about the anxiety which we all know and understand is felt but, in order to shape this reform agenda, which I know we will do well, we must include information through our Aboriginal Interpreter Service. We must include all those Aboriginal people who speak English as a third or fourth language. We have well over 108 languages in the Northern Territory. There are members, my colleagues, who know which are the most predominant languages spoken in respective areas. I encourage the minister and our government to ensure that within this 18-month process, this information flow occurs through the interpreter service; that we get on board the Aboriginal Interpreter Service and provide funding and support for them to be very much part of this. This is about their future, as well as all of ours.
This reform agenda under the Martin government, under the carriage of the member of the Barkly and his department of Local Government, is the largest reform agenda for local government in the history of the Territory. Let me reiterate that: it is a huge reform agenda. Speakers will probably say: ‘Remember this and remember that’, but let me tell you that as an Aboriginal woman standing in this House, it is one of the biggest reforms to occur for Aboriginal people across the Northern Territory. Now Aboriginal people have a chance to have their voices heard through the advisory board, and an opportunity to speak. In the words of the Minister for Local Government, failure to grab hold of this opportunity will mean more of the same - more crises and more dysfunctional councils, which will perpetuate this disadvantage for another generation in remote indigenous communities.
It is human nature to be apprehensive when faced with change. However, let me say that there are many who are anxious and, yes, we have to get it right. The land councils are correct in their cautiousness, and the Cattlemen’s Association is also fine in its reluctance to embrace this completely …
Mr KNIGHT: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be granted an extension of time, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms McCARTHY: Thank you, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker. The land councils are correct in their cautiousness and the Cattlemen’s Association is also fine in its reluctance to warmly embrace this. I am confident that we can talk a lot with the Cattlemen’s Association because we know that roads is one of the biggest issues that we have; a united issue and one which all people in our remote regions have concerns about. Without good roads, without access, without the bridges that we need, we cannot get the houses in there. We cannot get the people in to live there, to work with people, to train people. We cannot have the services that we need.
I say to the Cattlemen’s Association and to the Northern Land Council and to the Central Land Council: come on board with this; let us talk about this. We have the right person, Pat Dodson, to do this. We have all the members of parliament who know their areas and who can speak strongly on the issues of concern. We can shape this to be a great future for all people of the Northern Territory.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend the statement to the House.
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I support the minister’s statement on the Martin government’s Local Government Reform. I state from the outset that this reform is unprecedented in the Northern Territory. I know there have been several goes at tinkering with the system; it has never been as radically or fundamentally reformed as is being proposed. Previous lesser attempts have failed. I remember in 1999 when the CLP government and the Local Government minister at the time, Tim Baldwin, trotted out the local government reform. I take the comments from the member for Arnhem about not harking back to the past, but you have to learn the lessons of the past. That reform was called The Next Step, and the only step it took was a backward step - and a hasty one at that. The CLP blinked at the reforms; there was criticism and they blinked; they went backwards. That was seven or eight years ago and we are paying for it now. They dumped it, and the irony of all of this was that the CLP government had the ludicrous situation of establishing 63 non-contiguous councils as small as 100 persons.
I will just reflect for a minute on my first own awareness of the community government council schemes. I am getting back to how they were established. I was in Tennant Creek at the time. A family member of my partner had a small outstation just north of Tennant Creek, some 70 km away. It was 1994 and I vividly remember the conversation with Marlene Bennett, my partner’s aunty. She was going to apply for Blue Bush, the outstation, to become a community government council. All you needed was 20 people to show an interest and you had one. You had valuable local government money and you had a local government council with 20 people. This is the origins of local government establishment in the Territory that has us to this situation here. It lacked vision. It disregarded the significance and importance of local government in the Territory and it has produced the results that it has nowadays.
I take the comments from the member for Greatorex about that it has only happened in the last five years. Well, that is a load of rubbish. I have been around long enough, and certainly think many of other members have been as well, and it was not a pretty scene prior to 2001.
Why would this government not only reform local government in an even greater way? The minister alluded to it in his statement. Local government and general services out bush and in the region is under the pump. The demise of ATSIC, as the member for Arnhem alluded to, and its failed replacement has been the Shergolds vision of the ICCs, the indigenous coordination centres. This reform of ATSIC was probably the greatest act of bastardry of indigenous service delivery ever seen. The member for Greatorex referred to population drift. That is relevant to the demise of ATSIC and why people are moving back into town: they are not getting the services, they are not getting the support that ATSIC and ATSIS provided.
Major problems require major change and we cannot wait for things to get better or the Commonwealth government to finally wake up to the fact that they have set back the bush for decades. Recently in the VRD region, of the five local government bodies in the area, none had a permanent CEO. I spent five years as the Manager of the Ngaliwurru-Wuli Resource Centre in Timber Creek. I was the longest serving manager they ever had. I outlasted every resource centre and local government council manager in the Katherine region by maybe two. I saw councillors, both good and bad people, come into organisations. It would take them a year to just figure things out and another year to make plans for the organisation, and then they would leave. The organisation would have to start all over again with recruitment and training somebody in the position.
We need consistency, we need a regional perspective, and we need in-house, ongoing support for these local communities to build the services and infrastructure in their area. We cannot do this with the current model. So, what does all this chopping and changing mean to the local resident? It means that there are fits and starts in service delivery and we have seen that all over the Territory.
I have been very vocal and proactive in this reform because I want the best possible outcome for my region. I want the knowledge of how these regions work and the pitfalls in governance and service delivery to be heard and understood by the minister and the department so that the best decisions are made and the best is achieved. I know that this is what the minister is fundamentally focused on, and I thank him for his openness and making himself available for anyone who would like to talk to him about this. Anyone who knows the minister will know that over the last few weeks since the announcement, no one has been refused an audience. In the coming weeks, the minister has made himself available to constituents in my electorate to meet with him about these reforms.
I speak with a degree of knowledge about local government reform. I was in a community organisation when the CLP’s Next Step was around. I worked as a Community Development Officer with the Department of Community Development, Sport and Cultural Affairs in the Katherine Local Government office. I have been to most of the communities in the Katherine and Tennant Creek regions. I have also experienced the highs and lows of local government organisations. These reforms will impact significantly on my electorate and they will challenge all of us to come up with the answers to make it actually work.
Within the Daly electorate, I have the VRD Daly and the Top End Litchfield shires. The preliminary indicative boundaries of the VRD Daly Shire will extend from Port Keats in the northwest to Pine Creek in the north-east and then down around Katherine to Dunmarra, then heading south-west to Daguragu, Kalkarindji and across to the Western Australia border. The Top End Litchfield Shire will include the current Litchfield Shire, the Coomalie Shire, the Douglas Daly region and the Dundee Bynoe area and the entire Cox Peninsula. Within the VRD Daly Shire, you currently have 14 government service delivery organisations. In the Litchfield Shire, you have four organisations.
Developing a governance and service delivery model for such a vast and diverse area will provide a challenge for the shire transitional committees, but I believe it can be achieved. The minister has talked about a regional council model. Those who remember these structures from the ATSIC days will realise that local autonomy and advancement can be achieved. Having a wider regional structure supporting you will also have untold benefits over time.
The announcements of the minister in relation to this matter provided a number of tools which are available to the shire transitional committees to use in the development of the shires. These tools include use of wards, local community plans, community priority lists, ward budgets, ward representations, strategic resource sharing arrangements and ward delegations. Thus, we can see what may be possible in the aforementioned shires. For the Daly VRD shire, you can see the Wadeye, Palumpa, Peppimenarti and Daly areas having wards. These wards could set their own priorities in their own ward community plans. These plans would, obviously, be costed and form the basis for the overall shire budget and business plan.
Ward management plans could be given delegations around roads, maintenance, parks and gardens, CDEP, housing, etcetera. They will be given the autonomy to provide core services in the best localised way, and also be given the regional support of continuity and professional advice to the shire. In the Litchfield Top End shire, you could imagine a situation of perhaps the current Litchfield area not changing; the Dundee and Bynoe area having their own ward; and a couple of wards up in the Cox Peninsula area. They would establish their own priorities for service delivery. They would establish their own community plans. They could get delegations from the shire, maintain their own expenditure, and have their own representation. So, it is very achievable, and those matters that are important to the people can be achieved in development of those shires.
The measure for government would be the effectiveness of service delivery within the local community plans. It would form the basis of local resident analysis of what they actually get from the shire. It would form the key agenda items at community management boards and shire meetings and the focus of the elected members from the various wards. The member for the Greatorex asked: ‘What are these people going to do?’ Well, they are going to work to their community plans; get back to basics. The residents of a ward area set the services that they want, and those boards within those wards work to those, and the elected member on the shire work to those. It is quite fundamental that things can work with what is there.
The people of the Port Keats region in the development of Thamarrurr Regional Council, a task by which 20 different clan groups came together, talked about two main things: autonomy and alliance. They wanted autonomy within the local area, and alliance throughout the region on common issues and aspirations. These two words have resonance with the other smaller councils which will, no doubt, be part of a larger shire. The common threads with these councils have been those two things: autonomy and alliance. Those traits need to be incorporated into any future shire structure. If we do this, we will make them stronger, more effective, and much more viable as an ongoing service delivery and advocacy body.
How are these reforms being progressed? We have heard from the minister today about the people and bodies which will progress these issues. The minister has appointed Mr Patrick Dodson as the Chair of the Local Government Advisory Board. This is an extremely prudent and positive move, and I support the comments of the member for Arnhem about Mr Patrick Dodson. His relevance to my area of the electorate is that he worked as a parish priest at Wadeye in the late 1970s. It is worthy to note that Pat was the first ever Aboriginal ordained Catholic priest in the country. He also had a bit of experience around Katherine, droving cattle into Katherine from outlying areas.
Mr Wood: He does not have any local government experience.
Mr KNIGHT: I will pick up the member for Nelson saying ‘he does not have any local government experience’.
Mr Wood: It will not help him with local government, being a priest.
Mr KNIGHT: It will, because it is about people; it is about their aspirations. Knowing those people and what their aspirations are, how they live their lives, what services they want, is important. If you get somebody in there who has a wealth of local government experience and no experience in the Territory lifestyle, they will fail because you have to understand the people who are out there. That is the most important thing – and it will teach you to interject, because I will pick it up every time.
Members interjecting.
Mr KNIGHT: I can always get an extension. Pat is a worthy choice, and I am sure that he will work with the rest of the advisory board in achieving that.
It is worthy to mention some of those people who are on the core advisory board. Ray Wooldridge - I will mention Ray later - and Brian Stacey, so we have the Commonwealth government there with probably the most senior person in the Northern Territory; Tony Tapsell is the CEO of LGANT; Chris Young from the Chamber of Commerce; Stuart Kenny from the Cattlemen’s Association; Mike Burgess from the Department of Local Government, Housing and Sport; Dennis Bree from the Department of the Chief Minister; and the Northern and Central Land Councils. There is a wealth of experience that is incorporated in there.
Other key people on the advisory committee include Ray Wooldridge whom I mentioned before - I guess this is relevant to my electorate –Veronica Birrell, John Berto and Maurie Ryan. These people are significant to me because they are on the advisory board and are from within my electorate. Ray is someone who most anybody who has been involved in local government will know. He works and lives in Pine Creek and comes from a business background. He knows local government back to front and is a fierce advocate for it. He shares the minister’s vision for fully incorporated and larger councils in the Territory. He could see what the problems are and knows that this move is vital for the sustainability of local government in the Territory.
Veronica Birrell is now based at Kybrook Farm in Pine Creek. She was the chairperson of the Nyirranggulung-Mardrulk-Ngadberre Regional Council, which is to the east of Katherine. Nyirranggulung, along with the formation of Thamarrurr and Tiwi, started off the first round of amalgamations, so Veronica knows the pitfalls. She has the lessons and can bring that learnt experience into the development of the other shires.
Maurie Ryan Japarta is the President of the Daguragu Community Government Council. I support the comments of the member for Stuart, because Maurie is a very strong, vocal advocate for his people and for the region.
John Berto is currently the CEO of the Thamarrurr Regional Council. He came to Port Keats from the NLC, where he was second-in-charge. John is a very capable person and brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to his role on the board.
The Local Government Advisory Board has now established terms of reference. I would like to refer to them so that people can see what they will be looking at and the responsibilities they are charged with. The advisory board will be looking at three main areas.
The first is: Responsibility One - Provide advice on Local Government Regional Management Plans. Within that area, they will be looking at service delivery, administration, development and planning. Within the service delivery area, they will be looking at the core local government services that must be delivered by councils; the methodology for determining the level and standard of core local government services delivered to different communities within the shire; and the methodology of determining the viability of delivering non-core services within the shire.
Within the administration: arrangements for regional sharing between municipals and shires and, where relevant, special purpose towns; and other administrative arrangements, such as the location of regional and sub-regional headquarters.
The development area, obviously, covers areas of economic development, town planning, regional partnerships …
Mr Wood: Town planning? The minister said we do not have town planning.
Mr KNIGHT: That was not being referred to. In the other planning area, they will be looking at strategic plans; business plans, in the operational, finance and service delivery area; transition plans; and governance and representation plans. They will have their work cut out for them.
There are a number of public forums which have been organised, and I put my bid in for a bit more and I am happy to take that on. I know that within the Port Keats/Daly area the key players want to work with the government on getting more information. They know how deep information needs to be put into the region and whether it is down to the family or clan groups, and the best way to do it.
I mentioned core services, and this has been a problem …
Mr NATT: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be granted an extension of time to complete his speech, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr KNIGHT: You have heard the minister talk about core services and that is what we have to get back to. I refer to Wadeye. When John Berto went there, he went back to basics. He said: ‘Clean the streets up, mow the parklands’, and do those things. And the town is looking better, and the townspeople are feeling better. Things are getting delivered. There has been a lot of work done on cost shifting within local government and these shires have to do what they are paid to do; not do the things they are not paid to do, and question what they take on.
Core services are high on the agenda and I support the minister in that. I also want to comment that those core services are going to be worked out by the advisory board, I understand, at a workshop in Katherine. I mentioned core services, and the member for Macdonnell made some comment about it, and it is true. You get asked to provide Centrelink services out there. Some places are only getting paid for 10 hours a week and you have hundreds of people on Centrelink payments. We had the ridiculous situation at Port Keats, a community of 2500 people, and Centrelink was represented with a little hole-in-the-wall phone which was shut much of the time. Therefore, the responsibility of various government agencies to provide those services there was put under the spotlight.
Also, many programs such as the CDEP program, if and when that gets incorporated in the shire, need to be looked at. With the formula for CDEP, you get a certain amount to run operational areas, but it is the same figure if you run it at Katherine or at Lajamanu. Obviously, the cost of providing a similar level of service in those two areas is vastly different. These shires will need to push back to their agencies about what they take on.
One of the areas mentioned was governance training. I know the minister knows this is a hugely important thing which needs to be recognised. One of the most successful governance training programs was called the RAMP program, Remote Area Management Program, which was run in the VRD area in about 1997-98. It was highly successful and the outcomes of that training still exist today. It was a sad time when the CLP canned it. It was a trial and had huge successes, but they canned it. It makes you wonder about the seriousness in which the CLP regarded local government councils at the time ...
Mrs Miller: You cannot help it can you? No.
Mr KNIGHT: I cannot, because it is true. Rates are obviously a huge subject and they will be worked through and developed appropriately by the transitional committees. The pastoral industry is nervous about it, but it is prudent to remember what has been the situation in the Northern Territory and other states. I am just providing a bit of information about what the situation is in the Territory, and I refer to the Parliamentary Record of 1991. The Hon Max Ortmann - a blast from the past - was the Lands and Housing minister, and he was talking about upping the lease arrangements for pastoral properties. He referred to leasing rates and he said:
That just provides a bit of information about the global picture for pastoral rates and pastoral leases across Australia. Any form of revenue raising in the pastoral area can be accommodated.
I referred to the vermin rates, which is a scheme under the Agricultural and Related Resources Protection Act 1976 of Western Australia. The agricultural rate is imposed and that contribution by the pastoralists is matched $1-for-$1 by the state government. That money is used to control declared pests, declared plants and animals on and relating to pastoral leases. We have issues with weeds and feral animals and that is one way that money raised from pastoral properties can be used in supporting the stations themselves. I am certainly not prescribing any of these rates, but it is a reminder that the NT is abnormal in this area.
The member for Nelson, I will bet $1m, will talk about rates within the Litchfield Shire. That arrangement is up to the shire to develop but, being a ratepayer in Litchfield shire, I believe …
Members interjecting.
Mr KNIGHT: It does not matter. I have not paid it yet. The shire is comfortable with the level of rate it is paying. I believe the people of Dundee and Bynoe are looking forward to being part of local government, because they need some authority down there. Again, if they saw that any money they contributed went back into roads and rubbish collection, that would be something they would see as being tangible and beneficial to themselves as individuals. I do not believe that anything to do with rates cannot be worked out and be mutually beneficial for both the people and to the shire.
The lead-up, and the eventual announcement, has been an anxious time for many people in the region. People are very aware of the structural problems with local government …
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Daly, I will just remind you, even though I did give you permission to complete your speech on unlimited time, you have been extended for another 10 minutes. I ask you as a courtesy to think about wrapping things up, please.
Mr KNIGHT: I thought you gave me an extension of time to finish my comments.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: I have given you an unlimited extension, but would you please start to wrap things up.
Mr KNIGHT: All right, thank you. Something bold had to be done in regards to local government. It has been a very trying time for me personally, having been heavily involved in local government. I, like many others, really want to get it right. We do thirst for more information and we eagerly await that information. However, as most of us have become aware, some of the details are not there. They are not there because it is up to the people in those communities, in those regions, to work it out for themselves. The minister has quite literally put the boundaries in. The people who truly know what and how to deliver services in the region - namely, the ones who live there - will decide how the services and representations should be worked out for their own area.
There are matters which are evolving; namely, what is the Commonwealth doing? The minister is working through those developments as information and decisions by others are made. So on this policy, and matters yet to be decided, we must trust the minister to do the right thing. If any other politician, other than Hon Elliot McAdam, was to ask that of any person in the country, they will be told to go jump. However, this minister is like no other minister. I do not know any person who would challenge his honesty and integrity. No one in this House would believe that he is not working for the people of the Northern Territory, in the way that he believes and knows from his years of experience in the Territory, is truly best. That is my personal reassurance when I get a little nervous and want to know what cannot be known at that point. At the helm, we have Elliot McAdam, steering and guiding this battered and damaged local government ship through the treacherous waters of change into a safe and peaceful harbour.
So, Captain McAdam, I trust you and I look forward to an exciting, difficult, scary, but ultimately successful journey.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I will just put my life jacket on - I might need it. There are so many things to say about these changes there is, obviously, not going to be enough time. Hopefully, we will have another chance to comment as the year goes on. I would like to say one thing that I have not written down. Many people talk about councils being dysfunctional, and there has been a lot of knocking, as you say, of councils in previous times or under previous administrations. I would like to put a nice spin on the council.
My first job was with Nguiu Shire Council in 1974 - two months before Cyclone Tracy. We had two non-indigenous people, the town clerk and me. I was the works supervisor. My background was horticulture and his background was administration. We employed about 107 Tiwis. We were given a budget and we stretched that as far as we could. We had people working on graders, bulldozers, backhoes, front-end loaders, lawn mowers, labourers, chainsaw cutters - you name it. We had a nursery and we looked after the airstrip. We did all those sorts of things. We were not dysfunctional. At that time, Nguiu would have had a population of around about 1000 people. We operated a good council. That is not because I was on it. I am just saying that that is what we were able to achieve. It is a great shame for me to hear all these stories about dysfunctional councils because I know that the council I worked for was a good council that employed people. There are lots of other reasons - which I might get into later - why councils became dysfunctional. It is not quite as simple as it is sometimes made out. I will get back into my prepared speech.
There is no doubt that when it comes to local government neither the previous government nor this government can really hold its head up high. Local government has rarely had anyone in this parliament who cared or actually understood local government. Why? Because NT governments are the boss of local government and, under the Local Government Act, they can do what they please. I remember Yulara only too well. The ruthless dismantling of a local government was, and still is to my mind, a disgrace. A secret deal between a company and the government of the day meant the local government was dissolved - no consultation; just a letter handed to the president and the CEO as they were leaving to go to the Tidy Town Awards night. I can still remember that night.
It was the CLP that set up the Tiwi Island local government that was, and still is, not a properly democratic elected council as other councils are throughout Australia. I recall at a local government meeting in Alice Springs, where the Milikapiti representative, Guy Gibson, said that they did not want to belong to a bigger council. However, just before the upcoming NT election, Milikapiti suddenly changed its mind.
Let us not only put the boot into the CLP government; let us look at the ALP. It continued propping up the Tiwi Island local government. According to the figures in the documents that have been going out with this new process, the Tiwi Island Local Government Council, with a population of about 2500 people, received $23.3m in 2004-05 in local government income. Litchfield Shire, with a population of 17 000, received $7.3m. I know that Tiwi Island local government was involved with housing, which it should never have been - and I still think that is not a core function of council - but that is still a lot of money. I am interested to know where all that money went, as well as the years before that. The government has not been open about the amount of money poured into this council, either by the NT or federal. I asked the question in parliament sometime back, and the government said: ‘Go and ask the council’.
This government was also quick at sacking councils; you just have to remember Jabiru. It has sacked other councils, and there may have been very good reasons for it. However, what I am saying is that, in the end, local government is run by the Territory government.
I sometimes laugh when we always complain about Canberra overriding the Territory. I know that the Territory certainly overrides local government. In fact, in the case when it sacked Yulara, the Territory government, at that stage, was running a campaign about Canberra interference. As a local government person I felt that this was a hypocritical approach.
Minister, your statement begins with the statement that 50% of councils are, basically, dysfunctional. Minister Ah Kit, in his well-publicised statement on 7 March 2002, said something similar:
In today’s statement, the minister has used the dysfunctional council argument as one of the bases for developing his new council scheme, and this seems to be a fate accompli. Isn’t it time the government and its department took some of the blame? Where were the field officers during this time who were checking the audits? What was the government trying to do to fix this problem? This government has been in power for six years. Four years ago, the minister said many councils were dysfunctional. What did the government do? It brought out the Building Stronger Regions, Stronger Futures strategy – something that has not been mentioned at all today. This was the answer to dysfunctional councils. Where is that document today; lost in the memoirs of Mr Jack Ah Kit?
That document was the beginning of great plans for our Territory. One of its key planks was in the negotiation of governance arrangements which support regional and economic development. The government put forward the idea of 21 regional authorities which were, in fact, local government under another name. The big question is: what happened to this strategy? How far was this strategy advanced? Who decided to scrap it or severely modify it? How much money was spent on this strategy? Yes, the debate is about a new process, but how can one have faith in a new plan if we do not know what happened to the last one?
When the minister said in his answer to my question last week in parliament that the government had to bite the bullet, surely that was not because of local government? Surely it was because government did not or could not introduce its Building Stronger Regions, Stronger Futures strategy. To bite the bullet, it may want to do, but local government is the servant of the Territory government and it has taken over six years to do something. That is not the fault of the councils; it is the fault of the government. To avoid proper processes because government could not get its act together is not a proper excuse regarding consultation.
Interesting differences show up between the approach the government had in 2003 and the statement introduced by the minister today. Again, minister Ah Kit was keen to point out this when he said: ‘We are now inventing a new tier of government, but we are creating the capacity for councils to voluntarily come together for improved service delivery’. He also says further on: ‘The establishment of such potentially powerful organisations will be the subject of long and detailed negotiations’. This is four years ago. The minister was saying we will negotiate. The difference today is, we will do it. This is in stark contrast to what the government has done. It has said there will be nine shires and four municipalities - no ifs, no buts. Remember, the reform process has not been the fault of the councils; government is the boss. The reform process has been dragged around by the department until it eventually confused itself and died.
The simple reform proposal had been around for a long time, but the lack of clear and concise understanding of local government has made the whole process of reform, so far, a disaster. I believe councils were dysfunctional partly because the department, over the years, has been dysfunctional. As well as that, I do not think the councils had the backing and support they needed. I remember standing here and asking why operational funding was being reduced. I had a letter from, I think, Cox Peninsula Council, showing me how their funding had gone down, and they needed that funding for some of their basic services. I do not want to hear this argument that it is all about the councils not operating properly. Well, they might not have been able to operate properly because I do not think that they necessarily got the support they needed from the department. If the council was falling apart, then the department should have been in there and said: ‘Whoa’. I heard recently - and it may not be the right example - Angurugu Council went out the door for about $900 000. One would have to ask, how can a council go out the door for that amount? Wasn’t anyone doing any checks and balances before the council went out the door?
Even LGANT said on 8 December 2006 that the delegates expressed concern that the contract between the government and LGANT in relation to consultation had been broken, and that the association had had no direct input into the actual plans which are before Cabinet. So, Cabinet approved plans that had not been given a chance to have been looked at by LGANT. Yes, LGANT does welcome the statement, minister; I realise that, but the process that went before that certainly was not inclusive.
Minister, the reality is that, while I support the concept of amalgamation, I do not support the lack of community and council input into both the numbers of councils and the boundaries. Your statement today claims that there had been extensive consultation with LGANT and experience with other regionalisation discussions. Those regionalisation discussions were mainly ideas thought out in-house. As for the consultation with LGANT, I have problems with why Tennant Creek and Litchfield Shire did not know they were going to be dissolved. In other words, you are saying the number and size of the councils has been decided. One can only presume that from the timetable you have put out – that is that little timetable that I showed you the other day, for community consultations about the boundaries between 30 January and 30 March – basically, that consultation will be tokenistic because, when you read the statement, minister, you are basically saying that, except for some minor tinkering, that is it.
It is a little sad because in many things the government has consulted with people – and on other things it says we have to bite the bullet. If you had told local government some years ago that you were asking them to volunteer to amalgamate councils, and the councils were slow and dragging their feet, what you say is dead right. I would step in and say: ‘Whoa, we will do it!’
The previous minister said this will be a long process of consultation. What happened? Why have we reached the stage where you have had to bite the bullet? Surely, it was not necessarily the councils’ fault. I believe it was the government’s fault.
Minister, one of the problems in this debate is that you have left four municipalities out of the reform agenda – the big ones: Darwin, Alice Springs, Katherine and Palmerston. They are not going to care too much about little old Litchfield and Tennant Creek, along with all the other councils that have little chance of getting a hearing in this Labor-dominated parliament because all the proposed shires have Labor members of parliament, except for one seat: Nelson.
I feel it is imperative, more than ever, to scrutinise what you and the department behind you are doing to local government. There are many matters that concern me. As I have already outlined, what happened to the Building Stronger Regions, Stronger Futures strategy? Why was there no real consultation with the community over the numbers and boundaries of councils? To highlight that even more, one has to ask: why was not amalgamation of Darwin and Palmerston on the cards? Here is a classic example of reducing the duplication of administration and bringing savings to ratepayers, but there must have been too many seats held by Labor for any consideration of that to happen.
On top of that, not to put the East Darwin Port region into local government, which could easily have been done if a Palmerston-Darwin amalgamation had occurred, is simply a disgrace. To say that this area is too strategically important to be brought under local government is a cop-out. You are not the only minister to say that, but it is not the way to go. One of the most important areas in Darwin is not to be scrutinised by local government or a proper Development Consent Authority but, instead, by a bunch of non-elected public service heads and a delegate of the Planning minister. I do not believe that is good governance.
Minister, there are many more questions. In the case of Litchfield and Tennant Creek, surely you are misleading the ratepayers of both municipalities by saying that Litchfield will be non-viable into the future and Tennant Creek is not viable, therefore, they should be dissolved. Remember you or your department did not tell these councils even by letter that they were to be dissolved, and that is pretty unfair.
These councils are democratically elected. Both are not dysfunctional – far from it – and both, I understand, are willing to be part of the amalgamation process. Surely, to treat them this way just highlights what I said earlier about the way government deals with local government: big brother, not equal partner. Many people in Litchfield would like to see the small print before they will support these changes. For instance, will the rates go up because of the changes? Will the government be putting in a substantial financial establishment package so that councils are not burdened with infrastructure that is not up to a reasonable standard?
The classic example must be in the Dundee area, one of the worst planned areas in the Territory. I have no shame in saying that I blame the CLP government for that. This is an area where there was very little public infrastructure, such as tips and reserves, and only very basic road infrastructure in place. Who will pay to bring that area up to a reasonable standard? I do not believe existing council ratepayers will be part of that.
You say that more funding will be available to shires because of their greater capacity to access funding through NT and the Australian government programs. Will this mean that Litchfield will receive less money? The pie will be the same, but councils with little revenue-raising prospects will receive more money. Will this also apply to road funding?
That is an important issue. My understanding is that we receive money from the federal government based on population. Some of that money goes to services and some goes to roads. Roads are based on length and type of road. Is the pie going to be the same and councils like Litchfield - who you might say do fairly well out of road funding - suffer a reduction in road funding because the new councils, having more unincorporated roads in their area, will receive money to help with the maintenance of those roads? Are the people of Litchfield going to suffer a reduction in their funding because of the new process? Other councils may get an increase, and I have heard members saying that will be good, but the reality is that I live in a council of 17 000 people and, when it is bigger, it will probably be over 20 000. I am sure people want to know if they will have the same amount of Commonwealth funding for the roads.
What type of rates will there be? Is the government going to say that councils must use unimproved capital value and not flat rates? That would be extremely unpopular in many parts of Litchfield shire. If people were cranky about the rates going up $100 because of the government requiring Litchfield shire to cart its rubbish to Shoal Bay, I am sure they will not be too pleased if UCV is introduced. The flat rate is a good system – not perfect, but much fairer than a system that has nothing to do with the cost of providing services, but just the value of your land. UCV pushes older residents out of their homes simply because their rates are calculated on location and evaluation.
There are rumours going around that valuers have been assessing pastoral properties. If this is true, does the government intend to rate pastoral properties based on the value of the land? If it is, I believe they are asking for trouble. I believe that pastoral properties cannot be left out of local government if the government intends to incorporate the whole Territory. Koolpinyah Station is already in Litchfield - it has been since it started - but I believe it is only charged at a flat rate. If the government wants to charge rates for pastoral land, then I reckon a flat rate is perhaps the way to go. Perhaps some of the lease payments for the government could be included in that flat rate.
I am sure Litchfield residents would like to know about what core functions they are going to be required to manage. Presently, the functions they agreed to when they became a council are roads, reserves, rubbish, and the cemetery. Of course, there has been some debate in years about dog by-laws. I believe the member for Goyder is on record on the radio saying he wants dogs to be a core function of the council. Whilst I agree some control over stray dogs needs to be introduced, any move to have Darwin- and Palmerston-type dog laws will be impractical and a very expensive cost to ratepayers, and highly impractical especially if a bigger council is formed.
I should make some comments about core functions. Interestingly, it was nice to listen to other people speak before I did. The member for Casuarina started to talk about the functions that he is used to knowing in Port Hedland. He mentioned environmental health, Meals on Wheels, etcetera. That is the very thing minister Ah Kit said was a killer. I heard the member for Drysdale saying the same thing, and the member for Macdonnell saying something similar. Certainly, minister Ah Kit was very careful about that as well. He said Aboriginal community councils have been given far too much to do. Bob Beadman, former head of Local Government, a very experienced public servant in Aboriginal affairs, pointed out on a number of occasions that Aboriginal community councils have administrative responsibilities that far outweigh those of the Darwin City Council. Please, do not go down the path of the members for Casuarina, Macdonnell, and Drysdale.
If you want to give this system a chance with what you are trying to do, you must stick to the core functions first. Councils must have to prove that they can do those core functions. People want a road without potholes. They want to be able to get to the next outstation or next town. They want a town to look nice; there is no rubbish, there are a few trees planted, and there is an oval to play on. Get those things right. That is why I believe the council I worked on at Nguiu shire was successful. We did not take over health, we did not have the post office. We did not do all that. Much of that was forced on councils, and I understand that there was no option. I believe we need to stick to the basics and then we have a fair chance of making this work.
There are even questions like: where will the Litchfield rubbish go? We talked about a regional waste facility, but if you have a Top End Litchfield Shire, that is a very big shire. I am interested to know what the practical issues would be with rubbish ...
Mr MILLS: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be given an extension of time so can conclude his comments, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: There will be many other practical issues, but not enough time to go into them today. There is an interesting statement by the minister about wards. Firstly, he said there will be lots of scope for public input into wards. I have to say that that is what you should be saying about the shire boundaries and the size of the shires. Having public input into wards may be important but, surely, that is not so great compared to where the boundaries or the numbers of shires will be. Wards also relate to something I believe is fundamental to local government. This is where I differ from the member for Drysdale.
Local government provides essential services fairly to all its constituents and ratepayers. When there is an election, all members of the council have been elected by a secret ballot, possibly a preferential system, and with a basic premise that all votes are equal.
It concerns me greatly to see the minister make the statement that wards will be based on geographic areas and population areas. Wards must be based on one person, one value. Manipulation of the numbers in each ward is undemocratic and has a Bjelke-Petersen ring to it. Any idea that the Barkly may have four equal wards for the town of Tennant Creek, and six or eight wards outside of Tennant, not made up of the number of voters at the Tennant Creek wards, is unacceptable. Local government wards should not only be based on race or a particular land ownership; it must be one person, one vote. To do otherwise would enshrine undemocratic systems and we will have the Tiwi Islands system repeated.
I do not agree with the member for Drysdale …
Mr Natt: I am the member for Drysdale. That is the third time.
Mr WOOD: That is right; you are fishing; the member for Daly. He talked about having ward management plans – and they would all decide what is going to happen within their ward. What you are setting up is bureaucratic; you are starting to set up to fail. This needs to be simple and low cost. If you start having ward managements and boards, I would be careful that those local boards - which are a good idea - do not become some paid job. Those boards need to be like a progress association where people turn up and say: ‘These are our concerns for our group’. I am just a little concerned that when you get into management plans you start getting another little mini-bureaucracy and you will have a whole heap of those - like 12 of them. All right, the minister said it is not going to happen. I will agree with you, minister.
One of the most glaring errors of the advisory board set-up is the lack of any member of the proposed Top End Litchfield Shire Council being represented. This shire will be the biggest by far in population, and has councils that are not dysfunctional, yet they are not represented on that northern advisory board. I still think that needs to be changed. People will feel they are out of the loop, and that is an area that we need to look it. It is a bit hard to understand why the Mayor of Katherine - God bless her, a lovely person; I am not knocking her personally – is on an advisory board when Katherine is not directly affected by these changes. I understand the boards were actually appointed or announced before the boundaries came into existence.
Minister, you and your predecessor, when looking at the solutions of dysfunctional councils, had obviously looked at mainly indigenous councils. In fact, out of the nine shires, eight would be indigenous predominately, with a mixture of small towns and mining and pastoral leases. However, in the case of Litchfield, which is a predominately non-indigenous council, it does not fit the guidelines when you say what the reasons for these changes were.
The new Top End Litchfield shire has more than 5000 people. It is not dysfunctional, has many industries and has relatively low unemployment. The problem with the statement today is that much of what is said does not fit the mould of what is in the statement. The statement does not seem to recognise that fact. Whilst I hope all shires will benefit by the changes proposed by government, the Top End Litchfield shire proposal needs to be approached differently.
Regarding a couple of other issues I have mentioned many times in parliament, the federal government should provide full employment along with management and capital infrastructure required to create meaningful work in remote communities. I know, minister, in your statement you talked about the benefits of local government is real local jobs. However, if it is the belief of governments that Aboriginal people should live on their own land, then it should provide the proper means for them to do so, otherwise do not fund them and let everyone drift to town. We know what will happen then.
Presently, we have a poorly-paid CDEP program with its own administration. The CDEP program should be part of the new councils, and proper wages should be paid. Councils traditionally have been a source of employment, and there is no shortage of work on communities. You need to make it happen otherwise communities will continue to be dysfunctional. If the federal government is behind many of the proposals the government is putting forward - and I presume it is because of the representative on the board - then I hope there are real and practical changes to the CDEP program and its funding. I hope that we can make some changes to employment on these communities. They will continue to be dysfunctional if people cannot get work.
One more issue, minister, is the practical size of the council. Whilst the government may have decided a viable council must have a minimum size of 5000 people, the size of the territory the council covers is just as relevant. In the proposed shire of Central Desert, what happens when the bulldozer is working at Tobermorey on the Queensland border, and you get a phone call that you need to do some work on Lajamanu? Just putting my hand across this map, from Tobermorey to Lajamanu is the same distance as from Darwin to Tennant Creek. One of the issues that seem to have been missed out in all of this is the practicalities of the size of these places. A bulldozer would have to go along a dirt road all the way; it is not as though it is going up the main highway. Those are the issues that need to be discussed. It is no good having a big council that might look like it is going to work because it has the right population, but is so large it is just about impossible to work.
Summing up quickly, I support the principle of what you are doing. I believe the people in my area want to see the fine print. I have heard some really glowing praises of what is going to happen. In reality, it is going to be much harder than you or some of these other people think to get local government back, you might say, on the straight and narrow. If you think that many of these councils are dysfunctional, is not going to be easy. The reality is you have a big piece of country to serve, many small communities and a relatively low budget. It is certainly going to require a lot of effort to make sure it works.
My job is to, basically ask the questions. In asking those questions or criticising, I am not coming from the point of view that I do not want it to be successful. I just think there needs to be people saying: ‘Hang on, minister, that does not make sense’. I will just give a little example. If you look at the boundary for the proposed Litchfield shire it goes around Nauiyu Nambiyu, which means that the Top End Litchfield Shire Council would come all the way down to the Wooliana Road to maintain the roads. Just across the other side of the river, Nauiyu Nambiyu and Wooliana would be served by the Victoria River shire. There are some issues there that need to be looked at to make sure these things work properly.
Minister, I wish you all the best. I also hope to have some public forums in my area. I realise you are dealing with two different systems to some extent. Top End Litchfield shire is not the same as the Central Desert shire. Trying to talk and debate about these things here is a bit difficult when I have a different clientele, you might say, than the member for Arafura or the member for Macdonnell. I support the statement in principle, but I will be looking carefully at what is happening and making sure that what is put forward is both practical and democratic.
I say again that I do not believe that wards should be based on either race or ownership of land. If you do not have the principle that it is one person one value then you start to destroy the very thing you are trying to do. I agree with the member for Casuarina: that democratic principle must be the foundation of good governance in the Northern Territory.
Mr McADAM (Local Government): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank all members for their input tonight on local government reform. On balance, it has been a very thoughtful debate. It has been a very constructive debate, and also on occasions a very impassioned debate. That is how it should be because the important thing here is that we are dealing with a diverse, very complex portion of the Northern Territory in the context of this proposal. It is very important that we remain flexible, that we have the capacity to be able to think outside the square to take into consideration those specific, special needs that will apply on a community-to-community basis within the shire-type model.
There were any number of questions raised here tonight, and I am not in a position to answer all of those because I just simply am not going to have the time. However, I want to assure all members who have spoken here this evening that we have had officers present throughout the course of this debate and they have taken down all the pertinent points, particularly those which raise questions that require answers. I will give undertakings that in due course - I am not going to say it is going to happen tomorrow because there is a lot of detail to digest and a lot of information to process. However, I give this assurance that it will be properly assessed and, for all those members who have raised questions here this evening, we will endeavour to get you the answers in respect to your specific inquiries.
The point I want to make is this: right from the very beginning we have heard many speakers speak about a whole range of issues and concerns of why we need change. I believe that there is a basic understanding, there is a basic premise that something needs to be done in respect to local government in the Northern Territory, particularly out in the remote regions of the Northern Territory.
I, for one, am not going to apologise for the course of action the government has taken. We have heard some speakers, particularly from the opposition, refer to the processes that occurred under my predecessor, Jack Ah Kit. I pay tribute to him for his outstanding contribution, not only to local government, but a whole range of issues. I believe Jack Ah Kit had the guts and courage to at least put into the public forum the debate in respect of the existing status of councils out there. I believe he was the real driver in the context of where we are going today.
In regards to some of the points raised by the opposition and the member for Nelson, I do not want to go there. That is all past history and I do not want to get into debates about what Richard Lim did or did not do when he was the Minister for Local Government or, indeed, the member for Braitling when she was the minister or, indeed, you, member for Nelson, in respect of your long and distinguished record in local government throughout the Northern Territory. I am not going to debate in that context. The important thing is that we should never get bogged down in the insular, isolated responses in respect of a whole host of complex issues right across the Northern Territory today. Unfortunately, they are the types of issues being raised. People have to see the bigger picture and have the vision, guts and courage to address these issues in a very constructive and coordinated way.
I have to say - and I am guilty of this too as part of the last government, the previous government and the Commonwealth government - we have failed communities in the bush miserably. We have said to them: ‘Carry out those functions’ for which they have never been resourced nor had the support to do so. Other speakers in this House have spoken today about the expectation of councils out there. It might have been the members for Macdonnell and Arnhem who talked about the pressures placed on community councils.
Name me any similar type of council here in the Northern Territory or, indeed, in Australia, that would be asked to carry out those functions that are expected of indigenous community councils. I can tell you they are unrealistic, and they are not going to get the outcomes which we, as governments, expect of them. It is very easy for us to blame people and councils, use the word ‘dysfunctional’, but the bottom line is this: we have never, ever attempted to put in place a model, a form of governance, that recognises the need to support and resource the councils.
The other matter I want to raise is important. I come back to the isolation and insular perception. It is natural that we, as individuals, as members of our respective electorates, think a certain way because we are looking after the interests of our electorates. I want to say something to the member for Nelson about the Litchfield Shire Council. You also referred to the Tennant Creek Town Council. If I were a parochial local member, then I would not have said the Tennant Creek Town Council was not viable, but I have to go above that in the context of the best interests of the Barkly and, more importantly, the best interests of the Northern Territory.
This government is being accused, basically, of a lack of consultation. I totally refute that. There has been any number of discussions about this reform, and not only this reform, but the previous reform by my predecessor and under the previous government. To suggest this has come out of the blue is quite false. There have been discussions, consultations - not to the extent required by you, member for Nelson, but there certainly have been discussions out there. I have spoken to LGANT and to the NT Cattlemen’s Association. As I have gone around the Northern Territory in the last 12 months, in probably 20 to 30 communities, I have raised the issue of the future of local government in the bush. Do not come at this stunt saying there has been no consultation because I believe there have been levels of consultation …
Mr Wood: Mary Walshe did not know.
Mr McADAM: We will come back to the Litchfield Shire Council in a moment. There have been levels of consultation to the degree that it would have been very clear to anyone that these sorts of changes were going to come in.
You mentioned Mary Walshe, and you talked about consultation. We put out expressions of interest to people out there – please, nominate to the advisory board. Not one nomination from the Litchfield Shire Council.
Mr Wood: I am told Mike Bowman.
Mr McADAM: Not one.
Mr Wood: Mary Walshe said Mike Bowman.
Mr McADAM: My advice is this …
Mr Wood: Well, that is my advice.
Mr McADAM: I am just telling you what I believe. We will sort it out later.
Mr Wood: Perhaps we will agree to disagree.
Mr McADAM: My advice is this: that no nominations were received by my office from the Litchfield Shire Council in respect to the advisory board. I will show you how flexible I am, because you did raise the point about how flexible we need to be. Officers from my department had discussions with Mary Walshe the other day. I was present, partly, regarding the animal control stuff as opposed to the local government stuff. My understanding is that, if the Litchfield Shire Council wishes to nominate someone on to the council, I will give it due consideration.
Mr Wood: Thank you. I will go and see them.
Mr McADAM: It is very important because, as I say, sometimes we get caught up in these debates when we have the bigger picture, but we get caught up in these little insular, isolated, nitpicking exercises, because, ‘Oh, my council is not on there’. Well, there is probably a whole host of other councils that are not on there.
Mr Wood: I agree with you, minister, but there was no one from any council, that was the problem.
Mr McADAM: We can debate this later, member for Nelson. The point I just want to make is …
Mr Stirling: It is a bit bigger than rubbish dumps.
Mr McADAM: It is a bit bigger than rubbish dumps, and it is a bit bigger than dog control, and it is a bit bigger than roads. What we are talking about here is the future of the Northern Territory.
The most important thing I believe that this reform will do is to provide certainty for people in the regions and the remote parts of the Northern Territory. It is going to provide opportunity - an opportunity denied in the past. Not perhaps deliberately, but an opportunity denied because, effectively, it certainly was not there in the context of the framework that we propose.
The other issue I want to refer to is that there will be, I believe, an equity - high levels of equity in the context of people themselves knowing that, at the very least, they have the same rights, the same opportunities, and the same certainty as you living in Litchfield and someone living in Nightcliff. That does not mean to say - and people are smart enough to know this - that all of a sudden you are going to get the resources; all the things are going to start flowing, because it is not, and people know that. But, at the very least, by going down this pathway, introducing this model, you will get certainty, you will get equity, and you will get opportunity. It is fair to say that, at this point in time, that is not afforded people out in the remote regions of the Northern Territory. At the very least, this will go part of the way in dealing with this.
Another issue raised is the plight of the some of the communities out there. We have heard it from members, particularly for Arnhem, Macdonnell and Daly. Even you raised it, member for Nelson, in respect to the Commonwealth’s response to all of this. What other members have said is true; there has been a gutting of service provision, funding from the Commonwealth, over the last few years, particularly since the demise of ATSIC. We acknowledge that. We all know it. I am not interested in arguing with the Commonwealth government, minister Brough, saying: ‘You did not do this, you did not do that’; or, indeed, any other minister within this jurisdiction or any other jurisdiction. I am not into the blame game any more.
All that I am asking for is for this model to provide certainty, to be a vessel in the context of the Commonwealth re-engaging back out there with the communities. They failed miserably in the past. We have people from the Commonwealth on the committee. We have letters in principle from minister Brough who believes this is a future, this is one of the ways forward.
I honestly believe that there can be greater capacity because of the certainty of the model for the Commonwealth government to park their dollars. Surely, that is what it is all about: how do we maximise, how do we utilise those dollars that are coming into the region in the most effective way? No one can tell me that over the last three to four years that has occurred, because it has not. I know it; I visit communities. I hear communities saying to me: ‘What in the hell is going on? How can we restore some of these services? Why are we given all of this responsibility, why are we being blamed for all these things and, yet, we do not have the resources?’ Part of the reason is because there has not been certainty. I honestly believe that this model will provide the certainty, not only in the context of the Commonwealth or the Territory governments, but other agencies with regional economic opportunities, social development, and social outcomes. The best way to get these things is through a coordinated approach.
There has been much hullabaloo over the last few weeks in respect of the NT Cattlemen’s Association. It is important to understand that this government recognises, without any shadow of a doubt, the importance of the role of the pastoral industry in the Northern Territory, and to the economy. People also have to understand that, whether we like it or not, good or bad, there has been a connection between the pastoral industry and indigenous people in the bush. Under this government, I honestly believe we have made some very sincere and strategic responses in trying to foster that. We only have to look at the number of cattle properties which were previously under-utilised, and are back into production, actually creating dollars. Have a look at some of the pastoral properties in my electorate in the Barkly region; the most productive, probably, in the whole of Australia. They are realising that the indigenous community is an important component of that region. They are actively engaged in getting people into real jobs.
I believe the NT Cattlemen’s Association is an integral component of this particular exercise but, more importantly, there will be some real benefits in that relationship as we go forward, just as there will be, in a different way, member for Nelson, in your particular shire council as proposed.
I am certainly not going to be prescriptive. I am not going to tell you how it is going to happen in your area. We want you to tell the advisory board what is the most effective way of the delivery of services, the economic possibilities, and how you should live within that shire council; that is the beauty of this exercise. I have made it very clear to the department: do not be prescriptive in the shire model. Be fair, but do not be prescriptive.
There are some other matters that have been raised throughout the course of this debate. I say to members who have differences, we will listen to those differences; we will respect those people out there who might not necessarily agree with what we do. However, there is a very good process in place which allows for very constructive exchanges of how we might go forward.
The member for Greatorex talked about the advisory body and how ineffective it would be, and that I would be telling them how to do things. Can you imagine me telling Patrick Dodson what to do? Can you imagine me telling Maurie Ryan what to do? Or Stuart Kenny what to do? Or Esther, the lady from your area? Can you imagine me telling those people what to do?
Mrs Braham: You might have to.
Mr McADAM: I might have to, but the point is this: they are all very strong people. They are dedicated. They have a vision for what is best for their community. Not only the four people I have just mentioned, but all the people on the advisory body. Do you think that I would have put them on the Cattlemen’s Association if I knew they were going to come out and rubbish me, or Maurie Ryan, because they were going to come out and rubbish government? Not at all. It is important for this very robust debate to occur. We have to have it out in the open. We have to put in place certainty and a future for those people out there.
I will not add too much more, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, other than to say, thank you all very much for a very constructive and thoughtful response to this. I know that it is not going to be easy. I have acknowledged that right from the very beginning. The important thing here is that I believe that we have a good group of people who believe in the bigger picture of how we might go forward as a Territory. I have no doubt that, over time, this model will not only be accepted but it will, into the future, provide some real outcomes for people right across the Northern Territory.
Members: Hear, hear!
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
Mr STIRLING (Statehood): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, in September 2006, the Chief Minister created the portfolio of Minister for Statehood and appointed me to the task. I am very pleased to take on this important role. I was also pleased when the Leader of the Opposition followed suit and appointed a shadow minister for statehood, the member for Blain. Since that time, the shadow minister and I have acted in concert in achieving our combined goal of carefully bringing statehood to the Territory. I use the word ‘carefully’ because I am of the very strong view that the process has to be led by the community, not by the politicians. If we are to avoid the debacle of the 1990s, politicians need to take more of a back seat than be the front engine drivers.
Today, I wish to report to the House on the steps taken since September to continue the progress towards statehood. It will not be an excessively long or broadly ranging ministerial statement, as much is yet to be done before a definitive position can be put in place. I believe it is important to keep members aware of the progress that is occurring.
The first act was to meet with the Statehood Steering Committee Executive and the committee as a whole. This committee is charged with the responsibility of driving statehood among the community. It is the eyes and the ears for the whole issue. The Statehood Steering Committee, co-chaired by Sue Bradley and Barbara McCarthy, is working hard on the ground to educate and discuss constitutional issues so that Territorians can make an informed decision when the time comes. I also acted to ensure that the lines of authority were cleared by establishing clear reporting mechanisms between us. Government also moved to establish a framework budget for the operations of the committee. While this will be discussed again in this budget round, funds have been put into place to allow the committee to travel throughout the Territory.
Our first outing with the Commonwealth came in November last year. The House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs conducted a series of seminars in Alice Springs and Darwin. The Commonwealth committee has a reference provided to it by the Commonwealth Attorney-General to examine the federal implications of Northern Territory Statehood. I advised the committee that statehood is firmly back on the Northern Territory’s agenda. As the Minister for Statehood, I am determined to do my bit to push it through to reality. To achieve it, we have to ensure that Territorians are fully informed about statehood and its implications.
In fact, Territorians have clearly told us that they want to know the terms and conditions of statehood before they vote on such an issue in a referendum. I believe the member for Blain delivered a similar message to that committee. It was clear to me that we needed to make contact with the Commonwealth further, so the member for Blain and I travelled to Canberra to meet with the Hon Philip Ruddock, Attorney-General, and the Hon Jim Lloyd, Minister for the Territories. We also took the opportunity to discuss statehood matters with other MPs from both sides of politics, including the federal member for Lingiari, Mr Snowdon, Labor shadow minister for Territories, Mr Kelvin Thompson - very briefly, and more in depth with his senior advisor - and Senator Trish Crossin. I am sure the member for Blain can elaborate on those MPs from the conservative side of politics with whom he met during this time.
It is necessary for us to engage with the Commonwealth to get them thinking about the terms and conditions of statehood. One of the pitfalls of the last effort for statehood was that Territorians were being asked to vote for something in a referendum without knowing what the terms and conditions on offer from the Commonwealth were. In our meetings, we were seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth to work in a parallel process with us. We want Territorians to be working through the questions and issues, and we want to feed those views to Canberra to inform the Commonwealth.
The member for Blain and I also met with Peter Slipper, the chair of the House of Representatives committee to which I referred earlier. It was an important opportunity to remind the chair of the committee the importance we place on the issue and to make sure he is aware the shadow minister and I were in Canberra to discuss the statehood issue with the Attorney-General and other senior decision-makers. By happy coincidence, his committee was holding hearings with Commonwealth agencies such as the Attorney-General’s Department and the Department of Transport and Regional Services on the same day the shadow minister and I were in Canberra. The Executive Officer to the Statehood Steering Committee was able to attend those hearings and to continue our message of support for Territory statehood.
In our meeting with the federal Attorney-General, I tabled a letter, which I wish to provide to the parliament today - I do not think have a copy of it. I will make sure I get that. Essentially, the letter expresses the view that it is our view engagement with the Commonwealth is a critical part of the statehood process. We sought their agreement to the recommencement of their consideration of the issues involving in granting statehood. We recommended the recommencement of the interdepartmental committees and the appointment of a senior Commonwealth liaison officer. We recommended some timing in relation to finalising a date for clear terms and conditions for statehood.
It is reasonable to suggest the federal Attorney-General was quite clear in his concerns. I think the member for Blain will agree with me when I say the Commonwealth has squarely put the ball back at our feet. The Attorney-General’s view is that the Territory must convince the Commonwealth that we really do want statehood and we must let them know on what terms and conditions we want it. It is now up to us to continue informing Territorians about statehood, offer the best possible advice on the terms and conditions we may end up with. They go around issues such as legal and constitutional affairs including representation in the federal parliament, indigenous issues including the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, environment, national parks and Commonwealth land, uranium mining, Commonwealth territories, industrial relations and financial implications.
We will do what we can and continue our discussions with the Commonwealth to ensure we are all on the same page. The member for Blain and I will continue to work with the Statehood Steering Committee to keep the process of engagement and information with the Commonwealth on track, and to keep Territorians informed and participating in the process.
I am also pleased to report that the Chief Minister has been successful in her efforts to bring the statehood issue before the Premiers and Chief Ministers of the Commonwealth at the recent Council of Australian Federations meeting in Sydney. Premiers and Chief Ministers endorse continued progress towards statehood for the Territory while seeking to be kept informed of the issues.
An indicative survey of visitors to the annual regional show circuit and online in 2006 indicated 82% of over 1000 people supported a continued move towards statehood. It shows a significant level of support. I can assure Territorians that the Martin government will continue to work with them in tandem with the member for Blain and the opposition in an effort to ensure that they are given every opportunity to make a clear and informed choice on statehood at some time in the future.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, this is a very important statement. Underlining this is the bipartisan approach to this most significant of issues. It is a response to this matter taken in a bipartisan way, which has ensured that people across the Territory recognise that this is a special issue.
I thank the minister for his support and cooperation with regard to advancing this issue to the federal level. It is a very important and strategic step, one, as a member of this parliament and from the opposition, for which I am grateful. It was a good opportunity to show that we can do things differently in this Chamber when we are considering matters of great importance. There are other matters aside from statehood that are of great importance, and it would be good to see if we could take a leaf out of this experience and work also in a bipartisan manner on other important issues. However, I digress - a theme that I have visited from time to time and will continue to do so.
Just from my own observations and experience from that trip, the recognition of the importance of removing politics to a different position in this matter is critical. Appropriate representation to the Commonwealth is required to make our presentation to the Commonwealth and bring to their attention the need for their engagement in the advancing of this issue - that was done. The letter was tabled and presented, and it will be on the Parliamentary Record for all members and other Territorians to assess. I left that meeting with a clear reminder that we do have a significant challenge ahead of us.
We have two responses to that significant challenge - either we can just go through the motions and give it our best shot, because it is something which is a part of our obligation as elected members and Territorians, or come back with greater resolve to determine whether this is a matter that is worth fighting for. I can say personally - and I am sure the minister would agree with me - that after recognising the level to which this issue must progress, the only response of Territorians is to increase the resolve and to strengthen our fight. Otherwise, this will be a matter that we can just entertain ourselves with for forever and a day and nothing will happen. I cannot allow that to occur, and I am sure neither would the minister who has made the statement. Also any member in this Chamber, or anyone with an interest in the future of the Northern Territory and a future in this nation, in fact, would agree that we should have equal rights to any other Australian in this Commonwealth. It is a matter that we must come back and strengthen our fight for.
Coming back with that resolve, I now see the urgency of the task we have before us, and the message is conveyed. I have a unique position, not only being the shadow spokesman on Statehood, but also a member of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee as well as being on the Statehood Steering Committee. The message was well received that we must step up to the plate to continue and strengthen our fight.
I commend the great work of Sue Bradley. It is not an easy task to have that response, which was either to shrink back or to stand up. Sue Bradley has stood up, as well as the rest of the steering committee, and said: ‘Right, the game is on’. I also acknowledge the sound leadership of the member for Arnhem in making sure that the steering committee stays true to its task. I also acknowledge the excellent support we have had from the executive officer, Michael Tatham, who has supported our activities in Canberra so well, supplying all members with an appropriate level of information, and ensuring that all of our endeavours and activities allow this issue to be progressed - and we have made some significant progress.
Having left the federal Attorney-General’s office, our challenge is to now convince the Commonwealth …
A member interjecting.
Mr MILLS: Well, I believe any Territorian going away after that would be saying: ‘Well, we will be back. We will take that challenge up and, the Commonwealth in due time, will be convinced’. I commend the work of the steering committee on that front.
As the minister outlined, lobbying was undertaken by members of his own party. I also did the same with the member for Solomon and the new CLP minister, Nigel Scullion. My message was not just to give them the courteous briefing and say: ‘This is what happened’ but, basically: ‘Please step up to the plate, you Territorians. You are down there and it is time for your part in this fight’. That was the message that they did receive.
It is a reminder that, back here, the work of the steering committee requires renewed focus on issues of education so people can actually understand what it is that we are after. We will come to the point where we will decide upon the terms and conditions that would be acceptable to us. Let the Commonwealth respond to that. That is a fair challenge to take up. It will require a certain level of activism. We need to be active in our communities and stir this issue up. Ultimately, that will lead to Commonwealth engagement that will arrive at suitable terms and conditions.
Therefore, the battle lines have been drawn. I thank you for the opportunity to speak from this side of the parliament on a matter of such importance, under-girded by the fact that it was undertaken in a bipartisan manner. There is also, I can report from the opposition, a commitment that we make a promise and will adhere to, to ensure that politics does not distract from a matter that is of core importance to all Territorians. With those comments, the opposition supports this statement.
Ms McCARTHY (Arnhem): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, as Chair of the Statehood Steering Committee, I would like to address the House in support of the bipartisan approach shown by the Statehood Minister and shadow minister and, indeed, all the parliamentary members, towards statehood.
I have had the honour of being the Chair of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee and Statehood Steering Committee for five months. In that time, a number of issues and events have occurred. I acknowledge the presence of my co-chair, Sue Bradley, in the parliamentary gallery and the executive officer, Michael Tatham. I also advise the Assembly of something quite significant that has occurred in regard to Sue Bradley on Australia Day. Sue was awarded the Order of Australia Medal. I say to Sue: congratulations on a job well done with your commitment to the Northern Territory community, not just with statehood, but in regard to many of your other activities in the wider Northern Territory community. A very warm congratulations, Sue. It is, indeed, an honour to work beside you on this Statehood Steering Committee.
The Minister for Statehood and the shadow minister have both spoken about their recent trip to Canberra. As chair, I take heart at the challenge placed before the people of the Northern Territory and this parliament to pursue the path to statehood by convincing the Commonwealth that this is what the people of the Northern Territory want. We have heard both the minister and the shadow minister talk about their trips to Canberra. I say to the Assembly that, in the short time that I have been involved with the Statehood Steering Committee as chair, I have been heartened by a number of events that have occurred.
The first one was the House of Representatives inquiry here in November last year. To have the inquiry come to Alice Springs and Darwin was something that the Statehood Steering Committee had been waiting for, for a number of years. It was important in the steps towards statehood that the committee did come here to hear what individuals and organisations had to say about the Northern Territory’s steps towards statehood.
What, in effect, the Commonwealth has done in a recent trip of both our minister and the shadow minister in Canberra is say that the Northern Territory needs to work out its position, the terms and conditions: ‘You show us what the people want. Tell us what people want because the last time we looked the people voted no’. Yes, that is true; the people did vote no. In 1998, the referendum saw 51.3% of voters reject statehood. What we have here is an opportunity to try again. Yes, we have the doubters in Canberra but we have the energy and enthusiasm of the Statehood Steering Committee right here in the Northern Territory, a committee that is made up of a large number of representatives of the communities. We have a visit to Alice Springs occurring on Monday, followed by a further visit to Alice Springs in May. There will also be a visit of the Statehood Steering Committee to Katherine next month to spend some time also with the Cattlemen’s Association.
At the inquiry last year, the views of the Chairman of the Northern Land Council, John Daly, were taken with interest by members of the Statehood Steering Committee. We acknowledge the work that needs to continue with Aboriginal communities throughout the Territory.
I would like to highlight to the Assembly the significance of this year in particular. In 1967, 40 years ago, this May, one of only eight questions resulting in a yes vote out of 44 asked of Australians at a referendum since Federation had a significant impact on the population of the Northern Territory. It was the 1967 referendum. Few people realise that no voter in the Northern Territory was allowed to vote at that referendum. I highlight that because it is a significant historical moment in the development and advancement of indigenous people right across Australia. We can try to bring home to people that only 40 years ago, when a referendum occurred, no Northern Territory resident was able to take part in that.
This year is an important year to recognise the significance of that milestone for Australia as a nation. This is only just one of those factors that come into account when we talk about our steps to statehood, and eventual equality - eventual equality where we can have the same rights as all people, next to all those people in all the other states around Australia.
I would like to also talk about the education aspect of it. I have heard the member for Blain speak about education. We are very vigilant in terms of our youth. The Statehood Steering Committee is acutely aware of the need to reach out to the young people. In fact, one of the earlier statements I made to the committee was about what kind of focus did we have as a committee, where we are going and what could we hold onto that could anchor us in the midst of great storms and controversy and difficulties. The member for Blain expressed it to our committee when he said: ‘Sometimes you wonder how we are going with statehood. We need an anchor. We need something to hold onto’. One of the committee members, Jamey Robertson, and others have said to me as well, that we need to look at statehood as being a gift - a gift for our children, a gift that we want to pass on for future generations. What kind of gift it is depends on each one of us; not just here in the Assembly, but all Territorians who are coming together to ask questions about why we should have statehood.
Just last week, we saw a forum of teachers from Taminmin High School, Humpty Doo Primary School, St John’s College, Marrara Christian School, Kormilda College, Jingili Primary School and Darwin High School. Jeannie Bennett from the Department of Employment, Education and Training, and Raine Caldwell from Darwin High were the facilitators. It was a successful forum where all the teachers indicated they had new resources and methodology to take back to their schools. They were all invited to continue their relationship with the Statehood Steering Committee through the Statehood Teachers’ Advisory Group, or STAG, which meets each term. This is an effort by not only the Statehood Steering Committee but certainly recognition from the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee. Indeed, the bipartisan approach of both the Statehood minister and the shadow minister of the importance of our youth and the statehood process, and questions about statehood and future governance for the Northern Territory, is an integral part of the education system.
These are the exciting things that we have under way. Bush trips will be coming up. One of the strong focuses for the committee is bush trips throughout the Northern Territory, including, of course, the utilisation of interpreters for our more than 108 languages across the Territory. We have about 200 interpreters in the Aboriginal Interpreter Service. Nora Kempster, from the Statehood Steering Committee staff, is involved with trying to identify those interpreters, together with Michael Tatham. We have huge challenges ahead of us, but it is exciting to know that we have such strong bipartisan support in the Assembly. I commend the minister’s statement.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I only have a few comments to make, but I thank the Minister for Statehood for delivering the statement, and to the shadow minister also.
I do not know whether you are aware, but the statehood committee was almost floundering. We were not quite sure what direction to go because we really did not know whether the Commonwealth would support us and, without that support, we were probably wasting our and a lot of people’s time. It was important for you to go to Canberra and suss it out and really find out where we stood. At least now we know. You did not get a: ‘No, you are not getting it’. At least they did not say no. Oops, I do not like the look on his face! The feedback you are saying to me is that they said: ‘Convince us’.
Mr Stirling: Yes.
Mrs BRAHAM: So at least all hope is not lost. Oops, minister, take that look off your face.
When the House of Representatives Committee came to Alice Springs, I was disappointed. I had the feeling that they really did not care less. They did not know what they were talking about and they were treating it all very irreverently. It was thrown back in the face of someone like myself who has been in this House a long time and went through the last referendum and was a great supporter of statehood, then to go to the House of Representatives Committee inquiry where they had a very laid back attitude to us, basically saying because not everyone agreed: ‘Well, there are problems here because you have got this group over here not agreeing and this group over here agreeing’. That is what debate is all about.
I am taking a bit of heart, minister, from your trip to Canberra. I hope I have the right perception in taking heart because I really do believe that, if we want to keep the members of this committee focused and with us, then we have to give them some strong direction. We have to give them strong support because it is very easy to get disheartened by sitting at meeting after meeting and not believing you are achieving anything.
So good or bad, whatever you brought back, I take a bit of heart because, let us face it, we need the federal government’s wholehearted support to get statehood, no matter what direction we go in the future. People still say to me: ‘How come we are not a state? It is 2006. Look at the Territory. How come you are not a state? What makes us any different from any other state in Australia?’ It is purely constitutional and they do not understand that.
I am very pleased to know that on Monday next week, the chair, the member for Arnhem, and Brian Martin, one of the members of the committee, will be meeting with community representatives in Alice Springs. I find, when we have been seeking people to attend this meeting, that many of the long-term residents are very supportive of statehood. People who have lived in the Territory for a long time have that commitment to it. They know where they are going. The next and younger age group who take everything for granted do not really understand what statehood is all about. They are the ones that I am concerned about. They say: ‘Why are you bothering? What do we need it for? Life is fine. It is not going to make any difference to the way we live’. We need to convince people out there, and most of all we need to give them that understanding of what it means and why we should be pushing ahead.
I, too, like the shadow minister, thank members of the committee, the chair and the executive officer for all their support. We have a very good statehood group within this Assembly which will go forward. I thank the chair because she has taken over and pushed it on, which is good.
Most of all, minister, thank you for your report. I hope that you will stay with us. I was impressed with the way, when you were appointed Minister for Statehood, you got on the wagon and came with us and kept pushing for action. You have now undertaken this trip which was very important. It is important that we see that you are there with us.
Mr STIRLING (Statehood): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I now have the letter. I will table the letter signed by the shadow minister for Statehood and myself which we presented to the Attorney-General on the day of our meeting.
I thank each of the members for their contribution. It is fair to say that the member for Blain, our executive officer and I were somewhat nonplussed on immediately exiting federal Attorney-General Ruddock’s office. We were forced to analyse and discuss our views and our thoughts and what we would make of it with some urgency because both of us had to go before the media. We needed to be very clear about what we were going to take from the meeting and what we were going to say to the media, and that was within perhaps 30 minutes of the meeting with the federal Attorney-General.
It is also fair to say that the more we discussed it and the deeper we probed and analysed what we believed the message coming from the federal Attorney-General had been, the more empowered we felt, the more optimistic we became about that message. So far from heads down, or tails between our legs, we now knew that the Attorney-General had clearly spelt out what was required, had set a task, and given us a clear direction.
That was very different to my preconception of what the meeting might have achieved. I am not sure about the member for Blain. That time of analysis before we went to the camera was that it was very useful. In the end, we both took it as a positive that the Attorney-General had spelt out that very clear direction which, perhaps as the member for Braitling was just saying, has been lacking up to now. So, we do have a clear direction.
I thank the member for Blain for his commitment to the task and for accompanying me on that trip to Canberra. I have signed off another letter to the federal Attorney-General. It will be on its way to the member for Blain, as shadow minister for Statehood, to also sign. We will get that letter away, reiterating what we took away from the meeting and just saying that we still expect an answer from our correspondence that we left with him on that day. So thank you to the member for Blain.
Thank you to the member for Arnhem for equal commitment to the task and her co-chairing, and thanks to Sue Bradley, and our executive officer, Michael Tatham. Between them, they both know so much about the history and the previous process, to the point of being very mindful of where we go in the future so as not to repeat the errors of the past. This parliament is very well served by each of those individuals. My thanks to them for the work they do, and for them, at this late hour, still being here to see this debate through.
We have a long way to go. We acknowledge that; the member for Blain acknowledged that. We will probably be back in here with a quite major landmark-type statement around statehood somewhere further into the year. It was very important that we report back to parliament on our trip, and what we had learned. I believe it is quite significant because, as I said, and I think everyone agrees, we now have a clear path and a clear direction.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr NATT (Drysdale): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to continue on from my adjournment last week, just mentioning a few things that are happening in the schools in my area. I had two schools to mention; I mentioned my other four last week.
I am pleased to talk about Driver Primary School. It is a great little school with terrific staff and wonderful students. The enrolment numbers of Driver have increased significantly this year. The current number is 485, and that includes 79 in the preschool. A couple of new teachers have come to the school this year. I am pleased to welcome Alison Sadowski and Tania Tamaotai, and Jim Crisp, who is here as an exchange teacher from New South Wales. The school is continuing the age of entry trial this year in preschool and Transition, and they have developed an excellent early links program with their young students.
The Driver Primary School this year will also be entering the National Story Telling Festival, the Wakikirri, conducted at the Darwin Entertainment Centre. The students will be involved in story telling through dance. I was lucky enough to sneak out of parliament one day last year to watch one of my other schools, Durack, perform. They did very well and received a special mention. It is a wonderful opportunity for kids to express themselves on stage.
The Driver Primary School has also been selected as a teaching school by the CDU and DEET. It will begin to take first year students who are attending Charles Darwin University as part of the new teaching course. Eleven teachers at Driver Primary School have nominated as mentor teachers for these CDU students, and have already been involved in professional development this term. It shows the professionalism of the school and the forward-thinking where they are trying to help some of these student teachers move forward in their careers. To have that mentoring behind them shows the effort the school is putting in to help the education system.
I pay tribute to a very forward-thinking principal, Mr Rob Presswell. He and his staff are just a wonderful group and they are doing wonderful things with that school. Deputy Principal, Fathma Mauger is also a wonderful backup to Rob Presswell. Her husband, Wally, heads up their committee. I can assure you the Driver Primary School committee is a very hard-working committee. I congratulate the school and wish them all the best for the year.
The other school that I would like to mention is not actually in my area, but I have quite a bit of work to do with them: Palmerston High School. Student numbers continue to grow and are in the vicinity of 750 this year. There are a number of new and young vibrant teachers, many of whom are recent graduates from the CDU. I would just like to mention Julie Danvers, Lisa Hamilton, Rachel Pike and Ilaria Tomassi, who have come to the school this year and, I understand, are really making some headway with their students.
The building project at the school is under way. It has commenced and is progressing very well. It is developing plans to refurbish the middle school at the moment, so we are really looking forward to those ongoing projects in the middle school area. The Palmerston High School is enhancing its links with the primary schools in the area to aid the transition for the middle schools area. It is hosting a whole school development program with the Palmerston High School staff and 20 staff from the primary schools from the area. They are conducting middle year workshops. It is great to see them working with other schools in the area, trying to help those students who are coming through from the primary schools to the high school in the not-too-distant future in the middle schools program.
Palmerston High School was also selected as one of the trial schools for secondary education, which is a great feather in their cap. This is the program minister Henderson launched last week where the kids can access work from home. I will speak more about that at another time.
I make mention of a very strong school council, headed by chair, Russell Ball. He and his group on the school council do wonderful things for that school. They are very forward thinking and have done a lot of really hard groundwork to ensure that the middle school process is falling into shape. I have full confidence that it is going to be an easy process for the school to come through that transition.
I also make mention of the new principal, Julianne Willis. I had a little to do with Julianne when she was the Deputy Principal at Kormilda College. She has come to the Palmerston High School this year. She is a very vibrant woman of vision and loves accepting a challenge. She is obviously going to have a few at Palmerston High School with all the building processes going on and settling the middle school process. As I said, she is up to a challenge and I am pretty sure that she will do a great job at that school. I have no doubt that Julianne will take Palmerston High School onto bigger and better things in all areas of education and their life skills. I wish Julianne, Russell, and the committee all the very best and the students and staff there as well.
As an interesting note, Driver Primary School and Palmerston High School are two of the 10 schools to trial the new computer technology that will benefit the students, teachers and, later in the year, parents. I will mention more about that at another time.
On 7 February, I attended an AFL Meet and Greet Sports Fitness Night for LifeBalance, which is a local family health and wellness centre situated in the Rosebery Shopping Centre on Granites Drive. My colleague, the member for Brennan, and I were the official barbecue cookers, and we were only too pleased to help out Wayne Zerbe, the president of the Palmerston Regional Business Association, help run an afternoon for the kids from around the area. There were several AFL players attending and it was great to see about 50 or 60 kids there with some parents. I can assure you the parents got a kick out of getting autographs on T-shirts as much as the kids did.
I arrived a little late and missed the Essendon players, but I understand three or four Essendon players visited, which is just a wonderful feat because the program that the Essendon players and the All Stars had while they were in Darwin was quite horrendous. For them to take time out to travel to Palmerston to attend this function for the kids of the area is a great feather in their cap. The All Stars players who attended were Andrew McLeod, Daniel Motlop and Xavier Clarke. These three ex-Darwin boys really brought the house down, and to see the smiles on the kids faces was exceptional. Michael McLean, the coach of the All Stars team, also attended and he gave a little talk to the kids. It was a worthwhile afternoon.
The pleasing thing for me was that I had an opportunity to talk to Daniel Motlop and Xavier Clarke on the quiet, away from all the goings on at the time. I had a little to do with the two boys when they were coming through the Thunder Squads when I was the CEO of the AFLNT, and to see the change in personality of these young men is quite extraordinary. I can remember some years ago when they first started playing in the Thunder Squads they were quiet, shy, reserved boys. They talked to you with their heads down, lacked a bit of confidence in their personality but, when it came to running around the field chasing a bit of leather, that confidence changed into something a little different again. To talk to these two young men and see the confidence they have gained in playing AFL football is an absolute pleasure. To shake their hand, they look you in the eye when they talk, and you could see that their transition from Darwin to Melbourne and Adelaide has really changed their lives. They have accepted that and they have accepted what is before them, and they are making big strides in their own lives. It was just a pleasure to see them. I congratulate them for that.
I congratulate Wayne Zerbe and everyone involved on the day. It was a great exercise. Wayne does some terrific things in the Palmerston area. I congratulate him and tell him to keep up the good work.
One of the other exercises I undertook on Sunday afternoon was the opening of the new Palmerston RSL Sub-Branch at the Hub Sports Club. It was just great to see the smiles on the faces of Gary Markwell, the president of the Palmerston RSL Sub-Branch, and Daryl Salathiel, the Secretary/Treasurer. They have being trying to achieve moving out of their old premises on Roystonia Avenue into a new premises. They had an official opening on that Sunday afternoon with the Chief Minister. Jock Stratton, the South Australia/NT member of the National Executive, was also present at the opening.
It was terrific to see the strides that they have made to keep the club going and to move out of the old premises into something new is a real effort for them. They deserve a big pat on the back. They are now in their new environment which is well presented and offers all members the comfort and knowledge that they will have a steady financial backing and a place that they can call their home. Gone are the gaps in the walls, the dirt roads and the termites which were synonymous with the old dongas they occupied in Roystonia Avenue.
To signify their presence at The Hub, an old military gun has been placed on the concrete slab out the front on the lawn of the club with a newly-erected flag pole. It signifies that the RSL is now established within the Palmerston Sports Club. I sincerely hope that this move will cement the future of the Palmerston RSL Sub-Branch and help them attract other members. I wish them all the very best and extend gratitude and good wishes to Gary and Daryl for the work that they have put in for this to be established.
On 9 February, I was lucky enough, in my role as minister, to attend the Alcan Suppliers Awards. Alcan is a very forward-thinking company and they have been spending many dollars on the expansion of their plant at Gove. They recognise all the suppliers they work with and it was terrific recognition for everyone who was there. It was held at the casino and there would have been probably 150 to 180 people involved on the afternoon. It was a terrific afternoon. They had a special guest speaker an ex-NBL player, Eric Bailey, who gave an inspiring hour-long talk about his background and how businesses should think ahead, not take the easy way out and accept what is happening at the moment, but to keep moving forward. It was quite an inspiring hour that Eric presented.
The highlight of the afternoon was the presentation of the awards. The Contracted Goods Suppliers came in three categories. The first tier was up to $100 000, the second tier was $100 000 to $500 000 and the third tier was $500 000-plus. The nominees for the nought to $100 000 were Garlock Pty Ltd, Antec Engineering Pty Ltd and Eutectic Australia Pty Ltd. I am pleased to say that Garlock was the winner of that. I congratulate them on the work that they have been doing for Alcan.
The nominations of the second tier were Klinger Ltd, Ecolab Water Care Services and HTL Perma Australia. I am pleased to say that Klinger Ltd was the successful supplier in that area.
For tier one, which was $500 000-plus, Louminco Pty Ltd, Tyco Flow Control and OneSteel Metaland were the nominees, and Louminco won that category. Congratulations to those suppliers.
In Service Contractors, there were three nominations: Perkins Shipping Pty Ltd, C&S Refrigeration and Airconditioning and Transpacific. A name synonymous with the Territory was the winner of that; that is, Perkins Shipping. They have done a lot of work with Alcan over the years in transporting much of their infrastructure to Gove.
I congratulate all the winners and also acknowledge Tyco Flow Control, the winner of the EHS Continuous Improvement Initiative Award. It shows you that business is really moving along nicely under the current economy of the Territory. It is pleasing to see that local contractors are getting the work in many of these places and it is very pleasing to see that big companies like Alcan acknowledge these local businesses for the work that they do.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I place on the record tonight my congratulations to John Baskerville who was formally recognised with the Public Service Medal for Outstanding Services to Central Australia on Australia Day this year.
Members: Hear, hear.
Mrs BRAHAM: Most of you will know John Baskerville. He is a long-time Territorian and has done a lot of work in Central Australia.
John was born and educated in Mudgee in New South Wales and studied electrical engineering at Sydney University. He worked in Papua New Guinea on the hydroelectric power scheme, and has also worked in Fiji, the Philippines and the Solomon Islands.
He came to Darwin in 1975 following Cyclone Tracy to assist in the rehabilitation of the electricity supply. He transferred to Alice Springs in the early 1980s to work with the then Northern Territory Electricity Commission, and became the executive officer responsible for government activities in the southern region. He has remained in that position in Alice Springs ever since and is now highly regarded.
He has certainly achieved much in his time. He covers a wide range of responsibilities such as capital and minor works, infrastructure development, Senior Territorians, Women’s Policy, Youth Affairs, Multicultural Affairs, Community Engagement and Business and Regional Development. Much is expected of John, but he has a keen interest in community issues and has often been the key driver in many issues in the town. One of them, in particular, was a family feud in an Aboriginal community in Central Australia, and he continues to provide support and guidance after negotiating a resolution. He has a diverse background and has done many different things.
He is chairman of many committees, including the Regional Coordination Committee. He has led many groups. He was behind the Alice in 10 Project. Some of the projects he has been involved in have been Qualify of Life, the Built Environment, the Todd and Charles Rivers, the Red Centre Way. Of the original 19 projects identified under Alice in 10, six have been completed and others continue as core business of various agencies.
One of the most successful projects, and I believe one that John would probably be the most proud of, is the Desert Knowledge Australia. This is the umbrella organisation of national and international activities sharing knowledge and developing partnerships which will, ultimately, benefit all people in Australia, not just in desert Australia. Desert Knowledge Australia has exceeded expectations in that it has now become an entity in its own right. It was established as a statutory corporation in 2003. At that stage, John was the interim chairman of the board for Desert Knowledge Australia and continues to provide input as an elected board member.
He is one of those guys who works hard, and he expects other people to work hard with him. He is fairly laid back; he prefers to take a back seat role rather than a up-front role. He has a keen interest in Alice Springs development. That is what I particularly like about him; he seems to be very passionate about Alice Springs. I am sure government would know that he is behind many projects and he stands up for Alice Springs whenever he can.
The nice part about John that many people may not know is that he has two children and five grandchildren, and he has been a most wonderful husband to Lyn, his wife, who, for many years, has had an illness that took her away from the workforce. John has always stood by her and has been a wonderful husband. I know Lyn would like me to say that.
It is a most deserving award, that we recognise and honour our senior public servants who have given so much of their lives to the Northern Territory and, in this case, to Alice Springs. I say to John, because I have known him for many years, well done. I know we are going to lose him soon, probably one day, because he is near retirement age, but when he does retire, he can at least know that he leaves behind a record of achievements that he has helped to foster, and they certainly have been a great benefit to Central Australia. So, congratulations to John Baskerville.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, today I stand here a proud parent. In May, and officially confirmed, my eldest daughter, Cherise Daiyi, will graduate with Honours with Distinction from Charles Darwin University. Four years prior to coming home, Cherise diligently studied towards gaining her Bachelor of Social Science (Psychology) undergraduate degree at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology. Like any parent, I was overwhelmingly pleased when, at the end of 2004, Cherise decided to come home to live and undertake further study at Charles Darwin University. Her Honours year was an extremely testing experience but, as she always does, she was able to work through whatever obstacles she had to, to produce her final and most important piece of work, her thesis.
The final product is entitled The Psychosocial Aetiology of Alcohol and Cannabis Use and Non-Use at Nguiu on the Tiwi Islands. From a mother’s standpoint, this final product is representative of all her hard work and commitment to the advancement of research and study in the areas of substance abuse amongst her own people, and of the commitment she has made to herself.
Another fantastic and very proud moment was – and I am sure everybody in Darwin and in this House has heard about the Tiwi Bombers and their entry into the AFLNT football for a trial period. I table an article from The Age newspaper which, basically, summed up much of the sentiments, and what had happened with the inception of the Tiwi Bombers. In this article there is a reference to the coach noticing that there had been a reduction in domestic violence, the drinking of alcohol and smoking of cannabis from the time of the creation of the Tiwi Bombers team.
One of the Tiwi Bombers greatest fans who never missed one game was my brother, and I pay tribute to my brother who passed away just a week shy of Christmas last year. I also take this opportunity to note why days like today are so important to my late brother’s memory. Today, John would have turned 52. Although he was halfway over the hill, his passing came far too early. On the countless visits I made to John at the Palliative Care Unit last year, he often reflected on how life was too precious to waste, and the nightmare of finding oneself in a fragile predicament. At his funeral, I attempted to bring back to life the character, personality and meaning of the life of my dear elder brother. The problem was that any words that I was able to string together were a poor and inadequate substitute for the experience of sharing time with him on this earth, and nothing I said that day was going to do justice to his memory.
Before he passed away, he entrusted me with a task of making sure that he got a good and proper send off, and that his burial took place on the Tiwi Island. I struggled with this task and, as unequal as I was to its demand, my brother’s final wishes were fulfilled.
John was the first of 11 children of my parents, Jack and Clare. His early years were at Garden Point near our traditional country. Getting a good education was very important to our parents and, like the rest of us, John attended St John’s College. However indirect the path that Johnny took through life, the one feature that marks it more than any was John’s own commitment to education as a lifelong journey of discovery and self-improvement. His endeavours and efforts in post-secondary school education and vocational training were extraordinarily varied and interesting. His experiences and accumulated learning gave him a rich and diverse range of knowledge and life skills.
This is a man who had qualifications in anthropology, bricklaying and zoology. He was outstanding at both cooking and cleaning, and with him there was no gammon, macho baggage about those being women’s work. He worked at all kinds of jobs and he served in the military. Although he had a slender frame, he was strong and dexterous. No job was too big or small for him. Sometimes, it meant changing the great big tyres for the council’s heavy vehicle; just one more example of those important skills that people valued him for. What made it all the more remarkable was that the qualifications and capacities that my brother acquired over decades of quiet application were never the subject of any display of pride or self-satisfaction. You had to get to know the man well before you could pierce the barrier of that wickedly wry sense of humour, to glimpse the wisdom and depth that harboured in his soul.
He was an adventurer, a pathfinder and a seeker. Although he had a profound and jealously-guarded sense of his own place and identity, both culturally and geographically, he was not shackled to Darwin and the Tiwi Islands by fear of the unknown or a desire for the comforts of the predictable and familiar. To the contrary, he relished the opportunity to travel to other regions and to meet and interact with other people. He lived in Dee Why, Sydney, attended the task force in Adelaide, and travelled widely throughout the country. My brother carried his calling card as a Tiwi man for the Northern Territory of Australia wherever he went. The Tiwi element in the mix of things that made up my brother we knew and loved became increasingly stronger and more dominant in his life from early adulthood onwards and culminated in his decision to return to Nguiu to live and work for the years which tragically turned out to be the final stages of his journey.
Nothing can highlight and underscore what being Tiwi meant to Johnny more than his decision, when still a comparatively young man, to change his name by deed poll to the name of our mother’s family. The courage, conviction and vision that that step must have required went way beyond what most people are capable of, and it still takes my breath away to think about it now. So many fond memories, so many funny episodes and pranks. It is impossible to convey to those of you who did not know him even the ghost of an idea of how entertaining and rewarding a companion this man was to those he loved and trusted, or how distinguished and stoic a human being, regardless of the trials and tribulations he had to endure of which there were many throughout his life; his terminal illness being just one of them.
At the end of the day, all of us, his father, his brothers, his sisters, are seeking solace in our own individual memories and sharing between us those memories. Sharing stories of him will continue for as long as we have each other and as long as we live because that is how much he meant to us.
Finally, and what that brings me to is I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to the wonderful staff. The last six months of that last year of John’s life was probably a road you would not wish your worst enemy to travel. I remember the day after Johnny had died found the eight of us, my sisters and I, with our vehicles all pulling up in front of the Palliative Care Unit. We found it a bit strange that we were there. We were on automatic pilot. During those six months, the staff took us through the inevitable of what was coming, and how to deal with that, and also gave post-support. The staff at the unit need a medal. I do not think there is a big enough medal to pin on those people whose daily task it is to work with families before the grieving process starts.
I suppose the grieving starts from the moment you find out that a family member is diagnosed with a terminal illness. I know that, as a family having gone through a terrible scourge, it has certainly changed my view of euthanasia and cancer, by watching the heartache of other families, and when you know people who have suffered it, just what that grief is. Everyone - the palliative care staff, all the doctors, the nursing staff, the cleaners - made us feel that we were not alone and that there were people who were there to walk with us. I thank them because they did make my brother’s final journey one of comfort and ease. When he did pass away - and I was with him when he went - it was comforting to know that he was not suffering from any pain.
I would like to just quickly add for my sister, Jackie, who provided for John over that time, one of the things that John did appreciate was why my mother had eight daughters. He used to always get cranky with this brother being surrounded by eight girls and in his ear all the time, and lecturing. In his last six months he appreciated just what it meant to have six sisters with him. We rotated him around our different houses, but Jackie had him for most of the initial stages of his treatment, sitting outside on her balcony and radaring at all the passers-by and sharing in the jokes. Whilst it was a sad time for us last year, sharing John’s disease with him brought us closer as a family, and all of us appreciate each day we are here with each other as a family.
When you come from a big family and you are all working and have different careers, sometimes you forget the people who are there, and the last six months with him brought us all back together again. It gave us back the love which was bonded in there by my mother.
Finally, a big thank you to my parliamentary colleagues. Your kind words and heartfelt messages through this time did not go astray. It was a hard six months, and I particularly thank the Chief Minister who gave me a lot of support, because it was not easy.
I am going to save the last thank you for my electorate because those six months did cause me to pull back on some of my electorate duties. When I notified every one of my electorate communities to let them know what was happening and that my visits would be pulled back, I do not think there was one person who criticised or said anything. They all knew this was about family and spending quality time. To the fantastic electorate I represent, I thank you as well because without your support, it is hard to do this job. My family and I appreciated all of your support, thank you.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I want to acknowledge Organ Donor Awareness Week, which is being recognised nationally from 17 to 24 February. I thank Madam Speaker for distributing the green armbands to promote Donor Awareness Week to all members of the Legislative Assembly to wear.
Unless you have been through the experience of a family member or friend going through the illness which accompanies an organ that is failing, it is easier to put the discussion regarding organ donation to the back of your mind or, for some people, right out of your mind. Some people find it too difficult to contemplate that part of their loved one could be used in someone else’s body.
As with so many difficult and challenging decisions, it becomes easier to understand and to accept organ donation when we know and have watched people who have been through this journey. I cannot help but marvel at how wonderful modern medicine is that it can transplant an organ which is no longer useful to a donor into a person who would otherwise have died. The medical expertise required from a broad range of specialists with limited notice and time to be able to carry out this procedure, and change the lives of the recipients, still amazes me. It is truly a wonderful side of medicine.
Of course, the tragic aspect of organ donation is that someone has to die for others to have the opportunity to live, but I, for one, am only too happy to be an organ donor if that situation should ever occur. Should I ever be a suitable donor, I am registered as a donor and carry a donor’s card in my wallet. All my family are well aware of my wishes.
If, through the simple action of registering and making my family aware of my wishes, I am able to help others have a quality of life, then that is how I want it. One donor can save up to 10 lives. I seriously do not know whether I would have that many good parts in me at my age; however, they can have whatever is suitable.
There are two people in Katherine who have been through the organ failure and transplant journey, and I want to acknowledge them and celebrate with them their new opportunity for a quality life. Di Trattles, the wife of Mal Trattles who owns and operates Benash Electrical, and mother of Ben and Shannon, waited for two years for her organ transplant, which was a liver. Most of that time was living away from her family in Brisbane until she successfully had a liver transplant early last year. What a delight it is to see her looking so well again. That two years was a very trying one for Di to be away from her family and Katherine. Every now and then she would return for something special, like her daughter, Shannon’s debutante presentation in 2005. These were very rare trips and were always short as she needed to be on standby in case a suitable donor became available. Her family would also visit her in Brisbane, but it is never the same as all being together at home.
Di has a new lease on life and a better quality of life since her transplant. Her goal and dream is to compete in the Transplant Games in Perth in 2008 in lawn bowls. I know with certainty that she will do very well.
Another long-term Katherine resident to have been through this experience is Richard Morris. Richard was diagnosed with hepatitis and spent many months away from his family in Adelaide while he was receiving treatment. The first time he was away for five months and, after a short stint back home, was back in Adelaide for another seven months. That is a long time to be away from your family, friends and your community, especially in times when you need the reassurance and presence of loved ones around.
From the time Richard was diagnosed with liver cancer, he was fortunate enough to wait for just 22 days for a suitably matched liver donor to become available. What a relief for Richard, his wife, Robyn, and their children, Guy, Kristie, Stacey, Megan and Luke, and their partners. Richard now has a new lease of life and this experience has given him a new perspective about what is important in his life and what is important to him.
A little closer to home, my son-in-law, Wade Neave, is also the lucky recipient of not one, but two kidneys. The first of those was when he was barely a teenager. Following the failure of that kidney years later, Wade was on dialysis for several years. Anyone who has had experience with kidney dialysis knows how restrictive all aspects of your life can be, and we all know there are many Territorians on renal dialysis. I know just how much of a commitment that is, to tie yourself to a machine for so many hours regularly each week. It is very restrictive. Wade was on the transplant list for several years with no match found, so it was very welcome news when his sister was found to be a suitable donor, and very generously and selflessly gave Wade one of her kidneys. I might add that our daughter, Amanda, was also tested and was a suitable donor but his sister was even more suitable. Wade has been able to realise two of his dreams since that time. One was to marry our daughter, Amanda, in a ceremony in Bali, and the other was to travel extensively, which they have been able to do together since that time.
There are a whole lot of people who are affected when a family member suffers organ failure, and that also reflects in the wider community of where they live. The message is that organ donation works and more donors are needed to save more lives. With an average of 200 donors across Australia and New Zealand annually, from the Northern Territory alone, one donor came from Katherine three years ago, one donor from Darwin two years ago, and two donors from Alice Springs last year. I am certain those donors have made a huge difference to the people who received those organs, but with a population of 200 000, I know that it is highly likely there are many more people who have not registered with the Australian Organ Donor Register. It was interesting for me to learn that Australia and New Zealand have an agreement where they work in cooperation in matching suitable donors and recipients. The retrieval team is flown to wherever they are to retrieve the organ. They fly on a commercial flight, if that is possible, or by private air charter, and that could be anywhere and to anywhere in Australia or New Zealand.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I know that Territorians are caring and generous people, and I strongly encourage them to register on the Australian Organ Donor Register. Make your family and friends aware of your wishes and know that you could be helping others to have the opportunity to lead a full life. I sincerely hope that this national awareness week will result in a huge addition to the Australian Organ Donor Register and, in turn, save many more lives.
Mr HAMPTON (Stuart): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to reflect on 2006, particularly in relation to some of the school functions I attended in December throughout my electorate of Stuart. In my electorate, there are some amazing and interesting people working in the education field. I am fortunate enough to have a diverse range of schools, programs, issues and people to keep in touch with.
I attended the Utopia School’s Christmas concert held at Alparra on 14 December 2006. Out of all the schools concerts and presentations I attended, both in town and out bush, this would have been one of the most fun. The Utopia School’s group consists of five homeland learning centres including Mulga Bore, Boundary Bore, Clinic, Apungalindum and Soapy Bore. The men were there cooking a great barbecue and the children were all dressed up in their colourful homeland school uniforms. It was just a fantastic day.
I was pleased to present the inaugural Chief Minister’s Literacy Awards to Allarcia Palmer, a Year 3 student, and Latisha Tilmouth, a Year 5 student, both from the Utopia Clinic Homeland Learning Centre. Kaureen Bird, a Year 3 student from Mulga Bore Homeland Learning Centre, Jazania Ross, a Year 5 student from the Apungalindum Homeland Learning Centre, and Nicole Jones, a Year 7 student from the Soapy Bore Homeland Learning Centre also received awards.
There were also a number of graduates from the Utopia region who received their Certificate III Indigenous Education Work certificate, including Lisa and Natasha Kunoth and Trisha Jones. Others receiving their Certificate IV in Indigenous Education Work were Maggie Bird, Violet Purvis, Rosie Bird, Angela Purvis, Wendy Tilmouth and Rebecca Gunner.
There are around 170 students enrolled across the five homeland learning centres, with attendance up around 69%. Whilst there is plenty of room for improvement, I believe the good attendance can be attributed to the involvement of the local indigenous people in their education system. I make special mention of Lisa Hall, a teacher from the Mulga Bore Homeland Learning Centre, who is currently on study leave. Last year, Lisa was awarded a scholarship in Masters of Education to study secondary education for indigenous education.
The Willowra School held their end-of-year Christmas concert during December, and I was very happy to have been able to attend. Sue McAvoy and the Yapa staff at Willowra have done a commendable job over many years. Like many remote bush schools, the staff and school are often the backbone the community, and their roles in the whole scheme of things should never be underestimated or undervalued. The students put on a very enjoyable play depicting the visit by the three wise men to baby Jesus and his parents, Joseph and Mary. I must say the costumes worn by the children were great and a lot of work had been put into making them.
The Chief Minister’s Literacy Award winners from Willowra last year were Jeremiah Ross, Danielle Collins and Morriszetta Martin.
Throughout my visits to some of the schools in my electorate, I was proud of how the students were all dressed in their uniforms. Whilst some schools in our larger towns struggle with getting students to wear uniforms, most of the schools in the bush have been doing it for years and are leading the way. It is great to see all of these students taking pride in how they are dressed. The parents were all just so excited watching their children performing in their concerts and receiving awards and their presents from Santa.
My simple message to all the school communities I visited was to keep encouraging their kids to attend school regularly, and to work hard at reading, writing and speaking English. It is important for our communities and the indigenous people to maintain our language and culture; however, it is equally important we give our children a better future by getting them to learn to read, write and speak English.
It is also great to see many local indigenous people involved in the education of their children in the bush. Many people have been calling on indigenous people to stand up and be leaders on issues that affect our communities. I say to those critics: get out there in the bush and meet some of these indigenous people who are leading the way. These people are in the frontline of these issues we talk about in parliament, and others talk about on the air waves in town.
I would like to talk about two sporting events that have occurred over the past month here in the Territory. The other week, people from all over the Territory converged on Darwin to watch the Aboriginal All Stars versus the Essendon Bombers. Whilst I could not make it to the game, I would like to talk about one of the games that was played before the big match, and probably did not get the attention it deserved from the media and others.
The Alywarr Eagles played the Lajamanu Swans in an earlier match to the Australian Indigenous Under 17s versus South Africa game. The game between the two completely different groups of young indigenous men was the idea of Kenny Martin. Kenny’s idea became a reality because of his hard work, energy and vision. His constant talking and lobbying of people such me and my colleague, the member for Macdonnell, demonstrated his genuine interest in giving young men a wonderful experience through football. The organisers from Lajamanu were equally pressing about providing their young men with an opportunity of playing in front of a big crowd at Marrara Stadium. Norbit Patrick, Peter Jigili, Dion Kelly, and Geoffrey Barnes supported the young men by organising the transport, accommodation, uniforms, and training sessions with much energy and excitement.
There is no doubt this hard work by Kenny has paid off by not only giving these young men an opportunity to play before such a big match, but also giving them the experience of visiting Darwin for the first time. I am sure the young men who played the game will never forget the experience of playing at Marrara Stadium and then going on to watch some of their idols playing for the All Stars against Essendon. I also want to thank the AFLNT for their support, and particular Tim Beechman in organising the game for these young men, and for providing the umpires and facilities on the big day. I look forward to catching up with the men who journeyed up north for the game, and also to hearing the many great stories about the trip, and looking at their photos.
Over the past week in Alice Springs we have seen the Imparja Cup Indigenous Cricket Carnival being played. I want to quote a couple of sentences from the Cricket Australia’s Chief Executive Officer, James Sutherland, in his media released dated 12 February 2007:
that is, Cricket Australia:
The Imparja Cup 2007 saw 24 teams competing in four divisions, including the State/Territories Division, Major Centres, Community, and Women’s Divisions. This year, in fact, was the first trip for the women cricketers from Innisfail in Queensland and, in typical Aboriginal fashion, the local ladies took them in like family. Over 300 players competed in the Imparja Cup, bringing into Alice Springs with them team managers and medical staff, as well as family and friends. I have been advised that the Imparja Cup this year contributed around $500 000 to the local Alice Springs economy. The significance of this event should not be underestimated.
The Minister for Sport and Recreation opened the Imparja Cup on Friday night at the Pioneer Racecourse in Alice Springs. Also at the opening was one of Australia’s greatest cricket legends, Rod Marsh, who was the guest speaker. I must admit he is certainly one of my great cricket idols.
I attended the Alice Springs versus Katherine game on the Saturday morning at Centralian College, and the final of the Community Division between the Centre for Appropriate Technology - who happen to be Bruce Walker, the Chairman of the Northern Territory Cricket Association’s team - and Stuart Highway in a close fought game, with Centre for Appropriate Technology taking out the game.
Other winners included New South Wales beating Queensland in the State/Territory Division. It was a tight game. With Queensland winning the last three Imparja Cup titles, it was great to see a change, and it is good for the competition to see New South Wales come up and beat them. Division 1 Major Centres winners was a local team called Gillens Bore who won over Alice Springs. The Women’s Division was won by an Alice Springs team called CGA Cougars defeating the Darwin Crocs, again in a tight game.
It has been reported that the games and the spirit of the carnival was tremendous this year, and the standard of play seemed to up a notch from last year. However, with the competitive games there has always been the respect, the friendship in each team, and a great team spirit that comes with the Imparja Cup.
As with any event of this size, there are many people who rate a mention. By no means in order, I congratulate and thank the following people: Michael McGregor, the Senior Officer of Indigenous Cricket with Cricket Australia, and the NT Cricket Office and staff, including Andrew Ramsey, the CEO; and all the members of the Northern Territory Indigenous Organisation Committee, including Trevor Woodhead, Marcus Rosas, Jenny Croker, Michael McGregor, Ian Redpath, and Peter Lake. Major sponsors were the Lords Taverners Australia, who also had representatives from all over Australia supporting not only the Imparja Cup, but Indigenous Cricket in Alice Springs. I understand the representatives from Lords Taverners were very grateful to see the investments first hand and were very impressed.
This year, the third wicket was also used for the first time at Larapinta Oval. The wicket received favourable comments from all state and territory teams which competed on it. The third wicket was a joint funding arrangement between the Northern Territory government, the Alice Springs Town Council and NT Cricket. This third wicket provides Alice Springs with the capacity to continue to host the Imparja Cup, as a couple of years ago there were murmurs from other states to try to move the event, which would have been a great shame. Along with the third wicket, the new grandstand at Traeger Park was well received and used with many spectators enjoying the views they had from it. Great support from the Alice Springs Town Council also needs to be recognised, particularly in keeping the grounds in great shape.
I pay special tribute to three men from Alice Springs and Tennant Creek for their vision and continuing work in promoting the Imparja Cup. To Shane and Mervyn Franey of Alice Springs and Ross Williams of Tennant Creek, I say well done, and be extremely proud of where the Imparja Cup is today. You deserve the utmost credit for its success since the first game back in 1994.
I also take this opportunity to welcome my new electorate officer, Mathew Adams. Mathew started in December last year after 13 years with the Aboriginal Legal Aid Service in Alice Springs. I am sure all members can appreciate just how important this position is to us all. It is very comforting when you have someone there on whom you can rely. Mathew has been able to quickly pick up the ropes, and I am looking forward to a long partnership with him in the Stuart electorate office.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I make some comments about Chinese New Year. As we all know, the first day of Chinese New Year was celebrated on Sunday, 18 February. Celebrations amongst Chinese families around the Territory will continue for 15 days after 18 February.
Last Sunday was the day when all Chinese people would wear something new, nothing old, and, for a month before Chinese New Year’s day, they would have done a great deal of cleaning of their homes. It is probably where the term ‘spring cleaning’ comes from because 18 February, while being the first day of Chinese New Year, is also variously known as the Spring Festival so people spring clean their house prior to that day. Tradition is that for the first 15 days of Chinese New Year, you do not sweep anything out of the house because that would mean sweeping out all the good fortune that one expects to be coming into the home at the start of each year.
This is the Year of the Pig, the Fire Pig, or the Boar. Some people call it the boar rather than the pig. Whichever way it is, it is the swine that we all know too well. They say that people born in the Year of the Pig are well meaning and generous, persevering and steady, and appreciated for their courage, prosperity and ability. This is something I took from the Internet written by a Feng Shui expert who practises from Adelaide, a man by the name of Richard Giles. He thought that people born of the Year of the Pig have best roles as doctor, mediator, judge, confessor, poet, painter or benefactor. He claims that people born in the Year of the Pig come into this world with a lot of goodness, tolerance and an admiral belief in the perfect ability of mankind.
Saying that, I suppose you can say that pigs might be nave, credulous and over-confident, and, it is thought, sometimes even downright stupid with money. Fortunately, pigs are very lucky with money and, somehow, the money seems to find its way to them so they end their days being very well off and contented.
I know there is a member of our Legislative Assembly who was born in the Year of the Pig and will be celebrating her birthday some time soon this year. For this person who is listening, it also says that pigs love domestic comfort and are also in love with nature. Their idea of heaven is to take long walks in the forest and their ideal house is in the country. I will come back to the political fortunes of the pig year in a little while.
A pig is honest, kind, understanding, has abilities as a peacemaker, and hates any sort of discord or unpleasantness. This book that I am paraphrasing a few pages from is written by Neil Somerville. I have used Neil Somerville’s book for the last 12 years. I started with the first Chinese New Year adjournment back in 1996 with the Year of the Rat. By speaking about the Year of the Pig this year, I have completed a full 12-year cycle. That is an achievement - I have done a full 12-year cycle of the Chinese lunar calendar and its significance to Chinese people.
The pig is an excellent conversationalist, speaks truthfully and to the point, dislikes any form of falsehood or hypocrisy, is a firm believer in justice and the maintenance of law and order. So, the pig who has listened to this on the CCTV at the moment, pigs are reasonably tolerant and I hope you are. They are often prepared to forgive others for their wrongdoings; they rarely harbour grudges, and are never vindictive. Pigs are very popular, enjoy other people’s company and like to be involved in joint or group activities, such as this parliament, I assume, and at functions always want to lend a hand. The best thing about this personality is that they are also excellent fundraisers, so we will be looking towards you for some fundraising for ourselves. They are hard and conscientious workers, who can be relied on to perform their jobs with integrity, and are feeling happiest when they are helping somebody. For that, the pig is highly valued by fellow colleagues and employers.
With all these good things about the pig, what happens then is that it makes the pig a person who has difficulties in saying no, and therein lies a major problem. The pig must learn how to say no and use the ability to recover from setbacks quickly.
In the Year of the Pig – this year is the Year of the Fire Pig – it is thought that it will be a year of great drama and change in politics. It will be interesting to see what changes there are. It says that it is a year where there will be clashes of values and criticism, of unrest, threatened coups or violence in politics, and arguments, disputes and fights over values and rights. It also cautions that those who tackle political issues in a violent, combative or aggressive mode will not do well this year. So, take heed my fellow parliamentarians, those who tackle political issues in a violent, combative or aggressive mode will not do well this year.
At the end of this week, the Chung Wah Society Lion Dance Troupe will be flying to Alice Springs, courtesy of the Department of Multicultural Affairs, which has assisted with funding to purchase airfares. The community of Alice Springs has provided, at no cost to the Chung Wah Society at all, accommodation, meals and transport throughout the three days they will be in Alice Springs. They will be commencing their blessings in the mall, as they do each year, performing on the stage in Todd Mall, followed by letting off a long string of firecrackers to herald in Chinese New Year celebrations to Alice Springs. This year, we can are going to do something slightly different. The numbers of Chinese in Alice Springs has grown significantly, especially over the last 12 months with an influx of Chinese employees who have come under the 457 Visa. There are, in fact, several of this group of Chinese also in Tennant Creek. Hopefully, they will come to Alice Springs to join the rest of the Chinese community and others in Alice Springs to celebrate Chinese New Year.
What is different about this year’s celebrations in Alice Springs is that Sunday afternoon there will be a public gathering at the town council lawns to promote matters Chinese and to encourage the community to assist in the formation of a Chinese support group in Alice Springs. I understand that the Chinese Embassy and the Taiwanese representatives are interested in supporting the activities as well. That would be good for Alice Springs. The Chung Wah Society has been in Darwin for many decades. Unfortunately, Alice Springs has lacked such a formalised support group. Obviously, many of us in Alice Springs provide assistance where we can when strangers who come to town need support or language assistance. They come to see us who are pretty well known in the community and are then pointed in the right direction, if not helped personally.
The lion dance troupe will bless many of the restaurants, homes and businesses over the next two days. Many of the primary schools and childcare centres have also requested to be involved, so the lion dance troupe will be going to those places blessing and performing for the children and demonstrating a small part of the Chinese culture that we know in the Northern Territory.
People in Darwin do not realise how lucky they are that they are so deeply immersed in the Chinese culture. Having that lion dance come to bless this Chamber at the start of each year is a fantastic thing. It is a demonstration of how cosmopolitan our community is in Darwin. There is such a thing as many different cultures and traditions living together in Darwin. This is definitely not just a lot of words but an act, an expression of community support and togetherness. The way that the blessing has occurred over the last 10 years in this Chamber bodes well for the involvement that parliament has with our community in Darwin and Alice Springs.
I look forward to a good and prosperous Chinese New Year and the Year of the Fire Pig. It is going to be a great year. They say that it is a year for completion. Neil Somerville says that pig years are certainly more innovative and, in 2007, we will witness more major inventions. This year, because it marks the end of the full cycle of Chinese years, can be a time for completing unfinished business as much as it can be for achieving a result. For individuals, pig years place great emphasis on family and relationships. Valuing those who are important to you and making the most of your situation and personal hopes can make this a positive and encouraging year. I encourage you to have a good year and Gong Xi Fa Cai!
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I talk about community safety. Every person in the Territory has a right to feel safe, and it is a core function of government to provide the infrastructure in its various forms to make people feel safe. However, it is my view and, indeed, the view of many others, that an increasing number of my constituents and, more generally, the people of Alice Springs do not feel safe, or are feeling less safe in their community. There is obviously a concern that I should bring to the parliament of the Northern Territory.
Put simply, there is a view which I share; that the Territory’s Labor government is failing the people of Alice Springs. The major issues - and there are many – proving to be a concern to so many in the Alice Springs community - and justifiably so - are lack of law and order including youth gangs - a relatively recent phenomena in the town of Alice Springs - and youths running riot in the central business district participating in vandalism, bashings and other crimes.
I also voice the frustration of many on the government’s failure to deliver its own promise. It was no one else’s promise. It was Labor’s promise to deliver 200 extra police on the beat. The government ministers and spin doctors can say and do what they like. They usually do. But there can be no doubt - there is no doubt - that this government promised 200 extra police on the beat. We are now seeing spin in overdrive or, put more bluntly, weasel words coming into play to justify somehow the government’s failure to deliver on what was a fundamental promise.
The crime statistics in Alice Springs tell, to a large extent, their own story. However, we know and it was the former Attorney-General, Peter Toyne, who wrote to the then member of Macdonnell agreeing or asserting there was a generally recognised under-reporting rate in the vicinity of 25% or thereabouts. I know from my constituents that many of them have given up reporting acts of crime because they have a feeling that nothing will be done.
This is not for a moment to be taken as any criticism at all of our police officers. I know from personal experience that the police officers in Alice Springs do a great job, and it is a constant theme when doorknocking and going to various functions both in my electorate and in Alice Springs generally. In other words, people have the utmost respect for members of our police service.
However, the fact that there are increasing levels of despair is something that the government needs to address. I come back to Labor’s failure to deliver 200 extra police on the beat. One cannot help but wonder why it is that the government has failed to deliver on this promise, and why it is that they cannot come clean and admit their failure to do so. Everyone wants to see the government deliver on its promise. Why? Because the people who are affected by crime have an expectation that with more police on the beat there will be less crime, there will be less criminal activity, there will be less vandalism, and people will feel safer.
In relation to youth gangs, on about Saturday, 3 February, there were two separate group bashings near the 24-hour bakery in Alice Springs. On both occasions, two long-term residents of Alice Springs were set upon by groups in what I understand to be unprovoked attacks. These young people were beaten and both of them required medical treatment. It is just one example, but people in the Top End will, I am sure, remember the man who was bashed - and seriously so - at the end of the Masters Games in Alice Springs in October last year. It is unacceptable that residents of Alice Springs are unable to go about their business and feel safe as they expect. They have every right to expect to feel safe in their community.
When we have gangs of young people roaming the central business district after dark, participating in mindless vandalism or group bashings or other serious crime, I would have thought that even those things would make this government act. The community, to the extent that I can gauge this, is generally disillusioned with government because they see the government’s failure to deliver on their promises affecting their daily lives.
It illustrates why it is that a group of concerned and frustrated business people, for example, took up the challenge to lobby for and ultimately provide closed circuit TV cameras in the CBD. These people did not take no for an answer and pushed the idea. So many of these business people pledged their own money - I will repeat that: their own money - towards provision of security cameras or CCTV cameras in the Todd Mall in the CBD. These people have shown that they are outraged and tired of the activities that have been occurring after dark and, for that matter, during the day in the Todd Mall and other hotspots in the CBD.
I have been a supporter of CCTV cameras for many years and made a representation to council several years ago encouraging the council to look at CCTV cameras. Hence my interest in the area and why I supported that group of business men and women who pushed so hard for the provision of CCTV cameras. I am, with them, delighted that the Alice Springs Town Council finally agreed to support the installation of security cameras in trouble spots in the CBD of Alice Springs. The council and its members have realised that there is no option but to pursue the safety of the community and there is, by implication, a recognition that the efforts of this government to date have not worked. It is curious, to say the least, and outrageous on another interpretation that this Labor government is opposed to the installation of CCTV cameras in the central business district of Alice Springs. Indeed, in response to a petition calling for the CCTV cameras, the current police minister said: ‘There is currently no demonstrated need’.
Today in parliament, the Chief Minister was talking about Community Cabinet. She gloated about the fact that her ministerial colleagues have met in places other than Darwin. Well, bully for you. When you go to other places in the Territory, you should at least do the people with whom you are talking the courtesy of listening to them. The minister gloated in parliament today that Community Cabinet and the forums associated with Community Cabinets provided an opportunity for people to talk to ministers and for government to get in touch with the community.
I cannot help but wonder what the ministers do when they are actually talking to people. In the absence of closing their eyes and falling asleep, and in the absence of stuffing whatever material in their ears to block the noise, one can reach the conclusion that these people - that is, Territory government ministers - are not listening. If they were listening to the people of Alice Springs, instead of saying there is no need for CCTV cameras in the mall, the police minister and his colleagues would say: ‘Yes, there is, and we will put our hands in our pockets’.
The Alice Springs Town Council, to its credit, has allocated $100 000 to kick start the installation of CCTV cameras in the CBD. I understand that the full cost of security camera installation is estimated to be about $250 000. I further understand that $150 000 of grant monies has been applied for. Where is the Northern Territory government in this process? It does not, on the face of it, even want to bother kicking in some money such is the contempt that this government and its ministers in particular have for the people of Alice Springs.
The bottom line is that there is widespread dissatisfaction with this government. This government has become the very things it says it objected to and did not like in the former CLP administration. They said that the former CLP government was arrogant and did not listen. If ever there was a government that was arrogant and did not listen, it is this one. If ever there was a government that treated the people of Alice Springs - and I am one of them - with arrogant contempt, it is this government under the leadership - or, I should say, lack of it - of the Chief Minister and member for Fannie Bay. She is not alone in her contempt. It is widely shared, in my view and, indeed, the view of others, by all of her ministerial colleagues.
That is why minister Lawrie has so quickly dismissed the idea of a youth curfew. The town council put together what it called a Youth Strategy. Under the strategy, unsupervised children younger than 15 years old would be taken into protective custody if found on the street between 10.30 pm and 5 am. Council members told our council meeting that the public believes there is a problem with youth in Alice Springs and moved to pressure the government to address the issues. Why then would a minister of this government say: ‘No, no, no, that is not a good idea because this criminalises children’? Firstly to illustrate that she has no understanding of the council’s Youth Strategy but, secondly and more importantly, it illustrates that she, like her colleagues, is simply not prepared to even consider ideas from the people of Alice Springs.
The CLP is on the record, as per the last election, in relation to its view on a curfew. In June 2005, the CLP launched a new public order legislation package to impose curfews for troublemaking juveniles as part of a package of tough new law and order initiatives to crack down on antisocial behaviour in Alice Springs. The minister for Police takes the view that incidents of social behaviour are sporadic in Alice Springs, and particularly in the central business district. He clearly does not live there, and that is, again, yet another example of a government minister showing contempt for, not only the people I represent, but for the people of Alice Springs generally.
Whilst no one can say that everyone in Alice Springs takes the view that the council’s Youth Strategy for the curfew - or call it whatever you like - is a necessarily good idea or will work, the fact that the government so arrogantly and flippantly dismisses anything that comes from Alice Springs is to its eternal shame. What is concerning - and again, the government has not even picked up on this - is that there are people forming groups in Alice Springs. There is Alice in 5, and Advance Alice - groups of concerned citizens who have come together to act and to develop better outcomes and strategies for Alice Springs. The government should be doing that and they are failing.
In a month or so, members of this government will go to Alice Springs, with hand on heart and declare their undying love and loyalty to the people of Alice Springs. Well, actions speak louder than words. A phrase that I anticipate members will hear from the opposition, as well as those barracking from the sidelines, I might add, is every time a government minister feigns love and affection for the people of Alice Springs, we will say: ‘People do not believe you’. We do not believe you because you continue to treat the people of Alice Springs with contempt. You do not care about them. The Chief Minister only goes there on a fly-in/fly-out basis. She has breached her own promise in that regard. The government should be ashamed of itself. I say again, they need to do better. I urge them to do so, so that better outcomes can be achieved for the people of Alice Springs.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
RESPONSE TO PETITION
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members that a response to petition No 43 has been received and circulated to honourable members.
- Petition No 43
Non-Support of Aboriginal People for Abortion
Date presented: 11 October 2006
Presented by: Mr Bonson
Referred to: Minister for Justice and Attorney-General
Date response due: 21 February 2007
Date response received: 19 February 2007
Date response presented: 20 February 2007
- Response
- Access to medical terminations in certain clearly defined circumstances is legal in the Northern Territory. The changes to the law are of a technical nature and will not affect access to abortion in the Northern Territory.
Moving this provision from the Criminal Code to the Medical Services Act is part of a broader reform of the Criminal Code. In this particular case, current section 174 of the Criminal Code regulates lawful medical. This is an anomaly as the code’s function is to set out lawful actions and penalties, not regulate lawful activity.
Abortion can be a controversial issue in the community. These changes do not substantively affect the current situation in the Northern Territory.
This bill was assented to 3 November 2006.
MINISTERIAL REPORTS
Community Cabinet
Community Cabinet
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to inform the House that Community Cabinet has just celebrated its fifth birthday. The Community Cabinet concept was a significant part of our Good Governance reform package when we came to government in 2001. The first two-day meeting was held in Nhulunbuy in February 2002 and, since then, Community Cabinet has given Territorians the opportunity to meet with government ministers and talk about the issues that are important to them.
In the past five years, we have visited regional centres like Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs, Nhulunbuy, urban communities in Parap, Marrara, Coolalinga, Palmerston and, of course, we have met with many people in some of our remoter communities: Ti Tree, Yulara, the Tiwi Islands, Timber Creek, Groote Eylandt, and Wadeye, just to name a few. We are now gearing up for our 48th Community Cabinet in the East Arnhem region and, before the year is out, we will have hit the half century mark.
Community Cabinet is extremely important, especially when it comes to effective policy formulation. It is only by getting to our communities and talking to residents that we get a handle on local issues and fully appreciate the complexities of service delivery. There is rarely a one-fix-all solution for issues affecting our communities. For example, what works at Belyuen may not necessarily be appropriate for Yuendumu. Our visits help us pinpoint the specific needs of different communities; information that is fed back to policy areas across government.
An integral part of the Community Cabinet process, and one I look forward to, is the women’s forum. The forums are an ideal opportunity for minister Scrymgour, in her role as Minister for Women’s Policy, and minister Lawrie, as the Minister for Family and Community Services, and me to talk to Territory women about the issues that affect them and their lives. They are particularly important to people who live in remote areas, giving them a rare opportunity to discuss policies and talk about our decision-making and how it affects them.
The importance of Community Cabinet cannot be over emphasised. It gives us the chance to see how existing policies and programs are working on the ground where it matters. We get to hear firsthand what the issues are, and whether service delivery is effective. Given the distances involved and the significant challenges we face, bringing Cabinets to Territorians can involve some expense but, wherever possible, we try to ensure that the local community benefits by outsourcing services such as catering, accommodation and transport.
As you would expect, a typical Community Cabinet involves much planning. Our aim is to make the most of the visits, which is why staff from my office visit the communities beforehand and identify the key areas of concern. That way, where possible, we can address issues on the spot during visits. In the weeks leading up to Community Cabinet, flyers are sent out inviting residents to come along, and all key organisations at the local level are contacted. Information is also broadcast on local radio and in local papers. After the Cabinet visit and the women’s forum, all queries and questions that need to be followed up are forwarded to the appropriate departments for action.
Newsletters are a fundamental communication tool of the Community Cabinet program. They are prepared on our return and often include updates of the issues raised, as well as photographs from the visits. So far, 32 separate newsletters have been produced. These have been circulated widely, not only back to the community, but also to many businesses and organisations across the Territory.
Madam Speaker, Community Cabinet brings government to all Territorians, no matter where they live or work. It allows people to talk about the things that matter to them and, importantly, gives us the opportunity to hear their concerns and aspirations firsthand and follow them through. I take this opportunity to thank everyone involved in making our Community Cabinet program the success it is today.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for her report. It is a fairly strange report to start the second week of parliament. I would have thought given what is a crisis at Royal Darwin Hospital, we might have seen the Minister for Health come into this parliament at the first opportunity and give an account of himself.
One would have thought, given the difficulties with police and law and order and the government’s failure to deliver its own promise of providing 200 extra police on the beat, that the minister for Police - not the former one who was so spectacularly demoted late last year but the present Police minister - might well have stood up and given an account of himself.
In relation to the contents of the Chief Minister’s report, we agree. Community Cabinets are a good thing. There is an underlying inference that the previous CLP government did not meet anywhere other than Darwin. I hope that is not the inference because that would be incorrect.
One wonders why, if, as the Chief Minister is suggesting, Community Cabinets are such a success that this government is so famously out of touch. One wonders how effective the Community Cabinets are in getting the message from the community to government, given the crisis in our health system and the ongoing difficulties in relation to law and order. One wonders, in Alice Springs for instance, why it is that the government refuses to go near a community-based plea for CCTV cameras in the mall. One wonders why it is that the government has rejected out of hand anything that vaguely resembles a youth curfew. These are not the things that speak of a government that is well informed and, as the Chief Minister would have us believe, in touch with the community.
In relation to the women’s forums, this is the government, after all, that abandoned the Business Women’s Consultative Council and abandoned the Women’s Advisory Council. One wonders whether the 32 separate newsletters of which the Chief Minister spoke came out of the Ministerial Support Unit. It is a mystery to all of us what the Ministerial Support Unit does. I ask the Chief Minister to advise whether the Ministerial Support Unit issued these newsletters.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I thank the Chief Minister for her report. I could probably say I thank the Chief Minister for borrowing the concept of the mobile electorate office and transferring it to a Community Cabinet, but being a humble person I can put it back to Litchfield Shire Council. When it first started, it actually had meetings that rotated around the shire. Sadly, that does not occur at the moment. It is an important way for governments of all types to get out to the people to find out what they have to say.
I should make a note on the local government aspects. With the proposals that the government is putting forward with some very large councils, part of the conditions of those councils should be that they rotate their meetings around those very large areas, not rely on electronic equipment to hold their meetings. They may have to, at times, because of weather or circumstances which makes that unavoidable. It is important that both the Territory government and local government get out and meet the people.
The Community Cabinets should get out when there are fairly controversial issues at hand. One time would be the case of the changes to local government. Another time might have been when the Road Safety Taskforce report was released. The Community Cabinet could then have received direct feedback from the community.
I support the government’s idea of Community Cabinet. It supports a very important part of the democratic process, especially in an area as big as the Northern Territory.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I am in two minds whether to reply. The diatribe from the Opposition Leader about an initiative that is an excellent one for the Territory - you wondered where it came from. The Community Cabinet is a successful operation of this government. There was no discussion of what previous governments had done. This was talking about five years of action from this Labor government. All we hear from the Opposition Leader is carping and whingeing and whining. All the Opposition Leader has to do is pick up a newsletter from the Community Cabinets to see that they are produced by the Community Cabinet in the Cabinet Office. This is an appropriate activity for the Cabinet Office. It is an interesting whinge and whine from the Leader of the Opposition …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms MARTIN: I thank the member for Nelson for putting some constructive ideas forward - excellent. You cannot say the same thing for the opposition.
Round Table of Young Territorians 2007
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Young Territorians): Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to advise the House today that I have recently appointed the 2007 Youth Minister’s Round Table of Young Territorians. As members would know, the youth round table is a program that gives young Territorians the opportunity to speak directly with the Northern Territory government about the issues that impact upon them. More importantly, it enables government to really understand the issues affecting young Territorians in their communities and to work towards achievable solutions.
The 2007 members were selected from all over the Territory and from all walks of life. They are: Shahank Ramakrishna, Darby Bicheno, Jacob Andreae, Siana Cork, Sarah Morris, Lauren Jew, Nicolette Pearce, Karlie James, Tara Alexander, Lyndon Duncan and Katrina Halse from Darwin; from Palmerston, Shamim Kholosi and Clare Paynter; from Darwin rural, John-Paul Thorbjornsen; from Tennant Creek, Rosalind Beadle; from Alice Springs, Claire Ryan; and from Nhulunbuy, Nathan Frick. The members represent a diverse mix of young students, workers, carers, parents, volunteers and entrepreneurs - all leaders in their own right with the capacity to offer different and unique insights into issues.
Over the years, the youth round table has developed a standing in the community as an exceptional youth development program that is based on the principles of inclusiveness, diversity, respect and participation. The youth round table is useful across government in providing their views directly to agencies on particular issues. For example, last year the youth round table had an information and feedback session with the Sessional Committee on Sport and Youth. They spoke with the Commissioner for Public Employment regarding WorkChoices, they discussed middle years schooling with the Department of Employment, Education and Training, and they met with the Department of Health and Community Services and public health physicians regarding the Road Safety Taskforce.
Members are also frequently called upon during the year to make a contribution to the development of government policy and programs. As well as attending formal meetings of the youth round table, members are very active in their communities by engaging with their peers.
As well as welcoming the new youth round table, I place on the record my appreciation for the hard work undertaken by the outgoing 2006 members. I take this opportunity to thank those members. Their dedication to their peers and to making a difference to the lives of young Territorians is admirable. I encourage them to continue to be active in their community to create positive change. I am always heartened to see young people focused on finding solutions and developing positive outcomes.
The first meeting of the 2007 round table will be held this weekend in Darwin where I will have the pleasure of meeting the new members for the first time. The members will be consulting with other young people in their communities throughout the year on issues of importance to them, and conveying these issues to government. I look forward to working closely with those members throughout the year and I encourage all young people to contact their members to ensure that they have their views heard.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, it is very important that we provide quality leadership for our young people and encourage them. The report given is fine and does all the right things, says all the right things, and that is great. It has the support of opposition, of course. Who would not support that?
However, we need to reflect, as parliamentarians, on the use of the parliament for the practice of reading media releases. I find it a little demeaning. We have so many serious issues to attend to. Maybe there are only four opposition and 19 of you guys, but you stand up and read a prepared script and the opposition, without any notice, has a bit of a talk about it.
We have very little legislation on the Notice Paper from a government that has said it is raring to go. To read out statements and media releases like this is really an unparliamentary practice. It does not really happen in other parliaments, nor does it support any element of debate.
I put it to the Territory government, which I believe is misusing parliament, that, first, if you are genuine about addressing serious issues, at least give the courtesy to the opposition of advising it of the issues that you want to promote so that we can give some more considered response to satisfy those we are elected to serve. If you cannot do that, why do you not just stand up and have a talk without the script and see whether you actually know the issues upon which you are reflecting?
What I am saying is in no way a reflection on the quality of our young people …
Ms Martin: Well, it sounds like it.
Mr MILLS: … or the appropriateness …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Mr MILLS: … of the statement that is being made. It is quite adequate, but there is another issue that I have just raised. If you cannot hear it, you have cloth ears.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Blain, I ask you to withdraw, please.
Mr MILLS: What? Cloth ears?
Madam SPEAKER: It was the tone and the manner in which you presented that. It is a matter of order.
Mr MILLS: Honestly, Madam Speaker, I am asked to withdraw what?
Madam SPEAKER: In commenting on members – in asking a member to withdraw, it is a matter of the way in which you say things, the tone as well as the actual words.
Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker, I …
Madam SPEAKER: There can be no dissent from a matter of order.
Mr MILLS: I find that a little difficult, Madam Speaker, on this issue. If this is to apply here because of an unpleasant tone in my voice, I would trust that it also applies to honourable members who made …
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Blain, I have asked you to withdraw. Will you withdraw?
Mr MILLS: I …
Madam SPEAKER: There is no …
Ms CARNEY: Madam Speaker, may I speak to you about this issue?
It seems to me, Madam Speaker, that you are asking members of the Assembly to withdraw a tone. My question is, how does one withdraw a tone, and secondly …
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, this is a matter of order, it is not a ruling.
Mr MILLS: All right. I will withdraw the tone.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you. The words themselves, member for Blain, it is the actual words.
Mr MILLS: What? Cloth ears?
Madam SPEAKER: I have asked you to withdraw. Thank you.
Mr MILLS: The tone or ‘cloth ears’?
Madam SPEAKER: I am saying to you that, in asking a member to withdraw a comment, it is not simply about the words, it is about the tone and the manner in which someone delivers it, and so …
Mr MILLS: Yes, I withdraw the tone, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: And the words.
Mr MILLS: And the words?
Madam SPEAKER: And the words. I am asking you to withdraw.
Mr MILLS: The words and tone?
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you.
Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker, I withdraw the words and the tone.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Blain.
Mr Mills: Cloth ears.
Ms Carney: We cannot use cloth ears.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I need to be very careful, don’t I, in what I say and how I say it?
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mrs BRAHAM: Let us hope the same applies to all members in this House then for that particular ruling, even government.
Minister, yes, good, we need to hear our young people and what they have to say. The fact is, I would like you to talk to them about curfews, from what has been happening in Alice Springs. The Alice Springs Town Council does not have a youth advisory council at all, and it would be interesting to hear their point of view, and how the young people in Alice Springs would come to grips with the problems that the town council sees.
I believe it is important that you do listen to young people, hear their points of view, and perhaps even do something to show them that you appreciate it by introducing something in this parliament.
However, I just hope this is not a token committee, as you did with the Seniors Advisory Council that did not meet for so long that people on it thought they were there for goodness knows what. It was an absolute disgrace that you treated the seniors in the way you did. I hope that you are not going to say to the young people, ‘Yes, we are going to have this wonderful meeting in Darwin. We will have a good time’, and then forget them for another nine months or 12 months.
Ms Martin: It has been in place for a decade, Loraine.
Mrs BRAHAM: Well, it has happened in the past with this minister and her Seniors Advisory Council. It could happen again.
Remember: do not meet just in Darwin. Try the other regional centres as well, and when you do come to those centres, invite a broad range of young people to talk to the round table people you have chosen. Let us really make it democratic. Let us really hear the voice of young people and not stifle them.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Young Territorians): Madam Speaker, in response, firstly, to the member for Blain. It was interesting to hear the shadow minister not think that the issues affecting and impacting on our youth are worthy of a report in the parliament first thing in the morning.
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: What is your point of order, Leader of the Opposition?
Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker, that is actually incorrect. The Hansard clearly states that I had no comment whatsoever disparaging of young people or the purpose of giving such a statement. There was another issue that was being addressed. That is incorrect, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Member for Blain, if you wish to, you can approach me later about making a personal explanation.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Madam Speaker, I will just qualify. The member for Blain did say that are other more important issues, and actually objected to a report on the youth round table and the issues affecting young people. Last year, there was a comprehensive youth statement tabled in this parliament outlining a number of programs and issues across all agencies, and what we work towards for youth.
Member for Braitling, the Senior Advisory Council is fantastic. They are working well. I have …
Mrs Braham: Oh, they are back again, are they? They were not there for a long time, as you know.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: … been working quite well with the chairperson …
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, your time has expired.
Illegal Foreign Fishing Prosecutions – Pressure on Legal System
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, illegal foreign fishing has a serious environmental and economic impact on Australia. We in the Northern Territory are on the frontline of this battle to protect our natural resources and maintain our marine biodiversity. Apart from the long-term effect on fish and shark stocks, illegal fishing boats also pose an extreme risk from noxious marine pests and other biohazards.
The Martin Labor government, therefore, strongly supports the Australian government’s expanded funding commitment for detection and apprehension of illegal fishing vessels. Increased coordination between Australian and Northern Territory agencies will also improve apprehension rates, and is intended to act as a strong deterrent to illegal fishing activities.
I wish to report to the Assembly that we recognise this effort to protect Australia’s northern waters will have an inevitable flow-on effect for the Northern Territory’s criminal justice system. The expected increase in the number of fishers prosected and imprisoned will put extreme pressure on courts and gaols. Based on data provided by the Australian government, by 2009 up to 30% of the Northern Territory’s total prison population capacity will be required to house illegal foreign fishers - that means up to 250 additional prison places. Even larger numbers will flow through courts. It is estimated approximately 1500 illegal fishing prosecutions will be brought to the court each year in 2007-08 and 2008-09.
The Territory government has been moving quickly to address the anticipated influx. I have been working closely with my federal counterparts at each step of the way because we will not be able to overcome this challenge without the Commonwealth’s strong support. I discussed the matter with the federal Justice minister, Senator Chris Ellison in November last year. We agreed the Territory Department of Justice would serve as the lead agency to coordinate the Territory’s costs and submit them to the Attorney-General’s Department for federal consideration and action.
I also took the opportunity afforded by a meeting with the Attorney-General on statehood to raise the issue with the Attorney-General, Philip Ruddock. I gave him an advanced copy of the work that had been done quantifying the costs to the Territory if the situation goes on as it has been predicted. We have now formally sent that submission to him following the approval by Cabinet of the scope it sets. The Territory looks forward to receiving a favourable response to the submission.
Agreement on funding will allow for the rapid expansion of judicial officer numbers, support staff, and infrastructure. In the meantime, the government will closely monitor illegal fisher numbers going through our system. The Department of Justice will also continue preparations to ensure Courts Administration and Corrections are operating as efficiently and cost-effectively as possible.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, in response, the minister’s comments traverse a number of portfolios, and I understand why that is the case. Thank you, minister, for your report.
We go back to my colleague, the member for Blain’s comments that if you are fair dinkum about an issue like this why you do not bring it on in a ministerial statement. You not only traversed a number of portfolios, as is your right, but you traversed a number of very important issues to the Territory under the heading of illegal fishing. I would have thought that, given that government ministers, with hand on heart - and I am sorry; I need to watch my tone now and appreciate that - are saying how important illegal fishing is in the Territory and how they will be maxisimising and moblising all efforts to address it, one wonders why it was done in a five-minute statement - which was delivered, I think, within five minutes - to which the opposition only has two minutes to reply. I also note that the statement was delivered without any notice.
Madam Speaker, there are ample examples of why it is that this system of ministerial reports needs review; why it is that I wrote to the Leader of Government Business last week. I look forward to his response.
Thank you, minister, but with the information you provided to us I do not think either one of us can expect a serious debate. I am increasingly of the view that this government does not want a serious debate on anything. You are, as a group, hell-bent on spinning your way out of just about everything. You have an enormous spin machine. Your resources are apparently endless to promote yourselves and to retain that goal that you seek; that is, your return to government as opposed to dealing with the problems in the Territory.
Madam Speaker, the clock is having difficulties; I guess I could just keep talking. In fairness, I am sure that my time will be coming pretty much up to closing. So thanks, minister, but I urge you to do better next time. I will not bother going on because I know the clock is not working.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, the Deputy Clerk is away today and the Acting Deputy Clerk is just learning how to do this, so good luck.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I put on the record the rationale why ministerial reports were introduced in the first place. It was to mark the spot, to advise members of detail around a particular issue without going to lengthy statements. They are very much mini-statements. On each occasion recently that ministers have risen to give a ministerial report, the opposition clamours over the minister speaking: ‘It ought be a statement so that we can all contribute in full on the particular question’.
On the other hand, we have a media release from the Leader of the Opposition slagging the government, having one bill today and filling the paper with statements ...
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order! What is your point of order?
Ms CARNEY: Two points of order, Madam Speaker. One is that I ask that you direct the Deputy Chief Minister to withdraw the word ‘slagging’ on the basis that it is unparliamentary. And Madam Speaker, in accordance with your previous ruling, his tone is offensive and I ask you direct him to withdraw it.
Mr STIRLING: Madam Speaker, in deference to the sensitivity of the Leader of the Opposition, I withdraw the word ‘slagging’.
This government was criticised for having a number of statements on the paper today. You cannot have it both ways, Leader of the Opposition. You cannot have it both ways.
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I ask that you rule the Deputy Chief Minister to withdraw his tone in accordance with your previous ruling, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, when I was previously discussing the matter with the member for Blain, what I said is that it is a matter of tone, behaviour and manner in relation to points of order and matters of order. It is not a ruling. It is not something for which there is any debate. That was the grounds on which I called on the member for Blain to withdraw. It depends on many things, Leader of the Opposition. The Deputy Chief Minister has, in fact, withdrawn the comments.
Ms CARNEY: He certainly withdrew the word, Madam Speaker, but the issue about the tone obviously remains.
Madam SPEAKER: Obviously, Leader of the Opposition, you cannot actually withdraw a tone. This is fairly obvious.
Ms CARNEY: Well, Madam Speaker …
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, I ask you to resume your seat. You are actually reflecting on the Speaker. I ask you to resume your seat.
Dr LIM: Madam Speaker, may I seek indulgence and speak to the point of order?
Madam Speaker, you have always maintained a very impartial manner of presiding over the parliament. It appears to me, for some reason, that matters have changed and the opposition is constrained in full parliamentary debate from bringing in the colour and the intensity of debate into this Chamber. When we use words, we are told you cannot use them because of the tone, or of the nature of the word. However, when government members do, particularly the Deputy Chief Minister in his full flight, bright red face, yelling and arguing and slagging into the opposition, we are told to put up with that. I ask you to return to the impartiality of your previous judging.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Greatorex, as I have commented, this is actually a point of order, a matter of order. It is not a ruling which I have made here. I shall be maintaining my independence as the Speaker. I would prefer that you did not reflect on me in relation to being the Speaker. I am happy to discuss these matters with the opposition in my Chamber at a later hour.
Please continue, Deputy Chief Minister.
Mr STIRLING: I think I made my point, Madam Speaker, that if we are going to be prevailed upon to make every report a statement, then it ill behoves the Leader of the Opposition to criticise the government for the number of statements it has on the Notice Paper.
Australian Tourism Awards
Mr HENDERSON (Tourism): Madam Speaker, I inform the House on the Australian Tourism Awards to be held in Sydney on Friday, 23 February this year. The Australian Tourism Awards recognise and promote excellence in tourism and are the pinnacle of achievement for the tourism industry in our nation.
Finalists are drawn from state and territory tourism award winners across a range of categories, where participants have undergone an extremely comprehensive application process to qualify as an entrant for their respective state or territory.
As you may well be aware, our local awards are called the Northern Territory Brolga Tourism Awards. This gala evening was held on Saturday, 2 December, at the Alice Springs Convention Centre, where I had the great pleasure of attending the 20th anniversary celebrations along with 340 industry delegates.
The Brolga Tourism Awards is an industry-based program that recognises all round business excellence in Northern Territory tourism businesses. It is a night where we celebrate and honour the tourism industry in the Territory and reward their achievements, their dedication and their commitment to excellence. This commitment to excellence has seen the Brolga Awards evolve over a 20-year time span to become our industry’s night of nights, while this same level of commitment to excellence has driven and motivated our tourism industry to enter the awards and be judged alongside their industry counterparts.
The awards are judged by a panel of 18 judges, who were, this year, under the stewardship of Mr Bob Woodward, whose long-term dedication and commitment I commend. Bob’s team of judges bought an abundance of insight, experience and knowledge to the panel, whilst their willingness in volunteering their time has been duly noted.
I also wish to formally acknowledge that this year’s management and coordination of the awards program was carried out in-house by Tourism NT. The agency worked tirelessly to ensure that the awards program delivered on expectations. The awards were supported by the offer of fantastic incentive prize packages, with the major prize of a specifically tailored sales trip to the value of $5000 offered by Tourism NT.
It seems that the agency’s solid efforts have been rewarded with a 20% increase in entries from 2005. This great result was also bolstered further by the agency’s offer of assistance to the tourism industry through free workshops and mentoring to assist with the preparation of award submissions.
The Chairman of Judges, Bob Woodward, has openly praised the industry entrants in this year’s Brolga Awards. He has commented the quality of this year’s submissions was outstanding and, to quote Bob: ‘In fact, the best I have seen’. This is a great testament to our tourism industry which has spent a massive amount of time, effort and resources in preparing submissions.
It is also verification that Tourism NT’s free workshops and mentoring are a fantastic initiative that has successfully guided the industry through the lengthy submission process, a submission process that may undergo modification this year following intense state and territory lobbying for change to the process at national level. Whilst details of these changes are still to be finalised, as Tourism minister, I await the announcement to the changes when the 2007 awards program is launched in the coming months. Positive changes to the process will encourage more Territory operators to get involved, to seek recognition at the Territory level, driving the industry’s commitment to tourism excellence into the future.
I extend my congratulations to all as I inform you of the 2006 winners of the NT’s Brolga Tourism Awards. I table a list of the awardees and seek leave to have this list incorporated into the Parliamentary Record.
Leave granted.
- Major Tourist Attraction – Alice Springs Desert Park; Significant Tourist Attraction - Yellow Water Cruises; Major Festivals and Events – Henley on Todd Regatta; Significant Festivals and Events - 2006 Tattersalls Finke Desert Race; Ecotourism – Alice Springs Desert Park; Heritage and Cultural Tourism - Discovery EcoTours Australia; Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Tourism – Unique Indigenous Land Tours; General Tourism Services – Central Australian Tourism Industry Association; Meetings and Business Tourism – Alice Springs Convention Centre; Mourism Retailing – Australian Crocodile Products; Major Tour and Transport Operator – Great Southern Railway; Significant Tour and Transport Operator – Discovery EcoTours Australia; Adventure Tourism – Arnhemland Barramundi Nature Lodge; Destination Promotion – Great Southern Railway; Tourism Product Marketing – Great Southern Railway; Media – 2006-07 Katherine Region Visitor Guide; Tourism Education and Training – International College of Advanced Education; Tourism Restaurants and Catering Services - SKYCITY Darwin; Tourist and Caravan Parks – MacDonnell Range Holiday Park; Backpacker Accommodation – Melaleuca on Mitchell; Hosted Accommodation – Orangewood Alice Springs B&B; Unique Accommodation – Seven Spirit Bay Wilderness Lodge; Deluxe Accommodation – Quest Darwin; Luxury Accommodation – SKYCITY Darwin; Outstanding Interpretive Guide – Sab Lord, Lords Kakadu and Arnhemland Safaris; Outstanding Contribution by an Individual Employee – Tom Earley, Tourism Top End; Outstanding Contribution by a Supervisor or Manager – Peter Ayre, Tourism Top End; Outstanding Contribution by an Individual – Emmanuel Cruz, SKYCITY Darwin; Chairman’s Choice Business Excellence Award – Discovery EcoTours Australia; Chairman’s Choice Business Growth Award – Venture North Australia; and Minister for Tourism’s Perpetual Trophy Award – Doug Gamble, Redco Investments.
Mr HENDERSON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Of the 31 Brolga categories, 24 feed directly into the national awards. The winners of these categories will go on to compete as finalists at the Australian Tourism Awards.
Each state and territory finalist’s entry is rejudged against strict rules and guidelines by a judging panel made up of representatives from each state and territory. The winners will be announced later this month during the awards evening, as previously mentioned, at the Star City Casino in Sydney on Friday, 23 February. I am sure all of members of this House wish our Northern Territory finalists the best of luck for this year’s Australian Tourism Awards.
Reports noted pursuant to standing orders.
STATUTE LAW REVISION BILL
(Serial 86)
(Serial 86)
Continued from 30 November 2006.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I advise the Attorney-General, as previously indicated, that the bill is supported. I have a couple of comments through on which I invite him to comment in reply.
In a surprisingly short second reading speech, you said that the main purpose of the bill is to make consequential amendments to various Northern Territory laws. You also said that the bill updates superseded references, corrects typographical and grammatical errors and omissions, and clarifies ambiguous terminology in the affected acts and subordinate legislation.
You then went through and touched on some, but not all, of the legislation to which the bill applies. In particular, you did not refer to the amendments and their consequences on the Northern Territory Firearms Act and the Private Security Act. My first question is: why was that? Second, you would be aware that the consequence of the changes to the Firearms Act is that it broadens the scope of the term ‘disqualifying offence’ to include offences committed elsewhere in Australia and, indeed, other countries.
The current situation, as I understand it, is that if you are convicted of an offence - that is the equivalent of an offence for which you can be disqualified in the Northern Territory - anywhere else in Australia, then you are deemed to have been disqualified in the Northern Territory. We have no problem with that because the issue is an important one. My question is: why did you not refer to the Firearms Act in your second reading speech, when it does represent a significant and important change to the Northern Territory Firearms Act? Secondly, did you consult and, if so, what was the outcome of any consultation with the Northern Territory Firearms Council? They are the two critical issues in relation to that. Why did you not mention it in your second reading speech and what was the effect, and did you consult with the Northern Territory Firearms Council?
Similarly, in relation to the effects on the Private Security Act, I note that you did not refer to that in your very short second reading speech. I ask why that was the case and, secondly, whether any consultation occurred with those working in the industry and, if so, what was the outcome of that consultation?
For the record, we do not oppose the effect of the amendments. However, it does seem that, again, there is an important change, important enough to have been worthy of at least a passing reference in the second reading speech. I am sure the Attorney-General wants to be seen to be transparent as, indeed, the government would when it brings legislation to this place. It really stood out as being odd that two of these quite significant changes were not referred to. So it begs the question: what, if any, consultation was there?
In relation to the changes to the Community Welfare Act, the Attorney-General might, in his reply, like to tell us when the new Community Welfare Act is going to appear. I believe it was promised in about 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005. Members opposite well know my views about amending the legislation. In fact, I probably even referred to it in my maiden speech. If the Attorney-General can give us any inside information as to whether this long overdue legislation is going to be amended, I would be very grateful.
With those comments, I will conclude; however, please make no mistake, the opposition supports the bill.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I also support the bill. I realise this is one of those bills that more or less tidies up matters. However, I would like the minister to clarify the section under the Animal Welfare Act being removed. My notes here say this removes the subsection concerning evidence for offences for not providing an animal with food, drink and shelter. If there is evidence the animal is not provided with clean water for 24 hours, the court can assume the offender failed to provide the animal with sufficient water.
It reminds me of a certain case by a certain minister in relation to a certain landowner of a large property in the Northern Territory. I am wondering whether this change to the act bears any relationship to matters arising from that particular case, or is it to do with something else? I would like to know whether I am right in what I said. Are the reasons for the removal of that section of the act? Does it have anything to do with that particular case that I am referring to?
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank the members for Araluen and Nelson for their contributions to debate. The member for Araluen spelt out the precise reasons why statute law revision bills are necessary from time to time. I will reiterate that they are to make necessary, but minor, consequential amendments; they are to fix errors and omissions and clarify potentially confusing terminology. She made the point that I did not touch on reference to the Firearms Act and Private Security Act. Nor did I in relation to a whole range of other bills that are touched on by their amendments.
The important thing is that there are no substantive changes to either policy or programs of government contained within these amendments. The primary purpose is to make consequential amendments following the enactment of the first tranche of the Criminal Code reforms which dealt with criminal responsibility. That act came into effect in late December 2006, so it is necessary to amend all related bills to correct the offence section references. Otherwise you have legislation across the board that does not correspond with each other. The bill makes minor amendments to acts, as I said, across various portfolios: the Cemeteries Act, the Swimming Pool Safety Act. These specific amendments and the reasons for them were set out in some detail in that second reading speech. While minor bills such as these demonstrate that legislation is not, and should not be, set in stone, we need to constantly review it and amend where necessary to ensure that the law operates efficiently and fairly for Territorians.
Does the member for Araluen really believe - let us take the private security that she raised – it is necessary to consult with the Miscellaneous Workers Union and the private security employees because we are renumbering the offences to coincide with the changes to the Criminal Code? I believe they would understand that if you have made changes to the Criminal Code Act and they flow through to other legislation, you consequently have to renumber the offences in the act and drop out references to a ‘dangerous act’ as in the firearms regulations where ‘dangerous act’ was omitted from the Criminal Code. Does she really think that we have to go and talk to the Firearms Council because we are changing references and corresponding references in different pieces of legislation? I think not. They would wonder why you are coming to talk with them.
That is essence of these changes: they stem from the initial changes to the Criminal Code and they flow through to these other pieces of legislation. I do not think it is necessary, in that sense, to talk to community groups: ‘Sorry, but that part of the act is now renumbered to take account of the changes to the Criminal Code itself’.
I take the point that, perhaps, the second reading speech in these bills ought to mention every piece of legislation. To do so would make it a much longer second reading speech. It is simply to say we are renumbering, we are deleting a word because it is spelt wrong, or something of that minor nature. The second reading speeches would be pretty dull.
If the member for Araluen was to go to the explanatory memorandum which accompanies the passage of the bill in the first place into the House it is all explained in that explanatory memorandum. I am not sure that it has to go into the second reading as well. We know that a court may, at a future time, have to go back to the second reading in relation to interpretation. I imagine they can also go to the explanatory memorandum which is tabled, as I said, at the time that the bill enters the House for its second reading. So I am not taken with the suggestion or the proposal that we should mention the purpose of every single amendment and where it goes to right through.
The Community Welfare Act is under development. I do not have a date; it is still to come to Cabinet. It is a body of work in progress.
In relation to the Animal Welfare Act, the section 8(2) in the explanatory memorandum being removed to remove evidentiary problems which may rise where food and/or water has been provided to an animal, the question from the member for Nelson was did it arise from a previous court case. I am told that, in part, it did.
I thank members opposite for their questions and their suggestions. I take on board what the member for Araluen said. I would not be taking, for example, where it is a simple renumbering, to have to put all of that in the second reading, but where it does touch across a bill perhaps there is a need just to mention that. The explanatory memorandum is the safeguard. It is the stop gap. If it is not in the second reading, it is certainly in the explanatory memorandum, both of which could be used by courts for future interpretation if there was ambiguity in coming to an understanding on interpretation of the bill.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Clause 1 agreed to.
Clause 2:
Ms CARNEY: Mr Chairman, I was not planning on going to committee in this area but, on the basis of the Attorney-General’s comments, I thought it appropriate to do so. I asked some specific questions and I wonder whether the Attorney-General will be good enough in the committee to provide me with specific answers. The questions were: did the government consult with the NT Firearms Council - yes or no? Did the government consult with those working in the private security industry - yes or no?
Mr STIRLING: Mr Chairman, I did answer it. If the member for Araluen had not been engaged in conversation and had been listening to my reply closing debate on the second reading she would have heard me say that the view was taken that it was not necessary to speak with the firearms association or the private security and Miscellaneous Workers Union when the bill goes to amending and replacing references to be renumbered following the changes to the Criminal Code.
If there was anything substantive here by way of change, the fact is the Criminal Code changed with the taking out of a ‘dangerous act’ and that meant consequential flow-ons through other legislation. If it was drastically changing the firearms regulations - what they might do with firearms or how they handle them, or how they secure them - of course, there would be a case for consultation and the same with private security. When you have major change to the Criminal Code, which was well known and well put about at the time that that amendment went through, and these are renumbering of the categories in those items of legislation, as I explained in my second reading, if the member for Araluen had been listening, no, there was no discussion.
Ms CARNEY: Attorney-General, I was listening. When you got up to reply before you said it was deemed unnecessary or it was not necessary. My question was: did you consult? They are two different questions and you should know the difference. So thank you, in the most long-winded way imaginable, for saying ‘no’ to both of those questions.
Attorney-General, is it the case that the consequential amendments to the Firearms Act are that if a person has been convicted of a disqualifying offence in another jurisdiction that that then applies to the Territory?
Mr STIRLING: Mr Chairman, the question posed by the member for Araluen does not go to the substance of these changes. I would need to seek further advice and I undertake to get that information to her.
Ms CARNEY: So, Attorney-General, whereas you have said in forceful tones that there was no consultation because these amendments were merely renumbering, you do not know whether the effect of the amendments change or broaden the scope of the term ‘disqualifying offence’ in the Northern Territory, but you undertake to provide that information to me. When will you provide that information?
Mr STIRLING: Let us be clear here. What is, is what is. These amendments do not change what is, and I will find out what is and get that back to you as quickly as I can. These amendments do not change what is. So do not put it to me that I do not know what these amendments are doing; they do not change the current situation.
Ms CARNEY: Then I am doubly confused, Attorney-General, by what you are saying. On the one hand, you say that these amendments amount merely to a renumbering. On the other hand, are you saying that the effect of the amendment does not have any implications in relation to a disqualifying offence in the Northern Territory?
Mr STIRLING: Mr Chairman, the member for Araluen is trying to read something into these amendments that simply is not there. There is no substantive change to the way that is now. In relation to the interstate disqualifying offence, as I said, I will get advice and relay that to the member for Araluen at the earliest opportunity. These amendments in themselves do not change the substantive practice now. I will clarify what that is for the member for Araluen at the first opportunity.
Ms CARNEY: Attorney-General, how can you, on the one hand, assert that the changes are numeric in effect, yet you do not know - because you will have to get me the information - about its effects in terms of the disqualifying offence and its consequences in the Northern Territory? How can you say the answer to the question the member for Araluen is asking is no, but that you will provide me with further information in relation to the very question I asked?
Mr STIRLING: I asked the member for Araluen to carefully read the explanatory memorandum around the Firearms Act and I will quote it:
- The definitions of disqualifying offence and offence of violence in section 3(1)(b) are amended to include a repealed law. This takes into account the repeal of the offence of dangerous acts or omissions currently set out in section 154 of the Criminal Code as well as other offences in the Criminal Code which may have been renumbered or reclassified as a result of the enactment of the Criminal Code Amendment (Criminal Responsibility Reform) Act 2005.
The dangerous act or omission is now repealed, but it is still picked up around the definition of disqualifying offence and offence of violence to ensure that it is still in there in relation to firearms.
That is really ensuring that someone found guilty under dangerous act or omission previously does not get a clean record now, given that that is now a repealed law. So that does not change what is. As I said, in relation to the interstate question, I do not have that, but I will get it to you.
Ms CARNEY: Would you be able to provide me with that information by late afternoon, five or six o’clock tonight? I imagine you have it somewhere.
Mr STIRLING: I have no doubt. Staff are listening, beyond the staff I have here now. I would have thought within the hour.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you. I guess it follows - well it does follow - that the issues I raised in relation to the Private Security Act should be dealt with between us in the same way and not repeated. So, to streamline things and, I suspect, to make your life a little easier, would you undertake to provide, in a timely fashion as you indicated in your previous answer, the answer to the earlier question I asked in relation to the Private Security Act regarding the effects of this amendment on the disqualifying offence provisions in the act? I am sorry, that question could have come out significantly better, but will you provide me with the same information that you have undertaken to do so in relation to the Firearms Act for the Private Security Act?
Mr STIRLING: I certainly would do so, Mr Chairman, when I understand the nature of the question.
Ms CARNEY: Okay. I was trying to make it easier. You are obviously having difficulty listening and maybe understanding. You will recall that, in relation to the Firearms Act, whereas you were saying that the amendments were, in essence, numeric amendments, I was suggesting to you that, in fact, the definition of ‘disqualifying offence’ has been broadened to include offences committed in other jurisdictions. I repeated that in relation to the Private Security Act because, in that legislation, there is also reference to disqualifying offences. You have undertaken, in relation to the Firearms Act, to get some information to me.
Mr STIRLING: Yes, I do not have a problem with that. It may be, Mr Chairman, if the member for Araluen is able to do so, that we get someone from Justice up here to go through this with her, or they give me the information.
Ms CARNEY: No, I would prefer it in writing, thanks.
Mr STIRLING: Fine. Either way, we will get the information - I have undertaken an hour. I hope I am not crucified if it is two.
Ms CARNEY: Mr Chairman, the minister answered a question that the member for Nelson asked in relation to the Animal Welfare Act. His question was – and I am rewording and providing a bit more information – in essence whether it had anything to do with the legal proceedings between Jack Ah Kit and Warren Anderson. Your answer was, yes, in part it did. Could you outline please which parts of that proceeding effected the changes to the Animal Welfare Act?
Mr STIRLING: It was not the Anderson case. It was another case that was brought to the attention of Justice. I can get the background to that, but it was not the Anderson case, I am advised.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Attorney-General, my apologies. Another question I have which I omitted to mention in my response to your second reading speech was that, in the third paragraph of your second reading speech, you said:
- Consequential amendments following the enactment of the Criminal Code Amendment (Criminal Responsibility Reform) Bill (No 2) 2005 include correcting references to offences which will be renumbered or reclassified when the changes come into effect following the passage of that act.
There has been a lot of legislation, but could you clarify my understanding that it is the case that the Criminal Code Amendment (Criminal Responsibility Reform) Bill is not operating in the Northern Territory at present? If so, why?
Mr STIRLING: Mr Chairman, I am advised it commenced on 21 December 2006.
Ms CARNEY: I see. Therefore, at that time when you made your second reading speech on 30 November 2006 – a couple of weeks before - that would explain the reference to the coming into effect? Okay, thank you. I have no further questions. I thank the Attorney-General for his assistance.
Clause 2 agreed to.
Remainder of the bill, by leave, taken as a whole and agreed to.
Bill reported; report adopted.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MOTION
Note Statement - Territory Tourism Moving Forward
Note Statement - Territory Tourism Moving Forward
Continued from 19 October 2006.
Mr VATSKALIS (Business and Economic Development): Madam Speaker, I commend minister Henderson on his statement Tourism Industry and Priorities for Moving Forward delivered during the October sittings.
I agree that the tourism industry plays an integral role in the Territory’s current and future economic development. I have been involved in the tourism industry in the past. Before I migrated to Australia, my first job was in a hotel when I was 15 years old during the summer holidays. In 1974, after I finished high school, I worked for year in a travel bureau and after, every summer holidays, then, full-time in a hotel until 1982. The hotel I worked in was one of the largest hotels in Greece – 400 rooms - and I worked in every area from the roof garden, down to the storeroom, to the night shift as a porter, and at reception.
Of course, Greece is a favourite destination for tourism - not only Greece, but most of the Mediterranean. In my mother country, every year the population would double. They have about 10 million tourists coming to the Greek Islands or to the mainland for holidays.
Tourism was a significant industry in Greece and also provided significant opportunities for people, for business development, for employment. It was very important as an entry level employment for young people who were finishing high school and wanting to get a job, or were between jobs. The flow-on effects from tourism were significant. We see the same things happening here in the Territory.
The figures released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics since minister Henderson’s statement in October confirmed the ongoing strong contribution that tourism makes to the Northern Territory economy. In 2005-06, the value-added contribution of the tourism industry grew by around 7% from $443m in 2004-05 to $474m in 2005-06. It is a very significant and growing industry, one that we are all part of, with benefits that flow-on to all Territorians.
Tourism, in particular, is very important in achieving Territory-wide regional economic development. Along with agriculture and mining, the tourism industry continues to underpin economic development in the Territory regions. If you go to other states, in some of our competitors like Western Australia tourism not only benefits big business and big hotel chains but also cottage industries such as bed and breakfast. People manufacture and produce in their own home produce that they advertise locally, and most of this produce is sold for tourism. On my recent holiday in Western Australia visiting family, we all took a trip south to Capel. Along every single kilometre of road we saw signs selling everything from strawberry marmalade to honey to local produce. That was not sold to the local people; it was mainly sold to tourists. That has contributed to the rural economy in the south-west of Western Australia.
The Territory’s iconic nature-based tourism attractions such as Uluru-Kata Tjuta, Kakadu and Litchfield attract hundreds of thousands of visitors to our region. Yesterday, I met with the American Ambassador and his wife and they were telling me how impressed they were with Uluru, how fantastic they found it. They also told me what they really liked most was Kata Tjuta. Kata Tjuta is a different environment with many microclimates in the crevices of the rocks. They found it unbelievable that these areas would have rich vegetation in a very dry environment. I have to admit that Kata Tjuta is a very special place because it is so different from what you see anywhere else in the world, anywhere else in Australia.
At the Chief Minister’s Business Round Table in Alice Springs last year there was definitely a feeling that this year’s tourist season has been a busy one, especially in the Centre. There is much to be done. We have markets. We know very well where our markets are - England, Europe, and northern Europe – but we have to evaluate these markets and explore emerging markets. Today, the European Union is expanding; from 10 members it has gone to 15. People who live in European Union member countries have significant disposable income. These people now travel and they do not travel to the next village, the next town, not even to the next country - they travel across the world.
I was with my wife in Bali a few years ago and we were sitting in a restaurant. I heard two people at the next table talking to each other in Greek. I asked them if they were from Melbourne. They told me that they were not from Melbourne. They had flown into Bali from Salonika. Now, if people can travel from one side of the world to the other to spend their dollar, it is very important for us to promote our Territory to overseas markets even further out from the existing markets and try to attract more tourists.
New Territory tourism products are appearing all the time with an increasing number of indigenous communities looking to provide quality cultural experiences for our visitors and securing a prosperous future for themselves and their children. My Department of Business, Economic and Regional Development works closely with officers in Tourism NT to ensure that these businesses are provided with the necessary support and guidance to maximise their success. DBERD has a dedicated team of officers across the regions providing valuable advice on the ground to many new and existing tourism ventures. This includes access to business skill training, grants funding, and business development programs.
DBERD’s Indigenous Business and Industry Services program, known as IBIS, plays a hands-on role in assisting indigenous tourism businesses. IBIS works with business operators to help identify opportunities for jobs and businesses, and provides ongoing support for indigenous people who take up business opportunities. IBIS also manages the very successful Indigenous Business Development Grant program. In the last financial year, almost $100 000 of funding was provided directly to indigenous tourism and related business through this program.
Cultural tourism and a cultural experience is something that tourists, if they come from developed countries, want. When I travel away most of the questions I get are about indigenous people and indigenous culture. The last time Turkish Prime Minister’s wife flew to Australia she had a stopover in Darwin. In the four hours they stayed in Darwin to refuel and service the plane, she was constantly asking about indigenous Australia, about the culture of indigenous people and about their paintings. This is not something that our neighbours know; it is well known all over the world as one of the most significant attractions: the traditional dances, the traditional painting, the traditional lifestyle, the bush tucker. All these are very appealing to tourists, whether they come from America or the Netherlands or from Scandinavian countries, or even from Asia. Cultural tourism and experiencing something different, not only the hotel and the resort, is very important. We should exploit it, and we can exploit it successfully.
We have examples of cultural tourism. Biliru Tours and Cultural Experiences was successful in receiving a grant that enabled them to purchase a second-hand tour bus, which made it possible for Biliru Tours to expand the range of experiences on offer to now include bushwalking and bird spotting. That is exactly what the tourists want.
Another example is the Kakadu Culture Camp, which received funding for the setting up of a camp kitchen at the Muirella Park campground and adjacent safari camp. The directors of Kakadu Culture Camp, brother and sister, Fred and Jennifer Hunter, are both experienced rangers and will be operating night wildlife cruises in association with the accommodation ventures.
In addition to this initiative by small business operators, there is increasing private sector investment in major regional tourism infrastructure projects. Such examples include the Dugong Beach Resort at Groote Eylandt, Gilligan’s Backpackers in Alice Springs, the Mandorah Resort and the All Suites Serviced Apartments in Alice Springs.
As the minister noted in his statement, Territory tourism is very positive. It is driving economic development in the regions and providing a solid foundation for increased investment and new business development across a range of industries, as well as providing real jobs for Territorians.
Tourism is an emerging industry in the region and, of course, with the advent of budget airlines like Tiger and Jetstar, it becomes more attractive and cheaper to fly from anywhere in the world to Australia. With the $49 one-way fare from Darwin to Singapore, which was advertised in Singapore while I was there, it becomes very attractive for backpackers who have a limited budget, but who want a totally different cultural tourism experience. It makes it easier to land in Singapore from Europe on very cheap flights - because Singapore is serviced by many budget airlines - and hop on to either Tiger Airlines or Jetstar and come to Darwin and then experience the real Territory.
Madam Speaker, I am looking forward to the positive outcomes of any initiative of Tourism NT and the tourism industry because every single dollar we spend on advertising has a multiplier factor that brings hundreds of dollars to the Territory. As I said before, one way to supply jobs and business development in regional areas of the Territory, in addition to mining and the pastoral industry, is tourism. Tourism is a very important. We welcome tourists in the Territory, but we have to make their stay here an experience that they will take back with them so that they will become real ambassadors for the Territory.
I welcome the minister’s statement. I wholeheartedly endorse it and strongly support him in Tourism Industry and Priorities for Moving Forward.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Madam Speaker, today I respond to the Minister for Tourism’s statement, delivered during the October sittings. I did not get an opportunity at that time to respond as I was in Ceduna with my family, spending some precious time with my brother.
I thank the Leader of the Opposition for responding, not only to this statement, but to all the others for which I would normally have responsibility at that time. I very much appreciate her support. It just goes to show we can take on any portfolio responsibility when we need to.
I have read the transcripts of the minister’s statement and the responses so far. I have listened this morning as well. It makes interesting reading, with each speaker highlighting positive tourism activities in their electorates, which is good.
Tourism, by and large, is very a friendly, people-friendly and people-intensive industry, with a huge diversity of tourism products and experiences. There is something for everyone. Tourism is also the single biggest employer in regional Northern Territory and without a doubt plays a vital part in the economy of the whole of the Territory.
Each of my last three sentences could have been taken from any statement on tourism from any speaker inside or outside this Assembly for at least the past 17 years that I have lived in the Territory. We all know that and we all accept those facts.
We also know that, back around 1990, while the population numbers were not as high as they are today, travel for tourists and locals through the major regional centres in the Territory was easier. For example, in my own electorate of Katherine, my mother flew into Katherine Airport in 1990 on an Ansett passenger service which ran daily from Darwin through to Alice Springs. In Katherine, there was the choice of passenger bus travel with Pioneer, Greyhound and McCafferty’s. When I was chairman of the Katherine Region Tourist Association, I could fly to Darwin on a small aircraft in the morning and return to Katherine that evening and arriving home before 8.30 pm. It made business easier to attend to for regional people.
The difference today with our so-called ‘in our booming economy’ is that there is no passenger airline service for regional towns like Katherine and Tennant Creek, and one bus company serving both the towns. Darwin and Alice Springs have significantly reduced airline capacity which makes the challenge to encourage increased tourism numbers even more difficult.
Over recent months, there has been plenty of concern expressed that Qantas may even pull out of the Territory. Heaven forbid that they do, because the Territory, with the addition of the convention centre coming on and, hopefully, encouraging major conventions and events to the Territory, will certainly need the services of Qantas to remain. Jetstar provides a good service for the budget traveller, but not everyone wishes to travel budget. There are many passengers who are quite happy to pay for the extra airline comfort of Qantas business class. I hope that government, and especially the Minister for Tourism, is in there batting persistently and consistently to ensure that Qantas retains their service to Alice Springs and Darwin.
Many business travellers have expressed their bitter disappointment that Qantas no longer has a red eye flight to Melbourne and that budget airline travel is the only option for this direct route. This disadvantages business for Territorians. You need a clear mind to make sound business decisions, and I can hardly call boarding a flight in the middle of the night in Darwin on a budget airline, arriving at Melbourne, say, around dawn, having the choice of either booking into accommodation right away and paying for a full night’s stay when you have only just arrived, or waiting somewhere in a coffee shop trying to clear your mind before you begin your business transactions. Not altogether the ideal situation, is it? I trust that the minister is in there constantly talking with Qantas about what Territorians need to support them in their business connections and, of course, that involves the tourism industry.
While business people prefer to travel in comfort to go about their affairs, many travellers are encouraged to visit a country if there is budget airline travel offering and, in this area, Tiger Airways has certainly been a breath of fresh air with their new services to Darwin. Tiger is very welcome because it offers budget airfares between Singapore and Darwin. That is a great enticement for travellers to not only begin their journey through Australia via Darwin, but to also spend time in the Northern Territory before continuing on with their travels. Darwin’s proximity to Singapore makes it very attractive for the budget traveller coming into Australia, and likewise for Territorians to also have the opportunity to enjoy a trip to Singapore. With the media focusing attention on Tiger Airlines, highlights to the travelling public that Darwin departures offer the cheapest flights to Singapore. I hope that travellers use this opportunity and support the intention of Tiger Airways’ commitment to the Northern Territory. I hope the minister is also in their batting for Darwin to be the hub for any future domestic travel that Tiger Airways may commit to.
Looking at a little slower and more leisurely pace of travel, Madam Speaker: The Ghan! The Ghan now provides some rail travel through the centre of the Territory, but it is not conducive for business people to utilise because of its schedule and the time it takes to travel from one end of the Territory to other. Hopefully, I will not be too long in the tooth, so to speak, before I can again have a relaxing ride in The Ghan as a holidaymaker. It was a great experience, but only if you have the time to enjoy it.
The statement about how wonderful tourism is really the same, as I have said, and, hopefully, will always remain the same. However, the challenge is how to deal with the changes, both globally and locally, that have occurred and will continue to evolve as time goes by. There is no doubt that our climate and our lifestyle - and there goes that famous catch word again - lifestyle - are the most attractive features for the majority of tourists wanting to come to the Territory. That has been mainly in the regional areas with grey nomads, as my age group is so loving referred to.
The caravan tourism industry operators have had a significant increase over the past 15 years and, thankfully, I can say that many operators have stepped up to the benchmark and have improved their accommodation facilities to the highest standards through accreditation. The accreditation process was important to ensure that the standard of caravan parks in the Territory was equivalent to those interstate to encourage even more tourist to come here.
Caravan designs have certainly changed over the years as well, with most modern vans being fully self-contained with showers and chemical toilets. This has resulted in another sea change for caravan park operators, with many travellers preferring not to stay in designated caravan parks and opting to spend the night along the road somewhere, either at a roadside stop or out in the bush. Unfortunately, there were many instances of chemical toilets being emptied out into the bush and, in some instances, the bushland around some of these roadside stops was being used as a toilet. So much for going for a nature walk. Of course, drastic measures had to be taken with some roadside stops made inaccessible to the caravaners. The preservation of the environment around these areas was becoming a serious problem and, as a result, there have been several dumpsters put in, in different locations across the Territory. However, there are still some travellers who do not utilise them correctly.
With that challenge over, the government now has another one; that is, with the introduction of speed restrictions on the open highways more travellers are going to be fatigued and will need to stop more often on their journey. What are you going to do now to provide more rest areas? Are you going to have tables, chairs, toilets and water at these stops? Where are you going to locate them, and at what distance from each one? How are you going to maintain the rubbish removal at these rest areas? These are all serious questions many people have been asking for some time. It does take a lot to maintain because of the distances that the people who would be required to attend to those rest areas have to travel to get to them. I hope the minister will answer those questions in his reply. I have no doubt that the issue of rest bays has been raised many times, and highly likely when you where Tourism Minister before.
Some previous speakers have mentioned the importance of indigenous tourism to the Territory. Many of our tourists are eager to experience authentic indigenous culture, and only too willing to travel to do so. I am pleased to see that Tourism NT has two programs - What is Tourism? and Stepping Stones - to assist indigenous communities in assessing their viability for any tourism venture. It takes strong and committed leadership to ensure the success of indigenous tourism ventures which, I might add, is no different to running any business anywhere. However, I believe that in some indigenous communities, while the intension and the motivation is there and certainly the capability, it does not matter how good the venture is, it will fall in a hole if there is no ongoing dedication and commitment.
I will use the example of Travel North in Katherine, which ran a very popular corroboree at Springvale for years that attracted tourists from all around the world. It eventually had to stop because of lack of dancers. Well-known indigenous actor and artist, Tommy Lee, also worked his heart out to establish a corroboree more centralised in Katherine, which only lasted a couple of years because he could not rely on constancy of attendance from dancers. I have no doubt that similar stories can be told right throughout the Territory.
A real success story for indigenous tourism, though, has been Manyallaluk which is situated in the Katherine Region Tourist Association area, but is also in the member for Arnhem’s electorate. Manyallaluk received three Brolga Awards for Tourism Excellence in the 1990s, and went onto win the national title three times, which automatically put them in the national Hall of Fame.
Another great and well-deserved success story has been the recognition of Anangu Tours based in Central Australia, which has also been recognised nationally for its outstanding tourism operation. Only just this week, Anangu Tours also received another award for best NT tour operator. I will read what was printed in the Northern Territory News yesterday which says that they received a national tourism award:
- Anangu Waai - which manages Anangu Tours, Uluru Camel Tours, Spirit of the Night Sky, Frontier Camel Tours and Desert Tours and Transfers - was named best tourism operator for the Northern Territory in the PublicityShip Hidden Jewel Awards.
The awards aim to recognise small tourism operators who are relatively unknown.
I do not consider Anangu Tours a ‘relatively unknown’, but it is also pleasing to see that they have other tours that have been recognised as being worthy to be named the best NT tour operator, and good on them.
There is plenty of opportunity for more indigenous tourism to join Anangu Tours and the likes of Manyallaluk, but it is the commitment that is going to make the difference. The Minister for Arts and Museums last week delivered a statement which included the Territory’s submission to the development of a national framework for indigenous art and craft, and was one of 72 submissions. This shows how much interest there is in indigenous art nationally. This national framework will ensure the continued growth and development of indigenous art and craft for which the Northern Territory already holds a significant place. International tourists are very much attracted to indigenous art, so the potential is there. The potential for the future is very promising.
We also have great potential to increase our marketing in the areas that no other state or territory in Australia has the opportunity to do. This is where we need to stand out as different from the rest. I am fully supportive of croc safaris in the Territory, and I know that my colleagues also support this view. The economic benefit to remote communities to be able to run crocodile safaris is huge. It seems quite ridiculous to me that those communities which are willing to be skilled for this are not given the opportunity to run a very lucrative business. I do not believe for a moment that every man and his dog should be allowed to run croc safaris. The people who elect to be involved would have to be highly skilled and the operations heavily regulated. But it can and should be allowed to happen. Imagine the benefit to those communities which were willing to participate. Many international visitors would be very willing to pay the high sums of money to be part of a croc safari hunt.
I wrote to the federal minister last year stating my support for the safaris and was and still am quite willing to have a bipartisan effort to support government in a further push to the federal minister to allow croc safari hunting in the Northern Territory.
Another great attraction for the Territory, and one that would put us leaps ahead of other states and territories and in the international market is - heaven forbid – to stage a Cannonball Run. I know government ministers have had to toe the line behind the Chief Minister’s comments that there is no way there will be a Cannonball Run, but, as per usual, no talking and no research into how international Cannonball Runs are staged. And they have taken place. The door is shut by the Chief Minister and I guess …
A member: Four died.
Mrs MILLER: … she feels she would look pretty stupid if she backed down on that one.
There is no doubting that the tragedy of the loss of four lives in the initial Cannonball Run has strengthened the Chief Minister’s resolve. There is no question that it was a dreadful and a tragic accident. We may as well pack everything up and stay at home, though, if we say no to everything that causes an accident. I encourage government to have a look at the regulations of international Cannonball Runs and keep an open mind.
I compare this with the minister for Police, who late last year had a bruising experience with paintball while he was in South Australia. He is not keen on allowing paintball in the Territory because he got a few bruises, but there are hundreds of others out there who would love to have this sport introduced here. We are way behind the other states on this one. We are a tough lot up here and we would like to make our own decisions about how we are challenged. I have to say I do not personally have any desire to play the game myself, not being very fond of guns at the best of times, but I know many people who are very keen, so let us give them the opportunity. I digress a little, but that could be included as part of our tourism attraction.
For as long as I can remember, we have talked about improving visitor numbers in the shoulder season or the green season, whatever people want to call it. While it is important to market this time of the year as any other time, we must remember that the experiences of the past few years during this time of natural disasters through flooding and the threat of cyclones and cyclone damage is also a deterrent to many people. Many people have spoken to me over the years of feeling threatened by those two factors and it is a pretty important aspect to consider. For me, the Wet Season is fabulous, but it is not a great attraction for the majority of people down south who have found a fantastic beach where they can swim without threat of nasty jelly fish stings and being constantly sweaty.
Not only that, they are unable to access many of the fantastic park attractions because of Wet Season closures. Very clever marketing is the order of the day, and I will wait with bated breath, minister, and great anticipation, as I see in your statement that extending the shoulder season is a key priority for you. It is a noble goal, but do not forget our traditional Dry Season numbers are down in regional Northern Territory, and marketing dollars need to be spent on regional areas. Detractors to the development of business in regional areas include all-weather access and poor quality roads. I am sure that that is a debate for another time.
There is also plenty of opportunity to develop four-wheel drive tracks, station stays, heritage tourism, agricultural and horticultural tourism, amongst others throughout the Territory, and indigenous tourism is still far from reaching its potential. Again, access is a problem.
Our unique natural resources are by far the most appealing tourist attractions. While I could talk for lengthy periods about our icons, I would like to talk a little now of a different and unique natural resource that no amount of money could pay for the marketing of the Territory, and that was late last year with the recent national fame of Jessica Mauboy in Australian Idol. I am unashamedly a fan and my telephone account will obviously attest to that. I want to say that Jessica …
Mr HENDERSON: Madam Speaker, I move an extension of time for the member for Katherine - whose support of Jessica Mauboy is absolutely laudable - to allow the member to conclude her remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mrs MILLER: Thank you, Leader of Government Business. As I said, Madam Speaker, I am unashamedly a fan of Jessica Mauboy. Jessica has done more to promote the Territory with her wonderful skills and talents as a singer on Australian Idol than people would possibly realise. Her amazing personality and poise for such a young lady is a credit to her and her family. I thank her for being such a great ambassador for the Northern Territory.
I want to finish off by talking about the major impediments to tourism in our Territory, one that is talked about constantly and remains, unfortunately, a major problem, where it is so obvious, especially in our regional towns; that is, antisocial behaviour. Whether we want to accept it or not, it is a huge impediment to our industry, yet the government constantly pussyfoots around the problem and tries to deflect from it time and time again. Nowhere in the minister’s statement did he refer to how detrimental drunken behaviour, fighting, yelling and spitting in our streets is for tourism.
When the fifth minister for Tourism in the Labor government was Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services in 2004, he had no problem criticising my concerns about the problems Katherine was having and, since that time, it has been highlighted in other regional towns. His response at that time was that government’s $75m Building our Police Force was increasing the number of police in Katherine and that I was grandstanding. Well, guess what, minister? You were the one grandstanding then and you have not delivered. Katherine is still suffering at the hands of drunken, antisocial behaviour - you did not fix it at all. All the marketing dollars that are so willingly being spent promoting tourism – and need to be spent on promoting it –need a significant helping hand in tidying up the town, and we really do have to forget the softly, softly approach. The residents of Katherine, and I have no doubt, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs, are sick and tired of hearing the same old story.
Madam Speaker, generally I approve of everything that is in the minister’s tourism statement. Tourism is, as I said at the beginning of this statement, a pretty nice portfolio to have. Everybody is trying their best to make visitors to the Territory feel as welcome as possible. We just need to try a bit harder. I support the minister’s statement.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Madam Speaker, I support the minister’s statement on tourism, Tourism Moving Forward. First of all, I would like to thank the member for Katherine for her overwhelming positive remarks about tourism within the Northern Territory. I believe every member in this House realises the importance of tourism to the general economy. That is why it was very disappointing, at the last sittings, to listen to the Leader of the Opposition’s comments about tourism. Over her time as shadow minister for tourism - and I will go back to the last term between 2001and 2005 - we witnessed her constant negative attacks and some of her famous media releases and stunts in criticising the Northern Territory’s approach to tourism.
We have seen, with the Chief Minister, and now with the new Tourism Minister, that this government takes tourism very seriously. If you read through the statement, some of the initiatives that we are currently conducting and have enforced of putting money where our mouths are, show that we value tourism. It is unfortunate that the Leader of the Opposition takes a negative view on our efforts. It just goes to show me that, when she has an opportunity to contribute positively to a statement, through members of the opposition such as the member for Katherine, she has the inability to show a plan.
Let us face it, this government supports tourism because we support the famous lifestyle that we take for granted in the Northern Territory. We need to fight for that lifestyle; that is, the fishing, the swimming in national parks, visiting Aboriginal communities, sights and participating in our famous diversity of culture. The Leader of the Opposition’s past track record shows that she talks down our economy and our lifestyle; that we are under threat. I would say that the majority of CLP members and the Independents understand that the tourism benefits to our economy, not only in terms of purely monetary, but our lifestyle, is vitally important to the future of all Territorians.
The one point the member for Katherine picked up on is Jessica Mauboy. It is appreciated by Jessica’s family. I know, because I have spoken to them, during the time she was running for Australian Idol, about the support that this government, particularly the Chief Minister, gave her, both publicly, privately and within this House. It was unfortunate that the Leader of the Opposition put the view that we were politically grandstanding, and that it was a negative thing that the Chief Minister was doing.
In reality, like the member for Katherine has stated, Jessica Mauboy did a fantastic job of promoting the Territory to the whole of Australia. Her photo in the paper a couple of days ago is a classic example of how she has been able to galvanise people’s opinions, not only in the Northern Territory but throughout Australia. Knowing her family, and her parents, they will be great advocates and ambassadors for the Territory in tourism.
There are a number of issues I enjoy talking about regarding tourism. As a first time member, I took the opportunity to travel to Cairns to look at the Esplanade in Cairns when it was recently redeveloped, the access to the Great Barrier Reef, and the natural resources and sights around Cairns. What I realised was that the Queensland government had been running a campaign in tropical northern Queensland similar to what we are doing now with the Tourism Minister; that is, trying to lift the shoulder of what people consider is a great time to visit the north of Queensland. They have been doing it for 10 to 15 years.
It took us, as a government, to come on board to realise this. I visited and spoke to tourism industry leaders there, tourism members, the general public such as shop owners, hotel owners and managers. I came back and spoke to caucus in general. At the time, the Chief Minister was the Tourism Minister and we had some great conversations about the idea of selling the Territory as the Queensland government does in north Queensland. I believe we can do this. The reality is that it is a great time to visit the Northern Territory; to see the Territory in the Wet Season. The reality is that I enjoy thunderstorms such as we had last night in Millner. We can enjoy that through our national parks and our general green areas around Darwin, Kakadu, Litchfield, etcetera.
While I congratulate the member for Katherine’s positive contribution - and I know she has a background in the tourism industry - I am very disappointed with the Leader of the Opposition’s negative attitude towards our plan.
We have a plan for tourism, in getting people to visit, not only from overseas but from interstate. The former Tourism Minister, the Chief Minister, and the current Minister for Tourism fully understand that one of our major industries is tourism, and we need to support this. I am disappointed with the Leader of the Opposition talking down our economy and our lifestyle because, at the end of the day, any detrimental effect to our economy and lifestyle has a negative effect on our families - on family values that we hold dear to our hearts. That is employment for both mother and father and, of course, of the children of generations to come in the Territory. I am most disappointed with this constant attack on our family values by the Leader of the Opposition.
In my electorate, there are a number of tourism initiatives, one of which is the Darwin Airport. Many people may be aware that the Darwin Airport comes within my electorate boundaries. As the local member over the last few years, I have had many dealings with the management of the Darwin Airport and the developers in the Darwin Airport area, one of whom is famously known as ‘Foxy’ Robinson who runs the Darwin Airport Resort. This is located in my electorate. It is my understanding that this has been a fabulous success. It has enjoyed a strong occupancy rate of about 90% since it opened. That is fantastic. I remember speaking to ‘Foxy’ during the planning, as the Chairperson of the Rapid Creek Catchment Committee and dealing with the environmental effects on Rapid Creek, which is the only freshwater source in the Darwin region that continually runs all year round. We walked through with committee members and members of Landcare, Greening Australia, the local Larrakia people, the Darwin Management Group and ‘Foxy’.
He talked about his plan, which was that in other resorts based near airports they try to do a two-in-one day occupancy. If someone comes in they might have an eight- or 10-hour stopover, Instead of hanging around the airport, they will book into the local hotel, have a shower and a sleep, and catch their plane out. The hotel then turns over the room and puts somebody else in. That was his general plan and he was hoping for occupancies for between 60% and 80%. I am sure 90% is beyond his wildest dreams. I know he and his partners have been very happy with the outcome. From the flow-on of this tourism effect, the Darwin Airport Resort has also shown that they have been good corporate citizens in terms of the environmental awareness of the issues surrounding Rapid Creek and the ecosystem there. They respected the 75 m corridor along Rapid Creek and I commend them for that.
Ian Skewes from the Darwin Airport Management Group, whom I know a number of ministers have had to deal with in the development at Bunnings, has been very aware of the need to be a good corporate citizen. He has often said to me that the work the government is doing has had a positive effective on promoting passengers coming through the Darwin Airport.
I will touch on that because, since 2000-01, there has been a number of situations which have affected our tourism visitors. This government is well aware of that, and I know the Tourism Minister is well aware of that. I think, deep down, the opposition and Independents are well aware of that. It would be, however, more beneficial to the general overall picture if the Leader of the Opposition was more positive about the future of our economy based on tourism numbers. The reality is, I know, that the Opposition Leader is in an adversarial relationship with the government, but she needs to realise where to pick her fights.
What we have been able to achieve - and I will go through some of the numbers - has had fantastic results. As the Minister for Tourism has outlined in his ministerial statement, one of the government’s key priorities is to extend the shoulder season which provides the greatest opportunity for growth. I fully support that. It is a common story from all businesses. In the past, governments have focused - and even industries and locals - on talking up the Dry Season, which is a magnificent time to visit Darwin, Alice Springs and the wider Territory. However, we also need locals, our small business owners and big business owners, and governments and oppositions to promote the fact that there is a wonderful time to also visit the Territory; during the Wet Season. I thank the minister for his efforts in trying to expand the shoulder season. I understand that there are some fabulous statistics within the statement which showed that this is starting to work.
The Tropical Summer marketing campaign launched by the Minister for Tourism last November is aimed at building awareness of travel experiences on offer during the traditional low season and increasing visitations over the summer months. The minister has touched on those increased visitations, focusing on attractions of the Top End including Litchfield and Kakadu which are bursting with wildlife, or travel to Katherine to explore the sandstone country. Litchfield and Kakadu are magnificent sites to visit any time of the year with great fishing areas, great swimming holes, and great ecologies to have a look at. I sincerely encourage all visitors interstate and overseas to visit during these times of the year.
Traditionally, the tropical summer or Green Season, as some call it, has been perceived as the time to avoid the Top End. As long-time, born and bred Territorians, we often do say to visitors: ‘You should wait until the Dry Season’, but what we need to realise is that there are great places to visit during the Wet Season. We need to promote it as a place to come. We need to change the language that we use.
This period presents a viable alternative to the peak season as there are many great accommodation and travel deals on offer. The tropical summer is a great time of year to invite friends and family to visit us and experience another aspect of the Territory season. This time of year you can witness some fantastic lightning storms, magnificently flowing waterfalls, rejuvenated floodplains, smell the lush green tropical gardens, and listen to the sound of monsoon rains. I know there is not a greater feeling in the Territory than when, in the monsoon, it is raining and you are about to go to bed and you open up your windows and the full breeze is flowing through …
Mr Henderson: Yes, last night was a doozie.
Mr BONSON: Last night was an absolute ripper, as the Tourism Minister said. It is one of the fantastic times to visit the NT.
The domestic campaign commenced in November and runs through to March. The legendary Ghan is an example of a year-round tourism product delivering visitors to the Territory during our Wet Season and extending our shoulder season. It has been an outstanding success for the Territory since its commencement. To date, over 203 000 have been carried by The Ghan. Although The Ghan suffered a setback from its derailment in mid-December at Ban Ban Springs, rail services are continuing, although impacted somewhat, with an estimated 10 carriages out of action until mid-year.
Cruise ship visits are an important sector of the tourism market, with the majority of visits arriving during our Wet Season. This cruise season, we expect 46 cruise visits, which is a slight increase on last year. The value of this sector to the Territory economy cannot be underestimated. Cruise shipping is estimated to have generated approximately $12.3m of expenditure in 2005-06 for the Territory, including $7.5m in direct expenditure. The source is the Economic Impact of the Cruise Shipping Industry in Australia 2005 by Cruise Down Under and the federal government. I will touch on statistics and sources in a minute.
Tourism as a major industry in the Territory is one of the largest employment sectors and key revenue earners for the economy. We have seen good sustained visitor growth to the Territory. In fact, as the minister has previously mentioned, the Territory is performing ahead of the rest of the country.
International holiday visitors increased by 5.7%, representing an extra 17 000 visitors for the year ending September 2006, compared with September 2005. The source of this is the International Visitor Survey. For the same period, interstate holiday visitors increased by 15.8%, representing an extra 23 200 visitors, which is an amazing figure. For the same period, the international backpacker sector - which had been in decline for a number of years, not just here in the Territory but throughout Australia and, arguably, throughout the world - increased by 12.8%, which is great news for the Territory.
I have done a bit of research in preparing for my contribution. I went on to the Tourism NT site, which contains commentary on the need for research and how, through the research that we, as government, are conducting, we will be able to develop a plan forward. Some issues have come out in plans like the NT Backpacker Development Plan, released in May 2006, which provided a framework for the industry to work cooperatively to position the NT as a competitive backpacker destination and identified opportunities to ensure the continued growth of the sector. Feedback on the plan has been favourable by industry partners – this is in the executive summary – the Tourism NT Advisory Board and the Backpacker Tourism Advisory Panel, a national subcommittee of the Australian Tourism Export Council. It goes on to give a brief summary of key outcomes and achievements to date.
It deals with the state of the market, and I will not go through the figures in toto. However, if you have a look at page 1 of the executive summary, it says that the International Visitor Survey reported international backpacker numbers to the NT improved 11.3% for the year ending June 2006 compared with the year ending 2005; market share improved by 1.2% to 23.4%; and backpacker nights in the NT improved by 10% for the same period. Market share remained steady at 3.5%. The same trend has continued with the most recent figures reported by the IVS, suggesting international backpacker numbers and nights improved by 12.8% and 21.2% respectively for the year ending September 2006 compared with the year ending 2005, with market share improving from 22.2% to 23.5% for numbers, and from 3.5% to 3.6% per night. This is in the Northern Territory. While still not back to the levels experienced in the peak period around 2000 and 2001, we have started to see an improvement in international backpacker activity. You just have to walk around the Territory, particularly Darwin, and see the amount of construction of serviced apartments.
I did intend to talk on issues to do with indigenous business in terms of tourism, and I refer people to some sites and where they can confirm it for them themselves: the DBERD Internet site to do with indigenous tourism and industry surveys. I encourage all indigenous people to participate in creating small business opportunities through tourism. Also, if you go to the Commonwealth site, which is Indigenous Business Australia, it talks about enterprises there.
Madam Speaker, I thank the Tourism Minister for his contribution to this House, the economy, to our great lifestyle, to family values that we uphold. I look forward to further updates into the future.
Debate suspended.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of visitors who are here as part of the public tour program. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
MOTION
Note Statement - Territory Tourism Moving Forward
Note Statement - Territory Tourism Moving Forward
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I would like to place on the record a response to the Minister for Tourism’s statement made last year. I might say that sometimes these statements go on a bit too long – it is nearly four months since this statement originally was made to parliament. We need to make an effort to get these statements completed within the life of each sittings. Be that as it may, it is an important statement by the government.
I would like to concentrate on matters in relation to local tourism. I have spoken at other times about what I think is a niche part of our tourism market. Many speakers talk about the big picture such as The Ghan, overseas visitors, interstate visitors and the bigger picture generally. However, within the Litchfield Shire and the rural area, there is a lot to be advertised about many tourist opportunities in our area.
The Litchfield Shire and rural area are well endowed with natural beauty and features. We may not have the mountains of some other places in Australia, but we have the wetlands such as the Knuckey Lagoon wetlands. It is amazing how many people drive past Knuckey Lagoon and do not realise what a beautiful area it is. It is the headwaters, I think, of Mickett Creek which comes out near the barracks, feeds around the back of the 11 Mile and heads out to sea through there.
People also do not realise you can catch a barramundi on Thorak Road culverts where the water, when it is overflowing from Knuckey Lagoon, heads out towards the lagoons near the barracks. It is a favourite place for geese. This year, you will literally see thousands and thousands of geese arriving at Knuckey Lagoon as the water starts to recede. People who live around that lagoon tell you how lucky they are when the sun is setting over Darwin and all the geese fly over that area. It is right next to Darwin and that is why I believe it is just one of those great places that we should treasure. I suppose there is always the danger of telling people how wonderful it is, and they overcrowd it, but I do not think that is going to be the case. Knuckey Lagoon is a really wonderful area.
If you go further, you have the Howard Springs Reserve which, although it is a nature reserve, was set up originally as a reservoir for Darwin and then it became a recreation area. Much has been said about Howard Springs Reserve, but if anyone looked at the visitor figures over the last three years, they will notice they coincided with the closure of the Howard Springs for swimming. I believe it is important that the government does not drop the ball on making sure that the park stays open for swimming because it is certainly a major reason why people go to that park. The figures showed that, when it is not open, the numbers seem to drop off. I know the management plan is being looked at, at the moment. I must admit, the government has done a great job in getting that management plan out to the community, advertising at the local supermarket and putting advertisements in the paper and asking for people to comment.
Girraween Lagoon is one of the biggest lagoons in the rural area and is often used by people for boating. It is an all-year-round lagoon and is very popular with local people. The facts are that as the subdivisions start to encroach closer and closer on this area, more effort will be required to ensure the lagoon is not polluted from that sort of development. It is certainly a great jewel in the crown of the wetlands in the rural area. I have mentioned before, it was the place where some of Crocodile Dundee was filmed.
McMinns Lagoon is another great lagoon, and Benjamin Lagoon. These are all lagoons around the rural area which local people certainly enjoy. McMinns Lagoon is a very popular place for birdwatchers, people having weddings or anniversaries; there are nice barbecue facilities there. It is a wonderful place. It does not dry out and you can see all sorts of wildlife. Places like McMinns Lagoon are looked after by a dedicated group of volunteers who regularly have meetings and do work around the park.
There are some of our other great beauty spots: the Wildlife Park, Berry Springs Nature Park, and the beauty of the Darwin Harbour. I believe we forget that the harbour is a beautiful place. If you hear me whinge every now and then about digging up the centre of the harbour, it is because I believe the harbour, as a unit, needs to be protected to keep that beauty. Unfortunately, when you fly over it, you can see that some of the inappropriate development which has now occurred which tends to have spoiled that.
Mr Henderson: Where?
Mr WOOD: Well, in the form of gravel pits, which could have been put anywhere, I am afraid. I would like the government to rethink whether that land should be industrial, or whether we should have a levy on the amount of gravel that is pulled out of, and perhaps use that levy to rehabilitate the centre of the harbour. I believe the harbour is a world-class attraction.
We have other areas in the rural area such as the Windows on the Wetlands, sometimes called ‘windows on the weedlands’, because you do see quite a bit of the old mimosa from up on top of the hill there. As well as that, you have the jumping crocodiles. There are three of those businesses operating from there and they certainly encourage people to come out to that area.
One of the areas I believe we probably could do more in developing for tourism is the new park called the Shoal Bay Coastal Reserve. That, in combination with the Howard Springs Hunting Reserve and the Tree Point Conservation Area, could all become part of a move to encourage tourists to enjoy those areas. What will happen to Shoal Bay or the area to the north, I do not know. However, I believe the government has to look at putting in policies that will protect Shoal Bay or the Murrumujuk beaches. If there is not some form of control, it is likely that there will be overuse of those areas.
When we are talking about tourism - and the member for Katherine might have mentioned about helping some of these tourism operators with infrastructure - there are two fishing businesses in the rural area; one at the Shoal Bay Boat Hire and the other at Leeders Creek. Leeders Creek is accessible by road but, at times, the road does get cut up. However, it does not have power, even though power goes to Gunn Point. If we were to make Leeders Creek a more popular place for people to stay, I ask the government to at least consider either subsidising or setting up a plan where the owners of Leeders Creek could get power from what was the old Gunn Point Prison Farm - that is a town supply to there. That would certainly encourage that particular business to expand.
Shoal Bay Boat Hire has been an issue I have raised here before. It is very popular with people. Tourists can hire a boat and go fishing for the day to catch that lure of the Territory, the barramundi. However, the lure of the Territory, unfortunately, is at a place that does not have town power. I realise that is a fair way to get power out there, but the government should at least look at the possibilities of bringing power from or near the Defence Force facilities. Somewhere, sometime, the government has to consider building or gazetting a road into that area. The land that Shoal Bay Boat Hire is on, and the other block of land owned by Billy Boustead where he has his fish farm, was sold without any, you might say, formal land connection. The intention was to go in there by boat and go out by boat.
However, the reality is many people like to use the Shoal Bay Boat Hire. Again, to encourage local industry and to help with the tourism industry, the government has to say that it might have been all right 20 years ago. The reality is that many people go out there and we do not have a gazetted road. No one is willing to do up the road because it is neither council’s nor government’s. They just sit there and nothing happens. I encourage the government to look at it. If you are looking at putting a regional waste facility on what they call the Howard Peninsula, perhaps you should be building that road to where you think that might go, and continue that road through to the Shoal Bay Boat Hire area.
I have mentioned before that history is very important, and the government is now moving in the right direction. I said years ago that we were losing one of our great opportunities to encourage tourism; that is, by developing our World War II history. The classic example is that, in 1988, I think it was, when the Sattler Airstrip was closed down and, not long after, Power and Water decided to put the main pipeline from Darwin River Dam smack through the middle of a World War II airstrip. That is why Sattler is nowhere near as good as it should have been. When I came to the Territory, it was marked out as an emergency strip for the Darwin Airstrip. It was controlled by the RAAF at that time. When they decided to close it down, instead of it being maintained as a World War II airstrip, it is was, unfortunately, used for the major pipeline and a weighbridge site. It is not that far back. Members will remember when we had the debate about the future of Strauss Airstrip. Strauss Airstrip, only about three years ago, was designated as the route for the duplication of the Stuart Highway. Fortunately, after a lot of debate and effort, the government, together with the federal government, moved that the highway be duplicated on the other side away from Strauss Airstrip, and now we have wonderful interpretative signs and people stop there.
When you look at that new book that I spoke about in the adjournment debate the other night, called A Wartime Journey - Stuart Highway Heritage Guide, it discusses much of the World War II history that you can find if you travel from Alice Springs to Darwin. It is a fantastic book with two CDs and great photographs, great articles, great maps. It is a top book put out by Bob Alford in conjunction with the Tourism department. That is the sort of encouragement we need to help people come and enjoy what is unique in the Territory.
Our World War II history is something you will not get anywhere else. We have all these airstrips, the old railway line - we celebrated all those workers who worked on the railway line. There is a memorial near the Wishart Siding on the corner of the Arnhem and Stuart Highways. There used to be a locomotive there which has moved to Adelaide River Railway Station, but there is a memorial there to all the people who worked on the railway line during the war. We have a great amount of history and we should do our darnedest to preserve as much of it as possible.
I know there is talk about having a World War II museum in Darwin. Personally, even though there is some talk about having it here on the lawn or somewhere near here, I think it should go to East Point. That is where you have the gun emplacements and the museum, and you are looking across the harbour where the chain was put across to stop the submarines from coming through. The government should consider using some of the areas that are already well known as World War II sites for the museum.
The rural area is developing and the service industry is well served by tourism. There are quite a number of hotels and coffee shops; the service industry supports the tourism industry. There are a number of fishing outlets. There is one at Coolalinga, and one at the 11 Mile. Reidy’s Lures not only sells lures but manufactures them, and his block of land is next to Wishart Siding. The Didgeridoo Hut has become a bit of an institution now. It started off, literally, as a hut on the side of the highway and has now developed correctly, as it probably should have been in the first place, and has become a very popular place. It is also a great place for indigenous people to do paintings and other artwork and sell them.
Horticulture is still an important part. We have a number of orchid and cut flower farms in the rural area. People visit these areas because we have unique flowers. We have some wonderful orchid establishments. One area the government needs to look at is to ensure we release enough land, or have enough land available for caravan parks. I am not talking here so much about permanent caravan parks because that is an issue we need to look at. There was land near the Litchfield Shire Council set aside some years ago for caravan parks. I know a number of people - in fact, I know three people - who would like to purchase that land; the government has said no. Caravan parks are fairly difficult to site, yet here is a block of land which is close to the highway, away from residences, and the government seems to be a little reluctant to sell this land. If we have people saying that they would like to develop, the government should not be holding back that development. They should be putting that land up to the highest bidder.
Good quality tourist parks are essential and there is a need. As Darwin develops, some of the inner parks, as has happened to Sundowner, will be redeveloped into something the owners regard as more valuable than the caravan park. If we are going to encourage tourists then we need good quality tourist facilities.
I might say a little about our famous bicycle path along the railway line. I have been pushing this for I do not know how many years now – a long time. The member for Drysdale might pull me up if I am incorrect, but I believe the government has now made a promise to have it done in this term of office. I am stilling waiting for the letter which says that. It is not just about the locals, although it is very important to the locals. The development of a tourist park down the old railway line which could hook up to the bicycle path along the Arnhem Highway and go right up to the pub will be great for tourists. People are looking for that kind of tourist attraction; they want to get on a bike and experience the rural area along an adventure trail, if we call it that.
The old railway line has plenty of history. It goes through some beautiful areas and it has a lot of potential to help with tourism and to help locals who might like to ride their bikes to Coolalinga, or Palmerston, or Humpty Doo, safely off the main highway. The government should have a program to put a bicycle path in along the old railway line at least as far as the Arnhem Highway and, in time, take it out as far as Noonamah.
All those little things are part of what I call a local tourism economy. Many people can talk about the bigger picture, and I welcome that, but there are times when we forget that it is the local tourism that keeps the economy going. It is that little mix that helps people set up businesses in the area. The rural area is developing more and more and there are more opportunities for tourism to be encouraged in that area.
The member for Wanguri spoke some time ago, and I also have, about the possibility of using the Litchfield Shire area as part of the quick tour, the one-day tour. People who do not have much time can go out to look at the wetlands, see the history, have a nice meal and be back in the same day without having to go all the way out to Kakadu or even to Litchfield. There are many sites they can see without going further out. For anyone who does not believe me, visit Knuckey Lagoon in October at sunset and see the amount of wildlife there, which makes it a special place.
Madam Speaker, I thank the Minister for Tourism for the statement.
Mr HENDERSON (Tourism): Madam Speaker, I thank all members who contributed to this debate. As we all know, tourism is everyone’s business, and all of us have our own experiences as tourists in our own right. We all have our electorates to represent, the vast majority of which have tourism opportunities. Everyone would have people who work in tourism as their constituents. It is a significant economic driver for the Northern Territory which employs thousands of Territorians.
I will go through the contributions and answer some of the questions or issues that were raised. The Opposition Leader sought an assurance that this government will do whatever it can to ensure that Qantas remains in the Territory. That is absolutely imperative to our industry. When the announcement of the takeover bid by airline partners Australian was made, I immediately put a call in to Geoff Dixon, the CEO of Qantas, to clearly state that the Territory government did not want to see any dilution of Qantas scheduling to the Northern Territory, and Darwin and Alice Springs in particular. Mr Dixon assured me that under the proposed ownership, the two-brand strategy - that is Qantas and Jetstar - will be retained, existing management was to stay in place and, for the Qantas Group operations, it will be business as usual.
As Territorians we all have significant concerns about this takeover offer. It is disappointing that the federal government refused to allow a Senate inquiry to scrutinise the details of that offer, and to compel and require the proponents of the offer to front the Senate committee. However, I urge the federal government to look at the national interest argument before making a decision about whether this bid should go ahead. As far as the Territory government is concerned, we have sought reassurance from the CEO of Qantas, and that is the advice he provided to me.
The Opposition Leader talked about business travel to the Northern Territory being down 17%. Again, facts and figures; to try to pull one figure out of a whole heap of figures to show things are not as good as usual. My advice is that visitor numbers travelling on business, not just those going to conferences or conventions, are certainly up. A similar survey also showed that interstate business visitors were up 12% and visitor nights up 44%. You only have to talk to people in the hotel industry to know that business is certainly up and, of course, that is the reason why we are building the Darwin convention centre - to continue to grow that market.
The Opposition Leader pointed out that intrastate travel is down; that is, travelling within the Northern Territory. Again, there is no clear reason for this; however, it is likely to be a side effect of the new low-cost air services to Darwin. Many Territorians - and I have heard a number, 30 000 - took the opportunity to go interstate or overseas at Christmas time. Certainly, with the economy strong, people with money in their pockets in the Territory are choosing to take holidays outside of the Territory, and take advantage of those low-cost airlines, which is a win/win because we bring those carriers to the Territory as a result of the increased demand.
Regional tourism is very important. Many people spoke about regional tourism. Tourism NT proactively markets six priority destinations and their surrounding areas - Darwin, Katherine, Alice Springs, Barkly, Kakadu and Arnhem Land, and Uluru Kata-Tjuta. A $300 000 campaign for the Katherine region is planned for April/June this year. In the last sittings of parliament, I released the Barkly Regional Tourism Action Plan, and visited the regional tourism association on a visit to Tennant Creek with the member for Barkly just a couple of weeks ago. Certainly, the government, through Tourism NT, is focused on dispersing our tourists to the Territory through the region.
The Opposition Leader also made some comments about the Cannonball Run. I make it very clear that I support, and this government supports, that there will be no rerun of the Cannonball Run in the Northern Territory. I point out, in regard to responsibilities that we all have, that four people died the last time that event was run. Two of those people were overseas visitors from Japan. It was very disturbing to hear the totally insensitive and quite offensive comments that were made at the Opposition Leader’s rally that was organised to protest about the introduction of a speed limit on the Stuart Highway; that it did not matter because these people – ‘it was only one Jap’. I found that offensive, insensitive and just outrageous that the opposition would seek to align themselves with people with those views of wanting to reinstate the Cannonball Run. I also remind the Leader of the Opposition that two Territorians were killed as well. We believe there are better ways to grow tourism in the Northern Territory than to appeal to the types of people who were on the steps of Parliament House making those sorts of comments the other day.
Other members spoke in debate today. My colleague, the member for Casuarina, as Economic Development and Regional Development minister, talked about the cooperation between his agency and my agency. As the previous minister, I know there are some fantastic people in DBERD looking at helping to development regional indigenous tourism development products. They are doing a fantastic job, and the Stepping Stones tool that is being used is being distributed very widely. There is a lot of interest across the Northern Territory in new products. I put on the record my thanks to people in DBERD and Tourism NT who are on the ground in our regions helping develop those initiatives and aspirations.
I thank the member for Katherine for her contribution. She has, obviously, had personal experience in the industry. It is just nonsense about the speed restrictions, and we are going to have to introduce all these additional facilities up and down the highway. I am not going to go through the numbers again. However, I urge members to go to the Parliamentary Record for Wednesday, 29 November 2006, page 3609 where calculations were done in regard to the difference between the time taken from various points around the Northern Territory at 160 km/h and 130 km/h. For example, the increase in time to drive from Darwin to Katherine is about eight minutes. Therefore, regarding this nonsense that people are going to be on the roads for much longer periods of time, when you do the maths its absolute patent nonsense. I urge people to revisit those pages. If you do not believe the sums, do them yourself.
Thank you, member for Katherine, for the comments about Jessica Mauboy. I concur; she is a fantastic ambassador for the Northern Territory. I advise members of the House that Jessica’s music teacher, Judy Weepers, is retiring on Friday this week after 33 years of fantastic teaching service in the Northern Territory. She is a wonderful lady who has inspired and taught many thousands of Territorians; given them the gift and joy of music for the rest of their lives. Judy, on behalf of all members of this House, I wish you all the best in your retirement.
I agree with the member for Nelson; the rural area is a fantastic area. It is great that members can come in here and talk about the tourism potential of their electorates. I am sure the member does this, but it is beholden on all of us to encourage our constituents in their endeavours. I wish him all the best in working with his constituents to promote the great attractions of the rural area to visitors of the Northern Territory.
The World War II history museum is going to be a good debate to have, as part of the Chief Minister’s vision for Darwin. It was fantastic yesterday to see over 2000 people attend the commemoration of the bombing of Darwin. It certainly is a history that is not well known throughout Australia. It should be, and a museum in Darwin will contribute to spreading that knowledge. I certainly take those points from the member for Nelson.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I will continue to bring updates on the progress of the tourism industry in the Northern Territory to this House. I thank all honourable members for their comments.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Local Government Reform
Mr McADAM (Local Government): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, on 11 October 2006, I addressed the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory’s annual conference in Alice Springs. In my speech, I addressed the issue of the current state of local governments in the Northern Territory. I noted the success stories of local government, but also the failures, the pressing need for change, and the measures the Martin government was proposing to take in relation to a broad-based reform of local government throughout the Northern Territory. It is worthwhile re-examining the sobering facts which I laid on the table at the October LGANT conference.
In March 2006, my department conducted a risk assessment of 56 remote councils. This risk assessment classified 50% of these councils as either unsustainable or, at the very best, at high risk. From March to October 2006, 22 councils, or 38% of all community government and association councils, advertised for a chief executive officer. In addition, eight CEO positions were re-advertised in the past 12 months. This turnover of staff is having a very negative impact on the sustainability of basic service programs on communities as well as on residents.
The situation with finances of many small remote councils is not any rosier. The NT Grants Commission has advised me that about 20 of these councils could end up on the minimum grant by 2008-09 financial year. What this means, in effect, is that these councils, strongly reliant as they are on grant revenue, would have barely enough funds to pay a CEO and a limited number of staff, let alone providing services to residents. The reality is that even those councils not flagged to be in the above situation have basic structural problems where they spend a large proportion of their limited funds on administration rather than service delivery to their communities. In addition, they have limited capacity to raise non-grant revenue and to improve ageing infrastructure.
Last year, my department undertook 17 interventions in remote councils. Indeed, at this very moment, my department is intervening in the affairs of 11 remote councils. Unsustainable systems of local government has a broader impact than just poor local government service provision. It restricts employment, stymies environment health outcomes, slows economic development, and it perpetuates the perception that second best is good enough for Territorians in regional and remote areas of the Northern Territory.
Why should Territorians in remote areas not enjoy the same functionality and sustainability of local government enjoyed in other parts of regional Australia? For too long, the Northern Territory has not been given equal status in our discussions with the Commonwealth. For example, with less than 5% of our land unincorporated under local government we have not been able to achieve equitable access to roads funding. This reform is not simply about the fractured nature of small councils; this is about creating a professional third tier of government across the Northern Territory, a tier capable of delivering local government and other services in partnership and with the full confidence of the Territory and Australia governments. It is about providing a springboard for greater opportunity for everyone living outside our major towns, and a level of confidence and certainty that services will be provided at a standard we would expect in Australia.
The time has come to show strong leadership and to take decisive action to ensure a sustainable local government sector for the Northern Territory into the future. To this end, on 30 January, I announced details of a major local government reform package. The details include indicative boundaries for a new framework of local government based on four municipal and nine shire councils. In addition, as part of this framework, the whole of the Northern Territory will be incorporated under local government. These new shires will commence operation on 1 July 2008.
For the residents of Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine and Alice Springs there will be little change. However, these municipal councils will be encouraged to enter into strategic resource sharing arrangements with the new shires. Each shire will be divided into wards, based on geographic areas and population centres. Each ward will elect local representatives to the shire council. The local ward councillor will represent the people living in the area of the ward, be an advocate for local issues on the shire council, and keep local residents informed about all important decisions and activities of the council. Furthermore, a local community will be able to request its shire council to establish a local board for its local area.
The local board will be given delegations to perform certain functions on behalf of the shire such as participation and planning and delivery of community projects. The local boards will not be tied down with red tape and will be able to adopt culturally appropriate protocols in the way that they work. These boards will comprise local people who want to help make their community stronger, healthier and safer. The shire councils will provide staff and development support for local boards.
On 30 January, I was pleased to announce the appointment of Mr Patrick Dodson as the independent Chair of the Local Government Advisory Board. Mr Dodson has a wealth of experience working in administration, policy and indigenous affairs, and his role as chair will be a challenging one. The Local Government Advisory Board is made up of nominees of key stakeholders including the Local Government Association, the Local Government Managers Association, the Chamber of Commerce, the NT Cattlemen’s Association, the land councils, the unions, the Northern Territory and Australian governments, and representatives from regions right across the Northern Territory including north and south.
I announced the board membership in mid-December 2006, and the advisory board held its first meeting on 8 and 9 February 2007 in Alice Springs. I attended the first meeting, and can advise the House that the meeting achieved positive outcomes and that members of the board look forward to continuing to meet monthly, alternating between Alice Springs and Darwin.
The advisory board will oversee the development of regional management plans and legislative requirements to ensure a smooth transition to the new local government arrangements. My department is providing a secretariat to support the Local Government Advisory Board. Shire transition committees are being established for each of the new shire councils to develop shire plans, and to consider a range of administrative and representation issues. My department has put in place a dedicated project management team to manage the transition, implementation and post-implementation support phases of the reforms.
Local government regional management plans will be developed with councils and transition committees. These committees will examine relevant issues specific to each community and to ensure smooth transition of council operations. The regional plans will outline the administrative arrangements, development opportunities, representation and service delivery issues within and between councils and the Northern Territory and Australian governments in each administrative region. I will continue to meet regularly with the LGANT executive and community representatives to discuss these changes.
Communities throughout the Northern Territory will be engaged in consultations regarding what local government will look like and how to amend the Local Government Act.
In addition to community visits, the advisory board will hold public forums in each of the regions in June 2007. The advisory board will be particularly keen to hear from communities on matters of representation and services to local communities.
All communities across the Territory will be included in a municipal or shire council. The minimum core local government service standards will be negotiated depending on the size and the location of the communities. Non-core service delivery will be determined by community needs and the capacity of the shire to secure ongoing resources to provide the service. New shires will have a strong focus on a back-to-basics approach to delivering core services such as roads and infrastructure, waste management, environmental health and community facilities.
Improvement in core services will help create jobs for locals. Local government will continue to be involved in the delivery of a range of non-core services, and my department will work closely with LGANT and government agencies to negotiate better and fairer arrangements for local government to deliver non-core services such as Centrelink, primary health care and CDEP. These negotiations have already commenced. I applaud the positive attitude and commitment that senior officials of the Northern Territory and Australian governments have brought to the negotiating table. I also take this opportunity to express my gratitude to minister Brough, who has played a key role in this reform.
The proposed transitional arrangements for each of the new shire councils will be known by late 2007. My department will work with the shire transition committees to develop strategic operational transition and governance plans in 2007.
My department and LGANT will assist the new shires with transitional arrangements and begin the recruitment of new staff. A major focus of the new local government arrangements will be the creation of jobs for local people. My department, with support from other NT agencies such as DBERD, and the Australian government, will assist councils to provide on-the-job skills development for new local government employees. This approach is consistent with that being developed through the Indigenous Economic Development Task Force. Throughout the transition phase and beyond, my department will continue to provide advice, governance training, facilitate employment for locals, and help develop local plans to improve services and life on communities.
Development coordinators jointly funded by the Australian and NT governments will work with the new shire councils. They will ensure that elected members are able to effectively represent their ward constituents, that government processes are well understood, and that shire plans are delivering results, including good services and community engagement across all communities in the shire. Development coordinators will also help the new councils to form strategic partnerships and undertake new social and economic projects with other levels of government and the private sector.
The Australian government has indicated strong support for the proposed new local government arrangements and has shown its willingness to work with the Northern Territory government and new, strong shires to improve opportunities for regional communities. New shires will be able to share administrative systems and services, make better use of by-laws, contracts to local service providers, and strengthen local economies. The new shires will be stronger and will be able to leverage more funding on a per capita basis from the Australian government. There will be greater opportunity for small business development that can also support regional businesses such as in the pastoral industry.
Approximately 200 people, representing large and small councils and communities, are being included in the transitional arrangements to create the new local government. I commend the President of LGANT and her members for joining us on this important journey to create a strong local government sector. These reforms will provide the foundation for ongoing improvement to services governments deliver to bush communities. Local government will be positioned to lead the way, to work with communities to overcome disadvantage, and to build prosperity through jobs, small business and a viable community lifestyle.
The benefits of these reforms are considerable and I will summarise them for the House:
- employment prospects will be enhanced, regional service delivery will provide opportunities for local people to get real jobs in their community and across their region;
- greater opportunities for staff with skills, transferable from region to region as uniform systems are adopted, such as in ICT planning and accounting software;
- new shires will provide greater reliability, consistency of services, stable local government administration with highly skilled managers, and strong, elected members will ensure service delivery standards are maintained and money is spent with greater accountability;
- the new arrangements will provide higher levels of expertise in municipal servicing, such as in civil engineering, and greater clarity in the standards of procurement practice across the shires;
- there will be minimum service delivery standards for local government services in every community;
- better roads and infrastructure will be provided - modern plant and equipment will be used to improve roads in every community, and the new shires will be able to tap into additional funding to build better facilities;
- regional approaches to pest eradication, waste management, litter removal, housing services, animal welfare and control, water and sewerage will improve the environment and create real jobs;
- new shires will give communities a stronger collective voice - local boards will listen to the communities and then work with the regional shire to deliver on those priorities;
- regional shires with large budgets will work as equal partners with governments in Darwin and Canberra to source adequate resources to sustain and strengthen communities across the Northern Territory;
- the new framework will mean a fairer share. Funding and services will be more evenly distributed across and within communities. More funding will come to local government to do the things that communities want to do to make them stronger;
- new shires will mean greater opportunity. Regional approaches to recruitment, employment and training programs, business development and service delivery, will create jobs and enterprise opportunities for people in regional Northern Territory;
- the new shires will provide a better future, making communities safer and more harmonious places to live; and
- residents will have access to improved sports and recreation facilities, and events such as festivals.
I will not pretend that the local government reform process will be easy. There will be a substantial expenditure of time and money to make it happen, but the costs of not proceeding are much greater. Failure to seize this opportunity will mean more of the same - more crises and more unsustainable councils - which will perpetuate disadvantage for another generation in remote parts of the Northern Territory.
It is human nature to be apprehensive when faced with change. In the past few weeks, following my 30 January announcement on the reforms, I have been heartened by the many expressions of support for the government’s reforms from the local government sector. I have also personally responded to a number of concerns raised.
The member for Nelson, whilst supporting the local government reforms in principle, has expressed concern that Territorians are being presented as a fait accompli with the release of these indicative boundaries. Perhaps understandably, the member for Nelson has suggested that these boundaries should be a starting point for further deliberations in the framework for new local government in the Northern Territory.
This government has worked extensively with LGANT, and has drawn extensively on the research and experience of previous regionalisation discussions. Government has also taken into account demographic, financial and community-of-interest factors in arriving at these indicative boundaries. The fact is, there is an optimal size for remote local government in the NT context: too small and we risk unsustainability; too large and servicing over a great distance becomes a real problem. Without decisive action now, local government reform could be bogged down in a talkfest for the next decade.
The current situation of plugging holes in a leaky hull of small community government councils would continue to the detriment of the wellbeing of both indigenous and non-indigenous Territorians. Such a situation is unacceptable to me and to government.
These are indicative boundaries and, clearly, I will be taking advice from the Local Government Advisory Board and Shire Transitional Committees. However, I do not envisage major changes to the indicative boundaries I released on 30 January. There is, nevertheless, a great deal of scope for public input into the make-up of ward boundaries within shires. This input will generally occur, as I mentioned previously, through the Shire Transitional Committees, written submissions and through the Local Government Advisory Board’s public forums.
I also noted comments from the President of the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association concerning full incorporation of the Territory and rating of pastoral leases. Clearly, everybody will contribute to the cost of local government. Some people will pay rates, others service charges. We all pay taxes and some of our taxes are used by the NT and the Australian government to fund local government to provide services and good leadership to local regional communities. In the case of pastoral leases, any rating or service charges will accord with the level of service provision. Roads are an issue, close to the heart of the cattlemen, and it is my belief that full incorporation will improve remote road infrastructure. These are the same roads the communities use, so all users will benefit.
My department and I are working very closely with the NT Cattlemen’s Association. They have a representative on the Local Government Advisory Board. My government has provided assistance to the NTCA, for a consultancy examining factors to be considered with regard to the pastoral industry and other local government reforms in the Northern Territory. I do not think anyone could argue against a proposal that having better functioning shire councils creates the opportunity for better functioning communities and enterprises which can support growth in industries such as the pastoral, horticulture, ICT, tourism and small business developments.
The mining communities of Alyangula, Nhulunbuy, Yulara - which stands on Commonwealth land, the East Arnhem strategic zone and the East Arnhem port will continue to have local government-type services provided by non-local government organisations. These arrangements are working well and there are compelling strategic and contractual reasons for continuing with these existing arrangements.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, it is my firm belief that the reform of local government in the Northern Territory will provide a foundation of good governance, sustainable infrastructure and service delivery which will contribute to the long-term development, employment and health outcomes for all Territorians.
I express my appreciation to the Northern Territory Local Government Association for their support, for their vision, and also to the community councils – the shire councils and the community government councils - for their patience and forbearance, and also to officers from my department, the Department of Local Government, who have worked assiduously, and very hard to put in place a model which I believe is going to serve the best interests of Territorians into the future.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Mr Deputy Speaker, at the outset, let me say that the opposition welcomes the minister’s statement, and understands that reforms in local government are necessary. Nobody in his right mind will dispute the fact that community local government as we know it is not working for the Territory and for many of the indigenous Territorians who live in those areas. Therefore, reforms are necessary.
However, how these reforms take place may be up for argument or discussion or negotiation. First of all, let me thank the minister for organising a fairly quick briefing for me with officers of his department last week. However, the maps, tables and matrices that I asked for at the briefing, and which were promised, have not yet arrived for me to consider in due time before this statement was provided today. I ask the minister if he could kindly seek some redress on that and get the material to me as quickly as possible so I can have a look at them – at a more leisurely pace now the statement is up and will be over shortly.
Minister, you have said that many of the local community government councils are dysfunctional. Your audit of the 56 councils has found that - at one stage you said - over 50% of these councils were on the verge of collapse. What surprised me is that it was not as bad as this when I was Minister for Local Government. I have also been in this Chamber long enough to recall the speech made by the then Minister assisting the Chief Minister on Indigenous Affairs, John Ah Kit, who made a so-called landmark statement about indigenous affairs. He talked about the capacity building that he and his department was going to provide to indigenous communities across the Territory to enable them to govern themselves better.
I need to hear an explanation as to what failed in this last five years under the Martin Labor government; why capacity building had not occurred. It had to be the case that capacity building was not provided in a way that enabled these community government councils to manage themselves properly, otherwise he would not have over 50% of these community government councils at risk of total failure. Obviously capacity building has not occurred and now, in this endeavour to rationalise local government in the Territory, you are going to have the same people who do not have the capacity to govern themselves join into shire councils and govern a larger area with larger amounts of money and have greater responsibilities than they ever had when they were only running small, local community government councils. Time will tell as to how you propose to do that and what sort of success we can expect from the same individuals or personalities who have not been able to govern themselves previously.
When you say that the Northern Territory Grants Commission advised you that some 20 councils would end up getting only minimum grants by 2008-09, the only rationale I can think of that would cause such a ‘shrinkage’ of grants would be because of population decrease. If there is urban drift, as we see in Alice Springs, occurring around the Territory as well, are we likely to see a shrinkage of population across the Territory in the bush with these people moving into urban areas? If that is the case, then your shire base will shrink also …
Mr McAdam: No, no.
Dr LIM: I hear an interjection saying ‘no’. There is no reason given that there will be no shrinkage. I suggest to you that it is very likely that there will be shrinkage. We all know for certain that places like Yuendumu and Papunya, both in Central Australia, both with local members who sit in this Chamber with government, have lost a significant proportion of their population. They are all living in Alice Springs. When some 75% of Yuendumu is described as being empty and over 50% of Papunya is described as being empty, you have to ask the question: what is going on?
The minister said that the boundaries he has proposed for the Northern Territory with these nine shires are only indicative. Later in his statement he is saying he is prepared to let the advisory board advise on how to bring about this reform, and that he envisages no major changes. You are really saying that they might be indicative, but they are really fixed, aren’t they? They might be moved a little here and little there, adjust the lines of the boundaries, but the reality is that is what you want.
You have an expert body appointed with two subcommittees with other experts and tell them to talk to people and to come back to advise what they think is the best way to do this. Then you say: ‘By the way, you have use these boundaries. They are indicative, but they are pretty well locked in. We are not going to shift them very much’. Then you went on to whole series of ‘this is what I want; this is what I want to see happen’. Really, your advisory board is not going to do very much except to window dress what you propose to do. Some will call that leadership; some will call it by another name. It may be foolhardy to pursue this line.
You know very well, probably better than I will ever know, the conflicts that you will have by shoehorning different indigenous groups into a single governance area. Port Keats is a great example of that: where you have different groups of indigenous people living under one governance you see the huge amount of conflict that arises out of that powder keg of communities.
Look at the size of the shires that you propose. At least one goes all the way from the Queensland border to the Western Australian border. I do not have the map with me because I am still waiting for the map to come from the minister’s office. There are two shires that extend all the way from the Queensland border to the Western Australian border, which takes up the electorate of Macdonnell and part of the electorate of Stuart.
At the briefing I was told that the way these shires were worked out was based on aggregated monies from the Grants Commission and, in part, population size. With the shrinking of populations, the population size might become non-significant in how you designate which area or which shire one belongs to. But then, with the shrinkage of population, so would Grants Commission monies, so the imbalance will then start to creep into your structure of trying to rationalise these number of shires.
Would it not be better, I ask, that you say to your expert committee: ‘Here is the whole of the Territory, these are the government councils, this is the quantum money that each council receives from the Grants Commission, these are the population figures, these are the different indigenous groups - language groups, skin groups, call them what you like - go away and consider the totality of the problem and come back to me with good advice that I can use to construct the shire local government reform’. Instead, you took the advice of one or two public servants - some with very little experience in shires, others not even formalised in any level of seniority that they understood the issue of shire development in lands where Aboriginal people reside – and you come up with this model that may or may not work. I wish you well, that you get it to work, but I just wonder.
When you spoke about developing the shire model of government, you also reflected that it is very likely that you will have wards within the shires. Within the wards, you will have another level of governance - I suppose that is what you call it - local governance which will bring information about local issues to the shire council, which would also be able to provide information the other way from the shire councils to the local residents. Well, you have the Northern Territory government, you then have the shire council, then you are going to have a local ward or group or council – call it what you like. Are you not now creating more levels of governance than we have at this moment in time?
Again, I draw your attention to the fact that many of these people who are likely to be on the wards and the shire councils are currently the people who have failed to manage their own local government councils. If you have failed to provide capacity building in the last six years to ensure that these individuals are able to provide good governance, tell us what you are going to do to ensure that capacity building will occur in the next, less than 18 months now, to enable these individuals to have the skills to govern. How are you going to prevent the levels of quasi-bureaucracy occurring at the ward level and at the shire level?
You spoke about the organisations and groups that are represented on your advisory board, as well as your area advisory boards. The Local Government Association is represented by its president. I would have thought that the director of LGANT would be on it as well, but he is not there in his capacity as the director of LGANT. He is there in another capacity. I have spoken to the director of LGANT, and I find him to be very knowledgeable in this, and have a lot of faith in that man. I am not so sure that your expert group will have much scope – and there is the whole issue that you have already provided such strict guidelines for them.
The way I see it, you are not really seeking advice from the advisory board. You are not; you are saying: ‘This is what I want. Now tell me how I can go about doing it without getting too much political ruckus’. You know as well as I know that we cannot shoehorn communities that do not have commonality of interest. They are not communities of interest. In fact, they have diverging interests, views and cultural expectations. I hope that you will have a lot of direct input yourself; that you will actually go out there and speak to the community leaders and ensure that you can get their cooperation. Without that, you are not going to get very far.
I recall, back in the days when there was an attempt to form the Western MacDonnell’s model. In fact, that was raised by individuals such as the current member for Macdonnell. There was clear anger in Kintore; there were expressions of disinterest. In fact, not only disinterest, but rejection of the model. People in Hermannsburg said: ‘We are not going to be a part of this. I would rather do without the extra money than lose the autonomy’. Those things were said, in those days when the Western Mac’s model was attempted. Minister, I am saying to you: do not shoehorn people into it when they are not ready for it. You set a time line of less than 18 months, and you might be making a rod for your own back. I said before you have very strict things that you want: shire plans and regional management plans. All these things are going to be done and your advisory board has no input into those.
If all communities across the Northern Territory, as you say, will be included in the municipal or shire council, and there will be minimum call of the local government stance negotiated, depending on size and location of communities, then why do you need a board? What is the advisory board going to do for you? I look forward to listening to Pat Dodson shortly when he has the meeting upstairs. I am interested to hear what he has to say.
At the briefing, minister, I drew your officers’ attention to the fact that very often - particularly in local government but also in many other indigenous industries - white fellows take on jobs that they make into their sinecure; a job that they have for life. What would be more important, more relevant, and more useful is for conditions of employment to include five-year succession plans; that every white fellow employee will have, as part of his work conditions, a five-year plan to ensure an indigenous person takes over his or her job. That way, you can definitely indigenise local government jobs out in the bush. Sadly, what happened for many years - for decades, including time under the CLP - was that white fellows went into a community, ensured that the job was theirs for life or for as long as they could rip off the system, and then they nicked off. I am glad to see that there are many others who have done the right thing and ensured that there is continuity under local indigenous involvement, and also indigenous people taking their jobs when they make plans to move away.
We lament about the way local government has gone in the Northern Territory. Six years ago, the former minister, John Ah Kit, made this landmark statement saying what he needed and intended to do. What has failed in the last six years to allow over 50% of communities to fail so badly? Did government or the Office of Local Government take its eye off the ball? I do not want to see that the development of shire councils is all about a grab for money from the federal government. You say, okay, all these roads that are currently in unincorporated areas will now be coming under the jurisdiction of shires and, therefore, they require more funding. Remember the day when Warren Snowdon, the member for Lingiari, convinced the government that the way to fund roads in the bush was to make sure that every small community got a portion of the money?
Mr Stirling: At least they got their share.
Dr LIM: ‘Got their share’, the Treasurer said. But their share in that money has been for nought. What have we seen for that money? Very, very little. I hope it is not just the Treasurer’s intent through local government to try to grab some money from the federal government, to try to get some money for the bush roads. The bush roads need to be fixed without a doubt, but I hope it is not just for that intention; that would be unfortunate.
Before the last election, the Country Liberal Party had a different model of local government. I suppose it is a philosophical approach. You are now being very paternalistic. You even tell them this is the way we are going to do it: you have nine shires and four municipalities. That is what you say: this is how you are going to do it. You are going to be very directive, and people are going to be told to do it this way or no way.
What did the CLP want to do? We thought it was worthwhile pursuing an alternative. The CLP policy leading up to the last election was, and remains, that the role of local government administration should be seconded to the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory under any other name it wants to call it. Remember, LGANT is an elected association and would, therefore, deliver great accountability to its members. The minister could operate a liaison office, a single office under the Minister for Local Government, to liaise with - call it the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory - to maintain an overseeing role, but the decision-making process is handed lock, stock and barrel to LGANT and its constitutional members. It would then fall upon LGANT to make certain that standards were maintained and, where this was not occurring, to commence appropriate action. If appropriate action meant charges or winding up of a council, the minister’s office would conduct whatever investigations were needed after LGANT had referred the matter to the minister.
However, this is not what you have done, and it might be just a philosophical approach. You can hand over local government management to the elected body called LGANT. You provide the funding to them to run. You have an office that will liaise, supervise, oversee that elected body that you funded, and let them run with it. That way, you are not seen as a centralist government, otherwise that is what you are doing. What you are doing is being very paternalistic. You may not like the word, but that is what it is. We need this local government reform and I commend you for going down this path, but I also voice caution.
Your prescriptive methods may be more cumbersome than you anticipate. Your prescriptive methods may constrain advisory boards and, therefore, you may not be able to do what you want to do. I do not want to see your method become too dictatorial because it would leave very little room for negotiation.
Minister, I am sure you understand that when you get shire councils made up of elected representatives you will probably only be able to have one person per current community or ward on the shire council. That one voice is going to be speaking on behalf of the whole of the community. I suggest that is going to be very difficult, as it is now in a local community government council. Where you have 10 or more bodies representing a community, you have conflicting voices. How are you going to find that one voice to represent that ward? How are you going to find it? The minister shakes his head, but how are you going to find that one person who will not be so deeply obligated through family or land connections? How do you expect that person to sit on the shire council and make unbiased decisions for the betterment of the shire and not just his or her local community? I worry about that.
It is going to be a long and difficult road. While I wish to see better governance for the whole of the Northern Territory, and to see that there is some success for indigenous people to be able to take part in governance, I fear that this process may not be such a good way to go. I say that without saying to you, minister, that you should not do it. I wish you well in the exercise and hope that it will work for you.
I will be watching very closely and we will see where this process takes us. You have approached this business with reasonable credibility and sincerity in what you want to do, and I commend you on that, but that might not be enough on its own. You have to ensure that the people out there are given the capacity to do it in the way that you have envisaged.
I do not want to finish without speaking about the pastoral properties and what they are going to be faced with. They are concerned, minister. You know that; you have heard about it. They are screaming quite loudly about these shires and what it is going to do to them. It is unfortunate that prior to your announcement there was very little discussion with them so that they knew what they are in for. While you might have Stuart Kenny from the Cattlemen’s Association on your advisory board, pastoralists should have been consulted directly. We have to recognise that pastoral properties provide their own local government services. They also provide their own power and water. They provide much of their own roads. I concede that the Northern Territory government has provided some operational expenditure into pastoral property roads. The pastoral properties provide their own septic facilities and waste disposal. Many things that local government does are now done by pastoralist for themselves, at their own cost.
When you start to propose a rating for pastoral properties, you need to then say: ‘How are you going to offset your ratings against what they are spending?’ You need to explain that, and explain it clearly so they know what they are up for. Then you have to tell them: ‘We are going to rate your pastoral properties’. It is easy enough to rate because it is encapsulated fairly well within defined boundaries. How are you going to rate Aboriginal inalienable land where indigenous people live in homes that are owned by the community and not by themselves individually? Are you going to charge them?
Ms CARNEY: Madam Speaker, I move an extension of time to allow the member to continue, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Dr LIM: Madam Speaker, I will not be long. If you are going to have some form of rating for Aboriginal inalienable land, each householder needs to be repaid something that the community representative body can collect, and collect regularly, and have a rate that is commensurable to what the pastoral property will be paying for itself. I believe those issues have not yet been considered. I assume that the advisory committee might come up with some sort of model. The minister has been quite silent on it in his statement regarding these reforms. At the briefing, very little could be explained of how the pastoralists should be rated. I believe to allow the shire council to set the rating is problematical. If you look at the shire councils and how they are going to be elected, I would assume that, at best, the pastoralists within the shire will be represented by perhaps one of them. It is going to be a very difficult task for that single representative from a pastoral background to argue the case that his colleagues and he are not being rated excessively. He would be in the minority of the votes within the shire council.
There are many issues that are very much unanswered. So far, your prescription to the advisory board is tight, and I do not see how the advisory board has much flexibility in determining what it is going to do. However, I sit back and wait in great anticipation that something good will come out of this. I am not sure what it is going to be yet, but if it does, I will be here ready to congratulate you on your efforts.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, this government has demonstrated a willingness and capacity to tackle difficult areas right across the face of government and those areas needing reforms. Since the election of 2005, we have undertaken considerable reform of the education system, a matter which the minister will expand on later in the sittings - a massive program of tackling housing backlogs and continuing law reform aimed at providing the community and police with the tools to fight crime. Now, the Minister for Local Government is undertaking what is, without doubt, the most comprehensive root and branch change to the whole system of local government in the Northern Territory. I do not believe you will find too many - if you could find any at all - who will disagree that it is a system of government in desperate need of reform.
It was interesting to listen to the member for Greatorex, because he had a real opportunity when he was a minister in the former CLP administration to undertake that reform. He and the CLP also certainly had the knowledge of the need to undertake that reform. He failed the test and the CLP failed the test of absolutely failing to deliver meaningful improvement across local government.
There were two ministers for Local Government that spring to mind. One was the member for the old Victoria River electorate, Tim Baldwin, whose first act on becoming Minister for Local Government was to summarily dismiss the Yulara council on the same day that he took office. The closest the member for Greatorex came to reform was, similarly, sacking a council while speaking at a Local Government Association conference, with the council members not knowing they were sacked until they heard his speech.
Local government plays an absolutely critical role in the Northern Territory, and this government - and I do not doubt the CLP before us - has valued that role. However, our concerns have centred around the viability of many of our local governments and their structures. What we have seen created over about 20 to 25 years was a system that simply guaranteed failure, particularly for the smaller councils, and for a number of reasons. If you look at the population of many of our remote communities and the councils elected to run them, they are simply not large enough to be viable enough to sustain proper local government. We had many small councils unable to attract sufficient financial expertise in the first place to administer them and, often, subject as a result to either poor quality advice - and two of them toward corrupt advice.
In addition to the inability to attract people of sufficient skill and calibre to manage the financial side, the lack of critical mass of the small population meant the function of local government, maintenance and repairs to roads, dogs and drains issues simply could not be achieved because of the lack of favourable scale of economies, because the population is not large enough to attract a large enough per capita grant in order to run those sorts of services. And the list goes on. Having set up many unviable councils, it should not be a surprise to anyone that, despite the best efforts of many well-intentioned people in many communities, many of these councils have failed - and they have failed in spectacular fashion from time to time, with many hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt built up.
The minister listed the number of interventions he has had to make, and they are ongoing. We have seen regular dismissal of councils on numerous occasions. That background simply informed government that reform - and quite major and radical reform - was needed sooner rather than later. The reform is all about strengthening that third tier of government, local government. It is aimed, most particularly, at increasing the capacity of those councils to deliver proper quality services for their people. It is easy for us, living in urban areas with pretty reasonable rates some of us pay - particularly in Nhulunbuy - to get used to a certain standard of services. That is what we have grown up to expect and pay for. People in bush communities, by and large, frequently do not receive anything like those same service standards that we in the urban areas are used to and expect and, in fact, demand.
If a council fails the expectations of the ratepayers in an urban area, the ratepayers simply have the opportunity, next local government election, to vote them out of office and get in a new council to do the job. In small, remote communities, it is simply not as available an option as it is in urban areas. The size of the council, the number of people they have to draw on with expertise and management skill, make it almost impossible to elect a new council easily at all. The drawing power of the councils, in financial terms, is so limited that it often does not matter who really runs the council if they do not have the income capacity to provide decent basic level services in the first place. If you cannot provide those basic level services, you are unviable and your future must be questioned. That is what government has done.
There has been criticism - and I note that the member for Nelson so questioned - around consultation on the shire boundaries. It could have gone through a process of asking every Territorian in every local council area about their views and how they would be affected by their decisions. You would be there for a very long time doing that. Frankly, the need for reform, in the sense of the need for councils to be doing the job and providing services, is far more urgent than embarking on a talkfest Territory-wide.
The former government, the Country Liberal Party, did have a merger model in their last couple of terms in office where they were trying to bring about amalgamation of smaller councils into more viable-sized operations by a process of consensus. The exercise proved, I think, enormously difficult regarding the numbers they got to agree. It was certainly time consuming and it was extremely expensive, because when they did achieve anything like an amalgamation, there were very large and generous set-up packages on offer. So, in that sense, whilst that money was being spent that was, I guess, a sign for other councils to say: ‘Go this way, amalgamate with your neighbour, or draw up a sensible amalgamation plan and you will be resourced accordingly’. Even though that was on the table, they were not coming forward in droves in order to say: ‘Yes, we have to get bigger in order to get better and will take advantage of the establishment grants and the money on offer’.
At heart, I suppose I will always agree in principle with the need to include everybody in decision-making along the way. Sometimes, matters become so urgent - and it is such a good question that I think the bullet has to be bitten and this is one of those occasions. It is not optional in this reform; it is critical. It is critical that it be done and it is urgent because we, as the Territory government at the second level, have an obligation to ensure that our people and Territorians get services that are of a quality that they can rely on. When those services are not being delivered, quite properly something has to be done.
The minister has in place a very good advisory group. I am impressed by the fact that it is being led by Patrick Dodson. He is a first-class communicator across all levels of society. If anyone can get to the nub of real concerns and criticisms in the process of dialogue on the way forward, certainly Patrick Dodson is that person, and this government and that advisory group will be very well led and serviced by Patrick Dodson.
In addition, there are people with great experience in local government matters from around the Territory on that advisory group. I believe that they will have, on the one hand, an ear to the ground in their own patch of the Northern Territory and, on the other, be able to provide that advice to the minister and the minister’s office on intractable-type issues that are bound to pop up along the way. Therefore, at the end of that dialogue and the input from those people on the advisory group and from their constituents in that sense, we will have a very good system in place which will do what it is meant to do in the first place in local government; that is, deliver quality services to people. That is why the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory is backing these reforms and, of course, it is incumbent on us as members to get in and back them as well.
I understand the concerns from the member for Nelson as a former chair of a shire council. He probably is best suited as anyone in this House in his background experience in local government and the issues they deal with, the funding problems, and all the sorts of difficulties that local governments have. I ask him to come aboard in this process and support the minister on the way forward.
I do not pretend, and certainly the minister does not pretend, that it is a walk in the park going forward, but the time for reform is well past. I believe we will get through the bumpy road ahead in the dialogue and the way forward. Every Territorian will be better served by a stronger system of local government in place, a system that can be relied upon to deliver, that government can fund with some greater confidence than government does now - where we have seen councils, for any number of reasons, get caught up in financial concerns that perhaps they should not have gone near in the first place. Of course, the Territory taxpayer is overall bound to get that council out of trouble because of the possibility of running up potentially any number of debts, often to small business, along the way.
I listened with interest to the contribution from the member for Nelson because I respect his views. I respect the fact that he has a great deal of experience in this area and I have no doubt that he will be knocking on the door, picking up the phone, and writing to the Minister for Local Government at any time that issues come before him. In fact, he has a responsibility to do that, as we all do. I hope he does, but I look forward with some interest to his views.
Mr VATSKALIS (Business and Economic Development): Madam Speaker, I support the Minister for Local Government on the local government reform statement. At last, local government arrives in the Northern Territory. The 21st century has arrived in the Northern Territory. I say that because when I came here in 1993 and found that the Northern Territory was largely unincorporated with only a very small number of local governments, I was surprised.
I came from Western Australia in which local government has been the third tier of government since the end of the 19th century. I spent many of my working years working for local government, firstly for the city of Wanneroo and then, for a time, for Port Headland. I know the opposition raises many issues about local government and why and how it is happening, and lack of consultation, or the disastrous reform of local government, but local government will benefit the Territory, Territorians, people living in urban areas, and people who live in communities.
How many times have we read in the newspapers about communities being bankrupted? How many times have we seen so-called town clerks arrested by police for embezzlement? How many times have we seen people running away from one community after they use that community as a personal cashier only to find a job at the next community and do exactly the same? How many times do we go to communities and not find services? How many times do we go to communities and find the services are not provided and everybody expects the government from Darwin to provide services, which are the core services of local government?
I have to say to my colleague, the Minister for Local Government, is congratulations and it is about time. It is about time the 21st century arrived in the Territory. It is about time that every Territorian enjoys what people in Darwin, Katherine, Alice Springs and some of the local government bodies enjoy. It means by-laws that control dogs and local activities, and enjoyment of the service provided by the City of Darwin or the City of Palmerston or the Town of Katherine.
Let me describe to you local government when I worked for the City of Wanneroo. The City of Wanneroo was one of the biggest local governments in Western Australia. It was the fastest-growing local government in Western Australia. The City of Wanneroo had a population of about 40 000 people which increased to 150 000 people within 10 years. It had to be split in two: the City of Joondalup and the City of Wanneroo. It had a mix of urban, industrial and rural areas. However, the City of Wanneroo was an organisation that provided services to its ratepayers. The City of Wanneroo had an Environmental Health Branch, a Building Branch, a Town Planning Branch, a Welfare Branch, it ran its own childcare centres, it ran immunisation campaigns, it ran Meals on Wheels, and a number of other services that people in those cities are taking for granted.
These are services that do not exist in the Territory. If they do not exist even in the cities, you can imagine what happens out in the bush. I have been to many communities in the Northern Territory and was appalled by the conditions. However, what really struck me was that the previous government, for 26 years, did not see it fit enough for those people to receive services, did not see that it was proper for these people to have a proper system of governance in the form of local government.
Local government is not only roads, rates and rubbish. Local government can be a vehicle for economic development in the regions. The Port Hedland Town Council has about 12 000 people …
Mr Wood: Western Australia gets heaps more money from the Commonwealth than the Northern Territory – heaps!
Mr VATSKALIS: I will come to the member for Nelson. The town of Port Hedland has 12 000 people. The town of Port Hedland provides services to indigenous and non-indigenous people in the town, irrespective of whether they have paid rates or not. As a matter of fact, in Western Australia, some of the land that is actually indigenous land does not pay rates. The town of Port Hedland provided rubbish removal, fixed the roads, mowed the lawns on the verges, and provided any service that anybody else would get in the town. The town of Port Hedland also had a number of stations within its boundaries. These pastoralists pay rates. These pastoralists maintained the roads within their own pastoral lease, they have their own rubbish tips, their own water supply, but they pay rates because these pastoralists were …
Mr Wood: What is funding from the Grants Commission for Western Australia?
Mr VATSKALIS: … receiving the service of having built roads to their gate. These pastoralists have received services. To give you an example, the pastoralists communicated to my department, to the head of Environmental Health, that the water supply had some problems because people were getting sick ...
Mr Wood: Comparing apples with oranges.
Mr VATSKALIS: I had to travel 100 km to this pastoral property to inspect their water supply, and provide solutions in order to fix it. Then I had to go back another 100 km. The shire council in Port Hedland provided the service where I would go and sample the water …
Mr Wood: More funding that what we get here …
Mr VATSKALIS: I would take the samples, send them for analysis, at cost to the council, provide the result. The local government has a role to play, and the role to play with local government, irrespective of where you are and how big it is, is to provide service to all people.
Mr Wood: Extra funding. That is the problem. Commonwealth funding is not given …
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Nelson.
Mr Wood: Well, I believe he is talking …
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr VATSKALIS: Madam Speaker, the member for Nelson has his own idea about local government. Well, I do not agree with that.
Mr Wood: Of course you do not. You come from Port Hedland.
Mr VATSKALIS: To give you an example, if Litchfield Shire Council was in Western Australia now it would be forced to provide by-laws for dogs, it would be forced to provide services that they choose not to provide, and …
Mr Wood: And you want a bureaucracy.
Mr VATSKALIS: I remind you again, that I had to force Litchfield Shire Council not to pollute the environment. I had to issue a health order to Litchfield Shire Council to stop using an area as a rubbish tip and also to create a transfer station.
Now, about the size of the local government. Let me tell you the size: the Shire of East Pilbara is bigger than France. However, at the same time, the Shire of East Pilbara is administered in Newman, but they have another branch in Marble Bar, and when Wittenoom was opened, they had another office in Wittenoom. They had work gangs in these areas to provide for the ratepayers ...
Mr Wood: You will give funding to local government, minister?
Mr VATSKALIS: The member for Nelson says that Western Australia has a lot of money. Well, let me tell you, that a lot of that money and the funding to the local government of Western Australia did not only come from the state government, it was coming from the federal government ...
Mr Wood: That is right.
Mr VATSKALIS: And here is where we are missing out, member for Nelson. Say we were elected to this parliament and I was the minister for transport and works, I have to argue every time - every time - with the federal government about money through Roads to Recovery. Local government in any other state in Australia gets significant funding for the roads through the local government. Local governments get funded to maintain roads. Here we do not. Why? Because we do not have local government, and they did not believe that we performed the role of a local government. I am very pleased that this minister has actually realised it is about time to bring the 21st century to the Northern Territory.
It is not only the issue of providing services. It is a fundamental principle of democracy. Local government is the third tier of government. It is the closest part of government to the people. It is directly responsible to the people, and certainly the easiest form of government to respond quickly to the demands of the people. I know there are people on the other side who are afraid that if we establish local government it means that all the shires are going to be indigenous; Aboriginal people are going to have control of the shires. Well, that is rubbish.
The Shire of Wiluna is a typical example of how a shire can have a majority of councillors of indigenous descent and maintain its function as a normal council, like the City of Perth, or the Town of Port Hedland, or the City of Bunbury. In Western Australia, you could not vote for local government elections if you did not own property in the local government area. Then the first Labor government, when I came to Western Australia, changed the legislation. Everyone who was on the Commonwealth electoral roll could vote. Immediately, the Shire of Wiluna found out that, from the 400 people who were allowed to vote in the previous election, it now had 2500 people, the majority indigenous people, who could vote.
Guess what the catch was? The majority of the council were black fellas, indigenous people. However, these people did not care if they were white or black. They maintained the same system. They did not care about this because they were struggling to get the local government to maintain the function of the local government, because properly established local government has the structures in place to operate successfully.
In local government, councillors do not run the council; councillors do not dictate what is going to be done and how it is going to be done. The council determines the policy, the future directions. The people who run the council are the professionals: the town clerks, under the instruction and guidance of the council; people like the town engineer, the environmental health officer, the building inspector, and the welfare officer. These are the people who make the decisions on how things are run, and these are the people who provide the council the proper information about what should be done, why it should be done, and where it should be done …
Mr Wood: Yes, but we do not have planning, minister. You are talking Western Australia.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Nelson, you will get your chance.
Mr Wood: Yes, I know that, but I have to tell people the fairytale …
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Nelson, please stop interjecting. Minister, please direct your comments through the Chair.
Mr VATSKALIS: Mr Deputy Speaker, the member for Nelson said: ‘But we do not have planning’. Thank God for that ...
Mr Wood: Well, you cannot have building inspectors.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Nelson!
Mr VATSKALIS: The reason we do not have planning is because I do not think any of the councils - from the seven councils here - is mature enough to handle planning. We have seen some of the proposals, some of the recommendations about certain planning issues, and they are appalling.
The member also said there is no building inspection. I cannot recall any council since I came here in 1993 when the previous government decided, somehow, to change the situation with the building inspections - that is, sack the building inspectors and allow them to become private practitioners who can charge anything they like - say: ‘We will take over the building inspection’. Any other council in Australia has building inspectors - no previous Northern Territory council actually put their hand up and said: ‘We will take the building inspections, we can perform that function’.
As a matter of fact, they refused to take over environmental health because they said it cost money. ‘We do not want to pay money; that is the government’s role’. Anywhere else in Australia, environmental health services are provided by local government, but not in the Northern Territory. As a result, the government had to employ Environmental Health Officers in Darwin and the rural area, and these people had to travel from Darwin to places like Ngukurr, or Nhulunbuy or some of the other areas outside Darwin. They spent more time on the road than in the community, because the local government either did not want them or did not exist. It is about time this changed.
Let me tell you about the issue that is really important for me. The governance, I believe, is very important. We are not going to have proper development or proper economic growth in the regions if there is no confidence about the governance of local government. What the Minister for Local Government is proposing is just that: good governance. I believe this will enable the communities and the regions as a whole to create strong social and economic opportunities for all Territorians.
The Minister for Local Government has mentioned the never ending story of council recruiting chief executive officers and designated specific officers for their council, plus the growing reality of the troubled financial outlook of our councils, and increasing pressures from within and internal factors. We have all these community councils. Every single area has a community council and the money they get from us and the Commonwealth government is very limited, so their ability to service the communities effectively is very limited. I will give you an example. You give money to a council, probably about $30 000 for maintaining the roads - how much road can you maintain with $20 000 or $30 000? Not much. However, when you have a shire council that has a good financial base through rates, and money that they get from the Commonwealth, you have an increased ability to maintain roads and provide effective services.
The Good Governance model will have a positive flow-on effect into my sports portfolio. The restructure will allow Sport and Recreation to have a reduced number of regional bodies that can be funded according to the need and population, not simply the presence of an incorporated association. Every community that is incorporated comes to us and wants money. At the moment we have 50, 60, 100, with so much money to go around. That is not effective. However, this money can be better allocated if you have properly established local government that can cater for a larger area, and that can have a bigger cut of the cake.
People think that it is wrong, but I say again, it is about time we have local government in the Northern Territory. Local government provides opportunities for development and for jobs. Most of the jobs in the regions will be provided by people living in the regions. The local government will have the ability and the effective governance to establish a workforce in their own local government jurisdiction. This workforce can be utilised by council in other areas – let us say road gangs, maintaining roads, maintaining parks, rubbish removal, control of dogs and other functions that currently are not provided, or provided intermittently, or not at all.
People have told me that the best roads in the Territory were in the 1960s and 1970s when there were road gangs employed by the then government, and which provided them with direction to maintain roads. They were provided with equipment and they were doing the roads. Most of these road gangs employed indigenous people. They were quite happy to work out there, with what they used to call in the old time the mixed race people, and they were very keen to work on the dozer, or the trailer, or the grader, and they were travelling for miles maintaining the roads. My aspiration is to utilise the new model of local government to bring back this kind of structure in local government to provide training for indigenous people and employment with real salaries and real prospects.
The local government reform provides a clear channel for the voice of people in remote regions wishing to include the Territory in national policies. Strong local government provides a forum for community leadership. I know there are many people who will champion this reform and they will be the ones who want to provide a better quality of life for the children, their children’s children and, importantly, the maintenance of their identity.
As the Minister for Business and Economic Development, and Regional Development, these reforms will enable the creation of new networks for social and economic development at local and regional levels. Through this new local government structure, information will be provided on demand supply issues to government, private industry and other stakeholders. I know that there is a lot of concern; the member for Greatorex was going on about the pastoralists. Well, let me tell you, some of the pastoralists here in the Territory have properties in other states in Australia. Some of them have properties in New South Wales, in Victoria and in Western Australia. You never hear them complaining about paying rates in those states.
One of the Holmes Court family properties is in Halls Creek. I know very well that they pay rates that come up to millions of dollars. You never hear them complaining about the rates they pay in Halls Creek. I know some of the pastoralists in Central Australia have properties in other states. You never hear them complaining about the rates they have to pay there. Why are they complaining about the rates here? The local government will provide services to their doorstep. They provide services to the gate of their farms. What they are doing inside their farms and their pastoral properties is exactly what I am doing with inside my house. I mow my own lawn. I clean my own yard. I put my rubbish away myself, but I expect the council to maintain the road outside my house, the footpaths, to provide the rubbish services, and provide the services that local government is supposed to provide. That is what I expect these shires to provide to indigenous communities, to people in towns and communities, and pastoralists.
As I said before, I am a strong supporter of local government. It is the most democratic form of government, the third tier of government, the closest to the people, and the one that can provide jobs, services, opportunities and real democratic change, not only in the city but also in the bush.
I commend the minister for his statement. He has my full support bringing local government to the Northern Territory.
Mr HAMPTON (Stuart): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Minister for Local Government’s statement on local government reform. Local government has played, and will continue to play, an important and essential role in the Northern Territory, particularly in our rural and remote areas. I congratulate the minister, not only on his speech, but also on his courage and leadership in taking local government in the Northern Territory to a new and innovative approach. I acknowledge the support the minister has indicated in his speech from the Australian government and the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory.
It is very important for all levels of government to get behind and support this reform for the benefits to eventuate. It is important to be open and frank about the facts the minister has brought to our attention, because it demonstrates very clearly the need for members of the Legislative Assembly to support these reforms as well, and for a whole-of-community engagement process that the minister has outlined.
In my electorate of Stuart, as with most bush electorates, the disturbing results of the risk assessments conducted by the Department of Local Government in March 2006 are not surprising.
Whilst I am only relatively new to this Assembly, I am pleased to able to contribute to this statement because I have experienced for a long time much of the anguish the minister talked about in his statement. These reforms are not in any way trying to undermine or criticise the commitment and work many elected members in the bush over many years have demonstrated. It is equally important to recognise the efforts of many of the public servants and local government association members and officers who have worked tirelessly over the years supporting community government councils and associations.
Looking around the country, I was surprised to see how long local government and shires have existed in Australia. For example, the Municipal Associations of New South Wales was established in 1883 and the Shires Association of New South Wales established 1908. The Municipal Association of Victoria, with some 79 councils, was formed in 1879. From the beginning of the local government and shire council system in this country, the role of what they are responsible for has changed significantly. However, it is the fundamental role of local government councils that we must remember in this debate. Non-core responsibilities of councils will come as these shires strengthen and develop over the years.
I would like to read out the key principles underpinning the reform process because they best describe what the process is all about: a focus on delivering a fair standard of local government services to all communities; integrated planning between the three levels of government to ensure the delivery of better services in the bush; consultation across all communities throughout the transition and implementation process allowing for flexibility; existing municipalities and new shires working together and sharing resources through regional agreements; and ongoing cooperative partnership between the Northern Territory government, the Australian government and the local government sector to ensure a seamless transition to the new arrangements.
In the Northern Territory, local government has seen a number of changes over the past 29 years. In fact, I can recall the previous government’s attempts in introducing the local government reform agenda in the late 1990s. The CLP’s approach of endless talk and failure to show leadership and get the job done is a regular sore point that people in my electorate talk to me about. We heard in the debate earlier the member for Greatorex’s contribution when he called for more consultation, more talk. We know where that will get us: nowhere. I applaud the minister on his direction and leadership in this matter.
As the member for Casuarina said, it is about time. This is something that people out there are saying to me. They are not against these changes or the reform. They want to see it happen - soon. We must also remember two periods in the history of Northern Territory that have shaped the local government system that we have today and will continue to play a key role in what systems and reforms will be implemented into the future.
Self-government of the Northern Territory in 1978 and the Aboriginal land rights movement have both been significant events in our history that have contributed to both the development and governance of our rural and remote regions. Added to this was the introduction of the self-determination era that saw the management and control of former reserves and missions shifted to indigenous people.
While local government has a long history in Australia, in the Northern Territory it has a relatively short history, covering the past 29 years, as I have said. During this period, indigenous Territorians have been required to adapt to this form of governance and system from a very traditional system of living. Realising how old some of these local government associations are in other states puts into perspective the challenges we face in the Northern Territory. These reforms have the potential to move outside of these core service areas, highlighting the importance of the advisory boards and transitional committees established by the minister. It is clear the role of these advisory boards is critical because, as the minister has correctly stated, they are there to provide advice to him.
The detail we heard the member for Nelson talking about is the role and the issues that the advisory committees will, no doubt, take up. All of us in this House have talked about the issues of local government in the bush over time, and we are all aware of what the price of doing nothing has had on the Northern Territory. People out there in the bush deserve good local governance. If there is not a system in place, people will move backwards and forwards to where they can access these services.
Since the minister’s speech to the Local Government Association on 11 October 2006, I have had the opportunity to discuss the regional shire model with many of my constituents. The model, a framework based on four municipal councils and nine shire councils, all incorporated under the Local Government Act, will provide communities with certainty and direction. Obviously, like many of us, particularly the bush members, there are many issues that we regularly hear out and, having many relatives and friends living in remote communities throughout the Territory, I have heard my fair share of them.
Obviously, having to continuously recruit for new CEOs and the repetition community councillors have to go through when a new CEO starts is upsetting for many. I have seen firsthand the impact this cycle of continuous recruiting on remote communities is having, and let me tell you, the people out there are also very worried about it. For some of my communities, the result is that it has made it virtually impossible to establish and maintain basic services.
One area that I still do not quite understand is how the Grants Commission formulas work. They should be based on needs, not size or per capita. Work needs to continue to ensure this formula is more equitable to the needs of Territorians living in the bush. It is essential that all sectors of the bush community most affected by this reform, such as the Cattlemen’s Association, the land councils, the Chamber of Commerce, the Local Government Association and the indigenous communities work together because, as neighbours, they are the ones that will benefit most from this reform.
Pastoralists are key stakeholders in the regions of the Northern Territory. They are also neighbours to the many indigenous communities in these remote areas and, in many ways, are working alongside and sharing resources and services with the many communities in the regions. Key services, including maintaining roads and airstrips and the delivery of essential services, are just a number of areas that they are working together on. That is why they are important players in this whole process. I look forward to catching up with many of the pastoralists in my electorate over the coming months to discuss the local government reforms with them.
Mining, horticulture and other industries are also critical industries providing economic and employment opportunities in our remote regions and, through this government’s economic development strategies, will be significant players in developing our regions as well. I certainly appreciate the benefits the minister indicated during his speech, in the ability of the shires to share administrative systems and services, make better use of by-laws, contract to local service providers and strengthen local economies. I would add in there, that the cooperation between the municipal councils with shire councils is also a big benefit and a positive move.
I can give one small example to the Assembly on how this can be a positive; that is, the relationship between the Indigenous Knowledge Centre at Ti Tree and their relationship with the Alice Springs Town Council Library. The Alice Springs Town Council Library offers support, training and mentoring to the local indigenous officer working at the Ti Tree Knowledge Centre, which has been fantastic and provided great results for the community.
While the focus of the shires will be delivering core services, there will, no doubt, be other opportunities to venture into non-core service areas, particularly through the regional economic development process.
The current situation in my electorate, where we have a combination of outstation resource centres, incorporations or associations, and community government councils all working in isolation in a region, all competing for funding, sometimes against each other, is unsustainable. One of the biggest challenges the remote regions of the Territory face is that of raising non-grant revenue, as the minister has rightly pointed out in his speech. In the municipal councils, we have the rate system that allows revenue to be raised to assist with the delivery of municipal services and improving infrastructure in the community. However, whilst many of those people living in remote communities have been paying into some form of rental collection and rates for many years, it has not been enough to meet the growing demand on these services and infrastructure.
We must also remember that many of the people we are talking about who are most impacted upon by the regional shire reforms are those people living in remote areas who are on the lowest income levels in Australia. There needs to be a continuing acceptance by other levels of government that our remote communities and people will continue to need assistance through grants and programs from both the Northern Territory and federal governments. I have confidence in the minister to deliver this reform because he has a wealth of knowledge and experience from living and working in the Territory.
I also attended the first meeting of the advisory board on 8 and 9 March in Alice Springs with the minister. Whilst the talks were robust and direct, the mood was positive. I acknowledge the appointment to the advisory board in mid-December last year of a few men from my electorate: Maurie Ryan from the Daguragu Community Government Council, Tony Scrutton from the Anmatjere Council, and Geoffrey Barnes from the Lajamanu Community Government Council. Each of these members of the advisory board bring with them a wealth of experience but, most importantly, they are all community-based members so they know what living in remote communities is all about, which is what we often forget about in this House.
We must remember that by saying our communities are dysfunctional we are not having a shot at individual communities or people, but it is purely a description of the state that they are in. Perhaps a more appropriate word would be ‘unmanageable’.
Our regional centres such as Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Katherine are important and vital access points for remote Territorians. The minister has demonstrated through the work of the Town Camp Taskforce in Alice Springs that there is a genuine need for change - and the time is right. The normalisation of town camps and the work undertaken by the task force will deliver equitable and appropriate levels of municipal services around the town camps in Alice Springs.
Good local government will bring about positive images and environments to attract future developments into our regions. Strong local government and the establishment of the Economic Development Committees will provide the right environment for business to flourish and job creation for locals.
I am genuinely excited about the direction in which this government is moving in relation to the bush, and improving the lives of Territorians living in the bush. We, as members of parliament, need to get away from the blame game and bring on changes that are going to improve the living conditions and service delivery to those living in rural and remote Northern Territory. We must not forget the past, because the past is something that we are stuck with today, and it has its fair share of challenges that we need to address - things such as lack of education. The poor planning for the bush in the past has presented the problems we have today.
As I said, I am excited about the future. The minister’s statement today is just one example of how this government is working to improve the lives of all Territorians. We heard in the past week the Chief Minister’s statement on the challenges ahead for us all in this House and as Territorians - challenges in health, education, and for remote Territorians. I am proud to be a member of this government because I genuinely believe it is governing for all Territorians.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Mr Deputy Speaker, like many of us in this House, I certainly hope there is success for the minister in this big undertaking.
The Territory is unique and has a unique form of local and community government. In the past, I believe that community councils and associations have been useful in introducing people in remote communities to taking responsibility for their people, no matter how small or remote they are. However, as the minister said, it is probably now time to make changes - changes that in the past have failed and not brought about much major reform. I say that looking back to what the CLP did when I was minister. We did it on a voluntary basis, the reform agenda, but it obviously failed, and there is no doubt about it. I guess what the minister is saying is let us not make it voluntary; let us just tell them what is going to happen. That may seem a rather harsh way to go about things but it is probably at a stage when ...
Mr Wood: It is normal. That is how they have been treated all this time.
Mrs BRAHAM: Stop muttering; let me talk and then you can have your turn.
We had good faith when we looked at voluntary reform, but it did not work. The only thing I will say to the minister is that this should not be the final package. If, during the transition period and the consultation period, there needs to be fine-tuning and changes made again, then you should take it on board. It will not be a reflection of failure or anything like that if some changes have to be made to the boundaries or to the proposals to date.
We all know that any change must be managed with care and not disadvantage the people it was meant to help. That is what I am hearing from other members: do not take away the autonomy that some of those small local councils have enjoyed. Some have done well. There are some successful local councils out there, and we do not need to disadvantage them or make them feel as though they are failures because some other councils have failed. Do not let us take away their autonomy when they have proven that they have good employment, and good governance. That is important. Let us most of all still see some strong representation. That is going to be the hardest thing of all: to make sure that the small communities have as much representation to get their points of view as the large communities. That is going to be a challenge within itself, minister, to make sure that good representation does occur.
We also talk about services. We are hoping these changes will bring about better efficiency, better effective services, better accountability in the way we go about it, and better decision-making structures. All these are great words and great ideals but somehow or other you have to make sure that all these things are acceptable to all participants and that all participants get their fair share of the slice; that some do not get more than others because they are stronger and bigger.
I am not sure about the boundaries, and I know the member for Nelson will talk about this. I think it is huge. The area the member for Stuart was talking about, that is going to be serviced by this particular shire, is huge. It goes from the Queensland border to the Western Australian border. And it is not just communities in between; it is also small outstations that are being affected by this. Geographically, the Territory has always been hard to manage. Members in this House who have large bush electorates will say it is very hard to see everyone in the electorate because of the isolation and massive geographical distances in between centres. This is one of the disadvantages we are faced with in the Territory. We have to ensure the people on that side are not disadvantaged by the people in the middle who forget also the people on the other side. I believe, minister, that is going to be the greatest challenge for this particular reform agenda that you are embarking on.
I am still not quite sure whether your break-up for the Territory into shires based on population is the way to go because I believe the geographics come to play quite strongly in it. We must remember that many of our communities were based on missions, pastoral properties, and settlements. They often brought together many people from different clans and groups. We are now asking an even wider range of people to work together as one, when we know that many of the missions and settlements have not worked in the current form because of the disadvantage of having so many different clans brought together.
Just as it has been difficult to get people to work because they have family squabbles and what have you, how much harder is it going to be when you are bringing together an even wider range of people? We must bear that in mind. There is difficulty now in the administration of communities – which were set up from the missions and settlements - without looking at a wider range of people coming together.
We all know stories of dysfunctional councils in the bush. We all know that they find it difficult to retain good, qualified, competent staff. We know that not enough training goes on in the communities for the local people to take over. We also know that many councils will not take any notice of the advice given to them by their staff, and they prefer to make their decisions without thinking about the community as a whole. Sometimes it is family-based decision-making, which is not always the best thing to do. This is going to be the huge challenge for these decision-makers to appease all people. You cannot be God to everyone and make them all happy. There has to be some rationalisation and you have to get that across to them very strongly.
There has always been that strong relationship between traditional decision-making and local decision-making, which has often been a disadvantage for sensible decisions to be made at the community council level. Quite often, I hear of contracts that should be let that have been held up because people in the community cannot decide where the house is going to go, and who was going to get the house, so the house just has not been built. That is one of the frustrations of the system as it is now. Hopefully, the system you are talking about implementing will feature stronger decision-making.
There has been a comment by the CEO of Alice Springs Town Council that he was quite willing to help, and larger councils can do that. They have the expertise of the payroll people and the finance department. It is important to tap into expertise that is already there. If people like him are willing to share that expertise - going out to train or bringing people in to train - we should be taking that opportunity. Hopefully, there will be some good things that do come of it.
I am interested in by-laws. I wrote to you, minister, and you gave me a list of councils that had by-laws but they were mainly litter or dog by-laws, and many of them were not enforced. It is good if we can say: ‘These are examples of by-laws’. We could take some of them to communities in Western Australia or Queensland where the councils do have by-laws up on signs and they make people abide by them. Perhaps make them understand that you can get better living conditions for people if you do have these by-laws. Even now, we grizzle about the Alice Springs Town Council not enforcing their by-laws on camping and litter and dogs, and what have you. It is not just a remote community that might difficulty with enforcing by-laws; it happens in all our towns and municipal councils. It is just one of those things: if you do have rules, you can fall back on them.
I am not sure how you are going to get more funding. That is something, I suppose, because I did not have a briefing, I missed out on it. However, it would be interesting to know how …
Mr Wood: You did not get up.
Mrs BRAHAM: Yes, I did not get up at 7.30 am. It was offered to me last night for 7.30 this morning, and I have to admit, minister, I just did not make it, not being an early morning riser. I do get here by 10 am; that is the main thing.
Funding is important. The spread of funding and how to make sure small communities are not disadvantaged again is important. It is a bit like road funding. If you can tap into the federal budget for roads, we have so many roads in the Territory that need attention. There is no doubt about it. When you think back over history, many of them were just graded for cattle trucks. Now we need formed, well made roads because of the population and the movement of people. I would like to see how you are going to do that. Perhaps you can give us a bit more of that information as time goes by.
Can I give a little plug for outstations? There are good outstations. I know there is criticism that outstations have been spread out and almost deserted at times, and perhaps it was not wise to put a little cluster of houses here, and then have to provide them with power and all those services that you do. However, there are also some outstations that operate well. Someone who lived on an outstation said to me the other day: ‘It is the best way for us to live because it takes us away from all the humbug of big communities. We really love living out here in the bush. We have a good lifestyle. We can do the things we want to do without interference, and we can still enjoy the fun things that we have as people’. I believe, in some cases, some of these outstations have given a better life to many of the people. I understand that the federal government said at one stage that we should not be funding outstations; we should be making those people move in together. I just say that there are good outstations. We should support them and we should retain them, because I do believe there is an advantage in allowing people to live that type of life if that is what they want.
You also need to acknowledge those successful councils. I have said this a bit earlier, but there is a feeling that they are being put down, that because they are successful they are not getting the recognition they should. I can understand why the member for Nelson is concerned about Litchfield, but there are other councils that have also done well. I can understand their concerns. It is a bit like the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association - you have to win their hearts and their souls before they really take it on board because, obviously for them, what financial burden are they going to be asked to carry and will there be any benefits for them? I believe the benefit of them being involved in the shire is that they also have expertise that they can give to councils. I would like to think that they can use their expertise to guide some of the decision-making within their area, rather than just sitting on the outside looking in. Bring them in and make them part of the whole decision-making process. There are some excellent pastoralists out there who do good work, look after their people well, provide all the right sort of things for the people who work for them and, obviously, have a lot of knowledge. So let us not keep them on the fringes. Let us embrace them and say: ‘Come in and help us make this work’. We need to tap into their expertise without disadvantaging them.
On the whole, what can you say, except we hope it works. We hope at the end of the day it provides better services. However, if there need to be changes along the way, then let us do it. Let us ensure that we are flexible enough to change as it is needed, to review if necessary, and not just to come down with a big stick and say, ‘This is what will happen no matter what’, because if we do not take the people with them, then they will not be with us. They will scatter everywhere. It is all a case of cooperation, belief in what you are doing, having a fair go, and ensuring voices are heard. Good luck to the minister on this. I hope it succeeds. I hope he really does listen as he goes along.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the minister’s statement on Local Government reform. All of us who have been around for a long time have heard of the successes of the small councils, and even some of the big councils, within the local government systems. However, we have also heard the stories of the failures and the frightening statistics in the minister’s speech - eight CEOs in the last 12 months; and risk assessments carried out on 56 remote communities with nearly 50% of these councils either dysfunctional or in the high risk category. They are very high statistics.
The state of dysfunction is not good enough. For too long, there has been an acceptance that substandard local government service delivery for remote communities is what should be. People accept that as normal, and we are saying it is not good enough. As a government, we have to strive to put in place a better system.
We have heard from the members whose electorates will be affected by this reform. I am waiting to hear from my other colleagues. We have heard the members for Stuart and Nhulunbuy talk about their electorates. I am looking forward to hearing from the member for Macdonnell as well. There are many different issues and we will see them through each of the regions.
I am going to focus on my region. We know from the Tiwi Island local government, which was one of the first three amalgamations that went through previously, there have been problems in the past, and they have taken some time. One of the issues is changing from a system where you had single councils and coming up with one local government with layers of bureaucracy. I have made representation to the minister and discussed with him my thoughts and experience of working through the Tiwi Island local government and the structures there, and how the reforms in the shires can actually be made. We can see better efficiencies and the issues of governance and building a totally different structure which we have not seen in our local or remote Aboriginal communities.
West Arnhem and the communities in my electorate - Warrawi, Minjilang, Gunbalanya, outstations around the Cobourg Peninsula and throughout West Arnhem - have been involved for some time. For about three years they have been talking about whether they move towards having a regional system, and whether those smaller councils - particularly Warrawi and Minjilang, which have had problems in the past and have not been viable enough to stand on their own two feet - can merge with a bigger council.
I welcome the concept and the reforms the minister has proposed. It will create great efficiency. Issues will surface, and they will be talked about and worked through with not just the local government, but the advisory council. Then you have the local implementation transition teams. As a local member making representation to the minister, one of my big concerns with much of this is that women in my electorate have not had an opportunity to participate in that; and that there is fairly good representation by women in my electorate. That is very important and I thank the minister for taking those concerns on board. I am not saying that our men are not any good. I just think there are many issues at the coalface in many of these communities that our women have been involved in and it is important that they are at the table having input into how the structure should work.
I welcome the reforms, minister, and I join with the member for Stuart. I was listening to what he was saying. We have a minister who certainly knows and understands. I know the many discussions that he and I - and I am sure other members - have had about where these reforms are going to happen, and he is aware of a number of those problems. As I said, we will work through them.
It is time. We have to change what is happening on the ground in those communities. We have to get better efficiency happening in our remote communities. I am not saying that some time in the future we are going to see these problems. The reality is that it is going to take a number of years. It has taken nearly four years and we are going onto our fifth year with Tiwi Islands local government. We are still working through some of those areas, but the light at the end of the tunnel is there, and with these shires we can see that.
I want to pick up on this report from the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory, about which I had discussions with the minister. I do not know whether many members have had access to this. It is an audit of employment opportunities in remote communities in the Northern Territory. It was from the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations which funded LGANT to look at 52 remote communities in the Northern Territory - at those employment opportunities, and at CDEP. The profiles they came up with are quite an interesting. I was saying to the minister that the only area that was missing was the link and the opportunities through the shire for employment and tying that with CDEP. Building that capacity over those shires will certainly create, with documents like this, a greater opportunity for those communities involved in those shires to better explore those employment options. With the regionalisation of CDEP the capacity will increase.
The member for Braitling raised the issue of outstations. I welcome these reforms for the simple reason that, for the first time, those outstations will get an opportunity to access local government services which has simply never been there. In West Arnhem there is a strong outstation movement, and I am sure other members have those strong outstations because outstations play a strong role. We know that people move from the main communities to those outstations because of problems in the major communities, and the outstations provide a safe haven. I know that in West Arnhem the outstation movement is applauding this minister and the reforms. They are looking forward to it because they will get access to services for the first time. It will increase the capacity of those shires to be able to access federal funding, especially roads funding.
Minister, I know that on the other side, people will pick holes. It was good to listen to the member for Braitling because, whilst she had some concerns, we know that there have been problems out in those communities for such a long time. We cannot say: ‘This is bad and it is not going to work’. How do we know it is not going to work if we are not going to try it? Sure, any system that is going to propose change is going to get resistance. I, like many local members, have had concerns about the concept of the shires and the reforms, but have been able to work through those with your department. I thank officers from the department who have been able to provide that information, as well as officers in your ministerial office who have been very open to …
A member: Accommodating.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Yes, accommodating. That is the right word. They have been accommodating on many of those issues.
I welcome Patrick Dodson. You have selected someone to be the chair whose integrity and credibility - not just amongst Aboriginal people but with non-indigenous people - is there. His reputation is before him and his selection as your chair is welcome.
I also welcome your acceptance of three very strong people from my electorate – Esther Djarrhurunga from Oenpelli, Ronald Lami Lami and Ralph Blyth – three people with very strong views who have had a lot of experience working across those areas, particularly Ralph Blyth. They will certainly bring their opinions from their regions to the table and will be fantastic representatives for the West Arnhem Shire as we move towards development of these new shire concepts.
Minister, I welcome your statement. I support it and look forward to working through the transitional plans with those local bodies.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the statement on local government reform by the Minister for Local Government. This is a bold step, minister, but it is something that is required. This is required so that it gives our people hope, so that it gets them out of the box of just thinking about their communities and allows them to think in the shire model and a regional structure so that they are thinking about their neighbours, say at Hermannsburg, Areyonga, Mt Liebig and at Kintore, because we are all one people living in the one area.
From its inception, local government has had a troubled history in the Northern Territory and, as a result, community government processes have failed to improve the lives of people on remote communities. The situation is continuing to deteriorate because local government needs to spend an increasing proportion of their limited funds on administration rather than service delivery in communities. Compounding this problem is the difficulty of attracting and retaining skilled staff.
There is a pressing need for change, and I congratulate the minister for the comprehensiveness and detail of local government reform that has been developed. I particularly welcome the standardisation of services across all communities with the introduction of minimum, core local government service standards that will be developed on the basis of size and location of communities. Establishing a clear set of standards and targets for the provision of amenities in Aboriginal communities that reflect the Australian average will significantly improve the quality of life for Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory.
Standardisation of service delivery also means equity. Treating communities fairly and equitably will be a prime factor in ensuring the success of this local government reform, as it will lessen the reason for conflict between communities, and communities and the shire council. Standardisation will also mean that those communities located on the borders of South Australia and Western Australia, like Kintore, Docker River and Finke can be sure that they will enjoy equitable services with other communities in the shire, despite the tyranny of distance. Being part of a larger shire will also mean that they will attract other services despite their location. At present, such communities feel that their distant locations mean that they miss out on programs and opportunities because they are not on any radar screen and are too far away for people to visit. As members of larger shires, they will necessarily be included in the new developments and opportunities.
I will divert from my speech and talk about what I have heard at Finke. Finke is a classic example of what I am talking about. Because Finke is so far away, they fall under the radar of service delivery and people visiting there. They feel that, under this new shire model, they will get the attention that is needed. Also, the people in Kintore. I raised this with the minister on our travels about a month ago. I was very concerned when I went with Nigel Adlam into Western Australia and visited Kiwirrkurra, which is under the shire model in Western Australia. Kiwirrkurra has been left out of service delivery in Western Australia. I do not want to see that happening in the Northern Territory. I know we have spoken at length about those issues to ensure that communities like Kintore, Finke and Bonya keep within our eyesight; that people visit there, people talk to them and we ensure that the services are there so that all Territorians benefit.
I will be interested to see how the additional costs will be imposed on shire councils - because of the relatively isolated nature of most communities when compared with the municipal councils, it will be calculated through the grants process - and how the disabilities imposed, because of the fragmented nature of settlement on outstations, will be resolved. We have also spoken about that as well, minister. As the member for Arafura said, this will be the first time that outstations will get the local government services that communities have. In communities it is about unity, about ensuring that people feel they are part of the Territory, getting the same service, and about equity.
Permanent outstation residents in Central Australia who are becoming increasingly concerned about their future viability since the demise of ATSIC will also welcome standardisation and the security of service delivery that being members of the shire council will provide. An important initiative of the reform is the negotiation for better and fairer arrangements for local government to deliver non-core services like Centrelink, primary health and CDEP. Too often, the arrangement Centrelink has made with remote communities has resulted in community councils bearing the burden for providing the service. Communities that have entered into agency agreements with Centrelink have often found that the funds they receive are inadequate to cover the services they are required to provide.
A good example of this is the Arramwelke Resource Centre which services Bonya and outstations on the eastern Plenty to the Queensland border. It costs Arramwelke approximately $22 000 per month in phone and fax fees alone just to communicate with Centrelink to ensure that the residents can access their entitlements. In addition, resource centre staff need to devote a considerable number of hours each week to assist residents to complete the necessary paperwork. This is a large burden for small resource centres, one that they are required to undertake because, not only does the lack of income have enormous social and health consequences, the survival of the resource centre is vital. If people are not receiving income, they cannot pay rent, and the community would then not receive its R&M grant and houses would fall into disrepair.
Before the sittings, the member for Stuart and I had a meeting with Centrelink. This is exactly what we spoke about with the manager of Centrelink; that Centrelink services have become a burden on local government. The Northern Territory government and local government are delivering too many services to indigenous people that the Commonwealth should be providing.
For too long, communities across the Northern Territory have been caught in a catch-22 situation, so I am pleased that the local government reform is addressing these issues that have caused many people real hardship and grief. Ensuring that people receive their appropriate welfare income is important but, even more important, is moving people off welfare and giving local people the opportunity for real jobs with real incomes. I welcome the fact that the minister has made this a major focus of the new local government arrangements. It is crucial that local people will be provided with jobs and new skills. I have spoken on this issue many times in this House, but I express again that it is crucial to train local people for jobs rather than importing labour into communities where there is such high unemployment. Not only is this bad for communities and Aboriginal people economically, it is also has a devastating psychological effect which we all witness in such issues as violence and other forms of antisocial behaviour. The economic benefits for the Northern Territory of having a skilled indigenous workforce are enormous.
I also applaud the strategy of having development coordinators to assist elected ward councillors to undertake their representative functions. One of the challenges to being an effective advocate for their ward, as well as communicating important council decisions, is the ability of councillors to travel around their wards and communicate with people. I know from my experience with ATSIC that regional councillors become much more effective once our regional council implemented a system of regular ward visits and meetings supported by our staff. This helped councillors to further their understanding of needs within their wards, as well as communicating council decisions to community residents. This means that councillors were actually able to represent their wards and, as a result, I believe better and fairer decisions were made. The importance of ward councillors regularly visiting their wards to ensure that services are being delivered, and communicating council decisions in languages that residents of remote communities understand, is a powerful accountability tool that will ensure that the new local government reform is a success.
At present, councillors are meant to be accountable to their electorates as well as the Territory government. However, to date they have not been obliged to report in ways that are meaningful to their constituencies. This has meant that many people did not understand what their council was doing or even what their council was required to do, which resulted in much confusion and conflict. Putting in place a system that will ensure transparency is important to the ongoing success of the new councils.
Accountability would also be strengthened by ensuring that elected ward councillors are able to attend all local board meetings within their ward. This will be an important mechanism to avoid the development of a them-and-us mentality and, secondly, so that the shire council and the local boards continue to work to the same goals with the same information. This will support the ward councillors as representatives, as well as increasing accountability and transparency.
I also recommend that the minister also give consideration as to how to make the reporting by the department on performance of councils more public, accessible and readily understandable. Transparency is the best method of ensuring that the new system is working, and will also foil those who seek to undermine the new arrangements for their own purposes.
As to the matter of the indicative boundaries, I am aware that in Central Australia the communities along the Plenty Highway see their community of interest economically and culturally within the southern shire, and that this matter will be resolved through the regional consultation process. I had a long talk on my last visit before sittings, with Harts Range, Bonya and Alcoota, and explained to them that they were in a shire next to the southern shire. They wanted me to bring to you, minister, the fact that, culturally, they are not linked to those people and their service point is Alice Springs not Ti Tree. That is something that I hope you take on board.
The minister has appointed a good range of people on the Local Government Advisory Board, and I am confident that, in combination with the regional consultations, the shire council boundaries will be one that people are happy to support. I know that during our visit to Hermannsburg, Wallace Rockhole and Titjikala, people said to the minister: ‘Why 2008, minister? We want it now. We want it to start now’. As the minister said, without action now, local government reform could be bogged down in a talkfest for the next decade, as it has been over the past 20 years.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I look forward to the implementation of a local government system which will start to improve the lives of all people on remote communities in the Northern Territory. I commend the statement to the House.
Ms McCARTHY (Arnhem): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I support this courageous initiative by our colleague, the member for Barkly. It is courageous, because he is not afraid to tackle the deep-seated issues that affect the most impoverished people in the Northern Territory community: those who live in our remote regions and who are mostly Aboriginal Territorians. I have to stop here and just reflect on where we are in the history of the Northern Territory; to think that I can stand here, as indeed the previous speaker, the member for Macdonnell did, as one of six Aboriginal members in this parliament. I stand here to speak about one of the largest reforms in the history of the Northern Territory in regard to our remote regions, headed by the Local Government minister, who is also Aboriginal.
I would like to ask all members to have a good think about this particular statement before the House. Yes, there is a lot of anxiety, as the minister has said - anxiousness that comes with change, and not wanting to move from your comfort zone. I say to the minister that you are on the right path, that your care and concern for people of the Northern Territory is quite evident in the way you have gone about trying to establish the advisory board, and selecting the best person to head that advisory board.
I acknowledge, in particular, Pat Dodson, who is heading our advisory board. Let me just remind the House and give some background to Pat Dodson. Most people would be very well aware of Pat Dodson, but I would like to share something that I have not even told Pat Dodson, and that is perhaps the first time I met Pat. I was only a student at a boarding school in Alice Springs and I might have been in the third or fourth grade. I remember Pat working there and, at that time in his life, he was a Catholic priest at Our Lady of the Sacred Heart School. For someone as young as me, who had come from about 800 km away to go to boarding school there, to find a familiar and friendly face in this leader of the Aboriginal community, at that time; he provided a great insight and example to young Aboriginal people growing up in Alice Springs. They are the personal memories that I have of Pat Dodson as I was growing up in Alice Springs. To know that he could listen to our concerns as young people growing up and to know that he would be fair and just in whatever decisions he made in life.
This was clearly evident as he went along in his own life after leaving Alice Springs and moving into roles such as the Commissioner of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody. In 1989, I had the opportunity of running into him when I had started as a journalist with the ABC to cover the Aboriginal Deaths in Custody inquiry in the Northern Territory. I observed, at that particular time, Pat Dodson’s role in the wider community, adding to the respect and integrity that he had already gained in the indigenous community.
In 1991, he was appointed Chairman of the Reconciliation Council and I recall this event as a journalist with the ABC. He headed the Reconciliation Council at a time when white Australia and, indeed, all Australians, were dealing and struggling with the issue of the Mabo decision. All of a sudden, the legal system of this country had to recognise that Aboriginal people were here, that terra nullius did not exist in the legal term of the Westminster system. Pat Dodson had to carry through at that particular time the racism, bias and deep-seated prejudices in this country. I recall his disappointment and his own struggles in trying to walk a fair and just line between white and black Australia until he ended up retiring in 1997 from the Reconciliation Council, saying at the time that he ‘feared for the spirit of this country; this country we all love and know as Australia’.
To have him heading this advisory board, knowing that he will care and look out for the most impoverished people in the Northern Territory community, who happen to be Aboriginal, should be a fact that this House puts on notice with great encouragement and a huge welcome. We know that he will care for the people of the Northern Territory, for all people, and we also know that he will be fair and just in his deliberations and in his message. He will have plenty of messages to give to the Minister for Local Government as he observes what the staff of the Local Government department are doing as they travel around the Northern Territory over the next 18 months.
I would like to highlight that it is not the first time a minister of the Martin Labor government has stood in this House and spoken with great passion about the need to pave a far more effective future for people in our remote regions. I recall, with a great sense of pride, my predecessor, the former member for Arnhem, John Ah Kit, speaking about the need for Aboriginal Territorians to be a part of positive change for the future benefit of generations of Territorians to come. I quote a couple of paragraphs from minister Ah Kit’s statement to this House on 7 March 2002:
- If we do not turn things around for our indigenous citizens we risk the creation of a permanent underclass for which future generations, both indigenous and non-indigenous, will pay potentially overwhelming economic, social and political costs.
Secondly, we must act on the basis of the principles of social justice to which the Martin Labor government has committed itself and on which we will be judged. The objectives of that social justice policy include:
- equity in which all citizens of the Northern Territory receive a fair distribution of economic resources and power;
- equality of rights in which equal, effective and comprehensive rights are available to all our people;
- access to essential services in which there is fair access to employment, education, training, transport, health care, housing and child care;
- access to information so as to protect privacy as well as ensure freedom of information; and
- the rights to full participation in social and community decision-making which affect our citizens.
- … what this means for indigenous people of the Northern Territory is that policy will be, for the first time in our history, informed by principles of inclusion rather than the past policies that have contributed to exclusion and inequality. Social justice for the Martin government is not an empty phrase, but a major cornerstone of our approach to good government.
There you have it: good government, the cornerstone of our approach - equity, fairness, social justice, economic prosperity, the rights of every citizen of the Northern Territory. Here we have a minister, the member for Barkly, pursuing the cause that began when this government came to power. I know this for a fact because I have grown up in the Northern Territory. I am one of those people who grew up in the remote regions, who knows what it is like to feel disempowered in decision-making, who watched as my uncles and grandfathers had their rights stripped away from them in standing up in the local council in Borroloola, at that particular time in 1985. The council was dismissed, and I watched the sense of great disempowerment, wondering why people did not feel as though they were in charge of their own future. It is that thought that stays in my mind when I think of these reforms that we are looking at and the shire councils.
The minister has said in his statement that there are concerns, there are fears. People feel anxious about change. Yes, they have every right to. Let us not think that our fears and anxieties should overwhelm us in such a way that we not be courageous in pursuing what we can see will be a much better and improved future for all people here. It needs to be shaped, guided and directed, and we are going to do it under Pat Dodson. We are going to do it under Elliot McAdam, as the Local Government Minister. We are going to do it under Clare Martin, Chief Minister of the Northern Territory. We are going to do it with the goodwill of this parliament which, for once, will recognise that it is time - beyond time - that every single politician in this Assembly realises the urgency and the need to help the most impoverished people in the Northern Territory.
The minister is right when he asks: ‘Why should Territorians in remote areas not enjoy the same functionality and sustainability as local government enjoyed in other parts of regional Australia?’ It is a question that we in this House should all be asking, and that we should now get behind the Local Government Minister in answering. It is an absolute disgrace that, of the 56 remote councils assessed by our government, 50% of these councils are classified as either dysfunctional or high risk – 50%, right across the Northern Territory. Only half of our councils are working. What does it say then for those people who are living in those communities wanting a better life for their children, for their brother or sister to be able to go to school, to get an education, to work in the local council? What does it say for them? No sense of empowerment for their future, being able to speak about the things that they want.
The member for Greatorex taunts this government and asks: ‘Why, in the five years since my predecessor’s speech to this parliament, are there so many dysfunctional councils?’ Let me remind the member for Greatorex that we are all responsible, collectively, for ensuring an equitable and just future for all people of the Northern Territory. It is all very well to scoff and laugh at our government’s determined focus on improving the lives of the first Australians in our remote regions and, indeed, all who live there. I have to say to the member for Greatorex: you and your predecessors are not without blame. I do not want to go there, because that is going down a path that we do not want to go. There is no point blaming. There is no point looking at: ‘Oh, it is your fault. You did not do that, or while you were in government, you should have done this’. There is no point.
The people out there, the ones who matter, are sick and tired of hearing that. They want to hear and see action. They want to know that we mean what we say. Every time I go to Ngukurr, people ask me: ‘Barb, what is happening with the bridge? What is happening with our council? What is happening with the jobs? What about CDEP?’ When I go to Ramingining, the council wants to know what is happening to its building. They worry that the building is not good enough. They want to know what is happening to the services. They want to know what is happening to housing. They want to know what is happening for the women. These are the issues that are of deep concern to people in our remote areas. Sitting in here and blaming one another is not going to go anywhere.
It is about three years now, maybe four - I do not know, maybe someone can correct me - since the Howard government abolished ATSIC. I have mentioned this a few times in this parliament. I have to sincerely say that it has been since the abolition of ATSIC that we have seen a greater demise of a sense of empowerment, and a greater rise of absolute despair and hopelessness in our regions. For all its faults - and ATSIC had plenty of faults - at a national level, ATSIC was one of the strongest voices we had for grassroots people. ATSIC worked at a local level; it worked because people felt they had a voice straight to the halls of Canberra. It worked because people felt that their requests for funding and housing were being answered. With the abolition of ATSIC, there has been a huge vacuum - a vacuum so large it has lulled our communities into an even deeper sense of helplessness over their inability to govern their own affairs and future. That is a terrible feeling.
I say to the people of Alice Springs, Darwin and Katherine: you have a local council, but what if you did not have anything there? What if, all of a sudden, there was nothing there, and somewhere else was making a decision for you and, culturally, it was different because English is not your first language? Maybe English is your third language and, all of a sudden, the world is really strange. That is what it is like for many of my constituents in Arnhem. I have to learn Yolngu Matha so I can dialogue strongly with my constituents. Why cannot people in local government, in other government services, do the same? Why cannot members of this House choose to speak in Aboriginal language?
One of the greatest things we have to look at within this reform is the issue of information, and information flow. I have spoken about the anxiety which we all know and understand is felt but, in order to shape this reform agenda, which I know we will do well, we must include information through our Aboriginal Interpreter Service. We must include all those Aboriginal people who speak English as a third or fourth language. We have well over 108 languages in the Northern Territory. There are members, my colleagues, who know which are the most predominant languages spoken in respective areas. I encourage the minister and our government to ensure that within this 18-month process, this information flow occurs through the interpreter service; that we get on board the Aboriginal Interpreter Service and provide funding and support for them to be very much part of this. This is about their future, as well as all of ours.
This reform agenda under the Martin government, under the carriage of the member of the Barkly and his department of Local Government, is the largest reform agenda for local government in the history of the Territory. Let me reiterate that: it is a huge reform agenda. Speakers will probably say: ‘Remember this and remember that’, but let me tell you that as an Aboriginal woman standing in this House, it is one of the biggest reforms to occur for Aboriginal people across the Northern Territory. Now Aboriginal people have a chance to have their voices heard through the advisory board, and an opportunity to speak. In the words of the Minister for Local Government, failure to grab hold of this opportunity will mean more of the same - more crises and more dysfunctional councils, which will perpetuate this disadvantage for another generation in remote indigenous communities.
It is human nature to be apprehensive when faced with change. However, let me say that there are many who are anxious and, yes, we have to get it right. The land councils are correct in their cautiousness, and the Cattlemen’s Association is also fine in its reluctance to embrace this completely …
Mr KNIGHT: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be granted an extension of time, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Ms McCARTHY: Thank you, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker. The land councils are correct in their cautiousness and the Cattlemen’s Association is also fine in its reluctance to warmly embrace this. I am confident that we can talk a lot with the Cattlemen’s Association because we know that roads is one of the biggest issues that we have; a united issue and one which all people in our remote regions have concerns about. Without good roads, without access, without the bridges that we need, we cannot get the houses in there. We cannot get the people in to live there, to work with people, to train people. We cannot have the services that we need.
I say to the Cattlemen’s Association and to the Northern Land Council and to the Central Land Council: come on board with this; let us talk about this. We have the right person, Pat Dodson, to do this. We have all the members of parliament who know their areas and who can speak strongly on the issues of concern. We can shape this to be a great future for all people of the Northern Territory.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend the statement to the House.
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I support the minister’s statement on the Martin government’s Local Government Reform. I state from the outset that this reform is unprecedented in the Northern Territory. I know there have been several goes at tinkering with the system; it has never been as radically or fundamentally reformed as is being proposed. Previous lesser attempts have failed. I remember in 1999 when the CLP government and the Local Government minister at the time, Tim Baldwin, trotted out the local government reform. I take the comments from the member for Arnhem about not harking back to the past, but you have to learn the lessons of the past. That reform was called The Next Step, and the only step it took was a backward step - and a hasty one at that. The CLP blinked at the reforms; there was criticism and they blinked; they went backwards. That was seven or eight years ago and we are paying for it now. They dumped it, and the irony of all of this was that the CLP government had the ludicrous situation of establishing 63 non-contiguous councils as small as 100 persons.
I will just reflect for a minute on my first own awareness of the community government council schemes. I am getting back to how they were established. I was in Tennant Creek at the time. A family member of my partner had a small outstation just north of Tennant Creek, some 70 km away. It was 1994 and I vividly remember the conversation with Marlene Bennett, my partner’s aunty. She was going to apply for Blue Bush, the outstation, to become a community government council. All you needed was 20 people to show an interest and you had one. You had valuable local government money and you had a local government council with 20 people. This is the origins of local government establishment in the Territory that has us to this situation here. It lacked vision. It disregarded the significance and importance of local government in the Territory and it has produced the results that it has nowadays.
I take the comments from the member for Greatorex about that it has only happened in the last five years. Well, that is a load of rubbish. I have been around long enough, and certainly think many of other members have been as well, and it was not a pretty scene prior to 2001.
Why would this government not only reform local government in an even greater way? The minister alluded to it in his statement. Local government and general services out bush and in the region is under the pump. The demise of ATSIC, as the member for Arnhem alluded to, and its failed replacement has been the Shergolds vision of the ICCs, the indigenous coordination centres. This reform of ATSIC was probably the greatest act of bastardry of indigenous service delivery ever seen. The member for Greatorex referred to population drift. That is relevant to the demise of ATSIC and why people are moving back into town: they are not getting the services, they are not getting the support that ATSIC and ATSIS provided.
Major problems require major change and we cannot wait for things to get better or the Commonwealth government to finally wake up to the fact that they have set back the bush for decades. Recently in the VRD region, of the five local government bodies in the area, none had a permanent CEO. I spent five years as the Manager of the Ngaliwurru-Wuli Resource Centre in Timber Creek. I was the longest serving manager they ever had. I outlasted every resource centre and local government council manager in the Katherine region by maybe two. I saw councillors, both good and bad people, come into organisations. It would take them a year to just figure things out and another year to make plans for the organisation, and then they would leave. The organisation would have to start all over again with recruitment and training somebody in the position.
We need consistency, we need a regional perspective, and we need in-house, ongoing support for these local communities to build the services and infrastructure in their area. We cannot do this with the current model. So, what does all this chopping and changing mean to the local resident? It means that there are fits and starts in service delivery and we have seen that all over the Territory.
I have been very vocal and proactive in this reform because I want the best possible outcome for my region. I want the knowledge of how these regions work and the pitfalls in governance and service delivery to be heard and understood by the minister and the department so that the best decisions are made and the best is achieved. I know that this is what the minister is fundamentally focused on, and I thank him for his openness and making himself available for anyone who would like to talk to him about this. Anyone who knows the minister will know that over the last few weeks since the announcement, no one has been refused an audience. In the coming weeks, the minister has made himself available to constituents in my electorate to meet with him about these reforms.
I speak with a degree of knowledge about local government reform. I was in a community organisation when the CLP’s Next Step was around. I worked as a Community Development Officer with the Department of Community Development, Sport and Cultural Affairs in the Katherine Local Government office. I have been to most of the communities in the Katherine and Tennant Creek regions. I have also experienced the highs and lows of local government organisations. These reforms will impact significantly on my electorate and they will challenge all of us to come up with the answers to make it actually work.
Within the Daly electorate, I have the VRD Daly and the Top End Litchfield shires. The preliminary indicative boundaries of the VRD Daly Shire will extend from Port Keats in the northwest to Pine Creek in the north-east and then down around Katherine to Dunmarra, then heading south-west to Daguragu, Kalkarindji and across to the Western Australia border. The Top End Litchfield Shire will include the current Litchfield Shire, the Coomalie Shire, the Douglas Daly region and the Dundee Bynoe area and the entire Cox Peninsula. Within the VRD Daly Shire, you currently have 14 government service delivery organisations. In the Litchfield Shire, you have four organisations.
Developing a governance and service delivery model for such a vast and diverse area will provide a challenge for the shire transitional committees, but I believe it can be achieved. The minister has talked about a regional council model. Those who remember these structures from the ATSIC days will realise that local autonomy and advancement can be achieved. Having a wider regional structure supporting you will also have untold benefits over time.
The announcements of the minister in relation to this matter provided a number of tools which are available to the shire transitional committees to use in the development of the shires. These tools include use of wards, local community plans, community priority lists, ward budgets, ward representations, strategic resource sharing arrangements and ward delegations. Thus, we can see what may be possible in the aforementioned shires. For the Daly VRD shire, you can see the Wadeye, Palumpa, Peppimenarti and Daly areas having wards. These wards could set their own priorities in their own ward community plans. These plans would, obviously, be costed and form the basis for the overall shire budget and business plan.
Ward management plans could be given delegations around roads, maintenance, parks and gardens, CDEP, housing, etcetera. They will be given the autonomy to provide core services in the best localised way, and also be given the regional support of continuity and professional advice to the shire. In the Litchfield Top End shire, you could imagine a situation of perhaps the current Litchfield area not changing; the Dundee and Bynoe area having their own ward; and a couple of wards up in the Cox Peninsula area. They would establish their own priorities for service delivery. They would establish their own community plans. They could get delegations from the shire, maintain their own expenditure, and have their own representation. So, it is very achievable, and those matters that are important to the people can be achieved in development of those shires.
The measure for government would be the effectiveness of service delivery within the local community plans. It would form the basis of local resident analysis of what they actually get from the shire. It would form the key agenda items at community management boards and shire meetings and the focus of the elected members from the various wards. The member for the Greatorex asked: ‘What are these people going to do?’ Well, they are going to work to their community plans; get back to basics. The residents of a ward area set the services that they want, and those boards within those wards work to those, and the elected member on the shire work to those. It is quite fundamental that things can work with what is there.
The people of the Port Keats region in the development of Thamarrurr Regional Council, a task by which 20 different clan groups came together, talked about two main things: autonomy and alliance. They wanted autonomy within the local area, and alliance throughout the region on common issues and aspirations. These two words have resonance with the other smaller councils which will, no doubt, be part of a larger shire. The common threads with these councils have been those two things: autonomy and alliance. Those traits need to be incorporated into any future shire structure. If we do this, we will make them stronger, more effective, and much more viable as an ongoing service delivery and advocacy body.
How are these reforms being progressed? We have heard from the minister today about the people and bodies which will progress these issues. The minister has appointed Mr Patrick Dodson as the Chair of the Local Government Advisory Board. This is an extremely prudent and positive move, and I support the comments of the member for Arnhem about Mr Patrick Dodson. His relevance to my area of the electorate is that he worked as a parish priest at Wadeye in the late 1970s. It is worthy to note that Pat was the first ever Aboriginal ordained Catholic priest in the country. He also had a bit of experience around Katherine, droving cattle into Katherine from outlying areas.
Mr Wood: He does not have any local government experience.
Mr KNIGHT: I will pick up the member for Nelson saying ‘he does not have any local government experience’.
Mr Wood: It will not help him with local government, being a priest.
Mr KNIGHT: It will, because it is about people; it is about their aspirations. Knowing those people and what their aspirations are, how they live their lives, what services they want, is important. If you get somebody in there who has a wealth of local government experience and no experience in the Territory lifestyle, they will fail because you have to understand the people who are out there. That is the most important thing – and it will teach you to interject, because I will pick it up every time.
Members interjecting.
Mr KNIGHT: I can always get an extension. Pat is a worthy choice, and I am sure that he will work with the rest of the advisory board in achieving that.
It is worthy to mention some of those people who are on the core advisory board. Ray Wooldridge - I will mention Ray later - and Brian Stacey, so we have the Commonwealth government there with probably the most senior person in the Northern Territory; Tony Tapsell is the CEO of LGANT; Chris Young from the Chamber of Commerce; Stuart Kenny from the Cattlemen’s Association; Mike Burgess from the Department of Local Government, Housing and Sport; Dennis Bree from the Department of the Chief Minister; and the Northern and Central Land Councils. There is a wealth of experience that is incorporated in there.
Other key people on the advisory committee include Ray Wooldridge whom I mentioned before - I guess this is relevant to my electorate –Veronica Birrell, John Berto and Maurie Ryan. These people are significant to me because they are on the advisory board and are from within my electorate. Ray is someone who most anybody who has been involved in local government will know. He works and lives in Pine Creek and comes from a business background. He knows local government back to front and is a fierce advocate for it. He shares the minister’s vision for fully incorporated and larger councils in the Territory. He could see what the problems are and knows that this move is vital for the sustainability of local government in the Territory.
Veronica Birrell is now based at Kybrook Farm in Pine Creek. She was the chairperson of the Nyirranggulung-Mardrulk-Ngadberre Regional Council, which is to the east of Katherine. Nyirranggulung, along with the formation of Thamarrurr and Tiwi, started off the first round of amalgamations, so Veronica knows the pitfalls. She has the lessons and can bring that learnt experience into the development of the other shires.
Maurie Ryan Japarta is the President of the Daguragu Community Government Council. I support the comments of the member for Stuart, because Maurie is a very strong, vocal advocate for his people and for the region.
John Berto is currently the CEO of the Thamarrurr Regional Council. He came to Port Keats from the NLC, where he was second-in-charge. John is a very capable person and brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to his role on the board.
The Local Government Advisory Board has now established terms of reference. I would like to refer to them so that people can see what they will be looking at and the responsibilities they are charged with. The advisory board will be looking at three main areas.
The first is: Responsibility One - Provide advice on Local Government Regional Management Plans. Within that area, they will be looking at service delivery, administration, development and planning. Within the service delivery area, they will be looking at the core local government services that must be delivered by councils; the methodology for determining the level and standard of core local government services delivered to different communities within the shire; and the methodology of determining the viability of delivering non-core services within the shire.
Within the administration: arrangements for regional sharing between municipals and shires and, where relevant, special purpose towns; and other administrative arrangements, such as the location of regional and sub-regional headquarters.
The development area, obviously, covers areas of economic development, town planning, regional partnerships …
Mr Wood: Town planning? The minister said we do not have town planning.
Mr KNIGHT: That was not being referred to. In the other planning area, they will be looking at strategic plans; business plans, in the operational, finance and service delivery area; transition plans; and governance and representation plans. They will have their work cut out for them.
There are a number of public forums which have been organised, and I put my bid in for a bit more and I am happy to take that on. I know that within the Port Keats/Daly area the key players want to work with the government on getting more information. They know how deep information needs to be put into the region and whether it is down to the family or clan groups, and the best way to do it.
I mentioned core services, and this has been a problem …
Mr NATT: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be granted an extension of time to complete his speech, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr KNIGHT: You have heard the minister talk about core services and that is what we have to get back to. I refer to Wadeye. When John Berto went there, he went back to basics. He said: ‘Clean the streets up, mow the parklands’, and do those things. And the town is looking better, and the townspeople are feeling better. Things are getting delivered. There has been a lot of work done on cost shifting within local government and these shires have to do what they are paid to do; not do the things they are not paid to do, and question what they take on.
Core services are high on the agenda and I support the minister in that. I also want to comment that those core services are going to be worked out by the advisory board, I understand, at a workshop in Katherine. I mentioned core services, and the member for Macdonnell made some comment about it, and it is true. You get asked to provide Centrelink services out there. Some places are only getting paid for 10 hours a week and you have hundreds of people on Centrelink payments. We had the ridiculous situation at Port Keats, a community of 2500 people, and Centrelink was represented with a little hole-in-the-wall phone which was shut much of the time. Therefore, the responsibility of various government agencies to provide those services there was put under the spotlight.
Also, many programs such as the CDEP program, if and when that gets incorporated in the shire, need to be looked at. With the formula for CDEP, you get a certain amount to run operational areas, but it is the same figure if you run it at Katherine or at Lajamanu. Obviously, the cost of providing a similar level of service in those two areas is vastly different. These shires will need to push back to their agencies about what they take on.
One of the areas mentioned was governance training. I know the minister knows this is a hugely important thing which needs to be recognised. One of the most successful governance training programs was called the RAMP program, Remote Area Management Program, which was run in the VRD area in about 1997-98. It was highly successful and the outcomes of that training still exist today. It was a sad time when the CLP canned it. It was a trial and had huge successes, but they canned it. It makes you wonder about the seriousness in which the CLP regarded local government councils at the time ...
Mrs Miller: You cannot help it can you? No.
Mr KNIGHT: I cannot, because it is true. Rates are obviously a huge subject and they will be worked through and developed appropriately by the transitional committees. The pastoral industry is nervous about it, but it is prudent to remember what has been the situation in the Northern Territory and other states. I am just providing a bit of information about what the situation is in the Territory, and I refer to the Parliamentary Record of 1991. The Hon Max Ortmann - a blast from the past - was the Lands and Housing minister, and he was talking about upping the lease arrangements for pastoral properties. He referred to leasing rates and he said:
- They range from as low as $86 per annum for Larrakeyah Station, which is 227 km to $20 715 per annum for Brunette Downs Station which is 12 254 km.
- It is more useful to compare some Territory properties with their immediate neighbours in the adjoining state. For example, Lake Nash Station is located on the Northern Territory and Queensland border. It has an area of 8487 km and a carrying capacity of 30 500 beasts. The pastoral rent is $7918 and shire rates are nil. The total rent payable is $7918. In Queensland, Headingly Station has an area of 5959 km and a carrying capacity of 29 700 beasts. The pastoral rent is $19 600 and the shire rates are $55 314, making a total of $74 914. Mr Speaker, you will observe that there are no shire rates in the Northern Territory. In the example I have just given, the Territory lessee pays $66 996 less in charges than his comparable Queensland neighbour. To put it another way, the Territory station pays just over 10% of the charges that the adjoining Queensland station has to meet.
Another example is on the Northern Territory and Western Australian border. Legune Station in the Northern Territory has an area of 3084 km with a carrying capacity of 16 000 beasts. Pastoral rent is $4166, council rates and vermin rates are nil, making a total of $4166. Carlton Hill Station in Western Australia is 3812 km with a carrying capacity of 22 195 beasts. Its pastoral rent is $7208, council rates are $5459 and the vermin rate is $3462, making a total of $16 129.
That just provides a bit of information about the global picture for pastoral rates and pastoral leases across Australia. Any form of revenue raising in the pastoral area can be accommodated.
I referred to the vermin rates, which is a scheme under the Agricultural and Related Resources Protection Act 1976 of Western Australia. The agricultural rate is imposed and that contribution by the pastoralists is matched $1-for-$1 by the state government. That money is used to control declared pests, declared plants and animals on and relating to pastoral leases. We have issues with weeds and feral animals and that is one way that money raised from pastoral properties can be used in supporting the stations themselves. I am certainly not prescribing any of these rates, but it is a reminder that the NT is abnormal in this area.
The member for Nelson, I will bet $1m, will talk about rates within the Litchfield Shire. That arrangement is up to the shire to develop but, being a ratepayer in Litchfield shire, I believe …
Members interjecting.
Mr KNIGHT: It does not matter. I have not paid it yet. The shire is comfortable with the level of rate it is paying. I believe the people of Dundee and Bynoe are looking forward to being part of local government, because they need some authority down there. Again, if they saw that any money they contributed went back into roads and rubbish collection, that would be something they would see as being tangible and beneficial to themselves as individuals. I do not believe that anything to do with rates cannot be worked out and be mutually beneficial for both the people and to the shire.
The lead-up, and the eventual announcement, has been an anxious time for many people in the region. People are very aware of the structural problems with local government …
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Daly, I will just remind you, even though I did give you permission to complete your speech on unlimited time, you have been extended for another 10 minutes. I ask you as a courtesy to think about wrapping things up, please.
Mr KNIGHT: I thought you gave me an extension of time to finish my comments.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: I have given you an unlimited extension, but would you please start to wrap things up.
Mr KNIGHT: All right, thank you. Something bold had to be done in regards to local government. It has been a very trying time for me personally, having been heavily involved in local government. I, like many others, really want to get it right. We do thirst for more information and we eagerly await that information. However, as most of us have become aware, some of the details are not there. They are not there because it is up to the people in those communities, in those regions, to work it out for themselves. The minister has quite literally put the boundaries in. The people who truly know what and how to deliver services in the region - namely, the ones who live there - will decide how the services and representations should be worked out for their own area.
There are matters which are evolving; namely, what is the Commonwealth doing? The minister is working through those developments as information and decisions by others are made. So on this policy, and matters yet to be decided, we must trust the minister to do the right thing. If any other politician, other than Hon Elliot McAdam, was to ask that of any person in the country, they will be told to go jump. However, this minister is like no other minister. I do not know any person who would challenge his honesty and integrity. No one in this House would believe that he is not working for the people of the Northern Territory, in the way that he believes and knows from his years of experience in the Territory, is truly best. That is my personal reassurance when I get a little nervous and want to know what cannot be known at that point. At the helm, we have Elliot McAdam, steering and guiding this battered and damaged local government ship through the treacherous waters of change into a safe and peaceful harbour.
So, Captain McAdam, I trust you and I look forward to an exciting, difficult, scary, but ultimately successful journey.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I will just put my life jacket on - I might need it. There are so many things to say about these changes there is, obviously, not going to be enough time. Hopefully, we will have another chance to comment as the year goes on. I would like to say one thing that I have not written down. Many people talk about councils being dysfunctional, and there has been a lot of knocking, as you say, of councils in previous times or under previous administrations. I would like to put a nice spin on the council.
My first job was with Nguiu Shire Council in 1974 - two months before Cyclone Tracy. We had two non-indigenous people, the town clerk and me. I was the works supervisor. My background was horticulture and his background was administration. We employed about 107 Tiwis. We were given a budget and we stretched that as far as we could. We had people working on graders, bulldozers, backhoes, front-end loaders, lawn mowers, labourers, chainsaw cutters - you name it. We had a nursery and we looked after the airstrip. We did all those sorts of things. We were not dysfunctional. At that time, Nguiu would have had a population of around about 1000 people. We operated a good council. That is not because I was on it. I am just saying that that is what we were able to achieve. It is a great shame for me to hear all these stories about dysfunctional councils because I know that the council I worked for was a good council that employed people. There are lots of other reasons - which I might get into later - why councils became dysfunctional. It is not quite as simple as it is sometimes made out. I will get back into my prepared speech.
There is no doubt that when it comes to local government neither the previous government nor this government can really hold its head up high. Local government has rarely had anyone in this parliament who cared or actually understood local government. Why? Because NT governments are the boss of local government and, under the Local Government Act, they can do what they please. I remember Yulara only too well. The ruthless dismantling of a local government was, and still is to my mind, a disgrace. A secret deal between a company and the government of the day meant the local government was dissolved - no consultation; just a letter handed to the president and the CEO as they were leaving to go to the Tidy Town Awards night. I can still remember that night.
It was the CLP that set up the Tiwi Island local government that was, and still is, not a properly democratic elected council as other councils are throughout Australia. I recall at a local government meeting in Alice Springs, where the Milikapiti representative, Guy Gibson, said that they did not want to belong to a bigger council. However, just before the upcoming NT election, Milikapiti suddenly changed its mind.
Let us not only put the boot into the CLP government; let us look at the ALP. It continued propping up the Tiwi Island local government. According to the figures in the documents that have been going out with this new process, the Tiwi Island Local Government Council, with a population of about 2500 people, received $23.3m in 2004-05 in local government income. Litchfield Shire, with a population of 17 000, received $7.3m. I know that Tiwi Island local government was involved with housing, which it should never have been - and I still think that is not a core function of council - but that is still a lot of money. I am interested to know where all that money went, as well as the years before that. The government has not been open about the amount of money poured into this council, either by the NT or federal. I asked the question in parliament sometime back, and the government said: ‘Go and ask the council’.
This government was also quick at sacking councils; you just have to remember Jabiru. It has sacked other councils, and there may have been very good reasons for it. However, what I am saying is that, in the end, local government is run by the Territory government.
I sometimes laugh when we always complain about Canberra overriding the Territory. I know that the Territory certainly overrides local government. In fact, in the case when it sacked Yulara, the Territory government, at that stage, was running a campaign about Canberra interference. As a local government person I felt that this was a hypocritical approach.
Minister, your statement begins with the statement that 50% of councils are, basically, dysfunctional. Minister Ah Kit, in his well-publicised statement on 7 March 2002, said something similar:
- The simple fact is that it is almost impossible to find a functional Aboriginal community anywhere in the Northern Territory.
In today’s statement, the minister has used the dysfunctional council argument as one of the bases for developing his new council scheme, and this seems to be a fate accompli. Isn’t it time the government and its department took some of the blame? Where were the field officers during this time who were checking the audits? What was the government trying to do to fix this problem? This government has been in power for six years. Four years ago, the minister said many councils were dysfunctional. What did the government do? It brought out the Building Stronger Regions, Stronger Futures strategy – something that has not been mentioned at all today. This was the answer to dysfunctional councils. Where is that document today; lost in the memoirs of Mr Jack Ah Kit?
That document was the beginning of great plans for our Territory. One of its key planks was in the negotiation of governance arrangements which support regional and economic development. The government put forward the idea of 21 regional authorities which were, in fact, local government under another name. The big question is: what happened to this strategy? How far was this strategy advanced? Who decided to scrap it or severely modify it? How much money was spent on this strategy? Yes, the debate is about a new process, but how can one have faith in a new plan if we do not know what happened to the last one?
When the minister said in his answer to my question last week in parliament that the government had to bite the bullet, surely that was not because of local government? Surely it was because government did not or could not introduce its Building Stronger Regions, Stronger Futures strategy. To bite the bullet, it may want to do, but local government is the servant of the Territory government and it has taken over six years to do something. That is not the fault of the councils; it is the fault of the government. To avoid proper processes because government could not get its act together is not a proper excuse regarding consultation.
Interesting differences show up between the approach the government had in 2003 and the statement introduced by the minister today. Again, minister Ah Kit was keen to point out this when he said: ‘We are now inventing a new tier of government, but we are creating the capacity for councils to voluntarily come together for improved service delivery’. He also says further on: ‘The establishment of such potentially powerful organisations will be the subject of long and detailed negotiations’. This is four years ago. The minister was saying we will negotiate. The difference today is, we will do it. This is in stark contrast to what the government has done. It has said there will be nine shires and four municipalities - no ifs, no buts. Remember, the reform process has not been the fault of the councils; government is the boss. The reform process has been dragged around by the department until it eventually confused itself and died.
The simple reform proposal had been around for a long time, but the lack of clear and concise understanding of local government has made the whole process of reform, so far, a disaster. I believe councils were dysfunctional partly because the department, over the years, has been dysfunctional. As well as that, I do not think the councils had the backing and support they needed. I remember standing here and asking why operational funding was being reduced. I had a letter from, I think, Cox Peninsula Council, showing me how their funding had gone down, and they needed that funding for some of their basic services. I do not want to hear this argument that it is all about the councils not operating properly. Well, they might not have been able to operate properly because I do not think that they necessarily got the support they needed from the department. If the council was falling apart, then the department should have been in there and said: ‘Whoa’. I heard recently - and it may not be the right example - Angurugu Council went out the door for about $900 000. One would have to ask, how can a council go out the door for that amount? Wasn’t anyone doing any checks and balances before the council went out the door?
Even LGANT said on 8 December 2006 that the delegates expressed concern that the contract between the government and LGANT in relation to consultation had been broken, and that the association had had no direct input into the actual plans which are before Cabinet. So, Cabinet approved plans that had not been given a chance to have been looked at by LGANT. Yes, LGANT does welcome the statement, minister; I realise that, but the process that went before that certainly was not inclusive.
Minister, the reality is that, while I support the concept of amalgamation, I do not support the lack of community and council input into both the numbers of councils and the boundaries. Your statement today claims that there had been extensive consultation with LGANT and experience with other regionalisation discussions. Those regionalisation discussions were mainly ideas thought out in-house. As for the consultation with LGANT, I have problems with why Tennant Creek and Litchfield Shire did not know they were going to be dissolved. In other words, you are saying the number and size of the councils has been decided. One can only presume that from the timetable you have put out – that is that little timetable that I showed you the other day, for community consultations about the boundaries between 30 January and 30 March – basically, that consultation will be tokenistic because, when you read the statement, minister, you are basically saying that, except for some minor tinkering, that is it.
It is a little sad because in many things the government has consulted with people – and on other things it says we have to bite the bullet. If you had told local government some years ago that you were asking them to volunteer to amalgamate councils, and the councils were slow and dragging their feet, what you say is dead right. I would step in and say: ‘Whoa, we will do it!’
The previous minister said this will be a long process of consultation. What happened? Why have we reached the stage where you have had to bite the bullet? Surely, it was not necessarily the councils’ fault. I believe it was the government’s fault.
Minister, one of the problems in this debate is that you have left four municipalities out of the reform agenda – the big ones: Darwin, Alice Springs, Katherine and Palmerston. They are not going to care too much about little old Litchfield and Tennant Creek, along with all the other councils that have little chance of getting a hearing in this Labor-dominated parliament because all the proposed shires have Labor members of parliament, except for one seat: Nelson.
I feel it is imperative, more than ever, to scrutinise what you and the department behind you are doing to local government. There are many matters that concern me. As I have already outlined, what happened to the Building Stronger Regions, Stronger Futures strategy? Why was there no real consultation with the community over the numbers and boundaries of councils? To highlight that even more, one has to ask: why was not amalgamation of Darwin and Palmerston on the cards? Here is a classic example of reducing the duplication of administration and bringing savings to ratepayers, but there must have been too many seats held by Labor for any consideration of that to happen.
On top of that, not to put the East Darwin Port region into local government, which could easily have been done if a Palmerston-Darwin amalgamation had occurred, is simply a disgrace. To say that this area is too strategically important to be brought under local government is a cop-out. You are not the only minister to say that, but it is not the way to go. One of the most important areas in Darwin is not to be scrutinised by local government or a proper Development Consent Authority but, instead, by a bunch of non-elected public service heads and a delegate of the Planning minister. I do not believe that is good governance.
Minister, there are many more questions. In the case of Litchfield and Tennant Creek, surely you are misleading the ratepayers of both municipalities by saying that Litchfield will be non-viable into the future and Tennant Creek is not viable, therefore, they should be dissolved. Remember you or your department did not tell these councils even by letter that they were to be dissolved, and that is pretty unfair.
These councils are democratically elected. Both are not dysfunctional – far from it – and both, I understand, are willing to be part of the amalgamation process. Surely, to treat them this way just highlights what I said earlier about the way government deals with local government: big brother, not equal partner. Many people in Litchfield would like to see the small print before they will support these changes. For instance, will the rates go up because of the changes? Will the government be putting in a substantial financial establishment package so that councils are not burdened with infrastructure that is not up to a reasonable standard?
The classic example must be in the Dundee area, one of the worst planned areas in the Territory. I have no shame in saying that I blame the CLP government for that. This is an area where there was very little public infrastructure, such as tips and reserves, and only very basic road infrastructure in place. Who will pay to bring that area up to a reasonable standard? I do not believe existing council ratepayers will be part of that.
You say that more funding will be available to shires because of their greater capacity to access funding through NT and the Australian government programs. Will this mean that Litchfield will receive less money? The pie will be the same, but councils with little revenue-raising prospects will receive more money. Will this also apply to road funding?
That is an important issue. My understanding is that we receive money from the federal government based on population. Some of that money goes to services and some goes to roads. Roads are based on length and type of road. Is the pie going to be the same and councils like Litchfield - who you might say do fairly well out of road funding - suffer a reduction in road funding because the new councils, having more unincorporated roads in their area, will receive money to help with the maintenance of those roads? Are the people of Litchfield going to suffer a reduction in their funding because of the new process? Other councils may get an increase, and I have heard members saying that will be good, but the reality is that I live in a council of 17 000 people and, when it is bigger, it will probably be over 20 000. I am sure people want to know if they will have the same amount of Commonwealth funding for the roads.
What type of rates will there be? Is the government going to say that councils must use unimproved capital value and not flat rates? That would be extremely unpopular in many parts of Litchfield shire. If people were cranky about the rates going up $100 because of the government requiring Litchfield shire to cart its rubbish to Shoal Bay, I am sure they will not be too pleased if UCV is introduced. The flat rate is a good system – not perfect, but much fairer than a system that has nothing to do with the cost of providing services, but just the value of your land. UCV pushes older residents out of their homes simply because their rates are calculated on location and evaluation.
There are rumours going around that valuers have been assessing pastoral properties. If this is true, does the government intend to rate pastoral properties based on the value of the land? If it is, I believe they are asking for trouble. I believe that pastoral properties cannot be left out of local government if the government intends to incorporate the whole Territory. Koolpinyah Station is already in Litchfield - it has been since it started - but I believe it is only charged at a flat rate. If the government wants to charge rates for pastoral land, then I reckon a flat rate is perhaps the way to go. Perhaps some of the lease payments for the government could be included in that flat rate.
I am sure Litchfield residents would like to know about what core functions they are going to be required to manage. Presently, the functions they agreed to when they became a council are roads, reserves, rubbish, and the cemetery. Of course, there has been some debate in years about dog by-laws. I believe the member for Goyder is on record on the radio saying he wants dogs to be a core function of the council. Whilst I agree some control over stray dogs needs to be introduced, any move to have Darwin- and Palmerston-type dog laws will be impractical and a very expensive cost to ratepayers, and highly impractical especially if a bigger council is formed.
I should make some comments about core functions. Interestingly, it was nice to listen to other people speak before I did. The member for Casuarina started to talk about the functions that he is used to knowing in Port Hedland. He mentioned environmental health, Meals on Wheels, etcetera. That is the very thing minister Ah Kit said was a killer. I heard the member for Drysdale saying the same thing, and the member for Macdonnell saying something similar. Certainly, minister Ah Kit was very careful about that as well. He said Aboriginal community councils have been given far too much to do. Bob Beadman, former head of Local Government, a very experienced public servant in Aboriginal affairs, pointed out on a number of occasions that Aboriginal community councils have administrative responsibilities that far outweigh those of the Darwin City Council. Please, do not go down the path of the members for Casuarina, Macdonnell, and Drysdale.
If you want to give this system a chance with what you are trying to do, you must stick to the core functions first. Councils must have to prove that they can do those core functions. People want a road without potholes. They want to be able to get to the next outstation or next town. They want a town to look nice; there is no rubbish, there are a few trees planted, and there is an oval to play on. Get those things right. That is why I believe the council I worked on at Nguiu shire was successful. We did not take over health, we did not have the post office. We did not do all that. Much of that was forced on councils, and I understand that there was no option. I believe we need to stick to the basics and then we have a fair chance of making this work.
There are even questions like: where will the Litchfield rubbish go? We talked about a regional waste facility, but if you have a Top End Litchfield Shire, that is a very big shire. I am interested to know what the practical issues would be with rubbish ...
Mr MILLS: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be given an extension of time so can conclude his comments, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: There will be many other practical issues, but not enough time to go into them today. There is an interesting statement by the minister about wards. Firstly, he said there will be lots of scope for public input into wards. I have to say that that is what you should be saying about the shire boundaries and the size of the shires. Having public input into wards may be important but, surely, that is not so great compared to where the boundaries or the numbers of shires will be. Wards also relate to something I believe is fundamental to local government. This is where I differ from the member for Drysdale.
Local government provides essential services fairly to all its constituents and ratepayers. When there is an election, all members of the council have been elected by a secret ballot, possibly a preferential system, and with a basic premise that all votes are equal.
It concerns me greatly to see the minister make the statement that wards will be based on geographic areas and population areas. Wards must be based on one person, one value. Manipulation of the numbers in each ward is undemocratic and has a Bjelke-Petersen ring to it. Any idea that the Barkly may have four equal wards for the town of Tennant Creek, and six or eight wards outside of Tennant, not made up of the number of voters at the Tennant Creek wards, is unacceptable. Local government wards should not only be based on race or a particular land ownership; it must be one person, one vote. To do otherwise would enshrine undemocratic systems and we will have the Tiwi Islands system repeated.
I do not agree with the member for Drysdale …
Mr Natt: I am the member for Drysdale. That is the third time.
Mr WOOD: That is right; you are fishing; the member for Daly. He talked about having ward management plans – and they would all decide what is going to happen within their ward. What you are setting up is bureaucratic; you are starting to set up to fail. This needs to be simple and low cost. If you start having ward managements and boards, I would be careful that those local boards - which are a good idea - do not become some paid job. Those boards need to be like a progress association where people turn up and say: ‘These are our concerns for our group’. I am just a little concerned that when you get into management plans you start getting another little mini-bureaucracy and you will have a whole heap of those - like 12 of them. All right, the minister said it is not going to happen. I will agree with you, minister.
One of the most glaring errors of the advisory board set-up is the lack of any member of the proposed Top End Litchfield Shire Council being represented. This shire will be the biggest by far in population, and has councils that are not dysfunctional, yet they are not represented on that northern advisory board. I still think that needs to be changed. People will feel they are out of the loop, and that is an area that we need to look it. It is a bit hard to understand why the Mayor of Katherine - God bless her, a lovely person; I am not knocking her personally – is on an advisory board when Katherine is not directly affected by these changes. I understand the boards were actually appointed or announced before the boundaries came into existence.
Minister, you and your predecessor, when looking at the solutions of dysfunctional councils, had obviously looked at mainly indigenous councils. In fact, out of the nine shires, eight would be indigenous predominately, with a mixture of small towns and mining and pastoral leases. However, in the case of Litchfield, which is a predominately non-indigenous council, it does not fit the guidelines when you say what the reasons for these changes were.
The new Top End Litchfield shire has more than 5000 people. It is not dysfunctional, has many industries and has relatively low unemployment. The problem with the statement today is that much of what is said does not fit the mould of what is in the statement. The statement does not seem to recognise that fact. Whilst I hope all shires will benefit by the changes proposed by government, the Top End Litchfield shire proposal needs to be approached differently.
Regarding a couple of other issues I have mentioned many times in parliament, the federal government should provide full employment along with management and capital infrastructure required to create meaningful work in remote communities. I know, minister, in your statement you talked about the benefits of local government is real local jobs. However, if it is the belief of governments that Aboriginal people should live on their own land, then it should provide the proper means for them to do so, otherwise do not fund them and let everyone drift to town. We know what will happen then.
Presently, we have a poorly-paid CDEP program with its own administration. The CDEP program should be part of the new councils, and proper wages should be paid. Councils traditionally have been a source of employment, and there is no shortage of work on communities. You need to make it happen otherwise communities will continue to be dysfunctional. If the federal government is behind many of the proposals the government is putting forward - and I presume it is because of the representative on the board - then I hope there are real and practical changes to the CDEP program and its funding. I hope that we can make some changes to employment on these communities. They will continue to be dysfunctional if people cannot get work.
One more issue, minister, is the practical size of the council. Whilst the government may have decided a viable council must have a minimum size of 5000 people, the size of the territory the council covers is just as relevant. In the proposed shire of Central Desert, what happens when the bulldozer is working at Tobermorey on the Queensland border, and you get a phone call that you need to do some work on Lajamanu? Just putting my hand across this map, from Tobermorey to Lajamanu is the same distance as from Darwin to Tennant Creek. One of the issues that seem to have been missed out in all of this is the practicalities of the size of these places. A bulldozer would have to go along a dirt road all the way; it is not as though it is going up the main highway. Those are the issues that need to be discussed. It is no good having a big council that might look like it is going to work because it has the right population, but is so large it is just about impossible to work.
Summing up quickly, I support the principle of what you are doing. I believe the people in my area want to see the fine print. I have heard some really glowing praises of what is going to happen. In reality, it is going to be much harder than you or some of these other people think to get local government back, you might say, on the straight and narrow. If you think that many of these councils are dysfunctional, is not going to be easy. The reality is you have a big piece of country to serve, many small communities and a relatively low budget. It is certainly going to require a lot of effort to make sure it works.
My job is to, basically ask the questions. In asking those questions or criticising, I am not coming from the point of view that I do not want it to be successful. I just think there needs to be people saying: ‘Hang on, minister, that does not make sense’. I will just give a little example. If you look at the boundary for the proposed Litchfield shire it goes around Nauiyu Nambiyu, which means that the Top End Litchfield Shire Council would come all the way down to the Wooliana Road to maintain the roads. Just across the other side of the river, Nauiyu Nambiyu and Wooliana would be served by the Victoria River shire. There are some issues there that need to be looked at to make sure these things work properly.
Minister, I wish you all the best. I also hope to have some public forums in my area. I realise you are dealing with two different systems to some extent. Top End Litchfield shire is not the same as the Central Desert shire. Trying to talk and debate about these things here is a bit difficult when I have a different clientele, you might say, than the member for Arafura or the member for Macdonnell. I support the statement in principle, but I will be looking carefully at what is happening and making sure that what is put forward is both practical and democratic.
I say again that I do not believe that wards should be based on either race or ownership of land. If you do not have the principle that it is one person one value then you start to destroy the very thing you are trying to do. I agree with the member for Casuarina: that democratic principle must be the foundation of good governance in the Northern Territory.
Mr McADAM (Local Government): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank all members for their input tonight on local government reform. On balance, it has been a very thoughtful debate. It has been a very constructive debate, and also on occasions a very impassioned debate. That is how it should be because the important thing here is that we are dealing with a diverse, very complex portion of the Northern Territory in the context of this proposal. It is very important that we remain flexible, that we have the capacity to be able to think outside the square to take into consideration those specific, special needs that will apply on a community-to-community basis within the shire-type model.
There were any number of questions raised here tonight, and I am not in a position to answer all of those because I just simply am not going to have the time. However, I want to assure all members who have spoken here this evening that we have had officers present throughout the course of this debate and they have taken down all the pertinent points, particularly those which raise questions that require answers. I will give undertakings that in due course - I am not going to say it is going to happen tomorrow because there is a lot of detail to digest and a lot of information to process. However, I give this assurance that it will be properly assessed and, for all those members who have raised questions here this evening, we will endeavour to get you the answers in respect to your specific inquiries.
The point I want to make is this: right from the very beginning we have heard many speakers speak about a whole range of issues and concerns of why we need change. I believe that there is a basic understanding, there is a basic premise that something needs to be done in respect to local government in the Northern Territory, particularly out in the remote regions of the Northern Territory.
I, for one, am not going to apologise for the course of action the government has taken. We have heard some speakers, particularly from the opposition, refer to the processes that occurred under my predecessor, Jack Ah Kit. I pay tribute to him for his outstanding contribution, not only to local government, but a whole range of issues. I believe Jack Ah Kit had the guts and courage to at least put into the public forum the debate in respect of the existing status of councils out there. I believe he was the real driver in the context of where we are going today.
In regards to some of the points raised by the opposition and the member for Nelson, I do not want to go there. That is all past history and I do not want to get into debates about what Richard Lim did or did not do when he was the Minister for Local Government or, indeed, the member for Braitling when she was the minister or, indeed, you, member for Nelson, in respect of your long and distinguished record in local government throughout the Northern Territory. I am not going to debate in that context. The important thing is that we should never get bogged down in the insular, isolated responses in respect of a whole host of complex issues right across the Northern Territory today. Unfortunately, they are the types of issues being raised. People have to see the bigger picture and have the vision, guts and courage to address these issues in a very constructive and coordinated way.
I have to say - and I am guilty of this too as part of the last government, the previous government and the Commonwealth government - we have failed communities in the bush miserably. We have said to them: ‘Carry out those functions’ for which they have never been resourced nor had the support to do so. Other speakers in this House have spoken today about the expectation of councils out there. It might have been the members for Macdonnell and Arnhem who talked about the pressures placed on community councils.
Name me any similar type of council here in the Northern Territory or, indeed, in Australia, that would be asked to carry out those functions that are expected of indigenous community councils. I can tell you they are unrealistic, and they are not going to get the outcomes which we, as governments, expect of them. It is very easy for us to blame people and councils, use the word ‘dysfunctional’, but the bottom line is this: we have never, ever attempted to put in place a model, a form of governance, that recognises the need to support and resource the councils.
The other matter I want to raise is important. I come back to the isolation and insular perception. It is natural that we, as individuals, as members of our respective electorates, think a certain way because we are looking after the interests of our electorates. I want to say something to the member for Nelson about the Litchfield Shire Council. You also referred to the Tennant Creek Town Council. If I were a parochial local member, then I would not have said the Tennant Creek Town Council was not viable, but I have to go above that in the context of the best interests of the Barkly and, more importantly, the best interests of the Northern Territory.
This government is being accused, basically, of a lack of consultation. I totally refute that. There has been any number of discussions about this reform, and not only this reform, but the previous reform by my predecessor and under the previous government. To suggest this has come out of the blue is quite false. There have been discussions, consultations - not to the extent required by you, member for Nelson, but there certainly have been discussions out there. I have spoken to LGANT and to the NT Cattlemen’s Association. As I have gone around the Northern Territory in the last 12 months, in probably 20 to 30 communities, I have raised the issue of the future of local government in the bush. Do not come at this stunt saying there has been no consultation because I believe there have been levels of consultation …
Mr Wood: Mary Walshe did not know.
Mr McADAM: We will come back to the Litchfield Shire Council in a moment. There have been levels of consultation to the degree that it would have been very clear to anyone that these sorts of changes were going to come in.
You mentioned Mary Walshe, and you talked about consultation. We put out expressions of interest to people out there – please, nominate to the advisory board. Not one nomination from the Litchfield Shire Council.
Mr Wood: I am told Mike Bowman.
Mr McADAM: Not one.
Mr Wood: Mary Walshe said Mike Bowman.
Mr McADAM: My advice is this …
Mr Wood: Well, that is my advice.
Mr McADAM: I am just telling you what I believe. We will sort it out later.
Mr Wood: Perhaps we will agree to disagree.
Mr McADAM: My advice is this: that no nominations were received by my office from the Litchfield Shire Council in respect to the advisory board. I will show you how flexible I am, because you did raise the point about how flexible we need to be. Officers from my department had discussions with Mary Walshe the other day. I was present, partly, regarding the animal control stuff as opposed to the local government stuff. My understanding is that, if the Litchfield Shire Council wishes to nominate someone on to the council, I will give it due consideration.
Mr Wood: Thank you. I will go and see them.
Mr McADAM: It is very important because, as I say, sometimes we get caught up in these debates when we have the bigger picture, but we get caught up in these little insular, isolated, nitpicking exercises, because, ‘Oh, my council is not on there’. Well, there is probably a whole host of other councils that are not on there.
Mr Wood: I agree with you, minister, but there was no one from any council, that was the problem.
Mr McADAM: We can debate this later, member for Nelson. The point I just want to make is …
Mr Stirling: It is a bit bigger than rubbish dumps.
Mr McADAM: It is a bit bigger than rubbish dumps, and it is a bit bigger than dog control, and it is a bit bigger than roads. What we are talking about here is the future of the Northern Territory.
The most important thing I believe that this reform will do is to provide certainty for people in the regions and the remote parts of the Northern Territory. It is going to provide opportunity - an opportunity denied in the past. Not perhaps deliberately, but an opportunity denied because, effectively, it certainly was not there in the context of the framework that we propose.
The other issue I want to refer to is that there will be, I believe, an equity - high levels of equity in the context of people themselves knowing that, at the very least, they have the same rights, the same opportunities, and the same certainty as you living in Litchfield and someone living in Nightcliff. That does not mean to say - and people are smart enough to know this - that all of a sudden you are going to get the resources; all the things are going to start flowing, because it is not, and people know that. But, at the very least, by going down this pathway, introducing this model, you will get certainty, you will get equity, and you will get opportunity. It is fair to say that, at this point in time, that is not afforded people out in the remote regions of the Northern Territory. At the very least, this will go part of the way in dealing with this.
Another issue raised is the plight of the some of the communities out there. We have heard it from members, particularly for Arnhem, Macdonnell and Daly. Even you raised it, member for Nelson, in respect to the Commonwealth’s response to all of this. What other members have said is true; there has been a gutting of service provision, funding from the Commonwealth, over the last few years, particularly since the demise of ATSIC. We acknowledge that. We all know it. I am not interested in arguing with the Commonwealth government, minister Brough, saying: ‘You did not do this, you did not do that’; or, indeed, any other minister within this jurisdiction or any other jurisdiction. I am not into the blame game any more.
All that I am asking for is for this model to provide certainty, to be a vessel in the context of the Commonwealth re-engaging back out there with the communities. They failed miserably in the past. We have people from the Commonwealth on the committee. We have letters in principle from minister Brough who believes this is a future, this is one of the ways forward.
I honestly believe that there can be greater capacity because of the certainty of the model for the Commonwealth government to park their dollars. Surely, that is what it is all about: how do we maximise, how do we utilise those dollars that are coming into the region in the most effective way? No one can tell me that over the last three to four years that has occurred, because it has not. I know it; I visit communities. I hear communities saying to me: ‘What in the hell is going on? How can we restore some of these services? Why are we given all of this responsibility, why are we being blamed for all these things and, yet, we do not have the resources?’ Part of the reason is because there has not been certainty. I honestly believe that this model will provide the certainty, not only in the context of the Commonwealth or the Territory governments, but other agencies with regional economic opportunities, social development, and social outcomes. The best way to get these things is through a coordinated approach.
There has been much hullabaloo over the last few weeks in respect of the NT Cattlemen’s Association. It is important to understand that this government recognises, without any shadow of a doubt, the importance of the role of the pastoral industry in the Northern Territory, and to the economy. People also have to understand that, whether we like it or not, good or bad, there has been a connection between the pastoral industry and indigenous people in the bush. Under this government, I honestly believe we have made some very sincere and strategic responses in trying to foster that. We only have to look at the number of cattle properties which were previously under-utilised, and are back into production, actually creating dollars. Have a look at some of the pastoral properties in my electorate in the Barkly region; the most productive, probably, in the whole of Australia. They are realising that the indigenous community is an important component of that region. They are actively engaged in getting people into real jobs.
I believe the NT Cattlemen’s Association is an integral component of this particular exercise but, more importantly, there will be some real benefits in that relationship as we go forward, just as there will be, in a different way, member for Nelson, in your particular shire council as proposed.
I am certainly not going to be prescriptive. I am not going to tell you how it is going to happen in your area. We want you to tell the advisory board what is the most effective way of the delivery of services, the economic possibilities, and how you should live within that shire council; that is the beauty of this exercise. I have made it very clear to the department: do not be prescriptive in the shire model. Be fair, but do not be prescriptive.
There are some other matters that have been raised throughout the course of this debate. I say to members who have differences, we will listen to those differences; we will respect those people out there who might not necessarily agree with what we do. However, there is a very good process in place which allows for very constructive exchanges of how we might go forward.
The member for Greatorex talked about the advisory body and how ineffective it would be, and that I would be telling them how to do things. Can you imagine me telling Patrick Dodson what to do? Can you imagine me telling Maurie Ryan what to do? Or Stuart Kenny what to do? Or Esther, the lady from your area? Can you imagine me telling those people what to do?
Mrs Braham: You might have to.
Mr McADAM: I might have to, but the point is this: they are all very strong people. They are dedicated. They have a vision for what is best for their community. Not only the four people I have just mentioned, but all the people on the advisory body. Do you think that I would have put them on the Cattlemen’s Association if I knew they were going to come out and rubbish me, or Maurie Ryan, because they were going to come out and rubbish government? Not at all. It is important for this very robust debate to occur. We have to have it out in the open. We have to put in place certainty and a future for those people out there.
I will not add too much more, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, other than to say, thank you all very much for a very constructive and thoughtful response to this. I know that it is not going to be easy. I have acknowledged that right from the very beginning. The important thing here is that I believe that we have a good group of people who believe in the bigger picture of how we might go forward as a Territory. I have no doubt that, over time, this model will not only be accepted but it will, into the future, provide some real outcomes for people right across the Northern Territory.
Members: Hear, hear!
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Statehood for the Northern Territory – Progress Report
Statehood for the Northern Territory – Progress Report
Mr STIRLING (Statehood): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, in September 2006, the Chief Minister created the portfolio of Minister for Statehood and appointed me to the task. I am very pleased to take on this important role. I was also pleased when the Leader of the Opposition followed suit and appointed a shadow minister for statehood, the member for Blain. Since that time, the shadow minister and I have acted in concert in achieving our combined goal of carefully bringing statehood to the Territory. I use the word ‘carefully’ because I am of the very strong view that the process has to be led by the community, not by the politicians. If we are to avoid the debacle of the 1990s, politicians need to take more of a back seat than be the front engine drivers.
Today, I wish to report to the House on the steps taken since September to continue the progress towards statehood. It will not be an excessively long or broadly ranging ministerial statement, as much is yet to be done before a definitive position can be put in place. I believe it is important to keep members aware of the progress that is occurring.
The first act was to meet with the Statehood Steering Committee Executive and the committee as a whole. This committee is charged with the responsibility of driving statehood among the community. It is the eyes and the ears for the whole issue. The Statehood Steering Committee, co-chaired by Sue Bradley and Barbara McCarthy, is working hard on the ground to educate and discuss constitutional issues so that Territorians can make an informed decision when the time comes. I also acted to ensure that the lines of authority were cleared by establishing clear reporting mechanisms between us. Government also moved to establish a framework budget for the operations of the committee. While this will be discussed again in this budget round, funds have been put into place to allow the committee to travel throughout the Territory.
Our first outing with the Commonwealth came in November last year. The House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs conducted a series of seminars in Alice Springs and Darwin. The Commonwealth committee has a reference provided to it by the Commonwealth Attorney-General to examine the federal implications of Northern Territory Statehood. I advised the committee that statehood is firmly back on the Northern Territory’s agenda. As the Minister for Statehood, I am determined to do my bit to push it through to reality. To achieve it, we have to ensure that Territorians are fully informed about statehood and its implications.
In fact, Territorians have clearly told us that they want to know the terms and conditions of statehood before they vote on such an issue in a referendum. I believe the member for Blain delivered a similar message to that committee. It was clear to me that we needed to make contact with the Commonwealth further, so the member for Blain and I travelled to Canberra to meet with the Hon Philip Ruddock, Attorney-General, and the Hon Jim Lloyd, Minister for the Territories. We also took the opportunity to discuss statehood matters with other MPs from both sides of politics, including the federal member for Lingiari, Mr Snowdon, Labor shadow minister for Territories, Mr Kelvin Thompson - very briefly, and more in depth with his senior advisor - and Senator Trish Crossin. I am sure the member for Blain can elaborate on those MPs from the conservative side of politics with whom he met during this time.
It is necessary for us to engage with the Commonwealth to get them thinking about the terms and conditions of statehood. One of the pitfalls of the last effort for statehood was that Territorians were being asked to vote for something in a referendum without knowing what the terms and conditions on offer from the Commonwealth were. In our meetings, we were seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth to work in a parallel process with us. We want Territorians to be working through the questions and issues, and we want to feed those views to Canberra to inform the Commonwealth.
The member for Blain and I also met with Peter Slipper, the chair of the House of Representatives committee to which I referred earlier. It was an important opportunity to remind the chair of the committee the importance we place on the issue and to make sure he is aware the shadow minister and I were in Canberra to discuss the statehood issue with the Attorney-General and other senior decision-makers. By happy coincidence, his committee was holding hearings with Commonwealth agencies such as the Attorney-General’s Department and the Department of Transport and Regional Services on the same day the shadow minister and I were in Canberra. The Executive Officer to the Statehood Steering Committee was able to attend those hearings and to continue our message of support for Territory statehood.
In our meeting with the federal Attorney-General, I tabled a letter, which I wish to provide to the parliament today - I do not think have a copy of it. I will make sure I get that. Essentially, the letter expresses the view that it is our view engagement with the Commonwealth is a critical part of the statehood process. We sought their agreement to the recommencement of their consideration of the issues involving in granting statehood. We recommended the recommencement of the interdepartmental committees and the appointment of a senior Commonwealth liaison officer. We recommended some timing in relation to finalising a date for clear terms and conditions for statehood.
It is reasonable to suggest the federal Attorney-General was quite clear in his concerns. I think the member for Blain will agree with me when I say the Commonwealth has squarely put the ball back at our feet. The Attorney-General’s view is that the Territory must convince the Commonwealth that we really do want statehood and we must let them know on what terms and conditions we want it. It is now up to us to continue informing Territorians about statehood, offer the best possible advice on the terms and conditions we may end up with. They go around issues such as legal and constitutional affairs including representation in the federal parliament, indigenous issues including the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, environment, national parks and Commonwealth land, uranium mining, Commonwealth territories, industrial relations and financial implications.
We will do what we can and continue our discussions with the Commonwealth to ensure we are all on the same page. The member for Blain and I will continue to work with the Statehood Steering Committee to keep the process of engagement and information with the Commonwealth on track, and to keep Territorians informed and participating in the process.
I am also pleased to report that the Chief Minister has been successful in her efforts to bring the statehood issue before the Premiers and Chief Ministers of the Commonwealth at the recent Council of Australian Federations meeting in Sydney. Premiers and Chief Ministers endorse continued progress towards statehood for the Territory while seeking to be kept informed of the issues.
An indicative survey of visitors to the annual regional show circuit and online in 2006 indicated 82% of over 1000 people supported a continued move towards statehood. It shows a significant level of support. I can assure Territorians that the Martin government will continue to work with them in tandem with the member for Blain and the opposition in an effort to ensure that they are given every opportunity to make a clear and informed choice on statehood at some time in the future.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, this is a very important statement. Underlining this is the bipartisan approach to this most significant of issues. It is a response to this matter taken in a bipartisan way, which has ensured that people across the Territory recognise that this is a special issue.
I thank the minister for his support and cooperation with regard to advancing this issue to the federal level. It is a very important and strategic step, one, as a member of this parliament and from the opposition, for which I am grateful. It was a good opportunity to show that we can do things differently in this Chamber when we are considering matters of great importance. There are other matters aside from statehood that are of great importance, and it would be good to see if we could take a leaf out of this experience and work also in a bipartisan manner on other important issues. However, I digress - a theme that I have visited from time to time and will continue to do so.
Just from my own observations and experience from that trip, the recognition of the importance of removing politics to a different position in this matter is critical. Appropriate representation to the Commonwealth is required to make our presentation to the Commonwealth and bring to their attention the need for their engagement in the advancing of this issue - that was done. The letter was tabled and presented, and it will be on the Parliamentary Record for all members and other Territorians to assess. I left that meeting with a clear reminder that we do have a significant challenge ahead of us.
We have two responses to that significant challenge - either we can just go through the motions and give it our best shot, because it is something which is a part of our obligation as elected members and Territorians, or come back with greater resolve to determine whether this is a matter that is worth fighting for. I can say personally - and I am sure the minister would agree with me - that after recognising the level to which this issue must progress, the only response of Territorians is to increase the resolve and to strengthen our fight. Otherwise, this will be a matter that we can just entertain ourselves with for forever and a day and nothing will happen. I cannot allow that to occur, and I am sure neither would the minister who has made the statement. Also any member in this Chamber, or anyone with an interest in the future of the Northern Territory and a future in this nation, in fact, would agree that we should have equal rights to any other Australian in this Commonwealth. It is a matter that we must come back and strengthen our fight for.
Coming back with that resolve, I now see the urgency of the task we have before us, and the message is conveyed. I have a unique position, not only being the shadow spokesman on Statehood, but also a member of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee as well as being on the Statehood Steering Committee. The message was well received that we must step up to the plate to continue and strengthen our fight.
I commend the great work of Sue Bradley. It is not an easy task to have that response, which was either to shrink back or to stand up. Sue Bradley has stood up, as well as the rest of the steering committee, and said: ‘Right, the game is on’. I also acknowledge the sound leadership of the member for Arnhem in making sure that the steering committee stays true to its task. I also acknowledge the excellent support we have had from the executive officer, Michael Tatham, who has supported our activities in Canberra so well, supplying all members with an appropriate level of information, and ensuring that all of our endeavours and activities allow this issue to be progressed - and we have made some significant progress.
Having left the federal Attorney-General’s office, our challenge is to now convince the Commonwealth …
A member interjecting.
Mr MILLS: Well, I believe any Territorian going away after that would be saying: ‘Well, we will be back. We will take that challenge up and, the Commonwealth in due time, will be convinced’. I commend the work of the steering committee on that front.
As the minister outlined, lobbying was undertaken by members of his own party. I also did the same with the member for Solomon and the new CLP minister, Nigel Scullion. My message was not just to give them the courteous briefing and say: ‘This is what happened’ but, basically: ‘Please step up to the plate, you Territorians. You are down there and it is time for your part in this fight’. That was the message that they did receive.
It is a reminder that, back here, the work of the steering committee requires renewed focus on issues of education so people can actually understand what it is that we are after. We will come to the point where we will decide upon the terms and conditions that would be acceptable to us. Let the Commonwealth respond to that. That is a fair challenge to take up. It will require a certain level of activism. We need to be active in our communities and stir this issue up. Ultimately, that will lead to Commonwealth engagement that will arrive at suitable terms and conditions.
Therefore, the battle lines have been drawn. I thank you for the opportunity to speak from this side of the parliament on a matter of such importance, under-girded by the fact that it was undertaken in a bipartisan manner. There is also, I can report from the opposition, a commitment that we make a promise and will adhere to, to ensure that politics does not distract from a matter that is of core importance to all Territorians. With those comments, the opposition supports this statement.
Ms McCARTHY (Arnhem): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, as Chair of the Statehood Steering Committee, I would like to address the House in support of the bipartisan approach shown by the Statehood Minister and shadow minister and, indeed, all the parliamentary members, towards statehood.
I have had the honour of being the Chair of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee and Statehood Steering Committee for five months. In that time, a number of issues and events have occurred. I acknowledge the presence of my co-chair, Sue Bradley, in the parliamentary gallery and the executive officer, Michael Tatham. I also advise the Assembly of something quite significant that has occurred in regard to Sue Bradley on Australia Day. Sue was awarded the Order of Australia Medal. I say to Sue: congratulations on a job well done with your commitment to the Northern Territory community, not just with statehood, but in regard to many of your other activities in the wider Northern Territory community. A very warm congratulations, Sue. It is, indeed, an honour to work beside you on this Statehood Steering Committee.
The Minister for Statehood and the shadow minister have both spoken about their recent trip to Canberra. As chair, I take heart at the challenge placed before the people of the Northern Territory and this parliament to pursue the path to statehood by convincing the Commonwealth that this is what the people of the Northern Territory want. We have heard both the minister and the shadow minister talk about their trips to Canberra. I say to the Assembly that, in the short time that I have been involved with the Statehood Steering Committee as chair, I have been heartened by a number of events that have occurred.
The first one was the House of Representatives inquiry here in November last year. To have the inquiry come to Alice Springs and Darwin was something that the Statehood Steering Committee had been waiting for, for a number of years. It was important in the steps towards statehood that the committee did come here to hear what individuals and organisations had to say about the Northern Territory’s steps towards statehood.
What, in effect, the Commonwealth has done in a recent trip of both our minister and the shadow minister in Canberra is say that the Northern Territory needs to work out its position, the terms and conditions: ‘You show us what the people want. Tell us what people want because the last time we looked the people voted no’. Yes, that is true; the people did vote no. In 1998, the referendum saw 51.3% of voters reject statehood. What we have here is an opportunity to try again. Yes, we have the doubters in Canberra but we have the energy and enthusiasm of the Statehood Steering Committee right here in the Northern Territory, a committee that is made up of a large number of representatives of the communities. We have a visit to Alice Springs occurring on Monday, followed by a further visit to Alice Springs in May. There will also be a visit of the Statehood Steering Committee to Katherine next month to spend some time also with the Cattlemen’s Association.
At the inquiry last year, the views of the Chairman of the Northern Land Council, John Daly, were taken with interest by members of the Statehood Steering Committee. We acknowledge the work that needs to continue with Aboriginal communities throughout the Territory.
I would like to highlight to the Assembly the significance of this year in particular. In 1967, 40 years ago, this May, one of only eight questions resulting in a yes vote out of 44 asked of Australians at a referendum since Federation had a significant impact on the population of the Northern Territory. It was the 1967 referendum. Few people realise that no voter in the Northern Territory was allowed to vote at that referendum. I highlight that because it is a significant historical moment in the development and advancement of indigenous people right across Australia. We can try to bring home to people that only 40 years ago, when a referendum occurred, no Northern Territory resident was able to take part in that.
This year is an important year to recognise the significance of that milestone for Australia as a nation. This is only just one of those factors that come into account when we talk about our steps to statehood, and eventual equality - eventual equality where we can have the same rights as all people, next to all those people in all the other states around Australia.
I would like to also talk about the education aspect of it. I have heard the member for Blain speak about education. We are very vigilant in terms of our youth. The Statehood Steering Committee is acutely aware of the need to reach out to the young people. In fact, one of the earlier statements I made to the committee was about what kind of focus did we have as a committee, where we are going and what could we hold onto that could anchor us in the midst of great storms and controversy and difficulties. The member for Blain expressed it to our committee when he said: ‘Sometimes you wonder how we are going with statehood. We need an anchor. We need something to hold onto’. One of the committee members, Jamey Robertson, and others have said to me as well, that we need to look at statehood as being a gift - a gift for our children, a gift that we want to pass on for future generations. What kind of gift it is depends on each one of us; not just here in the Assembly, but all Territorians who are coming together to ask questions about why we should have statehood.
Just last week, we saw a forum of teachers from Taminmin High School, Humpty Doo Primary School, St John’s College, Marrara Christian School, Kormilda College, Jingili Primary School and Darwin High School. Jeannie Bennett from the Department of Employment, Education and Training, and Raine Caldwell from Darwin High were the facilitators. It was a successful forum where all the teachers indicated they had new resources and methodology to take back to their schools. They were all invited to continue their relationship with the Statehood Steering Committee through the Statehood Teachers’ Advisory Group, or STAG, which meets each term. This is an effort by not only the Statehood Steering Committee but certainly recognition from the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee. Indeed, the bipartisan approach of both the Statehood minister and the shadow minister of the importance of our youth and the statehood process, and questions about statehood and future governance for the Northern Territory, is an integral part of the education system.
These are the exciting things that we have under way. Bush trips will be coming up. One of the strong focuses for the committee is bush trips throughout the Northern Territory, including, of course, the utilisation of interpreters for our more than 108 languages across the Territory. We have about 200 interpreters in the Aboriginal Interpreter Service. Nora Kempster, from the Statehood Steering Committee staff, is involved with trying to identify those interpreters, together with Michael Tatham. We have huge challenges ahead of us, but it is exciting to know that we have such strong bipartisan support in the Assembly. I commend the minister’s statement.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I only have a few comments to make, but I thank the Minister for Statehood for delivering the statement, and to the shadow minister also.
I do not know whether you are aware, but the statehood committee was almost floundering. We were not quite sure what direction to go because we really did not know whether the Commonwealth would support us and, without that support, we were probably wasting our and a lot of people’s time. It was important for you to go to Canberra and suss it out and really find out where we stood. At least now we know. You did not get a: ‘No, you are not getting it’. At least they did not say no. Oops, I do not like the look on his face! The feedback you are saying to me is that they said: ‘Convince us’.
Mr Stirling: Yes.
Mrs BRAHAM: So at least all hope is not lost. Oops, minister, take that look off your face.
When the House of Representatives Committee came to Alice Springs, I was disappointed. I had the feeling that they really did not care less. They did not know what they were talking about and they were treating it all very irreverently. It was thrown back in the face of someone like myself who has been in this House a long time and went through the last referendum and was a great supporter of statehood, then to go to the House of Representatives Committee inquiry where they had a very laid back attitude to us, basically saying because not everyone agreed: ‘Well, there are problems here because you have got this group over here not agreeing and this group over here agreeing’. That is what debate is all about.
I am taking a bit of heart, minister, from your trip to Canberra. I hope I have the right perception in taking heart because I really do believe that, if we want to keep the members of this committee focused and with us, then we have to give them some strong direction. We have to give them strong support because it is very easy to get disheartened by sitting at meeting after meeting and not believing you are achieving anything.
So good or bad, whatever you brought back, I take a bit of heart because, let us face it, we need the federal government’s wholehearted support to get statehood, no matter what direction we go in the future. People still say to me: ‘How come we are not a state? It is 2006. Look at the Territory. How come you are not a state? What makes us any different from any other state in Australia?’ It is purely constitutional and they do not understand that.
I am very pleased to know that on Monday next week, the chair, the member for Arnhem, and Brian Martin, one of the members of the committee, will be meeting with community representatives in Alice Springs. I find, when we have been seeking people to attend this meeting, that many of the long-term residents are very supportive of statehood. People who have lived in the Territory for a long time have that commitment to it. They know where they are going. The next and younger age group who take everything for granted do not really understand what statehood is all about. They are the ones that I am concerned about. They say: ‘Why are you bothering? What do we need it for? Life is fine. It is not going to make any difference to the way we live’. We need to convince people out there, and most of all we need to give them that understanding of what it means and why we should be pushing ahead.
I, too, like the shadow minister, thank members of the committee, the chair and the executive officer for all their support. We have a very good statehood group within this Assembly which will go forward. I thank the chair because she has taken over and pushed it on, which is good.
Most of all, minister, thank you for your report. I hope that you will stay with us. I was impressed with the way, when you were appointed Minister for Statehood, you got on the wagon and came with us and kept pushing for action. You have now undertaken this trip which was very important. It is important that we see that you are there with us.
Mr STIRLING (Statehood): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I now have the letter. I will table the letter signed by the shadow minister for Statehood and myself which we presented to the Attorney-General on the day of our meeting.
I thank each of the members for their contribution. It is fair to say that the member for Blain, our executive officer and I were somewhat nonplussed on immediately exiting federal Attorney-General Ruddock’s office. We were forced to analyse and discuss our views and our thoughts and what we would make of it with some urgency because both of us had to go before the media. We needed to be very clear about what we were going to take from the meeting and what we were going to say to the media, and that was within perhaps 30 minutes of the meeting with the federal Attorney-General.
It is also fair to say that the more we discussed it and the deeper we probed and analysed what we believed the message coming from the federal Attorney-General had been, the more empowered we felt, the more optimistic we became about that message. So far from heads down, or tails between our legs, we now knew that the Attorney-General had clearly spelt out what was required, had set a task, and given us a clear direction.
That was very different to my preconception of what the meeting might have achieved. I am not sure about the member for Blain. That time of analysis before we went to the camera was that it was very useful. In the end, we both took it as a positive that the Attorney-General had spelt out that very clear direction which, perhaps as the member for Braitling was just saying, has been lacking up to now. So, we do have a clear direction.
I thank the member for Blain for his commitment to the task and for accompanying me on that trip to Canberra. I have signed off another letter to the federal Attorney-General. It will be on its way to the member for Blain, as shadow minister for Statehood, to also sign. We will get that letter away, reiterating what we took away from the meeting and just saying that we still expect an answer from our correspondence that we left with him on that day. So thank you to the member for Blain.
Thank you to the member for Arnhem for equal commitment to the task and her co-chairing, and thanks to Sue Bradley, and our executive officer, Michael Tatham. Between them, they both know so much about the history and the previous process, to the point of being very mindful of where we go in the future so as not to repeat the errors of the past. This parliament is very well served by each of those individuals. My thanks to them for the work they do, and for them, at this late hour, still being here to see this debate through.
We have a long way to go. We acknowledge that; the member for Blain acknowledged that. We will probably be back in here with a quite major landmark-type statement around statehood somewhere further into the year. It was very important that we report back to parliament on our trip, and what we had learned. I believe it is quite significant because, as I said, and I think everyone agrees, we now have a clear path and a clear direction.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr NATT (Drysdale): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to continue on from my adjournment last week, just mentioning a few things that are happening in the schools in my area. I had two schools to mention; I mentioned my other four last week.
I am pleased to talk about Driver Primary School. It is a great little school with terrific staff and wonderful students. The enrolment numbers of Driver have increased significantly this year. The current number is 485, and that includes 79 in the preschool. A couple of new teachers have come to the school this year. I am pleased to welcome Alison Sadowski and Tania Tamaotai, and Jim Crisp, who is here as an exchange teacher from New South Wales. The school is continuing the age of entry trial this year in preschool and Transition, and they have developed an excellent early links program with their young students.
The Driver Primary School this year will also be entering the National Story Telling Festival, the Wakikirri, conducted at the Darwin Entertainment Centre. The students will be involved in story telling through dance. I was lucky enough to sneak out of parliament one day last year to watch one of my other schools, Durack, perform. They did very well and received a special mention. It is a wonderful opportunity for kids to express themselves on stage.
The Driver Primary School has also been selected as a teaching school by the CDU and DEET. It will begin to take first year students who are attending Charles Darwin University as part of the new teaching course. Eleven teachers at Driver Primary School have nominated as mentor teachers for these CDU students, and have already been involved in professional development this term. It shows the professionalism of the school and the forward-thinking where they are trying to help some of these student teachers move forward in their careers. To have that mentoring behind them shows the effort the school is putting in to help the education system.
I pay tribute to a very forward-thinking principal, Mr Rob Presswell. He and his staff are just a wonderful group and they are doing wonderful things with that school. Deputy Principal, Fathma Mauger is also a wonderful backup to Rob Presswell. Her husband, Wally, heads up their committee. I can assure you the Driver Primary School committee is a very hard-working committee. I congratulate the school and wish them all the best for the year.
The other school that I would like to mention is not actually in my area, but I have quite a bit of work to do with them: Palmerston High School. Student numbers continue to grow and are in the vicinity of 750 this year. There are a number of new and young vibrant teachers, many of whom are recent graduates from the CDU. I would just like to mention Julie Danvers, Lisa Hamilton, Rachel Pike and Ilaria Tomassi, who have come to the school this year and, I understand, are really making some headway with their students.
The building project at the school is under way. It has commenced and is progressing very well. It is developing plans to refurbish the middle school at the moment, so we are really looking forward to those ongoing projects in the middle school area. The Palmerston High School is enhancing its links with the primary schools in the area to aid the transition for the middle schools area. It is hosting a whole school development program with the Palmerston High School staff and 20 staff from the primary schools from the area. They are conducting middle year workshops. It is great to see them working with other schools in the area, trying to help those students who are coming through from the primary schools to the high school in the not-too-distant future in the middle schools program.
Palmerston High School was also selected as one of the trial schools for secondary education, which is a great feather in their cap. This is the program minister Henderson launched last week where the kids can access work from home. I will speak more about that at another time.
I make mention of a very strong school council, headed by chair, Russell Ball. He and his group on the school council do wonderful things for that school. They are very forward thinking and have done a lot of really hard groundwork to ensure that the middle school process is falling into shape. I have full confidence that it is going to be an easy process for the school to come through that transition.
I also make mention of the new principal, Julianne Willis. I had a little to do with Julianne when she was the Deputy Principal at Kormilda College. She has come to the Palmerston High School this year. She is a very vibrant woman of vision and loves accepting a challenge. She is obviously going to have a few at Palmerston High School with all the building processes going on and settling the middle school process. As I said, she is up to a challenge and I am pretty sure that she will do a great job at that school. I have no doubt that Julianne will take Palmerston High School onto bigger and better things in all areas of education and their life skills. I wish Julianne, Russell, and the committee all the very best and the students and staff there as well.
As an interesting note, Driver Primary School and Palmerston High School are two of the 10 schools to trial the new computer technology that will benefit the students, teachers and, later in the year, parents. I will mention more about that at another time.
On 7 February, I attended an AFL Meet and Greet Sports Fitness Night for LifeBalance, which is a local family health and wellness centre situated in the Rosebery Shopping Centre on Granites Drive. My colleague, the member for Brennan, and I were the official barbecue cookers, and we were only too pleased to help out Wayne Zerbe, the president of the Palmerston Regional Business Association, help run an afternoon for the kids from around the area. There were several AFL players attending and it was great to see about 50 or 60 kids there with some parents. I can assure you the parents got a kick out of getting autographs on T-shirts as much as the kids did.
I arrived a little late and missed the Essendon players, but I understand three or four Essendon players visited, which is just a wonderful feat because the program that the Essendon players and the All Stars had while they were in Darwin was quite horrendous. For them to take time out to travel to Palmerston to attend this function for the kids of the area is a great feather in their cap. The All Stars players who attended were Andrew McLeod, Daniel Motlop and Xavier Clarke. These three ex-Darwin boys really brought the house down, and to see the smiles on the kids faces was exceptional. Michael McLean, the coach of the All Stars team, also attended and he gave a little talk to the kids. It was a worthwhile afternoon.
The pleasing thing for me was that I had an opportunity to talk to Daniel Motlop and Xavier Clarke on the quiet, away from all the goings on at the time. I had a little to do with the two boys when they were coming through the Thunder Squads when I was the CEO of the AFLNT, and to see the change in personality of these young men is quite extraordinary. I can remember some years ago when they first started playing in the Thunder Squads they were quiet, shy, reserved boys. They talked to you with their heads down, lacked a bit of confidence in their personality but, when it came to running around the field chasing a bit of leather, that confidence changed into something a little different again. To talk to these two young men and see the confidence they have gained in playing AFL football is an absolute pleasure. To shake their hand, they look you in the eye when they talk, and you could see that their transition from Darwin to Melbourne and Adelaide has really changed their lives. They have accepted that and they have accepted what is before them, and they are making big strides in their own lives. It was just a pleasure to see them. I congratulate them for that.
I congratulate Wayne Zerbe and everyone involved on the day. It was a great exercise. Wayne does some terrific things in the Palmerston area. I congratulate him and tell him to keep up the good work.
One of the other exercises I undertook on Sunday afternoon was the opening of the new Palmerston RSL Sub-Branch at the Hub Sports Club. It was just great to see the smiles on the faces of Gary Markwell, the president of the Palmerston RSL Sub-Branch, and Daryl Salathiel, the Secretary/Treasurer. They have being trying to achieve moving out of their old premises on Roystonia Avenue into a new premises. They had an official opening on that Sunday afternoon with the Chief Minister. Jock Stratton, the South Australia/NT member of the National Executive, was also present at the opening.
It was terrific to see the strides that they have made to keep the club going and to move out of the old premises into something new is a real effort for them. They deserve a big pat on the back. They are now in their new environment which is well presented and offers all members the comfort and knowledge that they will have a steady financial backing and a place that they can call their home. Gone are the gaps in the walls, the dirt roads and the termites which were synonymous with the old dongas they occupied in Roystonia Avenue.
To signify their presence at The Hub, an old military gun has been placed on the concrete slab out the front on the lawn of the club with a newly-erected flag pole. It signifies that the RSL is now established within the Palmerston Sports Club. I sincerely hope that this move will cement the future of the Palmerston RSL Sub-Branch and help them attract other members. I wish them all the very best and extend gratitude and good wishes to Gary and Daryl for the work that they have put in for this to be established.
On 9 February, I was lucky enough, in my role as minister, to attend the Alcan Suppliers Awards. Alcan is a very forward-thinking company and they have been spending many dollars on the expansion of their plant at Gove. They recognise all the suppliers they work with and it was terrific recognition for everyone who was there. It was held at the casino and there would have been probably 150 to 180 people involved on the afternoon. It was a terrific afternoon. They had a special guest speaker an ex-NBL player, Eric Bailey, who gave an inspiring hour-long talk about his background and how businesses should think ahead, not take the easy way out and accept what is happening at the moment, but to keep moving forward. It was quite an inspiring hour that Eric presented.
The highlight of the afternoon was the presentation of the awards. The Contracted Goods Suppliers came in three categories. The first tier was up to $100 000, the second tier was $100 000 to $500 000 and the third tier was $500 000-plus. The nominees for the nought to $100 000 were Garlock Pty Ltd, Antec Engineering Pty Ltd and Eutectic Australia Pty Ltd. I am pleased to say that Garlock was the winner of that. I congratulate them on the work that they have been doing for Alcan.
The nominations of the second tier were Klinger Ltd, Ecolab Water Care Services and HTL Perma Australia. I am pleased to say that Klinger Ltd was the successful supplier in that area.
For tier one, which was $500 000-plus, Louminco Pty Ltd, Tyco Flow Control and OneSteel Metaland were the nominees, and Louminco won that category. Congratulations to those suppliers.
In Service Contractors, there were three nominations: Perkins Shipping Pty Ltd, C&S Refrigeration and Airconditioning and Transpacific. A name synonymous with the Territory was the winner of that; that is, Perkins Shipping. They have done a lot of work with Alcan over the years in transporting much of their infrastructure to Gove.
I congratulate all the winners and also acknowledge Tyco Flow Control, the winner of the EHS Continuous Improvement Initiative Award. It shows you that business is really moving along nicely under the current economy of the Territory. It is pleasing to see that local contractors are getting the work in many of these places and it is very pleasing to see that big companies like Alcan acknowledge these local businesses for the work that they do.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I place on the record tonight my congratulations to John Baskerville who was formally recognised with the Public Service Medal for Outstanding Services to Central Australia on Australia Day this year.
Members: Hear, hear.
Mrs BRAHAM: Most of you will know John Baskerville. He is a long-time Territorian and has done a lot of work in Central Australia.
John was born and educated in Mudgee in New South Wales and studied electrical engineering at Sydney University. He worked in Papua New Guinea on the hydroelectric power scheme, and has also worked in Fiji, the Philippines and the Solomon Islands.
He came to Darwin in 1975 following Cyclone Tracy to assist in the rehabilitation of the electricity supply. He transferred to Alice Springs in the early 1980s to work with the then Northern Territory Electricity Commission, and became the executive officer responsible for government activities in the southern region. He has remained in that position in Alice Springs ever since and is now highly regarded.
He has certainly achieved much in his time. He covers a wide range of responsibilities such as capital and minor works, infrastructure development, Senior Territorians, Women’s Policy, Youth Affairs, Multicultural Affairs, Community Engagement and Business and Regional Development. Much is expected of John, but he has a keen interest in community issues and has often been the key driver in many issues in the town. One of them, in particular, was a family feud in an Aboriginal community in Central Australia, and he continues to provide support and guidance after negotiating a resolution. He has a diverse background and has done many different things.
He is chairman of many committees, including the Regional Coordination Committee. He has led many groups. He was behind the Alice in 10 Project. Some of the projects he has been involved in have been Qualify of Life, the Built Environment, the Todd and Charles Rivers, the Red Centre Way. Of the original 19 projects identified under Alice in 10, six have been completed and others continue as core business of various agencies.
One of the most successful projects, and I believe one that John would probably be the most proud of, is the Desert Knowledge Australia. This is the umbrella organisation of national and international activities sharing knowledge and developing partnerships which will, ultimately, benefit all people in Australia, not just in desert Australia. Desert Knowledge Australia has exceeded expectations in that it has now become an entity in its own right. It was established as a statutory corporation in 2003. At that stage, John was the interim chairman of the board for Desert Knowledge Australia and continues to provide input as an elected board member.
He is one of those guys who works hard, and he expects other people to work hard with him. He is fairly laid back; he prefers to take a back seat role rather than a up-front role. He has a keen interest in Alice Springs development. That is what I particularly like about him; he seems to be very passionate about Alice Springs. I am sure government would know that he is behind many projects and he stands up for Alice Springs whenever he can.
The nice part about John that many people may not know is that he has two children and five grandchildren, and he has been a most wonderful husband to Lyn, his wife, who, for many years, has had an illness that took her away from the workforce. John has always stood by her and has been a wonderful husband. I know Lyn would like me to say that.
It is a most deserving award, that we recognise and honour our senior public servants who have given so much of their lives to the Northern Territory and, in this case, to Alice Springs. I say to John, because I have known him for many years, well done. I know we are going to lose him soon, probably one day, because he is near retirement age, but when he does retire, he can at least know that he leaves behind a record of achievements that he has helped to foster, and they certainly have been a great benefit to Central Australia. So, congratulations to John Baskerville.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, today I stand here a proud parent. In May, and officially confirmed, my eldest daughter, Cherise Daiyi, will graduate with Honours with Distinction from Charles Darwin University. Four years prior to coming home, Cherise diligently studied towards gaining her Bachelor of Social Science (Psychology) undergraduate degree at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology. Like any parent, I was overwhelmingly pleased when, at the end of 2004, Cherise decided to come home to live and undertake further study at Charles Darwin University. Her Honours year was an extremely testing experience but, as she always does, she was able to work through whatever obstacles she had to, to produce her final and most important piece of work, her thesis.
The final product is entitled The Psychosocial Aetiology of Alcohol and Cannabis Use and Non-Use at Nguiu on the Tiwi Islands. From a mother’s standpoint, this final product is representative of all her hard work and commitment to the advancement of research and study in the areas of substance abuse amongst her own people, and of the commitment she has made to herself.
Another fantastic and very proud moment was – and I am sure everybody in Darwin and in this House has heard about the Tiwi Bombers and their entry into the AFLNT football for a trial period. I table an article from The Age newspaper which, basically, summed up much of the sentiments, and what had happened with the inception of the Tiwi Bombers. In this article there is a reference to the coach noticing that there had been a reduction in domestic violence, the drinking of alcohol and smoking of cannabis from the time of the creation of the Tiwi Bombers team.
One of the Tiwi Bombers greatest fans who never missed one game was my brother, and I pay tribute to my brother who passed away just a week shy of Christmas last year. I also take this opportunity to note why days like today are so important to my late brother’s memory. Today, John would have turned 52. Although he was halfway over the hill, his passing came far too early. On the countless visits I made to John at the Palliative Care Unit last year, he often reflected on how life was too precious to waste, and the nightmare of finding oneself in a fragile predicament. At his funeral, I attempted to bring back to life the character, personality and meaning of the life of my dear elder brother. The problem was that any words that I was able to string together were a poor and inadequate substitute for the experience of sharing time with him on this earth, and nothing I said that day was going to do justice to his memory.
Before he passed away, he entrusted me with a task of making sure that he got a good and proper send off, and that his burial took place on the Tiwi Island. I struggled with this task and, as unequal as I was to its demand, my brother’s final wishes were fulfilled.
John was the first of 11 children of my parents, Jack and Clare. His early years were at Garden Point near our traditional country. Getting a good education was very important to our parents and, like the rest of us, John attended St John’s College. However indirect the path that Johnny took through life, the one feature that marks it more than any was John’s own commitment to education as a lifelong journey of discovery and self-improvement. His endeavours and efforts in post-secondary school education and vocational training were extraordinarily varied and interesting. His experiences and accumulated learning gave him a rich and diverse range of knowledge and life skills.
This is a man who had qualifications in anthropology, bricklaying and zoology. He was outstanding at both cooking and cleaning, and with him there was no gammon, macho baggage about those being women’s work. He worked at all kinds of jobs and he served in the military. Although he had a slender frame, he was strong and dexterous. No job was too big or small for him. Sometimes, it meant changing the great big tyres for the council’s heavy vehicle; just one more example of those important skills that people valued him for. What made it all the more remarkable was that the qualifications and capacities that my brother acquired over decades of quiet application were never the subject of any display of pride or self-satisfaction. You had to get to know the man well before you could pierce the barrier of that wickedly wry sense of humour, to glimpse the wisdom and depth that harboured in his soul.
He was an adventurer, a pathfinder and a seeker. Although he had a profound and jealously-guarded sense of his own place and identity, both culturally and geographically, he was not shackled to Darwin and the Tiwi Islands by fear of the unknown or a desire for the comforts of the predictable and familiar. To the contrary, he relished the opportunity to travel to other regions and to meet and interact with other people. He lived in Dee Why, Sydney, attended the task force in Adelaide, and travelled widely throughout the country. My brother carried his calling card as a Tiwi man for the Northern Territory of Australia wherever he went. The Tiwi element in the mix of things that made up my brother we knew and loved became increasingly stronger and more dominant in his life from early adulthood onwards and culminated in his decision to return to Nguiu to live and work for the years which tragically turned out to be the final stages of his journey.
Nothing can highlight and underscore what being Tiwi meant to Johnny more than his decision, when still a comparatively young man, to change his name by deed poll to the name of our mother’s family. The courage, conviction and vision that that step must have required went way beyond what most people are capable of, and it still takes my breath away to think about it now. So many fond memories, so many funny episodes and pranks. It is impossible to convey to those of you who did not know him even the ghost of an idea of how entertaining and rewarding a companion this man was to those he loved and trusted, or how distinguished and stoic a human being, regardless of the trials and tribulations he had to endure of which there were many throughout his life; his terminal illness being just one of them.
At the end of the day, all of us, his father, his brothers, his sisters, are seeking solace in our own individual memories and sharing between us those memories. Sharing stories of him will continue for as long as we have each other and as long as we live because that is how much he meant to us.
Finally, and what that brings me to is I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to the wonderful staff. The last six months of that last year of John’s life was probably a road you would not wish your worst enemy to travel. I remember the day after Johnny had died found the eight of us, my sisters and I, with our vehicles all pulling up in front of the Palliative Care Unit. We found it a bit strange that we were there. We were on automatic pilot. During those six months, the staff took us through the inevitable of what was coming, and how to deal with that, and also gave post-support. The staff at the unit need a medal. I do not think there is a big enough medal to pin on those people whose daily task it is to work with families before the grieving process starts.
I suppose the grieving starts from the moment you find out that a family member is diagnosed with a terminal illness. I know that, as a family having gone through a terrible scourge, it has certainly changed my view of euthanasia and cancer, by watching the heartache of other families, and when you know people who have suffered it, just what that grief is. Everyone - the palliative care staff, all the doctors, the nursing staff, the cleaners - made us feel that we were not alone and that there were people who were there to walk with us. I thank them because they did make my brother’s final journey one of comfort and ease. When he did pass away - and I was with him when he went - it was comforting to know that he was not suffering from any pain.
I would like to just quickly add for my sister, Jackie, who provided for John over that time, one of the things that John did appreciate was why my mother had eight daughters. He used to always get cranky with this brother being surrounded by eight girls and in his ear all the time, and lecturing. In his last six months he appreciated just what it meant to have six sisters with him. We rotated him around our different houses, but Jackie had him for most of the initial stages of his treatment, sitting outside on her balcony and radaring at all the passers-by and sharing in the jokes. Whilst it was a sad time for us last year, sharing John’s disease with him brought us closer as a family, and all of us appreciate each day we are here with each other as a family.
When you come from a big family and you are all working and have different careers, sometimes you forget the people who are there, and the last six months with him brought us all back together again. It gave us back the love which was bonded in there by my mother.
Finally, a big thank you to my parliamentary colleagues. Your kind words and heartfelt messages through this time did not go astray. It was a hard six months, and I particularly thank the Chief Minister who gave me a lot of support, because it was not easy.
I am going to save the last thank you for my electorate because those six months did cause me to pull back on some of my electorate duties. When I notified every one of my electorate communities to let them know what was happening and that my visits would be pulled back, I do not think there was one person who criticised or said anything. They all knew this was about family and spending quality time. To the fantastic electorate I represent, I thank you as well because without your support, it is hard to do this job. My family and I appreciated all of your support, thank you.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I want to acknowledge Organ Donor Awareness Week, which is being recognised nationally from 17 to 24 February. I thank Madam Speaker for distributing the green armbands to promote Donor Awareness Week to all members of the Legislative Assembly to wear.
Unless you have been through the experience of a family member or friend going through the illness which accompanies an organ that is failing, it is easier to put the discussion regarding organ donation to the back of your mind or, for some people, right out of your mind. Some people find it too difficult to contemplate that part of their loved one could be used in someone else’s body.
As with so many difficult and challenging decisions, it becomes easier to understand and to accept organ donation when we know and have watched people who have been through this journey. I cannot help but marvel at how wonderful modern medicine is that it can transplant an organ which is no longer useful to a donor into a person who would otherwise have died. The medical expertise required from a broad range of specialists with limited notice and time to be able to carry out this procedure, and change the lives of the recipients, still amazes me. It is truly a wonderful side of medicine.
Of course, the tragic aspect of organ donation is that someone has to die for others to have the opportunity to live, but I, for one, am only too happy to be an organ donor if that situation should ever occur. Should I ever be a suitable donor, I am registered as a donor and carry a donor’s card in my wallet. All my family are well aware of my wishes.
If, through the simple action of registering and making my family aware of my wishes, I am able to help others have a quality of life, then that is how I want it. One donor can save up to 10 lives. I seriously do not know whether I would have that many good parts in me at my age; however, they can have whatever is suitable.
There are two people in Katherine who have been through the organ failure and transplant journey, and I want to acknowledge them and celebrate with them their new opportunity for a quality life. Di Trattles, the wife of Mal Trattles who owns and operates Benash Electrical, and mother of Ben and Shannon, waited for two years for her organ transplant, which was a liver. Most of that time was living away from her family in Brisbane until she successfully had a liver transplant early last year. What a delight it is to see her looking so well again. That two years was a very trying one for Di to be away from her family and Katherine. Every now and then she would return for something special, like her daughter, Shannon’s debutante presentation in 2005. These were very rare trips and were always short as she needed to be on standby in case a suitable donor became available. Her family would also visit her in Brisbane, but it is never the same as all being together at home.
Di has a new lease on life and a better quality of life since her transplant. Her goal and dream is to compete in the Transplant Games in Perth in 2008 in lawn bowls. I know with certainty that she will do very well.
Another long-term Katherine resident to have been through this experience is Richard Morris. Richard was diagnosed with hepatitis and spent many months away from his family in Adelaide while he was receiving treatment. The first time he was away for five months and, after a short stint back home, was back in Adelaide for another seven months. That is a long time to be away from your family, friends and your community, especially in times when you need the reassurance and presence of loved ones around.
From the time Richard was diagnosed with liver cancer, he was fortunate enough to wait for just 22 days for a suitably matched liver donor to become available. What a relief for Richard, his wife, Robyn, and their children, Guy, Kristie, Stacey, Megan and Luke, and their partners. Richard now has a new lease of life and this experience has given him a new perspective about what is important in his life and what is important to him.
A little closer to home, my son-in-law, Wade Neave, is also the lucky recipient of not one, but two kidneys. The first of those was when he was barely a teenager. Following the failure of that kidney years later, Wade was on dialysis for several years. Anyone who has had experience with kidney dialysis knows how restrictive all aspects of your life can be, and we all know there are many Territorians on renal dialysis. I know just how much of a commitment that is, to tie yourself to a machine for so many hours regularly each week. It is very restrictive. Wade was on the transplant list for several years with no match found, so it was very welcome news when his sister was found to be a suitable donor, and very generously and selflessly gave Wade one of her kidneys. I might add that our daughter, Amanda, was also tested and was a suitable donor but his sister was even more suitable. Wade has been able to realise two of his dreams since that time. One was to marry our daughter, Amanda, in a ceremony in Bali, and the other was to travel extensively, which they have been able to do together since that time.
There are a whole lot of people who are affected when a family member suffers organ failure, and that also reflects in the wider community of where they live. The message is that organ donation works and more donors are needed to save more lives. With an average of 200 donors across Australia and New Zealand annually, from the Northern Territory alone, one donor came from Katherine three years ago, one donor from Darwin two years ago, and two donors from Alice Springs last year. I am certain those donors have made a huge difference to the people who received those organs, but with a population of 200 000, I know that it is highly likely there are many more people who have not registered with the Australian Organ Donor Register. It was interesting for me to learn that Australia and New Zealand have an agreement where they work in cooperation in matching suitable donors and recipients. The retrieval team is flown to wherever they are to retrieve the organ. They fly on a commercial flight, if that is possible, or by private air charter, and that could be anywhere and to anywhere in Australia or New Zealand.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I know that Territorians are caring and generous people, and I strongly encourage them to register on the Australian Organ Donor Register. Make your family and friends aware of your wishes and know that you could be helping others to have the opportunity to lead a full life. I sincerely hope that this national awareness week will result in a huge addition to the Australian Organ Donor Register and, in turn, save many more lives.
Mr HAMPTON (Stuart): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to reflect on 2006, particularly in relation to some of the school functions I attended in December throughout my electorate of Stuart. In my electorate, there are some amazing and interesting people working in the education field. I am fortunate enough to have a diverse range of schools, programs, issues and people to keep in touch with.
I attended the Utopia School’s Christmas concert held at Alparra on 14 December 2006. Out of all the schools concerts and presentations I attended, both in town and out bush, this would have been one of the most fun. The Utopia School’s group consists of five homeland learning centres including Mulga Bore, Boundary Bore, Clinic, Apungalindum and Soapy Bore. The men were there cooking a great barbecue and the children were all dressed up in their colourful homeland school uniforms. It was just a fantastic day.
I was pleased to present the inaugural Chief Minister’s Literacy Awards to Allarcia Palmer, a Year 3 student, and Latisha Tilmouth, a Year 5 student, both from the Utopia Clinic Homeland Learning Centre. Kaureen Bird, a Year 3 student from Mulga Bore Homeland Learning Centre, Jazania Ross, a Year 5 student from the Apungalindum Homeland Learning Centre, and Nicole Jones, a Year 7 student from the Soapy Bore Homeland Learning Centre also received awards.
There were also a number of graduates from the Utopia region who received their Certificate III Indigenous Education Work certificate, including Lisa and Natasha Kunoth and Trisha Jones. Others receiving their Certificate IV in Indigenous Education Work were Maggie Bird, Violet Purvis, Rosie Bird, Angela Purvis, Wendy Tilmouth and Rebecca Gunner.
There are around 170 students enrolled across the five homeland learning centres, with attendance up around 69%. Whilst there is plenty of room for improvement, I believe the good attendance can be attributed to the involvement of the local indigenous people in their education system. I make special mention of Lisa Hall, a teacher from the Mulga Bore Homeland Learning Centre, who is currently on study leave. Last year, Lisa was awarded a scholarship in Masters of Education to study secondary education for indigenous education.
The Willowra School held their end-of-year Christmas concert during December, and I was very happy to have been able to attend. Sue McAvoy and the Yapa staff at Willowra have done a commendable job over many years. Like many remote bush schools, the staff and school are often the backbone the community, and their roles in the whole scheme of things should never be underestimated or undervalued. The students put on a very enjoyable play depicting the visit by the three wise men to baby Jesus and his parents, Joseph and Mary. I must say the costumes worn by the children were great and a lot of work had been put into making them.
The Chief Minister’s Literacy Award winners from Willowra last year were Jeremiah Ross, Danielle Collins and Morriszetta Martin.
Throughout my visits to some of the schools in my electorate, I was proud of how the students were all dressed in their uniforms. Whilst some schools in our larger towns struggle with getting students to wear uniforms, most of the schools in the bush have been doing it for years and are leading the way. It is great to see all of these students taking pride in how they are dressed. The parents were all just so excited watching their children performing in their concerts and receiving awards and their presents from Santa.
My simple message to all the school communities I visited was to keep encouraging their kids to attend school regularly, and to work hard at reading, writing and speaking English. It is important for our communities and the indigenous people to maintain our language and culture; however, it is equally important we give our children a better future by getting them to learn to read, write and speak English.
It is also great to see many local indigenous people involved in the education of their children in the bush. Many people have been calling on indigenous people to stand up and be leaders on issues that affect our communities. I say to those critics: get out there in the bush and meet some of these indigenous people who are leading the way. These people are in the frontline of these issues we talk about in parliament, and others talk about on the air waves in town.
I would like to talk about two sporting events that have occurred over the past month here in the Territory. The other week, people from all over the Territory converged on Darwin to watch the Aboriginal All Stars versus the Essendon Bombers. Whilst I could not make it to the game, I would like to talk about one of the games that was played before the big match, and probably did not get the attention it deserved from the media and others.
The Alywarr Eagles played the Lajamanu Swans in an earlier match to the Australian Indigenous Under 17s versus South Africa game. The game between the two completely different groups of young indigenous men was the idea of Kenny Martin. Kenny’s idea became a reality because of his hard work, energy and vision. His constant talking and lobbying of people such me and my colleague, the member for Macdonnell, demonstrated his genuine interest in giving young men a wonderful experience through football. The organisers from Lajamanu were equally pressing about providing their young men with an opportunity of playing in front of a big crowd at Marrara Stadium. Norbit Patrick, Peter Jigili, Dion Kelly, and Geoffrey Barnes supported the young men by organising the transport, accommodation, uniforms, and training sessions with much energy and excitement.
There is no doubt this hard work by Kenny has paid off by not only giving these young men an opportunity to play before such a big match, but also giving them the experience of visiting Darwin for the first time. I am sure the young men who played the game will never forget the experience of playing at Marrara Stadium and then going on to watch some of their idols playing for the All Stars against Essendon. I also want to thank the AFLNT for their support, and particular Tim Beechman in organising the game for these young men, and for providing the umpires and facilities on the big day. I look forward to catching up with the men who journeyed up north for the game, and also to hearing the many great stories about the trip, and looking at their photos.
Over the past week in Alice Springs we have seen the Imparja Cup Indigenous Cricket Carnival being played. I want to quote a couple of sentences from the Cricket Australia’s Chief Executive Officer, James Sutherland, in his media released dated 12 February 2007:
- The Imparja Cup is the games pinnacle event for indigenous cricket, and we are …
that is, Cricket Australia:
- … committed to developing the game for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cricketers.
The Imparja Cup 2007 saw 24 teams competing in four divisions, including the State/Territories Division, Major Centres, Community, and Women’s Divisions. This year, in fact, was the first trip for the women cricketers from Innisfail in Queensland and, in typical Aboriginal fashion, the local ladies took them in like family. Over 300 players competed in the Imparja Cup, bringing into Alice Springs with them team managers and medical staff, as well as family and friends. I have been advised that the Imparja Cup this year contributed around $500 000 to the local Alice Springs economy. The significance of this event should not be underestimated.
The Minister for Sport and Recreation opened the Imparja Cup on Friday night at the Pioneer Racecourse in Alice Springs. Also at the opening was one of Australia’s greatest cricket legends, Rod Marsh, who was the guest speaker. I must admit he is certainly one of my great cricket idols.
I attended the Alice Springs versus Katherine game on the Saturday morning at Centralian College, and the final of the Community Division between the Centre for Appropriate Technology - who happen to be Bruce Walker, the Chairman of the Northern Territory Cricket Association’s team - and Stuart Highway in a close fought game, with Centre for Appropriate Technology taking out the game.
Other winners included New South Wales beating Queensland in the State/Territory Division. It was a tight game. With Queensland winning the last three Imparja Cup titles, it was great to see a change, and it is good for the competition to see New South Wales come up and beat them. Division 1 Major Centres winners was a local team called Gillens Bore who won over Alice Springs. The Women’s Division was won by an Alice Springs team called CGA Cougars defeating the Darwin Crocs, again in a tight game.
It has been reported that the games and the spirit of the carnival was tremendous this year, and the standard of play seemed to up a notch from last year. However, with the competitive games there has always been the respect, the friendship in each team, and a great team spirit that comes with the Imparja Cup.
As with any event of this size, there are many people who rate a mention. By no means in order, I congratulate and thank the following people: Michael McGregor, the Senior Officer of Indigenous Cricket with Cricket Australia, and the NT Cricket Office and staff, including Andrew Ramsey, the CEO; and all the members of the Northern Territory Indigenous Organisation Committee, including Trevor Woodhead, Marcus Rosas, Jenny Croker, Michael McGregor, Ian Redpath, and Peter Lake. Major sponsors were the Lords Taverners Australia, who also had representatives from all over Australia supporting not only the Imparja Cup, but Indigenous Cricket in Alice Springs. I understand the representatives from Lords Taverners were very grateful to see the investments first hand and were very impressed.
This year, the third wicket was also used for the first time at Larapinta Oval. The wicket received favourable comments from all state and territory teams which competed on it. The third wicket was a joint funding arrangement between the Northern Territory government, the Alice Springs Town Council and NT Cricket. This third wicket provides Alice Springs with the capacity to continue to host the Imparja Cup, as a couple of years ago there were murmurs from other states to try to move the event, which would have been a great shame. Along with the third wicket, the new grandstand at Traeger Park was well received and used with many spectators enjoying the views they had from it. Great support from the Alice Springs Town Council also needs to be recognised, particularly in keeping the grounds in great shape.
I pay special tribute to three men from Alice Springs and Tennant Creek for their vision and continuing work in promoting the Imparja Cup. To Shane and Mervyn Franey of Alice Springs and Ross Williams of Tennant Creek, I say well done, and be extremely proud of where the Imparja Cup is today. You deserve the utmost credit for its success since the first game back in 1994.
I also take this opportunity to welcome my new electorate officer, Mathew Adams. Mathew started in December last year after 13 years with the Aboriginal Legal Aid Service in Alice Springs. I am sure all members can appreciate just how important this position is to us all. It is very comforting when you have someone there on whom you can rely. Mathew has been able to quickly pick up the ropes, and I am looking forward to a long partnership with him in the Stuart electorate office.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I make some comments about Chinese New Year. As we all know, the first day of Chinese New Year was celebrated on Sunday, 18 February. Celebrations amongst Chinese families around the Territory will continue for 15 days after 18 February.
Last Sunday was the day when all Chinese people would wear something new, nothing old, and, for a month before Chinese New Year’s day, they would have done a great deal of cleaning of their homes. It is probably where the term ‘spring cleaning’ comes from because 18 February, while being the first day of Chinese New Year, is also variously known as the Spring Festival so people spring clean their house prior to that day. Tradition is that for the first 15 days of Chinese New Year, you do not sweep anything out of the house because that would mean sweeping out all the good fortune that one expects to be coming into the home at the start of each year.
This is the Year of the Pig, the Fire Pig, or the Boar. Some people call it the boar rather than the pig. Whichever way it is, it is the swine that we all know too well. They say that people born in the Year of the Pig are well meaning and generous, persevering and steady, and appreciated for their courage, prosperity and ability. This is something I took from the Internet written by a Feng Shui expert who practises from Adelaide, a man by the name of Richard Giles. He thought that people born of the Year of the Pig have best roles as doctor, mediator, judge, confessor, poet, painter or benefactor. He claims that people born in the Year of the Pig come into this world with a lot of goodness, tolerance and an admiral belief in the perfect ability of mankind.
Saying that, I suppose you can say that pigs might be nave, credulous and over-confident, and, it is thought, sometimes even downright stupid with money. Fortunately, pigs are very lucky with money and, somehow, the money seems to find its way to them so they end their days being very well off and contented.
I know there is a member of our Legislative Assembly who was born in the Year of the Pig and will be celebrating her birthday some time soon this year. For this person who is listening, it also says that pigs love domestic comfort and are also in love with nature. Their idea of heaven is to take long walks in the forest and their ideal house is in the country. I will come back to the political fortunes of the pig year in a little while.
A pig is honest, kind, understanding, has abilities as a peacemaker, and hates any sort of discord or unpleasantness. This book that I am paraphrasing a few pages from is written by Neil Somerville. I have used Neil Somerville’s book for the last 12 years. I started with the first Chinese New Year adjournment back in 1996 with the Year of the Rat. By speaking about the Year of the Pig this year, I have completed a full 12-year cycle. That is an achievement - I have done a full 12-year cycle of the Chinese lunar calendar and its significance to Chinese people.
The pig is an excellent conversationalist, speaks truthfully and to the point, dislikes any form of falsehood or hypocrisy, is a firm believer in justice and the maintenance of law and order. So, the pig who has listened to this on the CCTV at the moment, pigs are reasonably tolerant and I hope you are. They are often prepared to forgive others for their wrongdoings; they rarely harbour grudges, and are never vindictive. Pigs are very popular, enjoy other people’s company and like to be involved in joint or group activities, such as this parliament, I assume, and at functions always want to lend a hand. The best thing about this personality is that they are also excellent fundraisers, so we will be looking towards you for some fundraising for ourselves. They are hard and conscientious workers, who can be relied on to perform their jobs with integrity, and are feeling happiest when they are helping somebody. For that, the pig is highly valued by fellow colleagues and employers.
With all these good things about the pig, what happens then is that it makes the pig a person who has difficulties in saying no, and therein lies a major problem. The pig must learn how to say no and use the ability to recover from setbacks quickly.
In the Year of the Pig – this year is the Year of the Fire Pig – it is thought that it will be a year of great drama and change in politics. It will be interesting to see what changes there are. It says that it is a year where there will be clashes of values and criticism, of unrest, threatened coups or violence in politics, and arguments, disputes and fights over values and rights. It also cautions that those who tackle political issues in a violent, combative or aggressive mode will not do well this year. So, take heed my fellow parliamentarians, those who tackle political issues in a violent, combative or aggressive mode will not do well this year.
At the end of this week, the Chung Wah Society Lion Dance Troupe will be flying to Alice Springs, courtesy of the Department of Multicultural Affairs, which has assisted with funding to purchase airfares. The community of Alice Springs has provided, at no cost to the Chung Wah Society at all, accommodation, meals and transport throughout the three days they will be in Alice Springs. They will be commencing their blessings in the mall, as they do each year, performing on the stage in Todd Mall, followed by letting off a long string of firecrackers to herald in Chinese New Year celebrations to Alice Springs. This year, we can are going to do something slightly different. The numbers of Chinese in Alice Springs has grown significantly, especially over the last 12 months with an influx of Chinese employees who have come under the 457 Visa. There are, in fact, several of this group of Chinese also in Tennant Creek. Hopefully, they will come to Alice Springs to join the rest of the Chinese community and others in Alice Springs to celebrate Chinese New Year.
What is different about this year’s celebrations in Alice Springs is that Sunday afternoon there will be a public gathering at the town council lawns to promote matters Chinese and to encourage the community to assist in the formation of a Chinese support group in Alice Springs. I understand that the Chinese Embassy and the Taiwanese representatives are interested in supporting the activities as well. That would be good for Alice Springs. The Chung Wah Society has been in Darwin for many decades. Unfortunately, Alice Springs has lacked such a formalised support group. Obviously, many of us in Alice Springs provide assistance where we can when strangers who come to town need support or language assistance. They come to see us who are pretty well known in the community and are then pointed in the right direction, if not helped personally.
The lion dance troupe will bless many of the restaurants, homes and businesses over the next two days. Many of the primary schools and childcare centres have also requested to be involved, so the lion dance troupe will be going to those places blessing and performing for the children and demonstrating a small part of the Chinese culture that we know in the Northern Territory.
People in Darwin do not realise how lucky they are that they are so deeply immersed in the Chinese culture. Having that lion dance come to bless this Chamber at the start of each year is a fantastic thing. It is a demonstration of how cosmopolitan our community is in Darwin. There is such a thing as many different cultures and traditions living together in Darwin. This is definitely not just a lot of words but an act, an expression of community support and togetherness. The way that the blessing has occurred over the last 10 years in this Chamber bodes well for the involvement that parliament has with our community in Darwin and Alice Springs.
I look forward to a good and prosperous Chinese New Year and the Year of the Fire Pig. It is going to be a great year. They say that it is a year for completion. Neil Somerville says that pig years are certainly more innovative and, in 2007, we will witness more major inventions. This year, because it marks the end of the full cycle of Chinese years, can be a time for completing unfinished business as much as it can be for achieving a result. For individuals, pig years place great emphasis on family and relationships. Valuing those who are important to you and making the most of your situation and personal hopes can make this a positive and encouraging year. I encourage you to have a good year and Gong Xi Fa Cai!
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I talk about community safety. Every person in the Territory has a right to feel safe, and it is a core function of government to provide the infrastructure in its various forms to make people feel safe. However, it is my view and, indeed, the view of many others, that an increasing number of my constituents and, more generally, the people of Alice Springs do not feel safe, or are feeling less safe in their community. There is obviously a concern that I should bring to the parliament of the Northern Territory.
Put simply, there is a view which I share; that the Territory’s Labor government is failing the people of Alice Springs. The major issues - and there are many – proving to be a concern to so many in the Alice Springs community - and justifiably so - are lack of law and order including youth gangs - a relatively recent phenomena in the town of Alice Springs - and youths running riot in the central business district participating in vandalism, bashings and other crimes.
I also voice the frustration of many on the government’s failure to deliver its own promise. It was no one else’s promise. It was Labor’s promise to deliver 200 extra police on the beat. The government ministers and spin doctors can say and do what they like. They usually do. But there can be no doubt - there is no doubt - that this government promised 200 extra police on the beat. We are now seeing spin in overdrive or, put more bluntly, weasel words coming into play to justify somehow the government’s failure to deliver on what was a fundamental promise.
The crime statistics in Alice Springs tell, to a large extent, their own story. However, we know and it was the former Attorney-General, Peter Toyne, who wrote to the then member of Macdonnell agreeing or asserting there was a generally recognised under-reporting rate in the vicinity of 25% or thereabouts. I know from my constituents that many of them have given up reporting acts of crime because they have a feeling that nothing will be done.
This is not for a moment to be taken as any criticism at all of our police officers. I know from personal experience that the police officers in Alice Springs do a great job, and it is a constant theme when doorknocking and going to various functions both in my electorate and in Alice Springs generally. In other words, people have the utmost respect for members of our police service.
However, the fact that there are increasing levels of despair is something that the government needs to address. I come back to Labor’s failure to deliver 200 extra police on the beat. One cannot help but wonder why it is that the government has failed to deliver on this promise, and why it is that they cannot come clean and admit their failure to do so. Everyone wants to see the government deliver on its promise. Why? Because the people who are affected by crime have an expectation that with more police on the beat there will be less crime, there will be less criminal activity, there will be less vandalism, and people will feel safer.
In relation to youth gangs, on about Saturday, 3 February, there were two separate group bashings near the 24-hour bakery in Alice Springs. On both occasions, two long-term residents of Alice Springs were set upon by groups in what I understand to be unprovoked attacks. These young people were beaten and both of them required medical treatment. It is just one example, but people in the Top End will, I am sure, remember the man who was bashed - and seriously so - at the end of the Masters Games in Alice Springs in October last year. It is unacceptable that residents of Alice Springs are unable to go about their business and feel safe as they expect. They have every right to expect to feel safe in their community.
When we have gangs of young people roaming the central business district after dark, participating in mindless vandalism or group bashings or other serious crime, I would have thought that even those things would make this government act. The community, to the extent that I can gauge this, is generally disillusioned with government because they see the government’s failure to deliver on their promises affecting their daily lives.
It illustrates why it is that a group of concerned and frustrated business people, for example, took up the challenge to lobby for and ultimately provide closed circuit TV cameras in the CBD. These people did not take no for an answer and pushed the idea. So many of these business people pledged their own money - I will repeat that: their own money - towards provision of security cameras or CCTV cameras in the Todd Mall in the CBD. These people have shown that they are outraged and tired of the activities that have been occurring after dark and, for that matter, during the day in the Todd Mall and other hotspots in the CBD.
I have been a supporter of CCTV cameras for many years and made a representation to council several years ago encouraging the council to look at CCTV cameras. Hence my interest in the area and why I supported that group of business men and women who pushed so hard for the provision of CCTV cameras. I am, with them, delighted that the Alice Springs Town Council finally agreed to support the installation of security cameras in trouble spots in the CBD of Alice Springs. The council and its members have realised that there is no option but to pursue the safety of the community and there is, by implication, a recognition that the efforts of this government to date have not worked. It is curious, to say the least, and outrageous on another interpretation that this Labor government is opposed to the installation of CCTV cameras in the central business district of Alice Springs. Indeed, in response to a petition calling for the CCTV cameras, the current police minister said: ‘There is currently no demonstrated need’.
Today in parliament, the Chief Minister was talking about Community Cabinet. She gloated about the fact that her ministerial colleagues have met in places other than Darwin. Well, bully for you. When you go to other places in the Territory, you should at least do the people with whom you are talking the courtesy of listening to them. The minister gloated in parliament today that Community Cabinet and the forums associated with Community Cabinets provided an opportunity for people to talk to ministers and for government to get in touch with the community.
I cannot help but wonder what the ministers do when they are actually talking to people. In the absence of closing their eyes and falling asleep, and in the absence of stuffing whatever material in their ears to block the noise, one can reach the conclusion that these people - that is, Territory government ministers - are not listening. If they were listening to the people of Alice Springs, instead of saying there is no need for CCTV cameras in the mall, the police minister and his colleagues would say: ‘Yes, there is, and we will put our hands in our pockets’.
The Alice Springs Town Council, to its credit, has allocated $100 000 to kick start the installation of CCTV cameras in the CBD. I understand that the full cost of security camera installation is estimated to be about $250 000. I further understand that $150 000 of grant monies has been applied for. Where is the Northern Territory government in this process? It does not, on the face of it, even want to bother kicking in some money such is the contempt that this government and its ministers in particular have for the people of Alice Springs.
The bottom line is that there is widespread dissatisfaction with this government. This government has become the very things it says it objected to and did not like in the former CLP administration. They said that the former CLP government was arrogant and did not listen. If ever there was a government that was arrogant and did not listen, it is this one. If ever there was a government that treated the people of Alice Springs - and I am one of them - with arrogant contempt, it is this government under the leadership - or, I should say, lack of it - of the Chief Minister and member for Fannie Bay. She is not alone in her contempt. It is widely shared, in my view and, indeed, the view of others, by all of her ministerial colleagues.
That is why minister Lawrie has so quickly dismissed the idea of a youth curfew. The town council put together what it called a Youth Strategy. Under the strategy, unsupervised children younger than 15 years old would be taken into protective custody if found on the street between 10.30 pm and 5 am. Council members told our council meeting that the public believes there is a problem with youth in Alice Springs and moved to pressure the government to address the issues. Why then would a minister of this government say: ‘No, no, no, that is not a good idea because this criminalises children’? Firstly to illustrate that she has no understanding of the council’s Youth Strategy but, secondly and more importantly, it illustrates that she, like her colleagues, is simply not prepared to even consider ideas from the people of Alice Springs.
The CLP is on the record, as per the last election, in relation to its view on a curfew. In June 2005, the CLP launched a new public order legislation package to impose curfews for troublemaking juveniles as part of a package of tough new law and order initiatives to crack down on antisocial behaviour in Alice Springs. The minister for Police takes the view that incidents of social behaviour are sporadic in Alice Springs, and particularly in the central business district. He clearly does not live there, and that is, again, yet another example of a government minister showing contempt for, not only the people I represent, but for the people of Alice Springs generally.
Whilst no one can say that everyone in Alice Springs takes the view that the council’s Youth Strategy for the curfew - or call it whatever you like - is a necessarily good idea or will work, the fact that the government so arrogantly and flippantly dismisses anything that comes from Alice Springs is to its eternal shame. What is concerning - and again, the government has not even picked up on this - is that there are people forming groups in Alice Springs. There is Alice in 5, and Advance Alice - groups of concerned citizens who have come together to act and to develop better outcomes and strategies for Alice Springs. The government should be doing that and they are failing.
In a month or so, members of this government will go to Alice Springs, with hand on heart and declare their undying love and loyalty to the people of Alice Springs. Well, actions speak louder than words. A phrase that I anticipate members will hear from the opposition, as well as those barracking from the sidelines, I might add, is every time a government minister feigns love and affection for the people of Alice Springs, we will say: ‘People do not believe you’. We do not believe you because you continue to treat the people of Alice Springs with contempt. You do not care about them. The Chief Minister only goes there on a fly-in/fly-out basis. She has breached her own promise in that regard. The government should be ashamed of itself. I say again, they need to do better. I urge them to do so, so that better outcomes can be achieved for the people of Alice Springs.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016