2007-11-28
Madam Speaker Aagaard took the Chair at 10 am.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, pursuant to the provisions of Standing Order 12, I revoke all previous warrants and lay on the table my warrant nominating Ms Malarndirri McCarthy, Mr James Burke, Ms Kerry Sacilotto, Mr Rob Knight, and Mr Gerry Wood to act as Deputy Chairmen of Committees when requested so to do by the Chairman of Committees and Deputy Speaker.
Mr HENDERSON (Tourism): Madam Speaker, this morning I inform the House of the 2007 Brolga Northern Territory Tourism Awards held on Saturday, 17 November, at Ooraminna Station Homestead in Alice Springs. I had great pleasure attending the event in the heart of our magnificent country, celebrating the Brolgas’ 21st anniversary with some 320 industry colleagues. The Brolga Awards are part of the Australian Tourism Awards program that celebrate and promote success in tourism by rewarding industry achievement, dedication and commitment to excellence.
This year’s Brolgas evolved to incorporate a streamlined entry process with fewer questions, shorter submission lengths and field requirements for supporting documentation. Equally exciting for 2007 was the trial of the new online submission for two award categories. In its trial phase, our entrants overcame some technological challenges and, through perseverance and valuable feedback, our tourism industry will enjoy a smoother online submission system in the future.
All entrants this year were offered free workshops and a structured mentoring program by Tourism NT to assist in their submission preparation. Tourism NT has been active in lobbying at the national level for its participation on the Australian Tourism Awards Working Group to ensure the categories and criteria of the awards remain relevant and encourage increased participation from our industry in the future.
The prizes were improved by Tourism NT, offering business category winners fantastic new incentive packages worth up to $2500 to develop their businesses. The prize packages included funding for industry attendance at a relevant trade show, consumer show or tourism conference, cooperative advertising support, and business accreditation fees.
This year’s winners were announced across 17 business categories and three individual categories including the new Young Achiever Award, introduced this year to recognise and encourage the personal and professional commitment of our younger industry members. This award is specific to the Territory and was presented to Matthew Turner from Alice Springs Desert Park, an inspirational young achiever who has overcome severe disabilities to become an outstanding tour guide and the inaugural winner of this award. Young Matthew is an inspiration to many.
I was delighted to see the number of entries in the fiercely contested New Tourism Development category. This category is for new businesses only and received the most number of entries in this year’s awards. The category winner was Bamurru Plains on the Mary River floodplains. Tourism NT’s Business Growth Award went to Airborne Solutions, whose $5000 prize package will enable them to attend a national or international tourism event, or a specifically tailored sales trip. I am happy to report that last year’s winner, Venture North, have this year taken out the Heritage and Cultural Tourism category so will now head to Canberra for the Australian Tourism Awards.
The Brolga Awards were judged by a panel of 18 judges who were, this year, under the long-term stewardship of Bob Woodward. The venue sponsor, Ooraminna Station Homestead, was a tribute to our industry, providing genuine outback hospitality. Set amidst the spectacular Ooraminna Ranges, the awards were presented beneath the stars as guest enjoyed a hearty country-style dinner and a delightful speech by Sally, our host, who I think should appear in our tourism advertising campaigns.
As part of Tourism NT’s effort to embrace the future through innovation, the prestigious Brolga trophy was this year revitalised thanks to the expertise of world renowned designer Vince Frost and manufacturer, Robert Foster. Vince Frost was the designer behind the Share our Story campaign, and now he has become part of our story by providing his expertise free of charge, investing in a significant amount of time and resources in developing the new Brolga trophy.
Madam Speaker I extend on my sincerest congratulations to all winners of the 2007 NT Brolga Awards. Our winners will go on to represent the Northern Territory at the Australian Tourism Awards. State and territory finalists are judged against strict rules and guidelines and winners will be announced during an awards evening in Canberra on 29 February 2008. I wish all of our NT finalists the best of luck at the Australian Tourism Awards. It really was a great night.
Mr CONLAN (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, it was a great night. I had a terrific night at the Brolgas a couple of weeks ago, not quite as good as alleged in some parts of the media, though. It was a terrific night, and I know that the …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr CONLAN: I know that the Chief Minister can search deep into his conscience and even he would probably have to admit that because we did speak to each other briefly throughout the course of the evening. He had his jacket off very early and was dancing on the stage to Silverchair, which was fantastic. Seriously, it was a great evening. There were 320 people, I think, at the Brolgas. I concur with the Chief Minister about Matt Turner; it was a fantastic achievement.
The Royal Flying Doctor Service was, once again, nominated for Most Significant Attraction and the Chairman’s Choice, a fantastic part of Central Australia and the Northern Territory. The MacDonnell Range Holiday Park is unstoppable, picking up their award for about the fourth or fifth time in a row. CATIA boss, Peter Grigg, who has come across from Kununurra, has been in town for five or six weeks and he collected the award for CATIA, which is, of course, is soon to be Tourism Central Australia.
Paul Ah Chee and Sylvia Wolf took out the king Brolga Award for this year. It was fantastic for them to win the Chief Minister’s Perpetual Trophy.
It was a terrific night. Bill and Jan Hayes and Sally gave a fantastic talk, as the minister said. He even mentioned in his speech that perhaps he would be a great asset to tourists in the Northern Territory. He is a real character and it just rolls off the top of the tongue. All in all, Bill and Jan at Ooraminna, have a fantastic spot and a great night had by all.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I did not attend the Brolga Awards but I believe it was a great night and some of you had a really good time. Let me say, though, it was historic in that so many of the Alice Springs tour people won awards. It is a great indication of how healthy the tourism industry is in Alice Springs in Central Australia. We have to take off our hats to people like Paul Ah Chee who has been flying the flag for so long, and Brendan Heenan at the MacDonnell Range Holiday Park who has done so well.
Matthew Turner is a fabulous young man. If any of you ever have the chance to meet with him, do so because he personifies young people who can achieve in the face of adversity. I take off my hat to Matthew. His award was great.
Ooraminna is a great place. Any of you ministers who are looking to have a function in Alice Springs and are wondering where to have it, consider Ooraminna. Jan Hayes is a fantastic host. It is a credit to her. We had the Territorian dinner there not long ago and it was outside; it is a beautiful venue. They deserve an award for what they have done for tourism and for Central Australia.
Minister, like you, I wish all finalists the best of luck at the national level. It is an indication of ‘we can do it’. We should be promoting tourism and getting behind all the people who are working their butts off to make a living. I congratulate everyone in Central Australia and the rest of the Territory who were finalists in the awards. It is a great effort.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arts and Museums): Madam Speaker, last month I had the pleasure of meeting with the CEO of the Australian Business Arts Foundation, or AbaF, Jane Haley, along with Susan Benham-Page of the South Australian chapter of AbaF. It was a valuable meeting. Since the election of the Labor government in 2001, I and my predecessor as Arts minister, have been active in encouraging links between the business sector and the arts sector here in the Northern Territory. We have done this in the belief that important and mutually beneficial partnerships can be formed between these two sectors. In many areas, we recognise that business and arts sector partnerships can do far better than government is ever able to do.
AbaF was established in 2000 by the federal government to do just that: build real and enduring connections between business and the arts. AbaF operates in each state through state-based networks of businesses called chapters. However, there are thus far no chapters established in the Northern Territory or the Australian Capital Territory. However, the South Australian chapter of AbaF, with the support of AbaF CEO, Jane Haley, has been making forays into the Northern Territory holding training workshops for the arts sector, as well as quietly encouraging business links with art organisations and working on business planning and supplying members of governing boards.
AbaF is not a funding body as such, nor is it narrowly involved in encouraging direct financial support from business to the arts, although that is an important part of its advocacy. AbaF’s three programs are:
(1) partnering, in which AbaF promotes and builds links between artists, art organisations and local government with business organisations;
(3) giving, looking at ways business might be involved in donating and making grants to the arts sector.
The Northern Territory business sector is very small compared with other jurisdictions, and the kinds of businesses we have here have often not traditionally seen the value of links with the art sector. While there are some wonderful examples of business sponsorship to the arts already in the Territory, we would like to see this expand in both size and nature.
As a result of my initial discussions with AbaF, we are committed to assisting in building a chapter of AbaF in the Northern Territory. At this stage, AbaF is interested in funding a part-time position for AbaF here in the Territory. I have committed to providing in-kind support for that position and am prepared to discuss other forms of support.
The initial model we have discussed would build on AbaF members from the South Australian chapter who also have significant business operations and branches here in the Northern Territory. Those branch offices and operations will be encouraged to form the nucleus of an AbaF chapter for the Territory. It will not happen overnight; it will be an organic development. However, it will be a welcome addition to the arts landscape here in the Territory.
Each year, AbaF holds prestigious national awards honouring best practice and great successes in developing relationships between the business and the art sector. These national awards flow from state-based awards, and I am sure that there will be support from both sides of politics here in this Assembly for the establishment of a Territory AbaF chapter. I am certain we will share the hope that examples of business and art partnerships which will, in the future, feature in those national AbaF awards.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for her report. Yes, we certainly support a chapter being established in the Northern Territory. There are so many artists who do not have the skills for business planning or marketing their products. It is very important that they have assistance. There are a lot of individual enturpreauers in the Northern Territory who are perfectly skilled in doing it, but I definitely support the establishment of a chapter here. I look forward to having a briefing on the matter.
Mr VATSKALIS (Defence Support): Madam Speaker, I report on my recent visit to Brisbane to meet with the senior management teams of two companies, Australian Aerospace and Haulmark Trailers Australia.
Australian Aerospace is the only helicopter manufacturer in Australia and New Zealand. It is wholly owned by Eurocopter, one of the world’s largest manufacturers of helicopters and part of the EADS group, which is the largest aerospace and defence company in Europe. Australian Aerospace is the manufacturer of the Tiger Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter which Defence is acquiring as part of an extensive helicopter replacement program.
Seventeen of the fleet of 22 helicopters will be based in Robertson Barracks with 1st Aviation Regiment from 2008 onwards. The value of the Tiger acquisition and sustainment program is well over $1bn.
Australian Aerospace will deliver through-life support for this fleet for 15 years and more. Australian Aerospace has confirmed that deep-level through-life support maintenance and routine maintenance for the Tigers based in the Northern Territory will be undertaken in Darwin. They have established a workforce at Robertson Barracks and are now preparing to receive and support the helicopters when they start arriving next year. Another company, THALES, which is a partner with Australian Aerospace in the Tiger program, will also establish a team at Robertson Barracks to support the simulator training.
The Tiger helicopter is very advanced technology. They have been described as ‘flying computers with weapons on board that can really upset your day’. They are considered to be the most advanced aircraft based in Australia and the most advanced helicopter in the world.
My reason for visiting Australian Aerospace was twofold: to strengthen the Northern Territory’s relationship with this company and their commitment to undertake as much as possible of the through-life support for the Tiger helicopter in Darwin; and to receive a briefing on the Tiger program and explore what the opportunities might be for local industry participation in the through-life support activity.
We do not have a significant aerospace sector in the Northern Territory compared with other states. However, Australian Aerospace has confirmed that they are looking to engage with suitably accredited small businesses that can deliver specific support. Such support could be in the areas of delivering tools, consumables, rotables, calibration services, non-destructive testing and minor composite repair. The company is also interested in working with registered training organisations to access apprenticeship candidates.
They are also working with Army to provide a small number of transition training aircraft with ‘glass cockpits’. The EC-135 is a very popular civil-type aircraft which is in great demand around the world. These aircraft will be operated in Darwin as part of the Tiger program, and Australian Aerospace’s preferred aircraft operator for this aircraft will need to establish operations in Darwin and utilise support from local businesses. Australian Aerospace is also investigating the potential for developing a major warehouse facility in Darwin to be the point of import and domestic despatch for repairable items in their aerospace pipeline.
During the visit I was accompanied by Mr Andrew Jones, Executive Officer of the local branch of the Australian Industry and Defence Network (AIDN); Mr Neil Ringshaw, Chief Operations Officer of the Industrial Foundation for Accident Prevention; and Mr Greg Haigh, Chairman of the Board of Accrete who also represented RANms.
I was pleased to see, as part of Australian Aerospace’s briefing, that they confirmed the ARH Underwater Escape Trainer is to be based in Darwin, and the company is working closely with Accrete to establish the training capability, including provision of the device for training the Tiger crews.
As I said earlier, this helicopter is very advanced technology. My department has previously facilitated discussions between Australian Aerospace and Charles Darwin University to explore whether a relationship could be pursued between the two organisations. It is worth reflecting for a moment on the considerable economic contribution that the relocation of 1st Aviation Regiment from Queensland to the Territory is delivering:
$82m infrastructure development at Robertson Barracks;
To round off my trip to Brisbane, I visited Haulmark Trailers to advance my discussions with Mr Spencer Grammer, Managing Director, and Mr Mike Ireland, General Manager of Haulmark. Haulmark is now the preferred tenderer to provide over 3000 trailers to be manufactured and supported. Naturally, many of these trailers will be for the Army at Robertson Barracks.
I was very impressed by the professionalism, enthusiasm and tenacity that this company has displayed through the lengthy tendering period. Members of Legislative Assembly will have noted some earlier media articles announcing that Haulmark has committed to establishing a $10m facility at the Defence Support Hub to manufacture the trailers and deliver through-life support for those trailers to be based in the Northern Territory.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, we were struck by the minister’s report. We thought it was curious, with respect, given that you brought on a statement about Defence and Defence-related issues last night, which is still to be debated in parliament today. I am compelled to ask why it was that you did not include what you have just said in the statement. It is a mystery to us. I feel certain, however, that is a mystery to you. Perhaps, Madam Speaker, this says much about the new leadership team.
I was asked a question by journalists last night: ‘Do you think there has been a brain drain now that the member for Fannie Bay and the member for Nhulunbuy have stepped out of the picture?’ ‘Yes’, in essence, was my reply.
These people, despite not being perfect, and they have heard from me over the years about their imperfections at length, at least, I thought, had a measure of intellectual competence, the likes of which is not matched, and not matched by a country mile, by the new leadership team,. Why am I saying this? It is because the strategy team has not worked itself out. They have not worked out that there is an opportunity, milked by government traditionally under the old leadership, to put government’s best foot forward.
Instead, we see an effort by the minister, no doubt taking instructions from the leadership group. I do not know how he voted in caucus. Perhaps he is as unhappy with the new leadership and other ministers as everyone else in the Territory. In any event, it is very interesting that you would present this report. I believe not all goes well for government. However, I only have about 13 seconds left.
It is curious and brave for you to talk about Defence and support, given that your new Chief Minister, a failed minister, was not able to get on with providing the Defence support hub.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for his report. It runs on from yesterday’s statement. I have not gone through the strategy he gave us yesterday yet, but I presume it is part of the same strategy. It is important to the Territory that we attract as many industries, either from our own industrial base or from interstate to the Territory, and work through the through-life support programs for all the equipment in the Defence area, especially the Tiger helicopter squadron. Anyone living in the rural area these days will often see the Tiger helicopter squadron flying past; they do it on a regular basis.
You mentioned the helicopter underwater escape facility. That raised a question as to what has happened to the facility at Berrimah and whether that still exists. Will that complement what the Defence Forces are doing, or will this be a separate facility all together?
On another issue, and this is one I am sure Knuckeys Lagoon people would be asking you, minister: will there be any move to look at reducing the traffic issues that surround Robertson Barracks? People do not have a problem with the Tiger helicopter squadron coming to Robertson Barracks, but with that comes extra people, extra traffic and extra noise, and complaints from the Knuckeys Lagoon people. During the federal election, it was stated by Mr Tollner that he would provide some funds to go towards rerouting Campbell Road. I believe Mr Hale also said that that would happen. It would need support from the NT government and the Litchfield Shire Council, so I am interested to know whether the government will support some changes to the traffic from Robertson Barracks because with all these extra facilities, traffic will only get heavier.
Mr VATSKALIS (Defence Support): Madam Speaker, if you need any proof that the Leader of the Opposition had no clue about Defence and Defence Support, today is a very good example. Yesterday’s statement was about strategy; today it is about the reality of things that happen here. I know you are upset. I know you are dumbstruck about the loss of your party during the election, and the loss of the Prime Minister’s seat. The surprise will continue today when you find that one of your mates, Dave Tollner, will lose his seat. You probably will not be very upset about it, because we know what David Tollner thinks about the Leader of the Opposition, which he made clear in public.
However, once again I point out that yesterday was a strategy statement; today it is about reality. I will be very happy to provide a briefing. I know you will not take a briefing, and I know that you have not even bothered to meet with industry in the Territory. We also know what the industry thinks after your ludicrous performance yesterday afternoon in this House.
Ms LAWRIE (Planning and Lands): Madam Speaker, I report on the Northern Territory government’s current land release strategies. The government strategically releases Crown land for residential purposes to meet projected population needs. The city of Palmerston has been the foundation of suburban growth over the last 15 years. Bellamack is the next suburb to be developed and is well located on our road network, and only 4 km from the services of Palmerston Town Centre.
It is important that housing opportunities are provided to all Territorians, and 15% of the Bellamack lots will be retained for first homebuyers, affordable and public housing. The approximate development area of Bellamack is 90 ha, with a potential yield of over 700 lots. Over 20% of the total area will be retained as open space and will include formal parks, drainage reserves and remnant vegetation.
The expressions of interest for the development of our new suburb attracted great interest from the development industry. Thirteen submissions were received by the closing date of 2 November, and the evaluation panel is currently assessing the submissions and will shortly report to government with a short list of proponents. Those on the short list will be invited to come forward with detailed development proposals.
The government is releasing Bellamack by creating three development leases to provide competition in the marketplace. There are two residential lease areas and one commercial residential lease for the development of the neighbourhood village. The first lots in Bellamack are expected to be available towards the end of 2008.
Government recently announced the rationalisation for the operations of the Berrimah Research Farm. This means that the majority of land is surplus to our requirements and is ideally situated halfway, between Darwin and Palmerston, for urban development. The Department of Planning and Infrastructure has prepared preliminary concepts for development that will see the northern most area of the site of some 20 ha being made available for light industry on a range of lot sizes. The design is such that it provides an extension of the existing industry and appropriate buffers for the development of the balance of the site. Approximately 80 ha are available for residential development, a mix of densities, including medium density unit-type housing. Together with single dwellings, this site will also provide around 700 dwellings with an expected population of 1800.
This government is committed to providing for first homebuyers in the Territory. This site also has potential for affordable housing and social housing. In all, some 20% of the present farm site will be available for both formal and informal open space. It will have its green zones. Government is more than aware of the declining affordability of housing nationally. The release of this strategically located parcel, together with Bellamack, and combined with the developments at Lee Point and elsewhere, will provide additional land supply and, importantly, choice for those in the residential market.
In Alice Springs, the government entered into an indigenous land use agreement with the native title holders in April 2004 to enable the Larapinta Stage 4 residential development to proceed. Titles to 40 residential lots at Stirling Heights, the first phase of Larapinta Stage 4 land release, were issued in February 2006, with all blocks being sold off the plan. The second phase on Albrecht Drive was sold under a development lease by public auction on 8 November this year. This development will provide a further 38 single dwelling lots and one multiple dwelling lot to the Alice Springs market. This is great news for the people of Alice Springs who want to build their own home.
The Larapinta blocks will be available for purchase off the developer’s plan early next year. The lease requires the developer to sell six serviced blocks back to the government for release for first homebuyers under the HomeNorth Scheme. The government will also purchase the multiple dwelling block to be developed for seniors public housing.
The release of blocks for residential housing is part of the Mt Johns Valley subdivision in Alice Springs is also a step closer, with the advertising of tenders for the commencement of headworks for Mt Johns Valley. The Northern Territory government has committed $1.3m to complete this work. The initial release at Mt Johns is expected to deliver at least 70 blocks into the Alice Springs market. Negotiations with native title holders are progressing well. Into the future, Mt Johns Valley is expected to provide up to 600 residential lots.
Our land release strategy strikes the right balance; it meets housing demand while safeguarding the existing property market. The last thing homeowners want to see is a decline in their property values.
Kevin Rudd made several announcements on housing affordability and has promised to fast-track the release of Commonwealth land for residential development. We will be talking to the new Labor government to identify opportunities for the release of Commonwealth land in the Territory.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, at the outset there is difficulty responding to this with some seriousness because it was not so long ago that this minister and this government, who proclaimed their great announcement that they were going to release land, were obstructing any argument calling on them to release land. They used one set of arguments to resist the call to release land, and this very minister stood in this Chamber and, apparently sincerely, believed that position until Cabinet chose to take an alternative position which was, in fact, the need to respond to what families are calling for.
These are families, people who have children, who have no hope of getting into affordable housing. There was the minister over there with one particular line, sincerely, apparently, believing it. That is why I find great difficulty in this. You can stick to your lines as though you do believe it and, then, when there is a decision change in Cabinet, then you espouse the alternative position and equally sincerely hold that position. What is true? What is reality? Who knows? It is a game.
The fact is you were asked a series of questions, minister, on this matter and you are unable to answer them. Can you tell us when the first house will be released in Bellamack? How much will it cost for that home? You were asked those before and you fluffed around the place. You are a pretty good performer in parliament but, when we are looking at the reality and the truth, we are finding there is a fair gap between what you say and what is endeavouring to be discovered. How much will it be for that house? How much will an ordinary person, an ordinary family man, a mum and dad, need to earn to be able to support that kind of cost? We have not had those sorts of answers. I am disappointed to have people coming up to me at the markets being so excited based on the advertisements that this government run, which are in fact fallacious ...
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, the overall time for ministerial reports has expired.
Reports noted pursuant to standing orders.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move the following motion: That -
Was it not an interesting day yesterday, Madam Speaker? The new Chief Minister said on radio that most people in the Territory supported Local Government reform and amalgamation. Indeed, in today’s Northern Territory News the following is reported:
He went on to say:
We, and indeed so many others, were disappointed and stunned – mind you, there have been a few astonishing things happen in the last couple of days – and genuinely shocked to hear that level of arrogance from the new Chief Minister. This is the bloke who said in his first media conference or in his early media interviews, that he wanted to ‘reach out to Territorians’. He backed himself and, indeed, has been backing himself for some time, into a corner. He thinks that he is going to do a significantly better job than his predecessor. The Chief Minister has assured all and sundry that he is reaching out, is going to do things differently and, by implication at least, be a better Chief Minister than his predecessor. That remains to be seen in a number of areas.
This government does not have a mandate from Territorians to embark on the radical reform that has been embarked upon, and any suggestion that it does is just wrong. This was not an issue that came to light, in any way, shape or form, prior to the 2005 election. As has been said in this place on more than one occasion, we and the many other Territorians support in-principle reforms. Some of the reforms are good; we make no bones about that.
However, the method of reform is wrong and reeks of arrogance for this reason: the minister and Chief Minister said that this is what they where going to do; they announced their plans and then they said they were going to consult. That is a curious way for a government to conduct itself. I refer members to what the new Leader of Government Business said in this place on 28 August this year:
A truer word has never been said, Madam Speaker, and I heartily congratulate the new Leader of Government Business for her comments in that regard. It is an arrogant government that says: ‘This is what we are going to do and, by the way, we are going to consult you’.
Hence why it is that the amalgamations in particular and the process of a method of reform that the government has embarked upon have been met with universal condemnation. Indeed, we have to date seen a steamrolling by the government. Just because the member for Fannie Bay now sits in a different chair does not alter the fact that, collectively, government, and in particular Cabinet, has a lot to answer for and has, it can fairly be levelled, acted disgracefully in relation to this issue.
We have seen this government steamroll over objections from, and let me list them: the Cattlemen’s Association; the Chamber of Commerce; the Minerals Council; the Territory Construction Association; the Australian Trucking Industry Association; the NT Business Council; the Northern Land Council; the Alice Springs Town Council; and the Darwin City Council. These are groups, oft cited by government ministers in this place and outside as being peak bodies, impressive bodies, and ones to whom government members refer when it suits them. What has government done in light of these organisations’ opposition to the reforms? The government has tried to fly under the radar; they have tried to water them down. I know that they have been meeting with key organisations. I also know that government has indicated to them on several occasions that, yes, they will take their concerns into account, but hang on until the federal election, hang on until this, hang on until that. Now, Madam Speaker, we are in a position where the government will introduce legislation tomorrow that will give effect to the reforms arrogantly imposed by this government.
Well, you cannot have it both ways. Hypocrisy does not work well in life or in politics. Any government worth its salt would have to listen to these organisations. Let me repeat them, Madam Speaker: the Cattlemen’s Association; the Chamber of Commerce; the Minerals Council; the Territory Construction Association; the Australian Trucking Industry Association; the NT Business Council; the Northern Land Council; the Alice Springs Town Council; and the Darwin City Council. Impressive groups, and groups that should be taken notice of, one would have thought.
Over and above that, here is a bundle of the petitions that have been tabled in parliament. There are an enormous number of people who have put their names to these petitions. We see petitions in this place regularly. What we do not see is a bundle like this. The only bundle I have seen that has been bigger than this was the bundle tabled in respect of the government’s ill-fated decision to sell the TIO. All of us know that this is a hell of a bundle of documents. This is a hell of a bundle of signatures. This a lot of Territorians who are expressing their displeasure, and I suppose I am being polite, about the process of government reform that the government has embarked upon, and the actual nuts and bolts, to the extent that the nuts and bolts are understood.
There have been drafts of documents left, right and centre. There have been seriously mixed-up messages coming from people in government. In relation to local government, even yesterday it was curious, and we noted with great interest in my office when we heard the new Chief Minister say that we, the Territory, miss out on funding and in particular road funding for unincorporated areas. Not true, Madam Speaker. I think he said it before; I do not know why he has such a block with this issue. The fact is that the Commonwealth provides road funding to areas incorporated or not. $12m was allocated from July 2005 in the Territory unincorporated areas. Things are not going well for the new Chief Minister.
Either way, the fact is that the community is getting mixed messages from government. Hard-working Territorians have taken the time to sign a petition. Key industry groups are exhausted. Why do I know this? Because they talk to me. You know that they talk to us. They are exhausted and frustrated with their efforts and endeavours to get government to see sense. That would explain, would it not, why some of these organisations banded together and embarked on a significant advertising campaign? We do not see in the Territory many advertising campaigns from many community groups or bundled together chunks of community groups, but we saw it here. We also saw it with the TIO issue.
I would have thought that, for an all-knowing, all-seeing new Chief Minister, this would be an opportunity since he said he wanted to reach out, to do as his predecessor has been urged for some time; namely, to stop, listen and start again. This is the new Chief Minister’s opportunity to listen to concerns of ordinary Territorians. He can stop the process now. He can engage in genuine, and I stress genuine, consultation with Territorians and Territory ratepayers and then put a proposal for reform before the people at the next Territory election. That is a prudent course of action, particularly, one would have thought, for a new Chief Minister. Over and above the key interest groups and industry bodies and the petitions, we should not forget that it was during the last sitting we saw a couple of hundred cars circling this building on the roads that surround it, protesting ...
Mr Knight: It was not organised by you, was it?
Ms CARNEY: I have not seen …
Mr Knight: It was not organised by you.
Ms CARNEY: Well, if the member for Daly would be any good …
Mr Knight: You are asleep at the wheel. You did not organise it, did you?
Ms CARNEY: … he would have been a minister. He would have been a minister.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr Knight: You have done nothing. You are asleep at the wheel.
Ms CARNEY: Bring it on, sport, bring it on.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Mr Knight: You were asleep at the wheel. You did not organise it. You did not organise it.
Ms CARNEY: You would have been a minister. Bring it on, sport, bring it on.
Mr Knight: You did not organise it did you? You have done nothing. Nothing.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order, member for Daly!
Mr Conlan: It does not matter who organised it.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, member for Greatorex!
Mr Knight: The shadow minister does not even know where parts of the electorate are.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr Conlan: The fact is they were there; it does not matter who did it.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It does say a lot, an awful lot, about the member for Daly that he was beaten to the ministry by the members for Millner and Sanderson. You must be feeling awful. You must be feeling just awful. Mind you, there is an up side to everything because now the minister for Primary Industry, the member for Drysdale, I reckon I know who he would have voted for, can claim not to be the worst minister in the Territory Labor government. Good luck to him because we know he was very upset after the last Question Time. In fact, we know was very upset after the last question. However, Madam Speaker, I digress …
Dr BURNS: A point of order; Madam Speaker! Under Standing Order 67, the Leader of the Opposition is digressing from the subject. Let her get on with it, and let her address her comments through the Chair instead of trying to cause trouble in this Chamber.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Leader of the Opposition, if you could direct your comments through the Chair and stay as close as possible to the motion which you have put to us, thank you.
Ms CARNEY: Yes, thank you, Madam Speaker, I will certainly do that.
A couple hundred vehicles were circling around. I know we have seen some protests in and around this building over the years but, none, I would have thought, that demonstrated the depth and feeling as on that occasion. People went to great lengths to attach signage and so on to their vehicles and around they went. There was another public meeting in the last sitting and my colleague, the member for Greatorex, the shadow minister, went to that. There have been other community meetings. I went to one not so long ago.
Is the community really concerned about this? Yes. Should our government, or any government, be doing things differently? Yes. Is this an opportunity for the new Chief Minister to stamp his authority on his government, on his Cabinet? He has clearly failed to do so in the first 24 hours.
We invite him to step up to the plate, as it were, and stamp his authority on his government today. Have the courage to go to the people. Go to the people; the people are talking. Is it not a fundamental proposition that when the citizens whom we all represent are becoming very active in the community with their protests and their condemnation, for even a garden variety politician to take notice of that? I think it is.
This is certainly no garden variety issue. It has significant implications, and those implications have been discussed in this Chamber before. Unless the new Chief Minister steps up today, those implications will continue to be discussed for years to come. It is a challenge, Madam Speaker. I know that there are challenges in politics but the new Chief Minister has been plotting for 15, 18 months. We know. Everyone knows he has had the numbers for a long time. Why it is that he did not have the ticker to challenge? I do not know. Far be it for me to comment.
However, we are now in the situation where this man can make a mark. He will command the respect of his fellow Territorians and the opposition if he stands up and says: ‘Yes, you are right. On the Richter Scale of issues, this is a really significant one that we, the government, and me as Chief Minister, will look at again’. We know that you know that it has not been done well …
Mr BONSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The Leader of the Opposition is again eyeballing government members. She is staring right at us. Could she please …
Madam SPEAKER: I am sorry, I …
Mr BONSON: She is eyeballing the government again. Could you please ask her to direct her comments through the Chair? I have just had breakfast.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Millner, please resume your seat. Leader of the Opposition you may, of course, look where you wish, but if you could direct your comments through the Chair.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Madam Speaker, I will. What an interesting couple of days in federal politics it has been.
In any event, I know that others will talk. I look forward to hearing their contributions. I look forward to hearing a sound and sensible argument as to why it is that government will not support this motion. If the Chief Minister really believes what he said yesterday and, of course, with this bloke there is always a difference between what he says, what he does, and what he says he believes. However, if he wants to stand by his comments of yesterday that the majority of Territorians support the local government amalgamations, he will allow a referendum on the issue. That is the challenge we put to the new Chief Minister. We wait with nervous excitement to hear from him so that he can tell us why it is he will not do it, or rise to the challenge and do it. We look forward to hearing from him.
Debate adjourned.
PLANNING AMENDMENT (DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS) BILL
(Serial 130)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Ms LAWRIE (Planning and Lands): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill now be read a second time.
Unlike any other jurisdiction, the Northern Territory Planning Act currently requires all development applications to be publicly exhibited. The only exceptions to the requirement for exhibition at this time are premises intended for short-term accommodation for persons requiring privacy, such as escaping domestic violence. The mandatory requirement for exhibition was introduced on commencement of the Planning Act of 1993 and was largely the result of pressure from some community groups claiming that the public was excluded from the development assessment process because it was uninformed of proposed developments.
Public exhibition currently requires the erection of a notice on-site, the pink sign, and an advertisement in the local press including a locality map. Any person may lodge a submission relating to a development proposal within the two-week exhibition period. It is common in other jurisdictions for the requirement for exhibition to relate to the nature of the development proposed. Minor proposals, for example a home occupation, may require no exhibition or merely notification to adjoining owners, while more significant developments that could be expected to have a broader impact on the amenity of a locality are more broadly exhibited. The continuing requirement that all development applications be publicly exhibited is an unnecessary cost burden and delay for many developments, and imposes a similarly unnecessary administrative burden in the assessment process.
This bill proposes that the planning of the amendment to allow for certain development applications to be exempt from the current mandatory public exhibition. This is achieved primarily through the introduction of a regulatory power, to the section of the act relating to notification of and consultation regarding development applications. The provisions of the proposed bill will also allow for development applications for the establishment or change of user premises for the accommodation of people requiring privacy and applications for the consolidation of land to be exempt from the climate of public notification.
A permit is required to consolidate land, amalgamate two or more parcels of land, anywhere in the Northern Territory. Consolidation of land is most frequently required as a consequence of new development that proposes construction across existing lot boundaries. The requirement to consolidate is often a condition of a planning permit necessary for a development to conform to building regulations. While the issues relating to the requirements of service authorities are equally important for consolidations, as for subdividing to create two or more lots, consolidations raise no implications for other land. The requirement to advertise an application to consolidate lots is, therefore, considered superfluous, again, doing nothing but adding time and cost to the proposal.
In addition to the exemptions relating to public notification, the bill contains a number of other consequential amendments which are necessary to give effect to the proposed exemptions and to clarify procedures as a result of primary changes. The proposed exceptions to the requirement for public notifications have been structured in a way as to ensure that any third party appeal rights that may currently exist under the Planning Act are not impacted by the proposed amendment. Applicant appeal rights as they currently exist are, likewise, unaffected by the amendment.
It is not proposed to alter the method by which more significant applications are notified, nor is it proposed to alter the requirements to notify the local authority or council if the application happens to fall within a council area.
The subordinate legislation specifying the classes of development application affected by the amendment act is currently being prepared. It is intended, at this stage, that only applications for variations to the side and rear setback requirements for single dwellings and ancillary structures such as carports, garden sheds, etcetera, and industrial uses on industrial zoned land that does not abut another zone, will be included under these provisions. It is important to note, however, that even if further application types are included in this subordinate legislation, the provisions of the amended act limit such application types to those that are considered not to have a significant impact on existing and future amenity of an area.
Prior to the commencement of the Northern Territory Planning Scheme in February 2007, an application for variations to setback requirements for single dwellings and ancillary structures such as carports, garden sheds, etcetera, on one lot were, with the exception of Tennant Creek and Alice Springs, not determined under the provisions of the Planning Act but, rather, the Building Act via the Building Appeals Board. An application to the Building Appeals Board required the homeowner to approach their immediate neighbours seeking their approval for the proposal. There was no requirement to advertise the application either through the press or with a sign on the site.
As a consequence of building setbacks now being administered through the Northern Territory Planning Scheme, any application that could vary the requirement attracts the full procedure of public notification under the Planning Act. The associated fee of $130 plus advertising costs of $240 has increased the end cost to the consumer for no discernable benefit. In recognition that a reduced building setback may have amenity consideration for adjoining owners, notification of an application could be more reasonably achieved by notification to the owner adjoining the boundary for which a setback variation is sought. Where the variation is for the setback from the street, in the case of a corner lot or primary street, there may be an argument that the proposal be more broadly advertised on the basis of potential effect on the streetscape generally. Hence, the subordinate legislation will not propose such variations be exempt from the requirement for advertising.
Experience demonstrates that, within industrial zones, the public exhibition process very rarely generates a submission from a member of the public. This is primarily because the use itself is permitted, and the need for consent relates only to the variation of the physical nature of the development. Most often, such variations relate to the building height or car parking requirements. The continuing requirement that such proposals be advertised cannot be seen as performing any useful function. The subordinate legislation will exempt such applications from the requirement for advertising.
I am confident that the proposed changes to the Planning Act will benefit the whole community, especially the end consumer or homeowner who may expect a reduction of the costs associated with an application for developments of a minor nature.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and I table both the bill and the explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
TRANSPORT LEGISLATION (DRUG DRIVING) AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 132)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Ms LAWRIE (Infrastructure and Transport): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The bill I introduce today will implement another important phase of the government’s Road Safety Package. The bill creates offences for driving under the influence of drugs, and powers to require blood tests in the case of accidents or where the police officer has reasonable cause to suspect a person is driving under the influence of drugs.
National drug-taking data reveals that 87% of drivers drove soon after using drugs. Recent drug use studies have also shown that cannabinoids are present in a significant proportion of drivers killed and injured in road accidents. Also, results from the Victorian drug testing program after 12 months of operation reveal that one car driver in 40 and one truck driver in 69 are driving under the influence of drugs other than alcohol.
NT Police have advised that a pilot study carried out in the Territory as part of the Drug Use Monitoring in Australia, or DUMA, project revealed that 29% of people detained by police for driving offences tested positive to illicit drugs.
There have been a number of serious accidents in the Northern Territory, some involving fatalities, where the police know drugs were a feature of the accident but have not been able to confirm suspicions or press charges because the Northern Territory has not previously had the power to test those involved in crashes for drugs. Currently, the power to test blood from those involved in crashes exist for alcohol but not for drugs. The bill will address this shortcoming.
All other states and territories in Australia have moved progressively, over many years, to introduce strong measures to send a clear message that it is unacceptable to take drugs and drive. The Northern Territory is the only jurisdiction in Australia that does not have the power to test blood from those involved in crashes for drugs. This is unacceptable. Why should the wider community in the Territory have to put up with drivers taking drugs and driving on our roads, with apparent impunity from the consequences of their behaviour? I am also aware of a culture in the NT that exploits the fact that police do not have the power to require a person at high risk due to drug taking to submit to a blood test.
The key road safety measures to be implemented as part of this amendment bill are:
provision for the collection of blood samples to test for drugs and other substances from persons involved in motor vehicle accidents;
power for police to require a blood test where an alcohol test and a saliva test are inconclusive; however, the police officer must reasonably believe that an offence has been committed. This situation should occur where the police officer believes the person, by continuing to drive, would pose a danger to the public. The police officer would be required to arrest the person for the purposes of a blood test;
a person arrested for the purposes of a blood test may be unable to drive for 24 hours following the test. The person may be subject to an immediate suspension of their driver’s licence for 24 hours. The suspension is unappealable and the police may issue the person with a notice establishing the suspension;
a list of drugs is included in a schedule to the Traffic Regulations. The first part, Part A, will establish drugs prohibited to be used in any capacity whilst driving. The second part, Part B, comprises the prohibited drugs morphine, methadone and amphetamines used in the treatment of narcolepsy and attention deficit disorder. However, a defence prosecution will be available if these drugs have been taken in accordance with directions from a medical practitioner. The defendant must be able to satisfy the court that he or she was in the care of a medical practitioner and the drug was taken in accordance with a prescription or specified dosage;
the defence will not be available if the prosecution establishes that the level of impairment observed was not consistent with the specific dosage; and
the bill provides that drug analysis results can only be used for the purposes of offences against the Traffic Act and not in evidence proceedings some of the Misuse of Drugs Act.
The right of an individual is also protected in circumstances where police compel the person to undergo a blood test. Currently, when a blood sample is taken to determine the blood alcohol content level in a person’s blood, the person taking the sample may make approximately half the sample available to the person from whom it was taken for independent testing. The provision is now also applied in cases where samples are taken for drug screening purposes.
It is intended that first offences of drug-driving will operate in a similar fashion to the recently introduced penalties for low-level drink-driving offences; that is, a first offence may only attract a traffic infringement notice issued by police. The TIN will be counted as a first offence, and second or subsequent offences will be subject to the same penalties as for low-level drink-driving offences on repeat occasions.
The penalties for persons charged with drive under the influence offences, will be the same as for exceed 0.08 blood alcohol content penalties. DUI offences are based on existing offences in the Traffic Act and requires police to prove impairment in the court.
During drafting of the drug-driving provisions, it became necessary to rewrite Part V of the Traffic Act that deals with blood alcohol content testing offences and penalties. The new Part V recreates the drink-driving provisions from the current act. The only major changes in regard to applying the two strike policy agreed for low-range drink-driving penalties to zero alcohol drivers - passenger vehicle drivers, drivers under the age of 25 who have not held their licence for three years, and truck drivers - who will be subject to licence sanctions should they re-offend within three years of the first offence. This will place these drivers on the same footing as other motorists attracting low-range 0.05 to 0.08 blood alcohol content offences.
The redraft of Part V presented in the bill has resulted in much clearer enunciation of alcohol- and drug-driving provisions. I am sure honourable members will support this important road safety initiative announced by the Chief Minister in November last year. The community and, in particular our children, have a right to expect that they should be safe from drink- and drug-drivers on the road, and that they have the support of the law when it comes to the appropriate penalties for those who transgress.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and I table both the bill and the explanatory memorandum.
Debate adjourned.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Child Protection)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I table two documents relating to the Care and Protection of Children Bill and I will make a short statement.
I present Amendment Schedule No 23, Care and Protection of Children Bill 2007 Serial 112, and Care and Protection of Children Bill 2007 Serial 112 draft bill inclusive of proposed amendments contained in Amendment Schedule No 23.
Madam Speaker, the Care and Protection of Children Bill establishes a contemporary and comprehensive approach for the promotion of children’s wellbeing. The bill reflects the central case of children and families in our community, emphasising the value of children to society, the importance of family wellbeing and the need to support the capacity of families in the community to care safely for children and allow them to develop their potential.
This legislation has been a long time in its development, not surprising since it is replacing a law that is nearly 25 years old, or most of the life of the Northern Territory Assembly since self-government. It has gone through wide-ranging consultation and debate over the three years. It has taken into account findings of the Little Children are Sacred report. It has, more recently, gone through a period of negotiation. Since introducing the legislation at the August sittings, I have received numerous oral and written representations from stakeholders and interested parties. This has importantly included the commitment and involvement of the Leader of the Opposition, the Law Society, and the Ombudsman.
As I said in those sittings, because we are dealing with people who are damaged, sometimes horrifically, our every action and inaction can have consequences that are profoundly difficult to predict. We are dealing with imperfect human beings in an imperfect world, administered by an imperfect state. It is for that reason I have been pleased to receive this input to changes that improve and enhance the Care and Protection of Children Bill. It has been welcomed by Cabinet.
The goodwill, care and commitment of those who have contributed to these amendments is a demonstration that such important legislation is beyond the usual cut and thrust of the political process. It is something that we have tried to achieve in a broad, but bipartisan, fashion. To this end, we have accepted some fundamentally important amendments to the bill, particularly in regards to ministerial responsibilities. We have not accepted all the amendments. On these, I guess, we will have to agree to disagree. However, I give this commitment in parliament: we will commence a review process for the legislation in 12 months. We recognise that, as the legislation beds down and as the courts interpret the new act, the legislation will have to be adjusted. No one could sensibly pretend otherwise.
In addition, as was made clear in the recent briefing on this bill to the Law Society, we will encourage ongoing involvement in the evolution of the care and protection of children legislation, especially through groups such as the Family Matters Forum. We will encourage stakeholders to be involved in the development of regulations necessary to making this law workable. We will encourage people to consider becoming involved in membership of the Child Death Review and Prevention Committee, as well as review panels established as a consequence of this legislation. We will encourage people to welcome and assist the new Children’s Commissioner when he or she is appointed.
Furthermore, my department will have an ongoing interest in the promotion of an understanding of the new act. This will include continuing professional development courses for lawyers dealing in the complex area of child protection. We will also work towards ongoing briefings to the health sector. Indeed, this will begin as early as this Thursday with a briefing to the executive of the Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance of the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, I will now supply clarifications behind the amendments which will be considered in committee. Since I last presented the bill, I have instructed Family and Children Services to provide further briefings on the legislation to key stakeholders with an interest in ensuring the safety and wellbeing of all children. As I said earlier, a number of proposed amendments to the bill were raised during these useful exercises. I report that after serious consideration, Cabinet approved a number of those amendments to the bill. Although the core concepts of the bill have not changed, the amendments strengthen the existing provisions to provide clarification around the intent of specific clauses. They also make more explicit the minister’s role and responsibility, and the responsibility of the Territory government.
Part 1.2 describes the meaning of the act which is to provide for the care and protection of persons under the age of 18 years, referred to as children in the bill, with provisions for the care and protection of certain young people between the ages of 15 and 25 who have been children in the CEO’s care. There has been a consequential amendment to the ‘Overview’, clause 5, contained in this part of the act which involves the insertion of the word ‘the minister’ in response to the introduction later in the bill outlining the minister’s powers.
Part 1.3 of the bill includes the guiding principles to assist in the interpretation and implementation of the act. Clause 7 of the bill had made mention of the responsibility of society as a whole to safeguard the wellbeing of children. While this government has very strongly indicated that child protection and the wellbeing of children must be considered as a responsibility of the whole of society, it was felt that this clause should be replaced by one that more explicitly identified the role of the Northern Territory government as the formally constituted political entity that represents the people of the Northern Territory and that has the responsibility for reflecting, promoting and enforcing the values and expectations of the people of the Northern Territory. The buck stops with the government and it is only right that this is reflected in the legislation. However, changing this clause in no way changes the government’s view that all of society has a responsibility for promoting and safeguarding the wellbeing of children and supporting family.
A minor amendment has also been made to clause 8, the provision reflecting the role of family. Henceforth, reference will be made to a child to be ‘removed’ rather than ‘taken away’ from her or his family if there is no other reasonable way to safeguard the child’s wellbeing. This phrasing is in line with other international and national child protection terminology.
Part 1.4 describes an expanded range of key concepts including when a child is in need of care and protection and parental responsibility for the child. The act quite clearly includes reference to child sexual abuse as a key form of abuse that may have a significant detrimental affect on a child. However, it was felt that the provisions of the act could be strengthened to more clearly demonstrate this government’s commitment to preventing the sexual abuse of children. First, it was felt necessary to have an explicit link between the broad concepts of sexual abuse and the criminal offences that typically result from it. To that end, a definition of sexual offences is provided in section 13 which linked to the definition provided in section 3 of the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedures) Act. Further, the reporting of both sexual abuse and sexual offences is incorporated in the mandatory reporting obligations of the act, which I will discuss shortly.
Second, to further strengthen the definitions relating to the harm and exploitation of children in sections 15 and 16, an amendment has been made to the definition of ‘Harm to child’ (section 15). Sexual abuse has been explicitly linked as a key form of harm to children along with other forms of exploitation, as listed in section 15(2)(b), together with the existing reference to sexual abuse that is provided in section 16, ‘Exploitation of a child’. The example provided of the harm caused to a child exposed to physical violence under section 15(2)(c) has been amended to make it clearer that children’s exposure to parental domestic violence is a key form of such harm.
There have also been a number of small amendments to this part to clarify and strengthen the act. First, recognising that children need care and protection, an amendment has been made to section 20 such that this phrasing ‘care and protection’ which reflects the title of the act itself is incorporated into the key clauses that relate to the care and protection of children. It is a semantic change, but I feel it is important in that it demonstrates the government's intent to both care for and protect children.
Second, under this same clause 20, the criteria of when a child is in need of care and protection have been simplified and rewritten to improve their utility. Under this clause, a child is now in need of care and protection in the following circumstances:
that a child has or is likely to suffer harm or exploitation because of the acts or omissions of a parent;
the parents of the child are dead, unable or unwilling to care for the child, and no other family member of the child is able and willing to do so, or
no one has effective control of the child and the child is likely to harm himself or herself or another person.
We have removed a reference to the parent’s failing to care for a child in recognition that, sometimes, parents are unable to care for a child through no fault of their own; for example, parents incapacitated by a motor vehicle accident. Rather than having failed to provide care, this clause frames the need for care and protection around a parent’s unwillingness or inability to care for a child.
Third, in order to be clear about who has the parental responsibility for a child, an amendment has been made to sections 21 and 22 such that parental responsibility for a child is linked to a person who is entitled to exercise the powers and rights, and has the responsibility for care and control of the child.
Chapter 2 is concerned with the safeguarding and wellbeing of children. It also lists the power of the minister in relation to delegating the powers and obligations to the CEO for the administration of the act.
Part 2.1, Division 1, defines the obligations of members of the public to report cases of children at risk of harm or exploitation, and ensures that the minister, the CEO and authorised officers have the powers, functions and responsibilities to ensure the care and protection of children.
Clause 24 has been amended to include references to the minister in relation to ensuring the available functions and powers are delegated to authorised officers. Reference to the reporting obligations of those in child-related employment has been removed from clause 24(a) as a result of amendments to clause 25 that I will shortly describe.
These days, it is common practice across Australia to frame child protection or child welfare legislation around the delegated powers of the CEO or equivalent executive positions, as that person effectively has the day-to-day management of the powers and functions of the act under the direction of the minister. This, too, has been our intent. However, it became clear that, while the minister’s role and responsibility for the legislation is implicit in the act, people outside of the legal profession were unclear as to what powers and responsibilities are held under the new act.
To resolve this issue, a new clause 24A has been inserted to define clearly the minister’s powers. This clause emphasises the importance and priority the minister places on the care and protection of children, and the role of families and communities in a child’s life. It explicitly defines the powers that may be exercised by the minister, including the ability to do anything for the adoption of a cooperative approach between familles, agencies and other public authorities, or any other individuals or organisations in relation to the care and protection of children, and making policy guidelines for the exercise of a power or performance of a function by the CEO under the act. It is also clear that the CEO must have regard to the policy guidelines in exercising of the power and performance of the functions under this act, and must comply with the minister’s direction.
Division 2 describes the general obligations about reporting. The section outlines reporting obligations. The attempt here was always that the new act would continue the broad mandatory reporting obligations provided under the Community Welfare Act. Further considerations of section 25, ‘Reporting obligations’, has led to some amendments to ensure that it reflects the provisions of the Community Welfare Act, and to make it simpler and easier to implement.
First, section 25(1) has been amended that a person is guilty of an offence if she or he believes, on reasonable grounds, that a child has been or is likely to be a victim of a sexual offence or, otherwise, has suffered or is likely to suffer harm of exploitation, yet fails to report that belief to the CEO or the police. This clause makes it clear that any person in the Territory who suspects a child is being, or may be, abused or neglected has to report the matter for investigation. This is very clearly spelt out. It does not matter if the harm or the offences are committed by a parent, a friend, a stranger or someone working with children, any reasonable belief has to be reported. As a result of this change, it has been possible to remove any specific references to the reporting obligations of those in child-related employment (that is, to delete section 25(2)) which has been included to emphasise the specific obligations of those working with children to take action when confronted with abuse.
Second, there has been a consequential amendment to the clause, ‘Protection of person making a report’, section 26. This ensures that all persons who make a report of suspected harm or exploitation, or of a sexual offence committed against a child, are explicitly protected from civil or criminal liability.
Third, a minor amendment has been made to the clause relating to what happens when the CEO receives a report, section 28. Section 28(2)(a) refers to the person who made the report. This new phrasing has been used, rather than ‘maker of the report’ to bring it in line with child protection terminology.
Fourth, there has also been a consequential amendment to the provisions relating to the duty of other persons relating to reporting obligations, section 29, to align it with the appropriate part of section 25, ‘Reporting obligations’.
Division 3 establishes the power of the CEO to make inquiries and to investigate reports. This division provides the CEO with greater powers to make inquiries if there are concerns about a child’s wellbeing, and to seek information from a range of agencies involved with the child or the family. Clause 33 contains provisions relating to the giving of information for inquiries to the CEO or police when they are conducting a child protection investigation. The categories of persons who are required to give information have been amended to broad the scope of who must provide information if requested. Parents and another family member must now give information about the child when an inquiry is being undertaken. This amendment was made so that, in cases where a parent or a family member is knowingly hiding a child from police or FACS, or knows of a child’s whereabouts when they are hidden, they must disclose that information or face a criminal sanction.
Similarly, an amendment was made to allow for regulations to describe which persons must provide an authorised officer access to a child as part of an investigation, clause 36, without informing the parent. This allows for the authorised officer to be able to sight the child and discuss with them the allegations of abuse. Obviously, parents or family members should be excluded from such requirements.
Division 6 describes the circumstances when the CEO may take a child into provisional protection. However, stakeholder feedback was that the example contained in clause 50 that was meant to highlight these powers was inaccurate or ambiguous. It has been amended to make it clearer as to the intent of the provision.
Part 2.2, ‘Children in CEO’s care’, defines and makes provisions for a child in the CEO’s care. A new requirement is introduced that requires a care plan to be developed for each child in the CEO’s care, and provision is made for regular reviews of these plans. Division 4 of this part requires the CEO to enter into a placement arrangement for a child in care. These arrangements may be made with the parent, another family member, or other individuals approved of by the CEO. A child is to be appropriately informed about a proposed placement arrangement. A consequential amendment was necessary to include clause 80, relating to parents to be informed about placement arrangements for a child in the CEO’s care, as it has effect on the provisions contained in the obligations of the CEO for an order, clause 134.
Clause 134 was written such that a carer - that is, a person providing daily care and control of the child, such as a departmental foster carer - has the obligation to inform parents of the child’s care arrangements. This was felt it placed too much responsibility on the carer and that the obligations should rightly sit with the CEO, and the clause has been amended accordingly. The amendment of clause 134 led to a change to clause 80 to ensure that the CEO’s obligations were evident in clause 80 as well.
Part 2.3, Division 3, ‘Court Proceedings’: legal advice was taken before determining that penalties for a range of offences under the act. However, one consequence was that in two clauses the penalties to be applied were, in fact, less than was incorporated in the provisions of the current Community Welfare Act. This government remains determined that sanctions for breaching this act will be taken seriously. Amendments have, therefore, been made to the provisions relating to clause 96, ‘Restrictions of publications’, and clause 98, ‘Restrictions on attendance’, to align the penalty units with those of the current Community Welfare Act: 400 penalty units or two years imprisonment.
It is also worth noting that some stakeholders criticised the penalties included in these sections for being too light when applied to agencies or body corporates. There seemed to be a misunderstanding of the law. Under the Interpretation Act, the penalty that applies to an individual, in this case 400 penalty units or two years imprisonment, is multiplied five times when applied to a body corporate. Thus, the penalty for an agency that breached these provisions is 2000 penalty units, not 400.
Subdivision 3, ‘Protection order’, has provisions for the CEO to apply for the court for a protection order if the CEO reasonably believes the child is in need of protection and the proposed order is the best means to safeguard the child’s wellbeing.
As noted earlier, clause 134 has been amended such that the obligations to inform parents as to what arrangements are made for their child when removed from their care is now clearly made the responsibility of the CEO, not the carer, and the clause has been renamed The obligations of the CEO for an order.
One concern that has been identified is that clause 137, ‘Court may adjourn proceeding’, severely restricted the opportunity for the court to adjourn proceedings and, in fact, did not appear to allow for adjournments for extending, varying or revoking an order as per clauses 135 and 136. Amendments have been made. Adjournments can now be granted for an assessment order or protection orders, and these include adjournments. For extending, varying or revoking existing orders as defined under section 135 or section 136, the court must still, to the greatest extent possible, avoid granting adjournments. If the court does grant an adjournment, it must consider what is in the best interests of the child to whom the proceedings relate and be satisfied that there are strong reasons for doing so.
Part 2.4, ‘Transfer of orders and proceedings’: this part sets out the provisions and conditions that enable child protection orders and child protection proceedings to be transferred between the Territory and other jurisdictions.
Subdivision 1, ‘Transfer by the CEO’: the provision pertaining to the review of decisions, clause 158, was amended to allow for a person to be given 20 working days instead of the proposed 10, during which time they could apply to the court for a review of a decision. The review is to assess the merits of a decision and the grounds specified in the application. Extending the time frame to make such an application gives parties to proceedings more time to consult their legal representatives, which is particularly relevant for people living in rural and remote communities.
Subdivision 2, ‘Transfer by court’: an amendment was made to the provision relating to the service of application, clause 160. The CEO is now required to provide a copy of an application by the CEO for a transfer of child protection proceedings to the child if he or she is at least 10 years of age and the CEO considers he or she has sufficient maturity and understanding to comprehend the transfer and its consequences. A copy must also be provided to each parent of the child and also anyone who was a party to the proceedings relating to the home order, other than the CEO.
This amendment ensures that the child, taking into account the prescribed conditions, and other relevant parties are aware of the application by the CEO to transfer of the child protection order interstate. This will also allow the child to voice their wishes in relation to the application to transfer of the child protection order. It should also be noted that this clause does not prevent the CEO from providing a younger child with a copy of the order if the CEO feels the child is of sufficient maturity and comprehends the proceedings.
Subdivision 3, ‘Transfer of child protection proceedings’: clause 165 lays out similar provisions for providing parties to proceedings with copies of an order transferring proceedings to another jurisdiction. Similar amendments have been made, as were made to clause 160, to ensure the subject child is provided with a copy of the order if aged 10 years and subject to prescribed conditions. Again, this clause does not prevent the CEO from providing a younger child with a copy of the order if the CEO feels that the child is of sufficient maturity and comprehends the proceedings.
Chapter 3, ‘Prevention of harm and exploitation’: Part 3.1 defines a range of agencies or settings where screening will become mandatory for both paid employment purposes and for people who wish to work voluntarily with children. Clause ‘188, Decisions on applications’, defines the offences or criminal history that will preclude a candidate from obtaining a clearance certificate. Clause 188(6) was amended such that the sexual offences that may be prescribed are linked to the definition provided in clause 13 and, therefore, is linked to the definition of offences provided in section 3 of the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act.
Chapter 4, ‘Regulation of children’s services’, Part 4.1, ‘Preliminary matters’: this act provides for the increased regulation of children’s services to ensure that children cared for away from their families are provided with a reasonable quality of care and safety. Clause 223 defines ‘children’s services’ under the act which will be licensed or regulated as they are providing children’s services to the Territory’s children.
In order to ensure that there is no ambiguity in relation to the act and the Education Act, amendments to this clause have been made. Any reference to an educational institution as defined under the Education Act has been removed from clause 223(3)(d), and clause 223(4) deleted. The intention is to make it clear that government and non-government agencies who are running education programs such as preschools for children aged three to five are not defined as children’s services under this act. However, if a non-government agency is providing childcare services for children aged three to five years and being paid the childcare benefit for each child by the Australian government, then that service would be defined as a children’s service and would fall under the licensing provision of this act.
Part 5.3, ‘General offences’: clause 300 defines the offence of disclosing a child’s identity, except in circumstances that are set out in the bill. It is forbidden to publish any material which might identify a child who has been taken into the CEO’s care and for whom an application for a temporary protection order, assessment order, or protection order has been made. An amendment to this clause ensures that information that would clearly identify a child involved, whether as a victim or not, in a sexual offence, or a child alleged to have been involved in a sexual offence, is also unable to be published. It does not restrict a child when they grow up from publishing their own memoirs or autobiographies, or reflecting on the experience. This clause is designed to prevent the child from being identified by others.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of the two daughters of the member for Katherine, Mandy Prescott, who is visiting from Boston and Trish Wachtel, and her son, Jack, and daughter, Jorja, from Jingili. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Continued from 22 August 2007.
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, I remind you that at 11.50 am I will be asking you to pause. You may continue your remarks after Question Time this afternoon.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I will be surprisingly brief. I thank the minister for providing the amendments in the form where the amendments are easily identified. That is of great assistance so, thank you. I did receive some amendments a few days ago, but in that format it is much more helpful for all of us.
Madam Speaker, I am not sure that very many people in the Northern Territory would recognise this as an historic day. This is an historic day. The Community Welfare Act, I understand, and certainly the minister’s second reading speech said that it, commenced in 1984, so that makes it 23 years old. It has served the Territory reasonably well for that period. I commend the minister on acknowledging that in her second reading speech and it is worth repeating today. She said in her speech that the act:
Not bad for the Northern Territory in 1984, Madam Speaker, not bad at all. It is also the case, and worthy of acknowledgement, as the minister did:
Indeed, it did. I say again, not bad for the Territory in 1984. We have often been cited as the leaders in the field in mandatory reporting and other child welfare provisions.
It is, in a sense, saying goodbye to an old friend today. As a former lawyer who worked in this area, I worked with it a lot, so it is saying goodbye to an old friend. I know that many in the legal profession will share with me a level of sadness, but great joy, that we are saying goodbye to our old friend.
It is important for me to say that I have wanted this legislation changed for many years. My eyesight is not as good as it used to be. There is a visitor in the gallery, Colin Dyer, whom I welcome back, who has had an interest in this legislation. If my memory serves me correctly, when I was a lawyer, having spoken at some length to a Territory Health minister, I believe it was Steve Dunham at the time, I think you were one of the public servants with whom I had some discussions.
I have been, even before politics, of the view that this legislation needed to be overhauled. As I was preparing my comments the other night, I thought I would have a look at what I said my maiden speech on 16 October 2001. To some extent, I gave a wish list of various amendments or reforms the government should make in its first term. In relation to the Community Welfare Act, I said:
I provided a copy of that submission to a staff member in the Attorney-General’s office. I do not know what became of it. Labor had not been in office very long, so I will not be surprised if it was genuinely misplaced. I should say that the very submission I prepared and gave to the Labor Attorney-General’s staff was the same submission I prepared for the CLP and gave to Steve Dunham when he was Health minister, which I believe was early in 2001. I prepared that submission because I recall speaking with Steve Dunham in remarkably forceful terms about the need for the act to be changed in a number of respects. Unfortunately, what I prepared back then was not taken up. I have told many people, and I think Colin was one of them, that I do not care who amends the Community Welfare Act, as long as someone does. Therefore, while this government has talked about changing the act from about 2003-04, the fact is they have now done it and, for obvious reasons, I am very pleased that they have.
I did work in the area; I know it reasonably well. I repeat the fundamental proposition that I made on 16 October 2001 in my maiden speech: there can be no greater responsibility for governments than the protection of its children, our children. I was pleased when I saw the bill when it was introduced in August.
I have talked to the minister at length about the bill. Our discussions have been frank and reasonably fruitful. I do not propose to outline those discussions on the Parliamentary Record, because not everything politicians do and say needs to be published or publicised. It is the case that some of the changes I proposed to the bill have been made, as is evidenced by the amendments we see today. I thank the minister very much for her pragmatic and courteous approach to our discussions.
I must, however, say on the Parliamentary Record that there are still many more parts of the bill that need to be changed. I say that even before the amendments and the bill that we pass today will filter down to the people who work in the area. Some of the changes are not insubstantial, and lengthy redrafting is required. I have conveyed this to the minister before today, but thought it appropriate to say it for the purposes of this debate. It is disappointing that today we are going to pass legislation about child protection that is less than perfect. However, I emphasise that I have adopted what I regard as a very pragmatic approach to this bill and our support of it today.
Despite my concerns, we will support the bill. First, Madam Speaker, it is because some of the changes, though not all, I had discussed with the minister have been made. Second, and perhaps more importantly, there is a spirit of goodwill between the minister and I about the bill and the issue of child protection. I am confident that, together, we can get it right, but it will take some time and significant effort by us both. However, I feel certain that we can do it. Therefore, although I am a little disappointed, some progress has been made as a result of our discussions, I commit to working with her when the redrafting occurs which, I believe, should be sooner rather than later. But I commit to working with her.
I genuinely and very sincerely thank the minister for, as I said, the pragmatic and courteous approach she has taken in relation to this matter and the very constructive relationship we have built up on this issue. It is the most constructive relationship I have had with a minister of the Labor government since I have been here. Thank you and I wish you well.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of staff from the Department of Family and Community Services, and also Mr Colin Dyer, who is known to me and was, in fact, an advisor to me when I was the Health Minister and Minister for Family and Community Services. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I also draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of students from Year 7 Marrara Christian College, accompanied by Ms Sarah Livingston. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
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 Parliament House program for visitors. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Continued from earlier this day.
Ms McCARTHY (Arnhem): Madam Speaker, it is, indeed, a great pleasure to be able to support the minister’s Care and Protection of Children Bill. I would like to reflect a little over the last four to six months in regards to many of the issues that have come about over the care and protection of children, starting first with the Little Children are Sacred report. I know the member for Araluen, the Leader of the Opposition, mentioned in her response this morning how historic today is in regard to the Care and Protection of Children Bill. There are a number of issues of historical significance today.
The first area that I focus on is to draw attention to the good work of the minister with her statement and her dedication to wanting to see the lives of our children in our communities and across the Northern Territory improve for the better. It is evident when you read through the amendments of the Care and Protection of Children Bill just how compassionate the minister is in wanting to see these changes genuinely work for the better on the ground.
I would like to start with the Little Children are Sacred report and quote from Pat Anderson and Rex Wild who put a tremendous amount of work in to the last 12 months going around to 45 communities to listen to the concerns of families, individuals and to children as they travelled across the Territory. Throughout this report that we refer to – and it seems to be referred to many times by politicians right across this country and, indeed, media commentators and organisations who want to make any references to the federal intervention that has taken place. This is what it is all about: the Little Children are Sacred report. I bring the Assembly back to these points to remember why it is that we are on the road that we are, and what it is that we are trying to achieve.
Rex Wild and Pat Anderson said:
When I look back on this, and I had a good look at how it is we have come where we are, I remind the parliament that it is because of the Little Children are Sacred report that we come together here today to push for changes. One of the main things that I am especially excited about when I look at this bill is the Commissioner for Children. I have to say, on reading through the papers, that it is that particular aspect of this bill that I am absolutely enthusiastic about, because I know for a fact, in particular in my communities in Arnhem, that our children need to know that there is a way forward for them. Our families need to know that we, as a government in the Northern Territory and, indeed, this parliament of the Northern Territory, is putting out exactly what it says it is going to do; that is, create a genuine and sincere future for our children out there.
The Commissioner for Children is a first here, and it is going to be a momentous task for whoever that person is going to be and, indeed, a special task for that person. I put to the parliament and, indeed, the minister, the way I would like to see that role played out on the ground for our children in the communities.
The first thing begins with education, and I am not talking just about schooling here. I will get to that in a moment. This is about the promotion of the Commissioner for Children. We need to ensure that this particular role of the commissioner is a role that is well understood right across the Northern Territory; that even the youngest of children is aware that they have someone who is looking out for their welfare, their concerns. That there is someone a parent, a sister, a brother, or an elder in the community who has a concern with the way any welfare agencies are working, or not working in this particular case, can go to, very similar, I suspect, to the Ombudsman for Health and other areas where we have Ombudsmen. We do need to have this Commissioner for Children, a task that is fundamental in ensuring that our children do have a real chance to become the people that we want them to become with the opportunities that every child needs to have in this country. That is the right to be able to sleep at night safely, to have a bed, to know that they are safe in a home that does not have a leaky roof, broken doors, holes in the windows that allow the rain to come in in the Wet Season or the dust to blow in in the Centre storms in the middle of the night, or snakes, animals or creatures of any kind that can come in to make that home an uncertain place for that child.
These are the rights of any child in this country, and in our communities, those rights are no different and no less important for those children. It is the right of knowing that that child can get up in the morning and go to a school where teachers want to be there and are able to teach those children in an environment and a classroom that is adequately resourced for those children; where a teacher can give the amount of time that is required for that child so that that child can grow and have those opportunities. If a child is speaking a number of different languages, they should have the access to be able to learn a Western education without being told to sit in the back of the room simply because they do not understand English.
I place so much hope in this commissioner, Madam Speaker. I place so much hope that, whoever this advocate is going to be for our children, that advocate must have the tremendous support of this parliament and, indeed, the whole NT community, because we are going to need so much help here to make the biggest inroads that we need to make to turn this around.
If we want to talk about the historical aspects of today, we only need to look at the last 48 hours, the last three or four days, to realise how quickly things can change. In this case, things are changing. We have Prime Minister elect, Kevin Rudd, in Canberra and, for the Northern Territory Labor government, that is the most wonderful position to have: to know that we can now proceed to talk with a government in Canberra which will meet us in partnership, meet us halfway, and will listen to the parliamentarians of the very Territory that they have intervened into. We have been given incredible hope by this change.
One of the things that happened on the 21 June this year, was the former Prime Minister, John Howard, pushed his way into the Northern Territory and said: ‘This is going to happen’. The bush members of this parliament went out to all our communities, not to drive fear into our communities. We went out to our communities to explain as best we could the 500 pieces of paper in legislation that went through the federal parliament without so much as discussion or inclusion of the Aboriginal people of the Northern Territory. We had to go out there because the fear that was there was not put there by the bush members of this parliament. The fear was out there because, when any intervention takes place in this country, it is much bigger than blaming it on one or two people; it is about the massive social and political change of this country’s landscape.
Nowhere in the history of the Northern Territory have we had a major intervention on this scale. Because of the different complexities of that intervention, dealing with alcohol, housing, health, local government, and leasing of land, all of these issues centring around our communities, we needed to ensure we could best explain what was going on. Let me tell you, Madam Speaker, one of the things that we knew about this intervention is that something had to happen for the better. Something had to happen for the better for our communities. Every person knew this. You did not have to be a certain colour, a certain age or live in a certain place to know that we are in crisis in those communities, and we need to do something to make a difference out there.
However, what was missing within that recognition of that need, was that it does not matter when you make a decision and you think that it is the right decision for a particular group of people; what matters is: have you included those people? Have they been included in the discussion? Are they included in the process? Are they included in any discussion and dialogue about how they see the future? On all those points, no discussion, no inclusion, no dialogue, no consultation. What that does to people, and it does not matter who they are, is that it disempowers them to such a degree that there is no hope, no sense of self-respect, all dignity is taken away from them, and any feeling of empowerment is absolutely squashed in the process.
How can that be a good thing? How can taking the dignity away from people, disempowering people to such a degree, be any good to anyone? I am filled with incredible hope because we have a Deputy Chief Minister who is putting forward a bill with absolute compassion, who knows that on the ground this is vital. It is more than just social and political change. This is at the core of the humanity, the humanness, the human nature of each one of us; when you strip people of their fundamental rights to speak for themselves, to take away what little they have.
In my communities alone in Jilkminggan, Manyallaluk, Barunga, and Beswick, those communities sit there in stunned silence. Manyallaluk, Barunga and Beswick have lost their CDEP and what little money they will have from that. Of 200-odd jobs that came through CDEP, 45 or thereabouts are supposed to be full-time work. We are supposed to be grateful for that? What happens to the remainder who have no money whatsoever? Of the 200, 45 have full-time jobs. We are only three weeks away from Christmas; what do they do for their children?
The people of Manyallaluk want to get into Katherine; the nearest store to them is Katherine. They have to get a taxi, which costs about $300 to $400. How much money do they get on CDEP? Well, they do not get CDEP any more. How is Christmas going to be for those kids? I heard after this federal election that the Howard government at the time used this intervention as a political means of getting themselves in power. Yet, we in the Northern Territory parliament had desperately wanted so much to work in partnership with them in the hope, in the really vain hope, that we could make a difference. Now, they are gone, the winds have changed, the cyclone has swept through Canberra. They are gone. Do you know who is left behind? Those little kids there, they are left behind. Their parents are left behind. Who is worrying about them now?
With school holidays soon, departments are closing up to go on their Christmas break, and people have their plans to go away somewhere. But for these kids, they have nowhere else to go. They have no money to go anywhere now.
At the national NAIDOC rally, the first and only thing I said about the intervention on the record is this: after all this money, and there is a hell of a lot of money that has been thrown at the Northern Territory because of this intervention, there is one thing I do ask Prime Minister-Elect Kevin Rudd: do not touch that money. Do not take one dollar away from this intervention. Do not touch it. That money needs to go exactly where it is needed. The difference this time, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, is that we are going to help you find a better way to do this for our people, a way that is inclusive, not exclusive; a way that empowers, not disempowers, that reaches out and gives back in return.
At the NAIDOC rally I said the greatest tragedy that could come out of this federal intervention when the eyes of this country were upon us, where millions of dollars were being suggested at the time to be thrown at us, and the eyes of the world were watching what was going on here in the Northern Territory, would be that nothing changes for the better. It is incumbent on every single politician in this House and every single politician in the federal parliament to pull together and ensure we do not leave those people in Manyallaluk, Barunga and Beswick alone, deserted, helpless, and vulnerable. It is a situation that we, as a Labor government, find abhorrent. We have sworn to defend the most vulnerable and disadvantaged in the Northern Territory. We, as a parliament, must remind every parliamentarian in Canberra of their duty to the most vulnerable and disadvantaged. I am certain that our federal members, Warren Snowdon and Senator Trish Crossin will be doing just that.
With regards to the vote that happened out in the bush, even with the great sense of disempowerment out there, was a small breath of hope. I drove to Ngukurr for the mobile polling and I pulled in at Urapunga on my way. As I pulled into Urapunga I had to cross the Roper River, then the Wilton River and, then, there was Ngukurr. I talked with all the community members. ‘How are you all going? How are you feeling? How are the children?’ We had major issues there with the children and the school. The last time I had spoken to the staff and the students at that school was only two months ago. I said to them: ‘Do you know that if a child does not come to school for more than three days of the term once the quarantine starts here, there will be a 100% of your money taken from you?. Do you know that as a parent? Do you know that if your child does not go to school for more than three days, you will not have any money? Your monies will be taken away from you? Instead, you will have a 100% in a voucher system to go to a shop. Do you know that?’ ‘No, I do not know that’ said the families to me.
My worry was for the teachers as well as the families because, if there is no communication there, then the teachers get blamed if they have signed off the kids are not at school. Then, the parents come wondering why they did not get the money. All of this is a part of that intervention. Now we have an opportunity to talk to the new Prime Minister of this country and say: ‘If you are going to do this, you have to do this well’.
We need interpreters, we need language, we need information and communication. If we are going to help our children, we need these things placed in each of our communities to change, give hope and maintain that hope for the future. Set up these agencies in our communities that will help, so that this Commissioner for Children knows that he or she has their finger on the pulse in places like Barunga and Beswick, or down in the Centre at Papunya or Mutitjulu. I am putting so much hope in this Commissioner for Children, and I am putting much greater hope in this parliament, that we do not let this federal intervention be the greatest tragedy that ever occurred in the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, in closing, I say that, for all children in the Northern Territory, any of these changes that will create a better life for them in the obligations of agencies, the needs of the CEO, the requirements of the CEO to explore, to investigate, to ensure that the children are being cared for, looked after adequately, safely and are receiving the full entitlement that they should as an Australian child in this wonderful country, that we all look for equality, dignity and respect. I commend the statement to the House.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I do not intend to talk about the intervention. I believe that is another matter for another day. However, I congratulate the government on introducing this bill. It has been a long process. I thank the officers for their patience and their opportunity for us to comment on it. I guess the proof will be in the pudding when we see what happens. The most important thing is: how many children have you saved? How many children have you rescued by your intervention, or have you turned a blind eye? I hope you do not do that. Perhaps this awareness has been raised to such an extent now that everyone will keep that in mind. As an ex-teacher and ex-principal, I see the number of children that have been rescued because of the intervention through mandatory reporting by teachers, and there is some satisfaction in knowing that.
I ask the minister about a few parts of the bill. I am not quite sure when you have the powers of the CEO, does it set a time limit at all for the CEO to respond? Quite often, one of the frustrations of people who do report things to FACS is the length of time it takes to process or to respond. It can be due to all sorts of circumstances. However, quite often, there are dire consequences if there is not a process that enables the system to move quickly. When the minister is responding, I hope she can give me some sort of response on that.
I also want to know whether this bill covers mandatory reporting of children in child-related employment. Quite often, you see children who have huge responsibilities or, in my mind, are being exploited. Does this bill, in fact, cover that aspect of child-related employment as well?
I say these things because it is such a huge bill; I must admit I am not completely au fait with all of it. I doubt whether anyone is because there have been so many amendments and changes as we have gone along that I admit the minister probably knows very easily the answers to some of the questions I may be asking.
As far as I am concerned, child protection is a right. It is a right for every child in our community. Although, sometimes, it puts us in terribly difficult positions, I believe it is very important that we take on that responsibility, no matter what children they are. It is so easy to not want to notice, or not want to get involved but, along the way, we really need to be involved.
In the previous welfare legislation, in section 80 of the NT Community Welfare Act, there was a duty of minister to hear complaints. This has been raised by the member for Nelson who, unfortunately, is at a funeral again today. He has raised the issue of some foster children who were taken away from foster parents. I am sure the minister is probably familiar with that particular case. His concern is that, sometimes, foster parents are put in situations by vexatious claims on the parts of neighbours or relatives or whatever. He wants some reassurance that those foster parents also have a right of reply, or right of appeal, to speak to their case. Without going into details about that particular case, perhaps the minister can respond. Is there written into this act the same as is written into the Community Welfare Act the right of appeal by foster parents?
There is a couple in Alice Springs, Doug Mellors and his wife, who have been fostering Aboriginal children for years and years. They do a tremendous job. I noticed in the act it talks very much about placing children in the same family or a family that has that same culture. However, quite often in Alice Springs we find that is not so. Even though I know FACS tries so hard to do it, we often need to be aware that, sometimes, that is not always the best option. Sometimes, the best option is to find them people who will take these children in and love them as their own. That particular couple, who are quite elderly now, are an amazing example of what people can do and how they can change children’s lives. If anyone should be rewarded for their efforts over many years, it should be this particular couple. I would hate to think how many children have passed through their hands and they have cared for in such a loving way.
Minister, if you can respond to me about the right of appeal of foster parents who may be put in a situation where they are accused of not doing the right thing. In this particular case you know, the children were taken away, even though the children themselves were desperate to stay in that situation. Sometimes, the voices of children need to be heard a lot more loudly than we give them credit. Children are not fools and they very much understand what is going on.
I remember a case where a young girl would occasionally just become so difficult to handle. She would do extreme things and we were all tearing our hair trying to find out why she would do such outrageous things. It was, obviously, her way of crying for help. It eventually came out that, every time she acted in this way, it was after an incident of sexual abuse by her stepfather. We take a while to recognise the signs and symptoms of a harmed child. It is not easy for every person on the street to be able to identify that, because they really do not recognise the signals that are happening. It is all part of a process of making people very sensitive to the world and the families around us. I, like all of you, get extremely frustrated at times at what I see as injustices occurring and the silence coming from the authorities or from those who should be intervening.
I hope this act puts everyone on notice: people in the community who can identify what is happening; the services available; the CEO; the minister; and the Children’s Commissioner. It is a big step you have taken, minister. I believe that, probably as time goes by, loopholes may appear in this bill that may need to be corrected. However, I am quite sure you have us with you with the intent and the spirit, because we certainly do want to ensure we put in legislation that provides a better life for children out there.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Care and Protection of Children Bill. Not only as the member for Macdonnell, but also as a member for this parliament and the Chair of the Select Committee on Substance Abuse.
Members will be aware of the committee’s report which was tabled during the October sittings, and debated both then and yesterday. It was the culmination of a long process of inquiry during which the committee met with, spoke to and heard many people who are dealing with these very issues on a daily basis, both in Central Australia and the Top End. The result was that the committee has made a total of 15 major recommendations, many of which cut across the very essence of what this bill is meant to achieve.
In speaking to the bill, I wish, in the first instance, to say how strongly I endorse the provisions of the bill and how keenly I appreciate its importance for the welfare of my people and that of the people of the Territory. Extension of the requirements for mandatory reporting is important, so also to increase clarity of the roles and responsibilities of persons required to report instances of child neglect and abuse though two other new internal review processes and the establishment of a Children’s Commissioner, as well as the Child Death Review and Prevention Committee, and the newly clarified responsibility of the CEO of the department administering the act. These, amongst other things, allow for enhanced flexibility, tailoring solutions to suit particular circumstances, and provide better, clearer lines of authority. These are all the things that will empower us to protect all our children who are the future of the Northern Territory. There is nothing more significant we can do in our lives than that.
In the second reading speech, the minister noted a high level of injury suffered by children in the Territory from various causes and, to my mind, unacceptably high infant mortality rates. We all know that this applies especially to indigenous children, and it is an enormous tragedy and indictment upon our society. I believe the bill represents a powerful set of interlocking measures which will create better protection for all children in the Territory and an enhanced set of formal processes that signal to everyone involved the way to do the right thing by some of the most vulnerable and precious members of our society: little children.
That is why it is so important that we all in this Chamber, as well as in our dealings with the federal government, give this bill our unanimous support. In this and related matters we need to put our differences aside so that we can deal with the current crisis, a crisis which reflects badly upon each and every member of Australian society. As the saying goes, bad things happen when good people do nothing. Let us be good people who do something. Let us end the ongoing tragedy we see here in the Territory. I do not think there is anyone here who doubts my passion on this matter.
Today I am inviting all my fellow members to share that passion and act upon it, for we know that this is so important for the welfare of the whole Territory, now and into the future. We are all aware of the present crisis. It has been put on the front page, where I believe it rightfully belongs. By recent events, our hearts and our compassions must be engaged. However, looking into the longer term we also need to fix these things for the most hard-headed of reasons. If you look at the demographic structure of the Territory population, it is as plain as day that the Territory has an expanding young indigenous population and an ageing non-indigenous population. We need to expand our tax base to make that sustainable, and the only way we can do that is to get more of these young people into productive work and give them a reason for believing in their right to a positive future.
The Northern Territory, like the rest of Australia, is experiencing skill shortages that are on record as a major barrier to growth. We need those young people; they are a major resource for the Territory. We would be fools if we did not find a way to make the most of them. It is on their shoulders that the Territory will rely in the years to come. However, they will not be able to rise to this expectation if we do not live up to our responsibilities to look after them now.
Yes, this bill is very important. This was impressed upon me through my involvement in the work of the Select Committee on Substance Abuse. Members will be aware from reading our report that there are many things we found which have a strong bearing on the welfare of children and families in the Territory; in particular, those occasions when we heard about young kids who slipped between the net and came to harm. Hearing these stories was one reason why the select committee has been so strong in recommending enhanced levels of coordination between agencies. It also lies behind the recommendation that agencies do whatever it takes to recruit to key positions which, together with other service providers, creates a continuity of care for young people affected by substance abuse.
There are many children and young people in the Territory who are hugely affected by substance abuse, directly or indirectly. Even around Darwin, they can be seen on the streets and often causing havoc at all times of day and night, simply because they do not have a safe and secure place to go that is not wracked by substance abuse and all it entails. Their right to security and an expectation of a positive future in life is impacted upon by substance abuse, as well as those other issues which combine to create dysfunction in the community as was comprehensively reported by the committee. No one in this Chamber should, by now, have any doubts about the importance and severity of those risks. The select committee found that children and young people out there in the community face huge challenges; that so much money in communities spent on drugs and alcohol is just one of the negative consequences they face. When that happens, lack of proper nutrition compounds problems with housing, education, health and employment. We found that these all add up to a set of structural factors that put these young people, and particularly the women who care for them, at significant risk of harm.
Of course as the Little Children are Sacred report so clearly showed, alcohol is a direct factor in the high rate of child abuse. That, too, must add to our resolve to fix substance abuse in the Territory; to put in place comprehensive arrangements that reduce supply, limit harm and treat people dependent upon alcohol and other drugs. These are tried and tested ways to reduce substance abuse, and the Territory has the good fortune to have many people out there putting them into practice. They need our support and the message needs to be spread throughout the Territory so that we can make some concerted progress on the problem.
Drawing attention to these issues does not take away from the intention of the bill before the Assembly today, rather, it complements it. However the select committee argued in its report, we also need to add to it to fill in the other gaps if we are really serious about the welfare of children and young people. Children and young people, together with their carers, need a reason to hope and not to turn to drugs and alcohol. They need opportunity in front of them so they can choose to lead meaningful lives, opportunities that others in our community and others in mainstream Australia may take for granted. All our children and young people should take these things for granted; it is what we owe them. We can do nothing about this. We can provide more continuity in funding, distribute our resources more effectively based on better information, the good people and strong programs out there will be in a better position to follow through. With better and easier access to funding schemes, these programs will be able to do more prevention work leading, again, to better outcomes. They can build on their successes and so can the young people in their care.
Here we are talking about breaking down cycles and building a future for our children. The select committee’s report suggests it is important for our efforts as government to achieve better coordination when it comes to substance abuse in the Territory. It is also important that local communities are fully involved in matters that affect their future. Keeping community ownership is critical to achieving success, whether it be with substance abuse, education or employment. That is the way of the future, the way to a Territory that sees its children growing up proud, resilient and healthy, well equipped to take their rightful place in our Territory and Australia of the future.
This bill on the care and protection of children is important as a package of measures designed to work together to make inroads on a difficult problem. It is a model for how we should go about tackling such things. It also fits in to a bigger picture - a picture we need to keep in mind if we want things to be better for our young people. We all know that young people should grow up and, when the time comes, bury their elders. However, too often, elders have to bury the young. As often as we do that, we bury our future.
I call on all my colleagues here in the Assembly to stand behind not only this bill, but other solutions we need in order to overcome this present crisis. Then we can put things how they should be, with our young people looking forward to their place in a better Territory.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I want to talk about Aboriginal children with disabilities that are abused, and young Aboriginal girls with disabilities who are abused. I have often asked myself: where are those children’s rights? They are already debilitated in communicating in society and the way they present themselves. I know of such a girl, where she has been abused on many occasions. I often ask myself and other people: where are their rights?
I close by saying something and putting it on record. I am very happy to hear the minister’s strong support for the condemnation of any individual organisation that stands in the way of protecting children from sexual or other abuse. It is so important that the expectation is that all evidence is followed and all people involved are forced to work cooperatively to bring these perpetrators of abuse to our vulnerable children to justice. I ask the minister again to reiterate her stance and place on public record that any person who stands in the way of protecting our children, either directly or indirectly, should be condemned and should not be in places of power within communities, within families or within government, federal, Territory or local. People in power have a great responsibility to protect the vulnerable, the young, and innocence of our children. I commend the bill to this House.
Ms LAWRIE (Planning and Lands): Mr Deputy Speaker, I join with members of this parliament in congratulating the Minister for Family and Community Services for seeing a passage today, which is an historic day, of an incredibly important, critical piece of legislation that, by its name, absolutely indicates its intent. It is about the care and the protection of our children. As we have heard in debate today in this Chamber, this legislation has been a long time coming. However, I know, as the minister who previously has had carriage of this, we absolutely wanted to get it right. This is critical legislation and, I believe, one of the most important pieces of legislation that we have seen in this House, certainly since I have been a member since 2001.
The consultation has been extensive. Extensive consultation really does reflect the important nature of this legislation. There have been information sessions right around the Territory with all the stakeholder groups. The draft bill was released for discussion. Some 70 groups made submissions. There have been numerous subsequent meetings with groups such as the Law Society. We had Professor Dorothy Scott, an eminent expert nationally, overview the legislation and give us recommendations. Professor Dorothy Scott gave the legislation, in its draft form, a very positive tick, but had some very constructive advice on where it could be improved even further, and those improvements were taken on board.
Then the legislation was delayed to allow the Little Children are Sacred report to come down with its recommendations so that we could assess how those recommendations would affect the legislation.
There has been a lot of debate in the Chamber, but what I propose to do is step us back through now what the legislation contains. This new legislation offers a more comprehensive approach to the protection and prevention of harm to children. The key differences to the current act are the strengthening of provisions to support families to care for their children. It extends support for young people leaving care and it gives powers to move a child to a safe place. The powers under the act are vested in the CEO and not the minister. However, the minister retains overall responsibility and powers. The Northern Territory government’s responsibilities and the minister’s powers are defined.
It introduces a screening system for child-related employment. It broadens the scope of regulated children’s services. It provides for the establishment of review teams to examine the operations of the child protection and care system, and a committee to review child deaths. It introduces guiding principles to assist the interpretation and implementation. It provides for the establishment of a Children’s Commissioner. It maintains universal mandatory reporting of any suspected child abuse and neglect, both harm and exploitation, or where a sexual offence is suspected of being committed. Anyone reporting in good faith is covered for any criminal or civil liability.
The providers of child-related services must ensure staff are trained and know about their reporting responsibilities. It maintains the Aboriginal child placement principle. It maintains provisions about the safe employment of children.
The statutory child protection activity within the act ensures that the act allows for a broader range of responses to: reports about a child believed to be suffering harm or in need of protection, or where there is concern about a child’s wellbeing; make inquiries and conduct investigations; coordinate assistance and arrange a mediation conference; take a child into provisional protection or temporary custody; apply for an assessment and/or protection order; place children; and monitor and review their care.
The act makes it clear that service providers must give information to FACS or police when they are conducting inquiries or investigations. It makes it clear that FACS has the ability to share information with NGOs and other government agencies involved with the child or family, where it supports the protection of a child. It gives new powers to police and authorised officers to move a child to a safe place. It gives new powers of restraint, search and seizure.
Regarding children in care and the court processes, this new legislation puts some current policy requirements and best practice standards into legislation. It provides for mediation and case planning. It maintains the family matters court. It makes it an offence to publish family matters court outcomes or proceedings, or to publish the identify of a child involved in an alleged or proven sex abuse matter.
Review teams are to be established to review the operation of services under Part 2, the child protection and care provisions. Review teams can make recommendations to the CEO and monitor the implementation of those recommendations. The membership of the team is defined in the act and accountability measures for the child protection system.
An important aspect of this legislation today provides for the young people who are leaving care. Currently, support to a young person who has been in the guardianship of the minister ceases when a child turns 18. The act extends an offer of support to a young person who is leaving care up to the age of 25.
Importantly, it provides for screening for child-related employment. The act makes provisions in relation to the range and scope of employment, the obligations of the employee, the obligations of the employer, and clearance by the screening authority. Categories of child-related employment are defined in the act. Employment arrangements include: acting under contract; being a member of a board of management; and a volunteer of an organisation or services that perform child-related activities. Parents volunteering for a group where their child is a member are excluded provided there are no overnight stays. Contact with children includes physical, verbal, written or communication through electronic means such as telephone or Internet.
The screening authority will receive information, make the decision and inform the applicant whether they may enter into child-related employment. Exemptions and appeals processes will exist. Generally, they will assess on the basis of whether the person poses a risk to children, but prescribed offences mean automatic exclusions; that is, no clearance. The authority will be auspiced by police and will be known as Safe NT. Safe NT will conduct and assess all employment-related criminal history checks in the Territory. Fees for all criminal history checks will be the same: $50 for employed persons; $5 for volunteers.
Importantly, the act provides for children’s services to be regulated. Children’s services are defined as: services provided to children of less than 13 years; and away from the child’s usual place of residence; and provided by a person who has been given the responsibility to care for the child; and provided as an ongoing operation for more than two hours a week. The following children’s services are required to be licensed: childcare centres and non-government kindergartens; outside school hours care; agencies brokering home-based care, that is, family day care schemes, disability and education group homes, and private home-based childcare agencies.
The following children’s services will have to register with a licensed officer or the department: an individual home-based carer; the provider of short-term care provided in close proximity to parents such as crche at the gym; the provider of time-limited childcare for a specific event under five days; for example, childcare at a conference. Some children’s services in specified locations, predominantly in remote areas, can operate if they have an agreement with the department. These are JET crches, childcare centres, and outside school hours care.
Importantly, the act provides for the establishment of a Children’s Commissioner. The Children’s Commissioner will be an independent statutory appointment for five years, renewable. The role of the commissioner will be to investigate complaints regarding services provided to a protected child; monitor how services respond to the commissioner’s findings; monitor this act as it pertains to protected children; monitor the implementation of government responses to the sex abuse inquiry; and annual and other reports to be tabled in the Legislative Assembly by the minister.
Also importantly, the bill provides for the establishment of a Child Death Review and Prevention Committee. It will research all child deaths from all causes. It will maintain a database. It will make recommendations regarding appropriate policy, and a report will be provided to the Northern Territory government and tabled in parliament. There will be about 10 to 16 members on the Child Death Review and Prevention Committee that will be convened and supported by the Department of Health and Community Services.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank those in the gallery who I know have given an enormous effort to ensuring that we have this legislation before the House today. There is an enormous commitment by the Department of Family and Community Services to providing a contemporary and robust child protection system in the Territory. They have done the best that they could do with welfare legislation that was not contemporary. The legislation that we have before us today provides them with a range of tools, powers and, importantly, checks and balances within its own system to improve the safety of our children and, importantly and specifically, the safety of the children who are in the care of the system. It provides support for children who are leaving the care system. We know that children who have been in the foster care system often underachieve in education, and often go on to lead very constructive lives and outcomes. Providing that ongoing support through to the age of 25 is critically important to giving them the best chance at life.
The government has responsibilities here. We have a responsibility to continue to resource the child protection agency, to continue to provide support in the non-government sector, to extend those supports right across the Territory, which the government has been doing and will continue to do. It is critically important in ensuring that we have the right supports within our remote communities, particularly because they are, at that point, the most vulnerable regarding the conditions of poverty in which many people live.
This is a comprehensive change to the way we protect our children in the Territory. It has not been rushed. It has been considered. It has passed through several different iterations taking on board the information and advice coming back from people intrinsically involved in it; for example, the Law Society and others. The professionalism and dedication I have seen from the staff of the Department of Family and Community Services has been exceptional and I sincerely thank them for their commitment. I thank the staff who have worked in the minister’s office as well, because they have put an enormous amount of energy and dedication into achieving what we will, hopefully, see today, which is the passage of the legislation.
I commend the minister for starting the process. It is quite appropriate that she be the minister to complete this. We all know a robust child protection system is an evolving system. It is a system that embraces contemporary practice. It is a system that provides training, professional development, support, extension of services, and involves a robust interchange between advocacy groups which, by nature, need to exist, for example the Foster Carers Association, and to work with people at that grassroots level.
It is my hope that the tools in here provide the professionals in the agency with an improved system. I am fairly confident of that. I also hope that the government continues its reform agenda in caring for our children. Again, I am fairly confident of that, particularly with the Deputy Chief Minister at the helm.
However, at the end of the day, the care and protection of our children is everybody’s responsibility. A system is only as good as the society in which we live. Yes, we have mandatory reporting in the Territory. Yes, mandatory reporting will continue. However, the system relies on everyone in every community not allowing children to be abused. If anyone is concerned about a child they should report that to the Department of Family and Community Services or, indeed, the police, because there has been a sea change in how government can respond.
We have a task force which is combined resources of police and the FACS intake team. I challenge someone to say that there is a report that goes unanswered, because we have a robust task force. The links now that exist between police and the intake team mean that there is the investigation grunt to follow through on those notifications; there is the information shared between those agencies that has meant a greater understanding of the risk involved in each of those notifications. It is up to every single member of the Northern Territory community, whether they live in a remote community, in our regional centres, or in our urban centres. Do not walk past a situation where a child is at risk. We have a system that has been resourced to take the notifications and follow up. Today, with the passage of this, we have the contemporary legislation and framework in which to more appropriately deal with those notifications.
Madam Speaker, I commend the legislation to the House.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Madam Speaker, I support the bill before the Assembly. I recognise those members of the department who are here to see this bill passed. It is important legislation. The legislation in this area has not had such a major revision as this for quite some time. I believe everyone in the area would accept it is well overdue.
Provisions such as this and major rewritings of areas of law provide the opportunity to incorporate the updated best practice in any area. This bill provides for the best practice principles in the area of child protection.
I acknowledge the statements of other members of the Assembly, especially the opposition who have given their support to this bill as a whole notwithstanding there may be some particular areas where they have differences. I believe the Assembly is united and unanimous in the view that this is a vast improvement on what was previously available. It is a credit, as other speakers have said, to the dedication of staff who have done the groundwork. It is also a credit to the parliamentary draftspeople, because pulling together threads of an area such as child protection and turning that into legislative clauses is no mean feat, especially when you look at the size of this particular legislation and the difficult areas that it covers. The body of work behind it is certainly a veritable mountain. I am sure, even if this is a large bill, that the amount of work that has gone into it is probably quite small by comparison with that effort.
The Martin government, and now the Henderson Labor government, have always been committed to consultation with community and stakeholder groups. I understand that, between July 2003 and February 2005, there where several phases of consultation, including the distribution of the draft bill. The level of consultation is reflected in the fact that there are many amendments that have been made to the first draft, and even the draft that was first tabled here as part of the second reading speech. That consultation goes on. I am positive that there will be further revision. As this bill becomes an act and enforced, and we see it in operation, there will be further amendment that is needed. The area that it deals with, if nothing else, guarantees that it will need continuous observation to see what its effects are on the ground and to ensure that it delivers the promise of the objects of the act set out in clause 4.
I understand the board of inquiry made some specific recommendations, and these were implemented through the legislation, new provisions providing for child-related employment screening; a Children’s Commissioner, which I believe is an extremely important step; and the Child Death Review and Prevention Committee.
The new legislation offers a more comprehensive approach to the protection and prevention of harm to children. From the briefing I received, and from as much an attempt to get across this act that you can really make in the short time I have had it before me, some of the key differences, I understand, are the strengthening of provisions to support families to care for children; extending support for young people leaving care; and giving power to move children to a safe place. I do not claim to be an expert in this area, not even close, but I believe the area of support for young people in leaving care has been an area that has need more attention. As I said, there are many great steps forward in this and one of those, particularly, is that extension of support for young people, because it is difficult for them coming from a position of care and then trying to build and regulate their life without that support mechanism.
The establishment of review teams to examine the operations of the child protection and care system, and a committee to review child deaths, will have an impact in ensuring that our legislation meet the needs that it describes; that it has the positive effect that we hope. I listened to the contribution of my colleague, the member for Arnhem. If you read through reports like Little Children are Sacred, you realise that what many children in the community, thankfully, have is not available to all children in community. There are a great many who do not have that protection and care that others enjoy. It is important social legislation to try to provide that and, at the same time, not disrupt unduly family relationships.
There has been a raft of changes through a number of Australian jurisdictions in regard to those who are employed in areas involving the care of children. This legislation incorporates that. We live in a time where the issues, dangers and care is required around the appointment of people working with children. Our society has become more aware of those problems; the need to ensure proper screening and that appropriate people can still obtain the employment, and that the system attempts to guard against those who may not be appropriate. Unfortunately, the media has been littered with stories where safeguards have not been enough. I do not need to talk about those instances for too long. However, just how careful we, as a community, need to be with the people into whose care we are placing our children is much better recognised now than it was in the past.
I congratulate the minister and former Minister for Family and Community Services for producing this legislation. Again, I thank the staff at Family and Community Services for their hard work and input. I hope it provides the extra protection that it is designed to provide. I will certainly be most receptive to hearing from people on the ground as to how they have seen its operation, once it has been in place for a little while and we can assess it. Congratulations to the ministers. I commend the bill to the House.
Mr CONLAN (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, I have been feverishly making notes throughout this debate. Unfortunately, I have not made enough notes to really do this legislation justice when you look at the amount of effort that has gone into it by the department. Have a look at some of the bills that have been put before us over the last day or two, the transport amendment bill and the bill for the Planning Act, and then have a look at the size of the Care and Protection of Children Bill and the amount of effort that has gone into it. I could speak all day and still not do this justice. I congratulate the minister and the department staff who are here today on their efforts in putting this together.
I echo the thoughts of the Leader of the Opposition who said it is an historic day for the Northern Territory: the first time since 1984 that we have some new legislation to deal with this very serious issue. Obviously, the opposition supports this legislation. Again, I congratulate the minister and her department on the effort that they have gone to.
I have listened carefully to the debate and we agree and support all the comments made. I will respond to the comments by the member for Arnhem, who articulated very well the point that, with regard to the federal intervention, the very worst thing to come out of that federal intervention would be that nothing has changed, or that nothing will change. Despite criticisms of the intervention, if nothing has changed, then what is the point?
I know that the unseated minister, former federal Indigenous Affairs minister, Mal Brough, had a unique ability to rub people up the wrong way, but I do not think that you could doubt his commitment to the children of the Northern Territory. I echo his and the former Prime Minister, who has pleaded with our new Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, that he continue with this. As they both said in their concession speeches on Saturday night, it is not for them and it is not for some ideology, but it is for the children of the Northern Territory.
In my short time in the House, about three or four months, there has appeared to be a common theme in almost every single debate, despite what that debate is, and that it that it is the care and protection of children. If we do not have safe, healthy and educated kids, then we do not have a future as a society here in the Northern Territory. It seems to be an underlying theme in just about every debate and is, obviously, emphasised beautifully in this bill today.
Regardless of where our children live, whether it is in a remote community or in the suburbs, they are vulnerable, easy targets for predators, sexual and physical predators, and therefore they must be protected. These gutless predators are always finding new ways to abuse our kids. It is an ebb and flow, and that is why I welcome the review in 12 months by the minister to have a look at this and look at ways to improve that legislation if, in fact, it does need improving.
I have not gone through the bill as carefully as the Leader of the Opposition and, hence, my short time on my feet here today. However, I do believe her when she says that more work needs to be done. That is why I welcome the minister’s commitment to review it in 12 months time. No doubt, she will be talking to the Opposition Leader about that to see if there are ways that the act can be approved.
Madam Speaker, I wish them well. I am not on my feet long enough to do this justice, but I congratulate the minister and the department for the bill for the care and protection of children. Congratulations to the minister, and I wish her well.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Child Protection): Madam Speaker, as I said earlier, and certainly the former Minister for Family and Community Services and my colleague, the Leader of Government Business, said, getting to this point has been a long process. However, what we have arrived at today is just not a cold piece of lifeless legislation. It is a living document which will continue to grow and develop in the future. It is a living document because so many Territorians have put so much energy and passion into its creation across countless consultations, meetings, arguments and negotiations.
It has covered public servants from many different agencies, as well as representation and input from a plethora of non-government organisations, community groups and individuals. Thanking you all individually would be impossible. However, it is worth placing on the record that public and industry forums in 2003 in Alice Springs, Darwin, Jabiru and Palmerston involved many people. By 2005, 43 participants were involved. By 2005, participants in forums in Darwin, Ali Curung, Alice Springs, Hermannsburg, Borroloola, Jabiru, Katherine, Palmerston, Tennant Creek and Humpty Doo grew to over 420 people. Written submissions responding to the initial discussion paper in 2003 numbered 26 and, for the discussion draft in 2004-05, the list of written submissions grew to 60. This legislation is a living document because many Territorians put their hearts into such an important issue.
I thank all the individuals, organisations and public servants who made such valuable contributions. I could go through many of them, but thanking them all individually would be impossible. However, I do want to start with naming a few people. I, too, acknowledge Colin Dyer because I know of his long commitment to children’s services. I want to start with Barbara Kelly and the work that Barbara has done since the very start of this. She is pretty much the one who gave birth to this project. I thank and acknowledge Barbara before this parliament.
I also want to thank Anthony Burton from FACS who did a fantastic job. As the minister and also the former minister, for your leadership, your contribution to our office, we thank you. I thank Helen Crawford, Lee-anne Jarrett-Sims, David Richardson, Hilary Berry, Sylvia Cecchin, Kelvin Currie, Adam Tomison and Jenny Scott. In the Department of Justice, I also thank Robert Bradshaw and Jenni Daniel Yee. I am breaking a promise because he told me I should not mention him, but I want to give special thanks to Paul Wan from Parliamentary Counsel for the three years of hard and complicated work that he should be very proud of. When we were going through the second lot of amendments, meeting with Paul and just talking through and negotiating, these lawyers in Parliamentary Counsel can be hard sometimes. I acknowledge Paul Wan for the latest lot of amendments and what he has pushed through.
Before I get to all of my colleagues in this Chamber that contributed, I do thank you, Barbara, because I know the many times that we had discussions on this very early at the beginning. Going around the Territory and starting it, you have done a fantastic job. To see the end result from everybody within the department who has had a part to play in it, you have come up with a very contemporary, very fantastic piece of legislation. We know that we are going to have to, at some stage - and that is the commitment that I gave to this parliament - amend in 12 months time or look at what does need to be amended.
I thank the Leader of the Opposition for her summing up and her support, as I know she is fully committed to the issue in relation to child protection. The same as her, our private discussions will remain that. One thing is obvious: we both give full commitment to this. On both sides of this House, there is no one in this House who is not committed to doing our very best to legislate in favour of the care and protection of our children. As I said when I was presenting the amendments, I know there are some things that we are going to disagree on with detail. You did say that you wanted more work done. A lot of work has been done. As I said, and I made this very clear to parliament as well as to stakeholders outside of parliament, I am committed totally to looking at the review and the workings of the act 12 months after we have had it in place. While we agree to disagree on the details of this bill, we remain committed to truly making it work.
I was pleased that the member for Arnhem raised the issue of the Little Children are Sacred report and the insistence in that report to international human rights law as the basis of what we must do towards the care and protection of children. Similarly, I endorse the member for Arnhem’s passionate support for the Children’s Commissioner, and the absolute need for all Territorians to know of the existence and the work of the commissioner. I, too, place great faith in the potential work of the commissioner, and place utmost importance in the independence of the commissioner, and the role of the commissioner in reporting to parliament.
The member for Arnhem pointed out the obvious potential we now have with the federal Labor Rudd government in responding, in a constructive way, member for Greatorex, not in a destructive way. Let us move forward in a constructive way to re-making the intervention, even if it is called a generational plan for indigenous people. There has to be a better, more strategic way. This is what I often kept saying to the former federal minister, Mal Brough. If it is about protecting children, let us look at the areas where we do need to protect children - alcohol, grog in our communities and towns is a major issue. The scourge that is use and abuse of marijuana is another area that causes a lot of heartache. I am not against any parts of that intervention that goes towards protecting our children. We have a strong legislative framework in place, such as this bill. As I gave my commitment to the Leader of the Opposition, as we go along, when we put the Children’s Commissioner in place, we will have a look across the implementation, because the department has worked out an implementation plan as to the stage-by-stage months of the various initiatives under the act that we need to put in place. Once that gets going, we should be able to look at where the gaps are and what needs to be tweaked to make it a bit more workable.
We are all on the same page, and we all want to achieve the same thing, so we just need to work through. The former federal minister accused me of being out of touch with my community. I believe the last federal election result showed just how far he was out of touch with his community. However, this is not about politics. I believe that, in his own mind, he did want to fix up and look at the issue of indigenous affairs. I actually thanked Mal Brough when I saw him one day. Like the members for Arnhem and Macdonnell, I thanked him for putting indigenous affairs back under the national spotlight because, too often, our remote communities and some of the Aboriginal issues are forgotten.
My words regarding what I think about the intervention have been twisted through the media. I know what I think about the intervention. I have always said that the imperative is to save our kids. It is to protect our kids. I have no problems. I share the member for Arnhem’s hope, and thank her for her passion that she brought into this debate today.
She is right, the money promised from the federal government as part of the intervention must remain here. However, we do need to talk to Kevin Rudd and the Rudd Labor government in Canberra to direct it in a constructive and sustainable way which will ensure real long-term solutions in our remote communities.
I also appreciate the member for Braitling’s concerns. She raised with me the time limits involved in responding to reports of child abuse. This is something that will be very much based in regulation and policy settings as the act develops, and based, of course, on experience. We cannot legislate for timetables when we have kids who are facing real and imminent danger. These kinds of decisions must be based on assessment of danger, wherein policy will determine that the most pressing and urgent cases will be dealt with, with the greatest of urgency. It is also policy that will need to be the most amenable as well, to advise and input over time, and not something that can be set in concrete for all time.
With regard to her inquiries about carers and the standard of carers, let me assure her that the regulations under section 77 of the act will well and truly allow for both the voice of the carer to be heard, alongside ensuring that the standards of caring are properly met. I remind her also, in the context of section 10 which refers to the paramount importance of any action being made in the best interest of the child and the need to take into account the effect of any change in circumstances of the child and its best interest.
All of us agree with the member for Braitling that there will be loopholes that will appear at some stage in the regulations. I did say this morning none of us can pretend otherwise, which is why we agreed to review the process after 12 months. With foster carers also, member for Braitling, you can raise that issue with the Children’s Commissioner.
For the member for Macdonnell on her contribution to this important debate and, in particular, her concern for interagency cooperation in dealing with issues such as the effect of substance abuse on kids, in clause 44 of the bill, at a case level the CEO will be able to pull together multi-agency responses to dealing with the specific case. Under clause 24A, the minister is able to do anything necessary to bring together agencies to deal with the problem at a systematic level relating to care and protection of children.
The member for Macdonnell is absolutely right; we must break the cycles of substance abuse, violence and disempowerment which is critical to a far safer future for our children and younger people. She also made the point that, too often at the moment, we are burying our futures by neglecting our young people. I endorse her sentiments about perpetrators of child abuse and the absolute need to bring them to justice.
I thank my colleague, the member for Brennan, for calling attention to the work and the level of consultation that has gone into the creation of this bill right through to the stages of final consultation amendments that we are about to deal with at committee stage. I will deal with that a bit more in the third reading speech. Suffice to say, many hundreds of people have been involved in this process.
The member for Brennan also drew attention to the new look at continuing to support people over the age of 18 to 25 after they pass from formal care arrangements. He rightly points out that the Child Death Review and Prevention Committee will have a long-term impact on the care and safety throughout the community, and not just those in care. The member for Brennan also highlighted the far more thorough going through approach we have in the new law towards screening of people involved in child-related activities.
I thank the member for Greatorex for his support for the bill and, indeed, the support that is coming from the Leader of the Opposition and the opposition generally. Again, I assure him that the 12-month review will happen. Today, I have been informed that when the Community Welfare Act was passed in 1984, the then minister, Ian Tuxworth, promised a similar review of that act. That is a long time. Member for Greatorex, I can assure you this will not happen in this case.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Clauses 1 to 4, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Clause 5:
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 23.1.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 5, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 6 agreed to.
Clause 7:
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Mr Chairman …
Ms LAWRIE: Mr Chairman, with your indulgence, I propose to speed things along. After having a brief discussion with the Leader of the Opposition who has been supportive of this legislation, I propose one way of dealing with these amendments is for the minister to table the entire amendment schedule and for members of the Chamber to deal with them as a whole and move through the committee stage appropriately. I move -
Mr CHAIRMAN: The motion by the minister is that all the amendments …
Mr WOOD: Mr Chairman, could I ask you, if this is done in the way you have put to the House, is there still room for questions in general on a section of the bill?
Mr CHAIRMAN: If we are going to do that we need to go back. Would you prefer …
Mr WOOD: Just to save you time, could I just ask the minister …
Mr CHAIRMAN: How about you just ask the questions and we will take it from there.
Mr WOOD: For the sake of flexibility, I ask the minister where in the bill is there any reference to carer’s right of appeal, and there may not be, where they have lost their children; their children have been taken away by the department? Is there a clause in there, which I could not see, which gives a carer right of appeal against the CEO’s decision to take the children away?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Member for Nelson, the member for Braitling asked that question on your behalf. Clause 77 of the bill will allow for both the voice of the carer to be heard alongside ensuring that the standards of care are properly met. There is also clause 10 which refers to the paramount importance of any action being made in the interest of the child and the need to take into account the effect of any change in the circumstances of the child and its best interests. Member for Nelson, I have said to the other members that I have given a commitment that we will look at this act in 12 months time. We will look at where those loopholes are, and give that commitment to addressing some of that. That commitment has been given to the opposition, and also to you.
There will be a welcome addition to this bill which is the recruitment and putting in place of a Children’s Commissioner. That will also be an avenue in which foster carers and children would be able to approach the Children’s Commissioner with any concerns that they might have.
Mr WOOD: Just one more question on that clause. What protection is there against a vexatious claim? In other words, if someone lodges a complaint, which the bill requires them to do, is there a mechanism that would test to see whether the claim is a fair dinkum claim or a vexatious claim?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Member for Nelson, I know that you have been looking at a particular case pertaining to this. As I said, no system is ever perfect, but there are some good, professional staff with integrity who do their best. There are set regulations and policy guidelines which staff working in this area need to address. I know that not everyone is happy. This bill allows for those responses to go back after the investigation. I know one of the concerns that you raised with me was that there is no response time or feedback as to where things are standing. Some of this bill and addresses some of those issues. There are always going to be issues regarding that. The CEO is putting a more streamlined process in, effectively, and getting the day-to-day operations of that act implemented in the department. The minister is still taking that responsibility; those professionals who implement that act will be ensuring that that happens.
Motion agreed to.
[Editor’s note: See Minutes of Proceedings for amendments to clauses agreed to.]
Amended clauses agreed to.
Remainder of the bill, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments; report adopted.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Child Protection): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
I thank the Leader of the Opposition for her cooperation and bipartisan support. Protecting children is very important to all of us, so I thank the opposition. I thank all my colleagues.
Finally, member for Nelson, we will place great expectations on the Children’s Commissioner. The Children’s Commissioner could also get that complaint, look at it to see whether it is vexatious and then decide not to go ahead. There are those levels of what you will be able to do.
I thank the department. They have done a fantastic job. Child protection and children’s services is never an easy area. It is a harrowing area, and often it is a thankless area. Often, in the media, all you see is the headlines. Yes, they are harrowing, it is terrible, and we never want to see what happens with a lot of the children. All too often, it is quite easy to pass the buck and to blame somebody else. Regarding the department and everyone who works in it, when people get to that point that the department should have done this or the department should have done that, it is easy to blame public servants for the failings. All of us have a role in ensuring that our children are protected; that when we see something, we do report it and we do not just talk about it, because that is what has been, fundamentally, the biggest mistake, particularly in a lot of our Aboriginal communities, where the Chinese whispers or when people talk about it, and we do not do anything. The issue of matters being too culturally sensitive has been the biggest buck-passing exercise for a long, long time where people have not wanted to grab the issue by the throat to ensure that our kids are protected.
Thank you, Leader of the Opposition. Thank you, members for Greatorex, Nelson, and Braitling; my colleague, the former minister, had just as much passion and commitment as I do; all of my parliamentary colleagues, the members for Brennan, Arnhem and Macdonnell who contributed. Thanks to Adam and Jenny Scott. Thank you Paul Wan. Thank you all for your contributions.
Let us get this bill into practice.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Continued from 18 October 2007.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Madam Speaker, the amendments before us today are designed to comply with the National Water Initiative by improving transparency and accountability. First, I thank the minister’s department for organising a briefing for me at reasonably short notice on Monday. I really did appreciate that; it clarified some points that I needed to have clarified. Thank you, minister, for organising it.
Transparency and accountability are so very important in many areas of our daily lives and in the way business is carried out, and the issuing of water licences is no different. My research has indicated that these amendments are well and truly lagging behind the National Water Initiative by three to four years, so they are welcomed at long last by industry members. I also believe that the Northern Territory government was allocated funding several years ago under the initiative to implement these amendments, so that has clearly not been met to this date. In the past, there has been some strong concern that, due to the lack of accountability and transparency, there were licences issued through the back door, so to speak.
The current government and other agencies lean towards corporates as a way of the future. The majority of applicants for water licences throughout the Northern Territory are smaller growers and, obviously, they feel threatened by the larger corporates. The perception of any favouritism towards the corporates must be eliminated. The amendments to the act being debated today will eliminate any doubt to future water allocation applications and licences issued by improving the application procedure.
I have sought advice from the small growers and the Northern Territory Horticultural Association which represents a huge number of growers, from corporate down to the smaller operators, and they welcome these amendments and say they are long overdue. These amendments improve the law as the current provision to issue a licence in section 45 is limited in its instruction as to how or why a licence should be issued. While this amendment is very much running behind the times in relation to our obligations under the National Water Initiative, it is welcomed by industry.
My understanding from the briefing is that, in future when an application is made to the Water Controller for a licence, he will be required by this new legislation to give notice publicly via print media. The notice gives 30 days for any submissions to be lodged against the application. Also, minister, I did not clarify this: with this application, does there also have to be a notice of intent placed on the public property boundary as there is in the Planning Act? Do they have to give advice?
Ms Lawrie: No.
Mrs MILLER: They do not? I just needed that clarified to see ...
Ms Lawrie: They do not have the pink.
Mrs MILLER: Oh, you do not have the pink? I did not know if you had to give notice and you were giving it publicly …
Ms Lawrie: Just to clarify, a letter to all neighbours.
Mrs MILLER: A letter to the neighbours? Right, thank you.
This legislation amendment does not affect the issue of meters on bores because these amendments do not go to that particular issue. In fact, under section 70 of the current act, the minister already has the power to direct meters be placed on bores. However, I would like the minister to clarify a couple of points for me in her reply. The reason why government was installing meters on bores in the first place was to gauge the quantity of water usage from each bore, and to be able to calculate the demand from each aquifer and, in doing so, have knowledge of the amount of water available for future use. There is certainly nothing wrong with wanting to gain information to be able to prepare for the future. The concern most people are bringing to me is: are they going to be charged for the quantity of water taken from each bore? I know in the past that the government has said no, it will not be happening. However, there is still concern in the community that that is exactly what will happen. With the issuing of licences and then the meter readings, what else are they going to do with them after you have done the meter readings and ascertained the quantity coming from the aquifer and the quantity being used by each property owner? There is concern out there.
What I would really like to hear from the minister in her summing up is that she could reaffirm that there will be no charges for those people who are having their water metered. It will be very reassuring for everyone who has a bore meter on their property to know that government still commits to no charging for the amount of water that is going through that meter.
I am sure the member for Nelson is going to have some additional comments in relation to meters in his response …
Mr Wood: No, no.
Mrs MILLER: He is not today? I was looking forward to his response. I thought he might contribute something in that area.
Madam Speaker, I support the Water Amendment Bill, but I just need some reassurances from the minister that there will not be any charges.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, the member for Katherine was trying to preempt my speech. I am sure there is a standing order in here somewhere that says you cannot preempt the next person’s contribution! Be that as it may, meters have been brought up in this debate. I thank the minister for introducing this bill. It is a very important bill. I also had a thorough briefing from the department, and I thank the department for that briefing.
Obviously, we need to have some regulation over the use of water. Gone are the days when we could just pump water willy-nilly, even if we are in an area where we do have a lot of water. We are developing the Territory. Some areas are developing faster than others and, because of that, we need to be wary of how much water we take out of the ground. What the bill is doing is very timely.
When you read the purpose of the bill; that is, to improve transparency and accountability – how could I ever go against such an object? That is something I know we all want. We are going to improve transparency and accountability in relation to requiring community comment to be sought on application for licence to extract water; requiring reasons to be published for a grant or refusal of that licence; and establishing a public register. That is very important as part of the overall strategy of water management in the Northern Territory.
I suppose what I saw as an anomaly is that this will only apply, basically, for water that comes out of areas that are covered by water allocation plan or, in the case of Litchfield, bores that extract more than 15 litres per second. If a station wants to put down a big bore, it does not need to get that licence. I am not saying that that is necessarily a bad thing, but we have, to some extent, an anomaly that people in certain areas will be required to licence their bores and other people in other areas will not have to do that. You will have water allocation plans in Katherine, so people who are extracting water out of there for commercial reasons will have to have a licence; in Litchfield, if they take out more than 15 litres per second. However, if you took Litchfield again, if someone had 10 litres per second, they do not have to have a licence. If you are on a cattle station and you want to pump 30 litres per second out of a bore, out of groundwater not surface water, you do not require a licence.
I suppose, with time, some of these things might be looked at. Some of them might be impractical. If you have a station about half the size of Victoria and you want to put a bore down, it is hard to see the sense in trying to ring up the neighbour and say: ‘Do you have any objections?’ He might not like the fellow and say: ‘Well, I will fix him up, I will not agree to his bore’. Whatever we do in the future has to be done with commonsense as well. You do still have these little anomalies, especially in Litchfield.
I touched an interesting area during the briefing; that we are going to have a register. I remember raising the issue of how much water does Power and Water pump out of their bores in the rural area. The word came back to me ‘commercial-in-confidence’. Well, if the register is going to be a register, it should be open to the public to see what any bore that is required to have a license is actually licensed for. To some extent, I would like to see a record of how much water is actually pumped on a per annum basis so we do have some idea. At the moment, I know people in the Litchfield area do get concerned about the amount of water that Power and Water pumps out. What we get is generally: ‘Well, we pump out about 40% or 30% of the total amount of water in the aquifer’. We would like to know what that is and whether it is necessary. Whilst it is good to have the register, I believe all people who are licensed should be required to have the details of that license on the register. I do not think ‘commercial-in-confidence’ with Power and Water will get anywhere because they happen to have the monopoly. I am not sure who they are competing with.
The other issue is where we go in the Darwin region. Obviously, there is concern. We have the CSIRO presently looking at the values of the Howard River. It is good that they are doing that. To some extent, even though we might be looking at regulating the amount of water, the land that surrounds the east Howard bore field has nearly finished its potential to be subdivided. You have nearly reached the limit of 2 ha blocks that normally take a bore in that area. Therefore, even though the government might be looking at a Darwin Water Advisory Committee, by the time that is set up and ready to make some recommendations, the area around the Howard bore field will probably come, to some extent, to the end of any more bores.
There are other areas in Litchfield where people want to extract water such as the Humpty Doo area, especially Humpty Doo south. There are areas where the subdivision was knocked back simply because they could not get approval for the amount of water that would be required to have bores in that area meant it could not be recharged. The issue of meters has been a touchy issue in the rural area. As the member for Katherine said, I have a number sitting against my bore. It has been there for quite a while. I am waiting for the meter; I am not sure when it is coming …
Ms Lawrie: We will get one around to you, Gerry.
Mr WOOD: Thank you very much, minister. My bore will be metered, and I am quite happy to do that.
I do believe that people are caught between the two concerns. There are lot of people out there who realise now, and this is not 10 years ago, that we are going to be careful of our water resource. At the same time, there is a fear that, eventually, although the government said it will not charge, governments change and policies change. I know that the minister can give me all the guarantees in the world, and that is fine, I accept that. I tell people that both the then minister for Power and Water and the then minister, I think for the Environment, who, I think had Natural Resources at that time, both said quite clearly that they would not be charging for water. That is fine. This government might not be here in five or six years’ time. People do have that fear.
Whilst this has to happen from the government point of view, when something like this comes out, or when I hear on the Country Hour that they are going to meter bores in Katherine on land over 0.5 ha. If I am listening to that in Litchfield, it is weird. Whilst this has a lot of good content and there is good reason for doing what you are doing, and I understand that this will be part of water allocation plans etcetera, at the same time, you have to realise people do not always understand what this is about. It would be good for the government to put out material explaining to people what this is about; what the government’s goals are in relation to the National Water Initiative and how this is all fitting into that; and more information about what is happening with the Howard River.
If people are involved in all those sorts of things and understand, I believe you will get less resistance. I am not saying you will get rid of all the resistance, but people will have a better understanding. The more we can tell people about the resource, and what that resource is needed for; many people do not understand that if you pump water continually, your rivers will dry up because we lower the water table earlier every year because we are pumping a lot of water. The Howard River will not run for as long as it used to. Some of the lagoons will dry up. I do not believe people always necessary make the connection between pumping water out of the ground 35 m to 95 m down, and why the Howard River is not running in August. After the CSIRO, for instance, has finished its work, perhaps we should have some forums and explain some of those things.
We have had that before but, again, from the government’s point of view of bringing the people along. As the minister said, transparency and accountability is important. However, I believe education is important as well. People say the water comes from New Guinea, as is often said, or it comes from South Africa, as I have heard some people say. There are myths out there and sometimes it would be good for the government to reinforce some of these good reasons that we need to protect our water resources.
I thank the minister for the bill. What they are doing is certainly important. I do take note of the minister’s last sentence which I could apply to the issue of local government. She was talking about water management, and she said we need to get it right and what we are doing we are doing in an open and transparent manner and, more importantly, we are doing it in partnership - I am not quoting verbatim here - with the community who depend on the ability to access water resources for economic, social, cultural, environment and prosperity. The issue of openness and transparency, and doing it in partnership with the community, not only applies to the Water Act, it applies to many things the government does. That applies especially to the changes that are being brought forward with local government reform.
Minister, thank you for sponsoring the bill. I am interested to know what the next stage after this is. What does the government have in mind? Do you have a timetable for other reform matters; for instance, the Darwin Water Advisory Committee? When will we see it and who will be on the committee? Do you have any other plans for future changes to the use of water in the Northern Territory?
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I only have a few comments. Much of what I was going to say has been already said. It is interesting because with everyone’s thoughts and minds on water conservation in Australia generally, here we are in the Northern Territory and we have access to water that is almost unrestricted. I was quite amazed to learn that the department or the government has no idea how much water is pumped out over the Territory in different areas, that metering is voluntary, so we really do not know how much is being pumped out on pastoral areas, on town basins, and on rural areas. I would have thought, in this day and age, minister, when we are all so acutely aware of conservation and we really do go into it, government would be thinking about establishing how much is being used.
In Alice Springs, for instance, one of the schools pumps water out for their oval at St Philip’s. The golf course pumps water from the town basin for their golf course, obviously, and they are more than happy to know that they do not have to pay for that water that they do collect for the simple reason they have to maintain the bores and pay for them in the first place, so there is a large cost there.
However, in your second reading speech, you stated: ‘A formal review of the act will be completed by late 2008’. I just wondered whether this is the start of something big. Perhaps you could give us some indication of what other changes we are likely to see over time. Will metering become compulsory? Will there be a charge? I take it this bill actually introduces that there can be a charge for licences although. at the moment, there is no charge for licences whatsoever. I take it also that it is more for large users than the smaller domestic-type users? Let us face it, there are a lot of them around the Territory that do that. Just give me some idea, minister. Will we eventually be metering all bores? Will we eventually be charging for water? Will we eventually have to license all users and all bores? Is this the way the government is going? Is this the way you see that we will actually be responsible for our use of water?
Ms LAWRIE (Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage): Madam Speaker, I thank the members opposite for their support, essentially, of the Water Act amendments we have before us today. I will step through what the amendments actually are, because the debate went right off the amendments into other areas of water management.
The amendments deliver an important first stage of an election commitment to review the Water Act and are a significant step towards guaranteeing transparency and accountability in statutory decision-making with regard to water extraction licensing. The over-allocation and over-use of water for consumptive purposes is a major cause of river degradation and lack of water security in every other Australian jurisdiction. As a signatory to the National Water Initiative, the Territory has particular obligations to water reform. These include requirements to put in place: transparent contestable processes for considering and reviewing approvals; sound information available to all sectors at key decision points; full public access to water entitlement registers; and open planning processes and careful monitoring of the performance of water plans with regular public reporting.
A simple set of transparency and accountability provisions are, therefore, proposed by way of amendment to the act and Water Regulations. The proposed amendments build upon the intent of the existing provisions and would see: the discretionary objections-based process for surface water extraction replaced with a non-discretionary public notification and comment process; the existing provision for a register enhanced by creating a public register containing relevant licensing information to facilitate water trading where water allocation plans have been declared; and an obligation on the controller to publish a statement of reasons for either granting or refusing a water extraction licence. The proposed amendments are not complex and add no entirely new processes to the act but, rather, they refine and remove discretion to dispense with existing processes. A requirement to give reasons for decisions is consistent with much Territory administrative law, especially in relation to applications for licences or entitlements in which there is a legitimate public interest.
There have been a few red herrings swimming around the House this afternoon, and I want to indulge in some plain speaking to clarify just exactly what the bill before the House does. The proposed amendments are not complex and add no entirely new processes to the act. They will amend the current act to require advertising of applications for water extraction licences, publication of decisions of the Water Controller and the reasons for these decisions, and establishment of a public register of water extraction licences. These changes improve accountability and transparency and enable the management of what we are becoming increasingly aware is a finite resource.
This bill does not introduce circumstances that would allow charging for extraction for domestic purposes. This does not provide the Power and Water Corporation with any special rights or entitlements. It does not create a situation where small farmers are going to be forced out of business by large commercial operators buying up water rights. This bill, plain and simply, provides for improved accountability in the management of water and the involvement of the community in decision-making about water allocation. As a signatory to the National Water Initiative, the Territory has particular obligations to water reform. The simple provisions included in this bill allow us to progress these requirements. There is no conspiracy here, no hidden agenda; just simple improvements.
In relation to the member for Braitling’s inquiries about the water use, I can advise that in your region we are the most advanced in water allocation management plans. We have a water allocation committee being put in place and we are more advanced in Central Australia in knowing exactly what water is available, what water is currently being drawn upon and used, what are the predicted water uses in Central Australia, and how those water uses will be able to be met.
What we do know in Central Australia is that, with the current usage rates and predicted usage rates to include expansion for domestic and, for example, horticulture, that there is enough water for 100 years. It is the Labor government that has put in place resources to ensure that we start to get a far greater understanding of exactly what water is in the Territory, both in the arid regions - and we have really been focusing significantly on the arid regions first, for obvious reasons; they are more vulnerable to that finite resource - but also in how our surface water interacts with aquifers and how that then interacts with our living rivers. An enormous amount of resources have been put in place to ensure that we start to understand our water resources and just what our means are of ensuring that we are not destroying our finite resource of water in the Territory, and that we manage our water needs appropriately.
Regarding the furphies about the meters on the bores in the rural areas of Darwin, we did not put them in place to start charging people. We put them in place to understand the water extraction of those areas. Plain and simple, this is an amendment to the act to provide for transparency and accountability, which is a very important thing.
For all the other bigger picture questions and issues, I am happy to provide a comprehensive briefing to the member for Braitling. I really encourage a comprehensive briefing as well for the member for Nelson. It is such a critical issue for the Territory that we do roll out our water allocation plans, our water allocation committees, and we put those in place. We have created the framework, we have put resources in place to do it. We have boosted the resources available to the agency to understand the water and the use of the water. We have a closer working relationship between our agency and Power and Water. We are giving no special favours to Power and Water. Any application for exemption to the public register would be considered by the Water Controller in the same manner as any application, and Power and Water would be required to demonstrate commercial disadvantage from publication in the same way any other applicant would. There are a few furphies floating around the Chamber this afternoon, but this is very clear, simple amendment to the act to provide for transparency and accountability.
I thank agency staff: Chris Weeks, Ian Lancaster, our Water Controller, and John Gilmore, for the efforts they have taken in bringing these appropriate amendments before the Chamber today. It is good to see that we have some sensible legislation; very clear, very concise, very targeted in improving the transparency and accountability of the Water Act.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Ms LAWRIE (Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill now be read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Continued from 27 November 2007.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Madam Speaker, I am very keen to talk on growing industry capabilities to support Defence in the Northern Territory. People may be aware that when I was elected in 2001, I had to travel throughout my electorate and find out what the people of my electorate were all about, explain who I was and try to make a connection with them.
Within the boundaries of my electorate is RAAF Base Darwin, which has been there for many years as all long-term Territorians know. There are approximately 400 houses there for Defence Force families and about 126 single men’s quarters. There are 930-odd people there, not counting children. It is quite a large part of my constituency and it makes up about 13% of those people who are enrolled in my area.
In 2001, I came into contact with this group of individuals who have, since 1990 and right back to World War II, played an important role in the history of the Northern Territory. I welcome the minister’s speech. When you look at the startling facts of the impact, not only on the economy of the Northern Territory but the sheer numbers of individuals coming here, you realise what an important role that the Australian Defence Force families play within the Northern Territory economy and society.
What I noticed when dealing with these constituents of mine was that many of the people living on the RAAF Base are young families, young Australians between the age of 18 and 35 mostly, married or de facto couples with young children. They have been posted here to the Northern Territory from all over Australia. When you talk to them about their lives and where they come from and what their family backgrounds are, you can see that the Army offered these individuals an opportunity to travel throughout Australia to places far and wide. One of those places far and wide is the Northern Territory.
They all say that they love coming to this posting. They believe that Darwin is one of the better cities that they travel to, if not the best. The main reason for that is the way that they are treated by the general public. They believe that they are actually very much welcomed in the Northern Territory, particularly in Darwin. I heard stories about how other cities treat the Defence Force families and, without a doubt, it is my belief that most of the Defence Force families love coming and staying in Darwin.
The single biggest issue is that they are a long way away from their original homes and are separated from their extended families and, with young families and young children, it puts a lot of pressure and burden on the family unit, particularly if a Defence Force member is posted overseas. Many of the postings are all over the world but, of course, the two high-profile destinations that many of the Territorian Defence Forces are going to are Iraq and Afghanistan.
During this period of time, I suppose over the last six years that I have been representing this group, there has been a number of issues that have come up. I have spoken with previous Defence ministers and the current one about ways that we can help these families settle into the Northern Territory and make them feel a part of what the Territory is about, and what opportunities the Northern Territory government and the people of the Northern Territory can get out of this relationship with the Territory.
That is why I welcome the Northern Territory Defence Support Industry Development Strategy. I know the minister has put in a lot of hard work, developing a 10-year plan is not easy. I note that the President of AIDN-NT, Mark Smith, compliments the Territory for its effort in attempting to build relationships, and stated that he is committed to that relationship and this ongoing strategy.
I would like to touch on the minister’s message simply because this record will be sent to many of the Defence Force families in my area and I would like them to know what the message from the Minister for Defence Support is. He stated:
The minister touched on the fact that nearly 10% of all Australian permanent Defence Force personnel are base in the Northern Territory - an amazing amount. Almost 13 000 Defence personnel and families reside in the Northern Territory, making up about 6% of our population - an amazing statistic. He goes on to talk about the skills that they bring, and what their families, their wives and partners, bring with them. Often they are teachers, nurses, childcare workers, shop assistants, secretaries, start small businesses, are skilled tradespeople, and the list goes on and on.
The minister also talked about the Defence contribution regarding its spending. It is an amazing figure when you have a look at it. Recurrent expenditure in the Northern Territory in 2005-06 totalled $954m. Close to 50% of this comprised salaries paid to Defence personnel. The flow-on effect of Defence salaries as private consumption expenditure continues to be an important contributor to the Territory’s economic turnover. In simple terms, these individuals are paid by the Commonwealth government, they buy products from the local shops, clothing shops, grocery store, etcetera. They go to events within the Northern Territory, whether they are sporting events or social events, and they expend their money within the general economy and, of course, this has a fantastic stimulation effect.
The minister touched on the fact that Defence has recently outlined its plan to spend an estimated $250m over the next five year on infrastructure. Of course, one of the areas that they are going to build on and have an important effect is in my electorate. That development and refurbishment includes the RAAF bases of Darwin and Tindal, and the Army base at Robertson Barracks. If you have a look at the sheer numbers of living areas under the project called ‘Single Living Environment and Accommodation Precinct’, you will see the construction or refurbishment of 3535 living accommodation units for single personnel Australia-wide at an estimated cost of $1.2bn, with 918 of these units to be upgraded located at Larrakeyah Barracks and Robertson Barracks. That is a huge number.
At the new housing developments of Lyons and Muirhead, which the minister described as groundbreaking initiatives, over $170m has been invested by the Defence Housing Authority in Lyons alone. We are talking about large dollars being spent by the Defence Force in the Territory economy so it is in the best interests of the Northern Territory government and the people of the Territory to work with the Defence Force. I know that will continue.
I will briefly touch on a couple of other matters. Over my time as the member, what I saw was that the Commonwealth government was committed to moving people to the Territory, but not necessary flexible in the way they accommodated people’s needs to remain in contact with people in other states or overseas. One of the big campaigns that I worked on throughout my area, and I was happy to be successful with, was getting Broadband from Telstra within the RAAF Base. It was a campaign that took between 18 months and two years. What it meant was that people living on the RAAF Base could not, in real time, communicate over the web with personnel in Afghanistan or in Iraq, or Melbourne, Sydney or Perth, because Telstra did not have a Broadband Internet connection in that area. After about a two-year period of lobbying intensively with the assistance and support of the RAAF Base, we were able to get the federal minister for Communications to commit to delivering broadband to the RAAF Base. This was a fantastic achievement, not dissimilar to this strategy which outlines how we are accommodating RAAF and other Defence Force personnel in the Northern Territory.
The last thing I will comment on in support of the statement is the phases of what occurred. It was interesting that, in the strategy on page 9, it states the AIDN-NT and the NT government agreed on a need for an industry development strategy. They then went on to scanning of Defence and Defence industry environment, and having a look at what was actually happening. They looked at the Defence White Paper 2000 and the updates, Defence Capability Plan, Defence Industry Sector Plans, Defence and Industry Policy Statement 2007, NT Economic Development Framework and the NT Jobs Plan manufacturing strategies. From there, they went to the production and national distribution of the discussion paper, which resulted in group consultations with Defence and Defence industry. Of course, this led to one-on-one consultations with key stakeholders which included Department of Defence, Department of Materiel Organisation, Defence Science and Technology Organisations, Defence support groups, NT industries, prime contractors, and the Charles Darwin University.
As a result, the strategy prepared a draft industry development strategy which was then commented on by AIDN-NT, the Department of Business, Economic and Regional Development and further consultancies. This led to test compatibility with the pre-existing Defence and Industry policies, the test acceptance by Defence and Defence industries, and the realisation of the strategy itself. That is where we are here today. With the support of the minister for Defence in the Northern Territory, and the President of AIDN-NT, we have before us here today this fantastic opportunity for all Territorians, for the next 10 years, to make the most out of the Defence spending. The families that come up from all over Australia and commit to the Territory lifestyle can only be applauded. I look forward to working with the families and the people of the RAAF Base in the coming years.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend the statement to the House.
Mr VATSKALIS (Defence Support): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank my colleagues for the comments on our Northern Territory Defence Support Industry Development Strategy. Defence Forces are going to be in Darwin and the Territory for a long time. The Air Force, the Navy, the Army are going to be here because there are strategic reasons to be here; not only to protect our strategic assets, but also to protect and to respond to very immediate possible threats in our region. Our region is not a very stable region. A lot of things are happening and will continue to happen. Of course, in view of the climatic change that will hold our planet to ransom, there might be need to intervene for other countries where disasters hit, or there will be civil unrest or war.
I thank the members for their comments; however, I have to say I was extremely disappointed with the response from the Leader of the Opposition, who would choose to play politics rather than to make a valuable contribution to the debate. It is obvious the Leader of the Opposition has no idea about Defence, or the Defence industry here in the Territory. She could not respond. I accept the fact that she did not have time to read the Defence Support Industry Development Strategy. However, it would not take long to pick up the phone and speak to the industry. In the previous weeks and months, for your information Mr Deputy Speaker, I have been informed by reliable sources that no such contact ever took place with the Leader of the Opposition.
I would like to respond to some of the comments she made. She said she would like us to report back in 12 months. Well, I am pretty sure by now that if she had read the documents, she will know that included in this document is a clause that says that there will be a report to the minister and to the industry every six months.
In addition to that, her claims about the previous Defence Support Minister and current Chief Minister are ludicrous and outrageous. If she had bothered to research the issue of the Defence Support Hub she would have found out the real story, instead of making up stories yourself.
I advise the House that in 2005, the then Minister for Defence Support, the member for Wanguri, identified the need for the establishment of first, a strategic industrial block of land to meet the needs of the industry. That announcement was made by minister Henderson and a 60 ha parcel was identified near the Robertson Barracks. This location was supported by Robertson Barracks and Defence itself. Minister Henderson travelled extensively around Australia to meet with private contractors, the companies, the Defence Department, in order to promote the Territory as a place to do business. Let us not forget that the Army, Air Force and Navy have significant platforms that they are utilising here in the Northern Territory. The Armidale class patrol boats are in Darwin and there is an agreement for them to be serviced in Darwin, which is a gain for us.
In 2006, minister Henderson went on a road show to Sydney to meet with THALES and Tenix, and then to Brisbane to meet with Australian Aerospace, and Adelaide to meet with BAE Systems and General Dynamics. In 2007, I took over as the minister for Defence and I continue the same tradition; I travelled extensively. At the same time, an environmental management plan was required for the Defence Support Hub and the draft plan has been developed. A subdivision now has been approved in the Litchfield division for the Development Consent Authority. This happened in August this year. In addition, the Land Development Corporation is working with DBERD for registration of interest in the land, with advertisements going into the southern papers recently.
We have four expressions of interest and the latest one is Hallmark Trailers. Hallmark Trailers is a company that is the preferred tenderer to provide trailers for the Defence for the next 15 years. The rest of the expressions of interest will be taken up as the Commonwealth announces the winner of various tenders. Unfortunately, the previous Commonwealth Defence minister delayed awarding any contracts and, now, with the change in government, we hope things will progress much faster.
A lot of things have happened since 2005 with Defence Support. In addition to that, even the member for Nelson admits that there are people laying electricity cable. The government has also allocated $2m for the establishment of services in the area.
Yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition waved a photograph of trees and water and said: ‘This is the Defence Hub’. Well, from the previous records, I doubt very much this was actually a true picture. I remember a leaked document, member for Johnston, which was waved around on a previous occasion and with a top secret …
Dr Burns: A copy of a leaked document.
Mr VATSKALIS: A copy of a leaked document! As a matter of fact, the copy was handwritten. Not to mention today’s graph which was so badly done that if you were a statistician you would die laughing. As a matter of fact, that graph shows a decline for about four years and only an increase in crime in the last two quarters. Therefore, I am not very confident about what the Leader of the Opposition and the opposition members present in this House. I take it all with a grain of salt. It was unfortunate for the Leader of the Opposition that, during her very peculiar performance, members of the industry were in the public gallery watching. The comments that came to me were not very good.
I thank the member for Nelson for his contribution. I note his concern about the wetlands, and would like to advise him the environmental management plan will address his concerns. Also, he wanted to know who is going there. The people who will be going there will be Defence-related industries or people who are related with this industry to service the Defence Force platforms.
The relationship which has formed between the Northern Territory government, Robertson Barracks and my department is excellent. While discussions occur with Robertson Barracks, the decision of who is going to be located where and when rests with the Territory government.
This document is a document that puts in place what can happen, what will happen, what we want to happen within the industry for the next 10 years. It is a great document; I am very proud of it. It was done with the industry, through the industry, but is owned by the industry. We are very happy to help and work with the industry to address the six key areas of workplace development: building business capabilities, leading industry opportunity, profiling and promoting industry capability, developing strategic infrastructure, establishing regional partnerships, and research and development. It is important to have strategic focus on assisting development in the Northern Territory business capability. As I said before, the Defence Force is going to be here for a long time.
The Defence Force has very complex platforms. They require technical expertise and a specialist workforce which we currently do not have in Darwin and we want to develop. Questions have been asked regarding the Defence Force already servicing their vehicles down south. The answer is it may be true but, unfortunately, that does not happen in one centralised area. While we have the Defence personnel in Darwin, they are not very happy to lose platforms and equipment for a significant period of time when they need it. Therefore, we are very keen to work very close with Defence and the Army, Air Force and the Navy to minimise the time that these platforms will be absent from the barracks, the airport or the port, and to maximise the return for the industry here in the Territory.
Defence contracts are unique because they have very long life periods, about 12 to 15 years. If we manage to acquire a Defence contract here in the Territory, that means for the next 12 to 15 years companies can plan ahead, train a workforce, organise apprenticeships, invest in equipment, resources and establishing workshops, and that will not only benefit them but it will benefit the Territory as a whole. The government is working very hard to deliver. We listen to industry and are working closely with industry. Very often, when we travelled down south to meet Defence Department personnel, the minister, or to attend different conferences, we ensured that the industry was with us.
It is a great document; it is a document that sets the parameters for developing the Defence support industry in the Territory. I thank very much my department and AIDN-NT for their contribution and their support. They supported us to develop this strategy; they supported us flying down south and arguing for the Territory. We give them a commitment we are prepared to support, and we will support them in their endeavour to attract more contracts here in the Territory.
Motion agreed to.
Dr BURNS (Health): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Deputy Speaker, I was not expecting to start so early tonight.
I want to talk about a fairly special lady who has, unfortunately, just passed away. That lady is Val Utley from Yeltu Park which is south of Katherine. Val died suddenly just recently and her funeral was in Katherine Friday of last week. It was attended by a large number of people and it was testament to the popularity of this lovely woman that there were so many people there. I asked the family if I could have their permission to read into the Parliamentary Record parts of her service which I thought were very special, which highlighted how much she was respected and admired. They have given me permission to do that and, so, it is with great pleasure that I do that. I first of quote what her brother, Peter Jackson, said:
That eulogy by her brother was followed by comments from Nola Sweetman from Katherine. She said:
Mr Deputy Speaker, there are some other things I do want to introduce to the Parliamentary Record, and there is some wonderful poetry. I will continue this tomorrow night.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Mr Deputy Speaker, I take the opportunity tonight to conclude with the usual greetings and thanks to people who have helped me throughout the year, and to give a bit of report card on what has happened in the Braitling area. It is very important for people to realise that, as an Independent, I can achieve and have achieved, and life is so much better in Braitling. They may not be big things that you get done for people but, every time you help someone, even with a small thing, it is better for their lifestyle.
I put on the record my thanks to Robyn who has been my faithful electorate officer for so long and does a tremendous job, has great PR with people and knows so much. She is down south at the moment. I am hoping she will have a very happy Christmas with her family in Adelaide. I thank her for everything she has done.
At the moment Kerry Gadsby is filling in for Robyn. Kerry is an amazing lady. She has MS, but she lives her life to the fullest. She certainly never lets that stop her in any way. I appreciate that she is always available to come in when we need her on short notice.
I also have an enormous number of people who use my office in Alice Springs. There is something like 22 groups which use it at some stage for meetings, and there is also another 20 groups which use our facilities. I will not go through them all, but they give us tremendous support and great feedback. The fact that they are there in the office, going in and out all day, means that we do have a very lively office. I tell them that they are more than welcome to continue to use our office in that way, because it is taxpayers’ money; it is there for them.
I also want to thank the public servants in Alice Springs and Darwin. They must shudder sometimes when I ring them up, but they are so good in the way they give me an answer, or very polite when they tell me they cannot. I appreciate all the assistance they give me. I must make special mention of Territory Housing in Alice Springs. At the moment, I know they must shudder every time our office rings up about a problem in public housing. However, lately they have been so cooperative they have actually resolved some of our issues. We have had three issues in one week. One was an elderly person who was getting a shower installed instead of a bath. You all understand that when many of the public housing units were built they had baths installed. Gradually, over time, you get a shower put in for an elderly person who cannot manage. She came in quite distressed because she had been put into a motel while they were doing the work which seemed to drag on forever. We rang up housing to let them know of the situation and the next day she was back in her unit. It is little things like that that count.
We had a fence built around a house that was giving problems and was a bit of an eyesore. That may seem a bit silly to be hiding it, but it gives privacy to the people in that public housing as well as privacy to the neighbours. I say to the minister, the no grog signs have been a good success in Alice Springs because they have helped some public housing tenants say no to their visitors. That has been a plus because we have quite a few in our area.
I also want to place on record my thanks to Caroline Cavanagh, the research officer the member for Nelson and I share. She does a tremendous job because, quite often, we are so involved with our electorate work we do not sometimes pay as much attention as she would like to the legislation that is coming up. She always prepares very well for sittings and she lets us know when there are briefings and is of tremendous value. I respect her for her knowledge and the way she goes about her work in such a professional way.
It is always difficult when you say thanks to people that you miss someone. I must say the Legislative Assembly still has probably some of the best people around employed here. The cooperation and the work they do to ensure the Chamber runs so well and smoothly is a credit to them, particularly under the guidance of Mr Clerk, who is not the best at the moment. I can see he is suffering quite a lot with the flu he has. We must place that on public record.
As well as that, I need to pass on my seasons greetings to all the colleagues in this parliament. Sometimes, they might think of the independents as a bit of a pain in the neck but, at least we are here to do our job and that is what is good about it.
I started off by saying I was going to give a bit of a report card for the Braitling electorate. Let me just say we have some bicycle paths built, and I thank government for doing that. We have a BMX track in a park. With the assistance of town council and volunteer parents, it is now a great little place for young people to go and ride their bikes in the middle of Braitling. We were lucky to get the short-term accommodation dongas stopped. We were worried they were going to be placed in our electorate but, through negotiation and a lot of assistance, we managed to get that stopped. We have had a lot of success in our schools. Living Waters sent a group of children over to compete at the national level in a problem solving program and they had a wonderful time. Everyone was surprised at the extraordinary talent they had. That was great.
Braitling Primary School also had three students who won prizes in the Alice Springs Wearable Works of Art. Braitling really embraced this particular part of the Alice Springs Festival with children, teachers, and parents getting all in together and ensuring that they are planning again for next year as well. Well done to Braitling Primary School.
We have concerns still about ANZAC Hill High School. We say to the minister: you may have messed up a really good school by suggesting that it may not be open past 2008. I know the parents and the staff and students have done a lot to encourage other students to enrol in this particular high school so that it does maintain its numbers. That is our concern; what is going to happen after next year?
Another plus was that lighting was installed at one of our North Side shopping centres which was very dark. We were having a lot of problems with itinerants and drunks. Thanks to the Northern Territory government and council again, we have improved, better lighting on the crossing and the are has been redesigned so there are not dark spots or big shrubs and trees where people can actually sit and drink. It is a much better and safer place because of that.
We managed to get the Telstra tower that was going to be placed within the Desert Park stopped. That is still going to go ahead, but the placement of the site will be a lot more sensitive to the residents’ needs in the Larapinta area. I have met with Telstra and discussed how we can go about it, and which locations would be the best suitable for this particular tower.
We had a good meeting on community patrols. We now have a working group looking at that and, hopefully, that will be able to start very shortly.
As I said earlier, we are pleased with the Alice Springs Town Council and their trial of recycling cans.
One of our other problems that we are still concerned about is the speed in our residential areas. People have continually complained about hoons, and the fact that many of our residential streets still have the 60 km/h, whereas possibly they could certainly be down to 50 km/h and, in some cases, even 40 km/h.
We are very pleased with the announcement that a seniors village is going to be built at the end of Albrecht Drive after the successful auction of the land. I believe that was the third time it came up for auction. People are really pleased that a managed seniors village will be built there. It is a great concept, because the other seniors villages we have in Alice Springs have been really great.
I could go on and on but, as you can see, we have had great success with many things in our electorate. Is it any wonder then that we do manage to keep a close contact with our constituents? They are not backward at all in being able to come forward and ask us to help them in any way. Sometimes we can; sometimes we cannot. We know that. Sometimes we can send them to people who can. Sometimes we have to say: ‘This is in the too-hard basket’. But, at the end of this year, I would say that we have had a very busy time just helping our people in the electorate and I look forward to doing it next year as well.
I will tell you a little about a young lad who umpired at the MCG on Grand Final day. This was young Jacob Dean. Jacob was chosen as the Territory rep to umpire down there. He was only 13. I just found it amazing that this young lad was able to do this. I will read a little of his letter that he sent. Jacob said:
And how awesome is young Jacob to have done that? I wish him well in his future sporting career, because I am sure he will do so well. I just wanted to share that with members because it is one of the success stories of young people, and we sometimes forget young people can do so much.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish you well for Christmas. Seasons Greetings to you and your family, and to everyone else in the building. I am sure we will all appreciate having a break. I am going to Adelaide to spend Christmas with my daughter, her family and my granddaughter. As well as that, my son and his two young girls will be joining us there, so it should be quite an exciting time. I really like to get together with family. It is the time where you feel as though family is so important. When you live in the Territory and you live so far away from them, you sometimes forget just how special they are
Mr Deputy Speaker, I hope I have said thank you to everyone. If I did not please, those people I missed out, just accept the fact that I wish you well. I am sure that you will enjoy my Christmas card when you receive it.
Mr KIELY (Sanderson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I have the pleasure tonight to take this opportunity to recognise, thank and place on the public record the good work of the community groups, individuals and friends who have helped me support the people of Sanderson over this last year.
Mr Deputy Speaker, 2007 for me was a far better year than 2006, as everyone will agree. I knuckled down, put my shoulder to the wheel, and really got into the community and worked with people around Sanderson to make our area such a better place to be. However, I could not have done it without a lot of help from the minister’s offices here in Parliament House and the ministers and all their staff, particularly the Territory Housing Minister, Mr Elliot McAdam and his staff. Because of all the Territory Housing homes that we have in the area, that is always a big issue. I thank staff at Territory Housing and the minister’s office as well as at the regional office, who have been of great support to the people of Sanderson throughout the year. I acknowledge their efforts in making families around Sanderson far happier over the course of the year.
I also thank the ministers and my colleagues for getting behind some election promises that I made which came through this year for my electorate, such as the money to allow renovations at the Anula school, much needed renovations that the staff and students have been wanting for many years. We also had some urban redevelopment money passed over to Darwin City Council for the Wulagi shops. I was very pleased to see the completion of Dante Road through the Marrara complex, as well as the continued efforts by the Darwin City Council, thanks to the funding money provided by the NT government, to get the footpath/running track/safety track around the ring road of Abala Road. These are all great things. There is more work to be done in Sanderson as far as those items go, but progress is really good.
I also take this opportunity to thank Mr Allan McGill, Mr Bendan Dowd, Mr Mark Spangler and all the rest of the staff at Darwin City Council for their assistance in helping get this work done. It is important that the different levels of government work together. I am pleased to say that I have a pretty good relationship with Darwin City Council, and Alderman Mitchell, so we are able to get things done at Sanderson. I wish each and every one of the staff of Darwin City Council a very merry Christmas, and thank them for the work that they have done for the people of Sanderson over 2007.
I want to mention an area on which we are working more closely with Darwin City Council: laneway closures. I am hopeful that, over 2008, a number of laneways in Britannia Circuit, McMillans Road, and one down by Howley Crescent and Union Terrace will be closed. Mr Denis Fields at Howley Crescent has been trying hard, working with the people around there and Alderman Mitchell, to try to get that laneway closed. It seems bogged down a bit. The people at Britannia Circuit also have some laneway issues, and we are working with them. It just seems to have hit a bit of rocky road. I understand the council has put through a number of closures. Perhaps some of them are in there now. If not, if we cannot get full-time closures, perhaps we can look at getting the temporary closures next year that the council seems supportive of. I would like to get on to that.
I also thank my wife Marie and our children, Ned and Clair, once again, for giving me a fabulous year. It is always great to be around your family. My family, it is fair to say, are just a hoot. They are really good fun. Ned and Clair are just booming along. It is a pleasure to watch them grow. It is good to watch them grow with all the other kids in the street. I am very fortunate that I live in a cul-de-sac with, I think, about 10 kids who live in that street and visit us. All the families get along and each year we see these children grow. I tell you, if this is the sort of population that we are growing up in Darwin, then I would say that in my old age I am going to be pretty happy to be sitting there in the yard knowing that we have some pretty good citizens running around the place. The parents of all these kids put in, look after them, feed them well, and the kids are respectful. Every family in our street needs a pat on the back. I would like to think that all the families in Eureka Court are typical of all the families around Darwin. They look after and love their kids. They are great kids in our street and in Anula, and I am very fortunate to live in the neighbourhood.
I wish all my neighbours a very merry Christmas. Ed and Anne down the road are doing a booming trade every Saturday with their wafer business. All these people add to the ambience of the neighbourhood. It is something that I treasure and I know that the people around my neighbourhood and my electorate also treasure.
I also acknowledge a couple of new CEOs who were promoted during 2007 whom I know personally. Dr David Ashbridge is the CEO of Health; and Mr Andrew Macrides has picked up the executive boss’s job at Power and Water. I have known both of these gentlemen through my previous life. I worked for both of them in either the Commonwealth or the NT Public Service. These are men of great character, integrity and intelligence and capacity and, rightfully so, they were made executive officers on their merit. These two men are locals and it is really great to see local people getting through to the top jobs. This sends great messages to the public sector. I hope to see in the future more and more local people hitting the top rung of our NT public sector and in our private enterprise.
I also thank all the people – well, it is impossible to thank all the people who have helped me over the year - but particularly Teng and Michael Murray, who are always there to help out, and Barbara Baggley. I just cannot say enough about that little group of people. They would be the core who come in and tirelessly assist. We have lots of regular people drop into the office. They know who they are; I will not burden Hansard with a whole list of names. Merry Christmas to you and I hope you have a great 2008.
I thank and extend my Christmas wishes to the following organisations and associations for their continuing support of the electorate of Sanderson: the Darwin City Brass Band, led by Robbo, the wonderful couple Frank and Coral Roberts, and Elaine, Iris, and the whole lot. The Darwin City Brass Band comes out annually to Anula Park to play for people in the park. It is just a wonderful little annual event that we have started with the Anula Neighbourhood Watch. We all get in there and it is a fabulous time. I wish them and all the band members - and I will be seeing them shortly - a wonderful Christmas.
We have great community leaders. There is John Rivas every year, and I should just put him on to the permanent list of people to thank because this man and his officers and committees of the Filipino-Australian Association just do so much. It is always worthwhile to thank these people. Fele Mann and King Roman, all manner of people in the area are always helping out. The golf club is just across the road from me. We have Bruce Sampson and his committee at Darwin Golf Club. They are great supporters of the work that I do and they are always happy to help out either with their annual functions, or if we need a quick meeting area. I thank them and Judy at the club for all the work they do. They do not ask for any thanks, they just do it out of community spirit, and for that I am very grateful. I acknowledge the good work of the Darwin Golf Club; they fit well into the suburb and support the community very strongly.
I also acknowledge the support of business people in and outside the community who help us year after year whenever we have community events. Their contribution is very much appreciated, especially donations towards awards, raffles, prizes and performances. I mention Stephanie and Kim Lin from Northlakes Chinese Restaurant; Kalotina Kotis and her fabulous team of professional hairdressers at Kut-n-Kurl Salon in Northlakes Shopping Centre; John Lay of Darwin Enterprises, Sharm Bali of Territory Care, Support and Services; Ian Kew at Darwin International Airport; George and Tania Enterprises, Darwin Airport Resort; Hingston’s Chinese Restaurant; La Paez, the Anula Fish and Chip shop; Wulagi Fish and Chip shop; the Malak Supermarket; Brumby’s; Red Rooster; Subway Northlakes; and my neighbour in the Northlakes Shopping Centre, Judy Williamson at the Northlakes Newsagent. It is a pleasure to come to work every morning and to run into Judy. She has spirit and energy and is down to earth. She will call a spade a spade and will let you know whether you are performing or not and I value her conversations. It is something to look forward to every morning.
We have an interesting cross-section of public groups that regularly meet in the Sanderson Community Rooms for public meetings; namely, COGSO; Darwin Athletics; Australia-Africa Friendship Association; Marrara Dragons Soccer Club; Carol Wallbank from the Christmas in Darwin Association; our regulars, Anula Neighbourhood Watch - and I look forward to working with them years into the future; Terry Denton and his team from Racehorse Owners of the Northern Territory; Kerrie Read from the Alzheimer’s Australia; Darwin Gymnastics; Veteran’s Affairs; Jay Collins and his team at South Darwin Sporting League; and the Rotary Club of the Northern Territory. We also get numerous casual bookings and I feel privileged to be able to assist them in any way I can. Merry Christmas to all those groups and it is great to see.
We have three schools in the Sanderson electorate and I am sure that members must be tired of hearing me talk about them. However, they are fabulous schools, with fabulous staff and fabulous kids. You just cannot use that word enough as far as I am concerned when it comes to Sanderson. Each is very similar in that they have highly competent professional and caring teachers and staff supported by active, diligent and thoughtful school committees. The principals of the three schools in my electorate are Sue Fisher at Wulagi, Sandy Cartwright at Anula and Russell Legg at Sanderson. They all do a good job and are all permanent principals. I look forward to working with them well into the future, should I be lucky enough to be around.
My sincere gratitude also goes to the parents who serve on the various school committees. Their dedication always amazes me. Nothing seems to be too much trouble with fundraising activities, care of school facilities and extracurricular activities. They are such great people and are so generous with their time. In Sanderson High School this year’s school committee members were D’ellise Kaitaanpaa, Denise Thomas, Lisa Lock, Michelle Sa Pereira, Lynn Wanganeen, Fatima Tam, Elizabeth Rumler, Tabitha Robinson, Cassandra Hodges, Marilyn Galt, Janet Schmidt and Kim Hill.
There was also in Wulagi School there’s Johnny Chugg, James Lantry, Nicki Arbon and parent members Chris Harris, Penny Kirby, Susie Thomas, Jodie Green, Veronica Turbin and Kirsten Cridland. Teacher representatives over there are Andrew Schulz, Margaret Kerle, Fiona Oliver and Jim Kensey.
The Anula School Committee comprises Jo Glennon and Elizabeth Lohmeyer, Haidee Brown, Leanne Noble and Sharna Ray. The parents’ representatives are Felicity - no, Felicity and Andrew Baxley moved on, but they were there very early on in the piece - Michael Rollo, Verena Graham, Kathie Stoll and Dorothy Iji, Robin Lawrence, Denys Spencer, Cassandra Yaxley, Ben and Tania Lockwood and the preschool representative was Kylie Sullivan. To all the teaching staff, parents and students at Sanderson, I wish each and every one of you a very merry Christmas and a happy new year.
If I do not mention my Electorate Officer, Therla Fowlestone, I will have every Electorate Officer in the Darwin area and probably across the Territory phoning me up and saying: ‘You ungrateful elected member, you! You have the person here in your office who is keeping you going and is keeping your shop open, servicing the community every day. She is the one who is the winner in that seat’. Rather than face their wrath, I will say, yes, you are right and I am acknowledging her. I send a big merry Christmas to Therla, her friend and mine over at the Johnston office, Judy, and to Kon’s office and Delia’s office, and to Matty’s office. We have to appreciate that all these Electorate Officers put in a lot of work for us elected members. I cannot stress enough how much I value Therla’s input. She is very valued by the community for the role she plays. I will be relying on her more than ever now that I have been fortunate enough to come into town here to work.
I take this opportunity to wish all my caucus colleagues a very merry Christmas, and for all the support that they have given me over this year. It is because of them I feel that I am qualified to now be entering Cabinet. I could not have done it without the support of my colleagues. Talking of support, I particularly acknowledge the good work, the valued work, the much appreciated work - not only by me, but by all my caucus colleague members and by all the communities of the Northern Territory - of the previous Chief Minister and the previous Deputy Chief Minister. Of course, we are talking about Syd Stirling and - a mental block, I do not remember …
Members: Clare Martin.
Mr KIELY: Clare Martin. I do not believe that! Clare and Syd have done so much for this Territory. I guess when the time comes we will give them a full and glowing report. I just say that they read the time, they took the opportunity, and their contribution, which will be written down at a later time, is just marvellous. I particularly wish them and their families a great Christmas and a great holiday break.
To all the staff at the Legislative Assembly, thanks a lot. You are a tremendous mob to work with. I look forward to next year. Oh, yes, the special people who I cannot just name. Thanks everyone. Merry Christmas to you all and we will see you all in 2008.
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Mr Deputy Speaker, it is with much sadness I acknowledge the passing of Robert Poulton from Adelaide River. Robert died in September aged 76. Robert was a well-known Territory character who had an opinion on most things. He was a regular contributor to the Letters to the Editor page. He wrote hundreds of letters conveying social, political, environmental and human rights issues.
Robert drove the first road train into Darwin after Cyclone Tracy. He was also a drover. He will be remembered as a real character and bushman. I extend my condolences to his friends and family. I received, from time to time, a couple of letters from Robert and they were quite humorous. As elected members, we regularly send out letters to our constituents, and the way the electronic system goes, it will attach names together. Mr Poulton shared a house with a mate of his, I will say, and it joined their names together. Mr Poulton wrote me a very nice letter saying that he was not gay. There was no problem with that at all, but it was just a quite humorous. The last one I received was this year after a parachute jump I did. It appeared in the paper, so he wrote me a letter. There is actually a joke contained within the letter, and I will not repeat it. However, it is quite humorous, mixing up parachutists and prostitutes. Anyway, goodbye to you, Robert, you made your mark on the Territory and you will be long remembered.
I would also like to acknowledge the passing of someone I only met several years ago, Val Utley. Val was a fabulous lady. She was a wonderful Territorian who worked so hard out bush. We came to know her for her struggle with opposing the nuclear waste dump at Fishers Ridge. Her property was adjacent to that. Val was devoted to her husband, Barry, and my condolences go to Barry. I know he was absolutely besotted with her, and I do hope he continues on at Yeltu Park where he is from, and that we will also put a stop to the nuclear waste dump there.
It is also with sadness to see Jeremy Greaves leave St Paul’s Church in Katherine this month. Jeremy, his wife, Josie, and children are moving to Darwin. Jeremy has been appointed the new Dean of Darwin’s Christchurch Anglican Cathedral. Jeremy and Josie are active members of the community and contributed so much to the Katherine region. I know they will be missed. Jeremy presided over a number of funerals I attended. He is a wonderful pastor and I believe the Darwin community will be enriched by his presence here.
I also congratulate Ian Rowbottam. ‘Rowie’, as they call him down there, who is the coordinator of the Roper River Landcare group, for winning the prestigious Alcoa Community Worker Award in the recent Environmental Awards. The Alcoa award was won by Ian and the Roper River Landcare group for their work with rangers from Ngukurr, Minyerri, Bulman and Jilkminggan. It is really well done, Rowie. You certainly do a great job for that community.
Now to some school awards. The Mataranka Primary School award for September went to Jessie Sullivan. Jessie was award the ‘You can do it, Emotional Intelligence Award’, for her recent hard work. Congratulations Jess, you certainly seem to be doing great down there. Hello to your grandparent, Jim, whom I have had a bit to do with over years.
At Woolianna School, I sponsor an award each month. The November award went to Hayden Long. Congratulations Hayden. He received this award for the positive effect he has had on the junior students in the school. Hayden is always prepared to help the students, whether it is during sporting activities or when they are in a classroom, where he acts as a peer tutor. Hayden is keen to share his knowledge and can be often found mentoring other students in the school. Hayden is an accomplished sportsman and also gives willingly as a volunteer for the sport and recreation activities such as swimming carnivals at the Nauiyu community. Hayden inspires other students to greater efforts. Congratulations, Hayden, and keep up the good work.
The Woolianna School will be a middle school next year, from Transition to Year 9. This should mean an increase of approximately 15 students. As a consequence, the school will get a new classroom and a third teacher. Congratulations, that is a great effort for that community. At the moment, they have two classrooms, and approximately 40 children enrolled, so that fabulous.
A special mention should go to Kaitlyn Ah Fat, the Woolianna school captain, who has fulfilled her duties diligently and represented her school with pride. Kaitlyn is the first school captain for the Woolianna School. Congratulations to Kaitlyn.
The new school playground will have a shade cover placed over it in the next couple of months, thanks to the Commonwealth government’s Investing in our School Grant. Congratulations to school staff for getting that application in.
I also highlight the hard work of the Woolianna School staff: Petrina, James, Petrina’s husband, Nadine, Sharon, Brendan and Teresa. They are a great school group. I have been there several times and they really love the environment they work in, and it shows with the outcomes they get with the children. They have achieved great attendance rates this year. They consistently encourage the students to be enthusiastic learners. Thank you, and look forward in seeing greater developments with the school in 2008.
Pine Creek School is very busy this week preparing for their Christmas concert and fete, which will be held next Thursday, 6 December. Thank you to the staff at the school who work very hard during the year. They work particularly hard to put on the school concert and fete. Thank you to Carmel, Mez, Kimand, and Bunny. Thank you also to the tutors at the school: Colleen, Sebastien, Lacrissa, and Christy. I hope it all goes well on the night. I hope to get there, and I am sure it will.
The Douglas Daly School Student of the Month Award for November went to Daniel Reed, who is in Grade 2. Daniel has been working hard at school, especially with his homework. He is a superstar speller and very good at maths. He gives 100% at school. Congratulations to Sian Phelps and Ben Hart, who won first prize in ‘Our place is safe’ drawing competition run by the Salvation Army’s flying padres, David and Jennie Shrimpton. Sian and Ben won $100 worth of books. Grace Phelps won second prize in her year and won $60 worth of books. Some budding artist are coming out the Douglas Daly region. Congratulations to those again.
Also in the Pine Creek community, I congratulate Kelly Burgemeister, who was crowned 2007 Rodeo Queen at the presentation night at the SKYCITY casino in August. It was rumoured that Kelly wore a dress for the first time - and also the last time. Kelly took home a tiara and belt buckle as part of her first prize. The Pine Creek Queen also does a great job driving the school bus from Pine Creek to Katherine. Well done, Kelly, its good to see great things are coming out of Pine Creek.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the graduation of Year 12 students from the Taminmin High School which I attended with you the other night. It certainly was great to be in the new building that has just been constructed. I acknowledge those recipients: The NT Board of Studies Academic Excellence Award was won by Rosaline Ho; the Indigenous Excellence Award was won by Joel Abbott; and it is great to see them being acknowledged. The Australian Defence Force Leadership Award went to Andrew McDevitt. The Ted Warren Citizenship Award, a much prized award, was won by Damon Hunt. The Rotary Community Service Award was won by Stacey Lee-Cannons. The Caltex Best All Round Award was won by Andrew McDevitt, and I you will hear that name a few more times this evening. The Taminmin Old Scholars Award went to Cal Kennedy, and was presented by a former member of the House, Peter Maley. The Litchfield Shire Council Scholarship went to again Andrew McDevitt. The Northern Territory Open Education Award went to Daniel Honey.
There was a great many awards that night and all the students need to be congratulated. I will just run through the subject awards. For Art, the Academic Excellence Award went to Megan Malan. The Biology Achievement Award went to Cal Kennedy and the Academic Excellence Award went to Eileen Lim. The Early Childhood Studies Award for Achievement, Sarah Hayden, and Academic Excellence Award, Bonnie Hageman. The English Communications Achievement Award went to Kelly Colliver; and Academic Excellence within that category went to Rosaline Ho. The Food and Hospitality Achievement Award went to Tenielle Burns and the Academic Excellence Award went to Emily Arthur. Geography - Chynna Colvano and again Rosaline Ho. The Information Processing and Publishing Achievement went to Kelly Colliver and Academic Excellence to Rosaline Ho. Integrated Learning to Beau Hennessy and the Academic Excellence was to Christopher Rhodes. Legal Studies went to Cal Kennedy and Academic Achievement to Bonnie Hageman. Maths Application to Bonnie Hageman and in that same category the Academic Achievement went to Lee Lee Ling. Modern History went to Cal Kennedy and Carlia Husband. Nutrition Studies went to Emily Arthur in Achievement and Academic Excellence went to Megan Malan. Outdoor Education went to Rebecca Flynn in Achievement, and Andrew McDevitt in Academic Excellence. Physical Education went to Michelle Menadue in Achievement, and Andrew McDevitt in Academic Excellence. Physics went to Joel Abbott in Achievement, and Rion Dickson in Academic Excellence. Psychology went to Aiden Mitchell in Achievement, and Andrew McDevitt in Academic Excellence. Small Business went to Lee Lee Ling in Achievement, and Academic Excellence to Rosaline Ho; and Tourism went to Kelly Colliver in Achievement and Bonnie Hageman in Academic Excellence.
Congratulations to those students. I think the member for Goyder would concur that these are fabulous kids coming out of the rural area. We do hope that they think about furthering academic education at university.
Taminmin prides itself in the technical area as well, having a technical college there. That is just as noble a pathway as the academic line. Congratulations to those kids - they are near adults now. I hope they do well and I hope they stay within the rural area community.
I would like to just lastly acknowledge my electorate officers Jo Nicol and Mary-Lou and Toni Coutts and my new electorate officer, Sharon McAlear. I cannot do this job without those ladies. They make it much easier for me. My sincere thanks to Jo, Mary Lou and Toni for all the work they have done over this last year for me, and I welcome onboard Sharon. I look forward to a great relationship in this role.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, this evening I recognise two indigenous women who have committed so much to Aboriginal education in a remote Aboriginal community. One is Linda Anderson at the Papunya School. She served 17 years service in Aboriginal education. It was a great honour to present her with the Northern Territory government Education minister’s recognition last Wednesday. I presented that on behalf of the Education minister who is now the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory. I place on record that Linda is a very committed person to Aboriginal education. It shows from her record of 17 years of commitment from an indigenous person to our people’s education. We have recognised her for that service. That shows that Linda has a great commitment and compassion to work in the education arena for our people. I encourage Linda to make sure that she continues to work in that area of education.
She is a very committed, loving woman who loves children. She takes in other people’s children as well who are homeless and parentless. They live on the outstation with her. She is Executive Principal of the Papunya School and has been for the last five years. I also say thank you to all the committed non-indigenous principals and teachers who have committed so much of their time into Linda’s qualification and education as well. Batchelor College is one institute that has put in so much to Linda’s profession. Linda had the commitment to not just do it for a couple of years. To do it for 17 years is a huge commitment in a remote Aboriginal community. I congratulate Linda.
There is another lady in my community as well, Patricia Phillipous who has committed 10 years of her life to Aboriginal education. I want to say thank you to Patricia as well. Patricia, like Linda, is very committed to Aboriginal education and takes in all the children who are homeless as well so that, between them, they share the burden of taking in all the children and looking after them and ensuring that every child in their family group or their clan goes to school five days a week unless they are sick. When they have community meetings, she is always encouraging the community and parents in Papunya to make sure their children go to school. These two people really recognise that education is an important part of us making choices and moving on in our life, and a great avenue to open other doors. I congratulate both Linda and Patricia.
There is also one non-indigenous lady I want to thank her for her commitment to Aboriginal education, and that is Tricia Smith who has worked down at Kintore and Mt Liebig. She works at Yulara College and I know that she has just received a transfer to move to Darwin. Tricia has been such a wonderful woman in Aboriginal education. She has been committed and she has so much compassion for young indigenous students. She is always there pushing them and telling them that education is important and they should go to school. Sometimes, Tricia, you become frustrated like everybody else does. Keep up the good work and I hope that our loss in Central Australia is a big gain for the Top End. I hope my colleagues here in the Top End of the Northern Territory welcome you as we have for years, Tricia, I really hope that you have a successful career.
I would like to also recognise my Electorate Officer, John Rawnsley, for the commitment that he has shown in the year that he has worked with me after the illness of my Electorate Officer, Rhonda. I take this opportunity also to place on record Rhonda’s commitment to Aboriginal people and to me as a member. I hope that Rhonda has a successful year ahead. I place on record, Rhonda, you will always be my sister and I love you.
I thank John for his commitment in taking over from Rhonda. John and I worked really hard during the federal election, doing the Eastern Plenty and all the way to Finke, and the western side as well, in my own community and Mt Liebig, Haasts Bluff and Papunya.
I thank all those committed people in the federal election in my electorate. My thanks to Alison and Douglas at Haasts Bluff. Thanks to Walter, Jarrod, Lance and Syd at Papunya. I also thank Warren Snowdon’s Electorate Officer, Tom Shard from Canberra, for the little trip he did with me and his commitment to the federal election for the member for Lingiari. I also thank Mildred and Carl at Hermannsburg. These people really showed their commitment to the federal election. I also thank all those people who turned up at the federal election, because these people were committed to make a difference in their vote, and they all showed up. I congratulate those people and say: keep up doing this kind of stuff, because you can only send a loud, clear message through your voting. You have the change that you wanted.
I commend my constituents in my electorate of Macdonnell. I also send a big thank you to Theresa Nipper at Areyonga and that I hope things start looking up for you, Theresa. I know that your husband, Phil, is really sick. Just keep praying, and hope things start working out for you. Thank you again for helping at Areyonga. Thanks to Judy also at Areyonga.
I also put on record my appreciation to Dorothea Randall at Mutitjulu and Judy Trigger, and say thank you to those women who are so committed to keeping operations open and operating at Mutitjulu. I hope that things can start improving and looking up for my constituents at Mutitjulu.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
TABLED PAPER
Warrant - Deputy Chairmen
of Committees
Warrant - Deputy Chairmen
of Committees
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, pursuant to the provisions of Standing Order 12, I revoke all previous warrants and lay on the table my warrant nominating Ms Malarndirri McCarthy, Mr James Burke, Ms Kerry Sacilotto, Mr Rob Knight, and Mr Gerry Wood to act as Deputy Chairmen of Committees when requested so to do by the Chairman of Committees and Deputy Speaker.
MINISTERIAL REPORTS
Brolga Awards
Brolga Awards
Mr HENDERSON (Tourism): Madam Speaker, this morning I inform the House of the 2007 Brolga Northern Territory Tourism Awards held on Saturday, 17 November, at Ooraminna Station Homestead in Alice Springs. I had great pleasure attending the event in the heart of our magnificent country, celebrating the Brolgas’ 21st anniversary with some 320 industry colleagues. The Brolga Awards are part of the Australian Tourism Awards program that celebrate and promote success in tourism by rewarding industry achievement, dedication and commitment to excellence.
This year’s Brolgas evolved to incorporate a streamlined entry process with fewer questions, shorter submission lengths and field requirements for supporting documentation. Equally exciting for 2007 was the trial of the new online submission for two award categories. In its trial phase, our entrants overcame some technological challenges and, through perseverance and valuable feedback, our tourism industry will enjoy a smoother online submission system in the future.
All entrants this year were offered free workshops and a structured mentoring program by Tourism NT to assist in their submission preparation. Tourism NT has been active in lobbying at the national level for its participation on the Australian Tourism Awards Working Group to ensure the categories and criteria of the awards remain relevant and encourage increased participation from our industry in the future.
The prizes were improved by Tourism NT, offering business category winners fantastic new incentive packages worth up to $2500 to develop their businesses. The prize packages included funding for industry attendance at a relevant trade show, consumer show or tourism conference, cooperative advertising support, and business accreditation fees.
This year’s winners were announced across 17 business categories and three individual categories including the new Young Achiever Award, introduced this year to recognise and encourage the personal and professional commitment of our younger industry members. This award is specific to the Territory and was presented to Matthew Turner from Alice Springs Desert Park, an inspirational young achiever who has overcome severe disabilities to become an outstanding tour guide and the inaugural winner of this award. Young Matthew is an inspiration to many.
I was delighted to see the number of entries in the fiercely contested New Tourism Development category. This category is for new businesses only and received the most number of entries in this year’s awards. The category winner was Bamurru Plains on the Mary River floodplains. Tourism NT’s Business Growth Award went to Airborne Solutions, whose $5000 prize package will enable them to attend a national or international tourism event, or a specifically tailored sales trip. I am happy to report that last year’s winner, Venture North, have this year taken out the Heritage and Cultural Tourism category so will now head to Canberra for the Australian Tourism Awards.
The Brolga Awards were judged by a panel of 18 judges who were, this year, under the long-term stewardship of Bob Woodward. The venue sponsor, Ooraminna Station Homestead, was a tribute to our industry, providing genuine outback hospitality. Set amidst the spectacular Ooraminna Ranges, the awards were presented beneath the stars as guest enjoyed a hearty country-style dinner and a delightful speech by Sally, our host, who I think should appear in our tourism advertising campaigns.
As part of Tourism NT’s effort to embrace the future through innovation, the prestigious Brolga trophy was this year revitalised thanks to the expertise of world renowned designer Vince Frost and manufacturer, Robert Foster. Vince Frost was the designer behind the Share our Story campaign, and now he has become part of our story by providing his expertise free of charge, investing in a significant amount of time and resources in developing the new Brolga trophy.
Madam Speaker I extend on my sincerest congratulations to all winners of the 2007 NT Brolga Awards. Our winners will go on to represent the Northern Territory at the Australian Tourism Awards. State and territory finalists are judged against strict rules and guidelines and winners will be announced during an awards evening in Canberra on 29 February 2008. I wish all of our NT finalists the best of luck at the Australian Tourism Awards. It really was a great night.
Mr CONLAN (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, it was a great night. I had a terrific night at the Brolgas a couple of weeks ago, not quite as good as alleged in some parts of the media, though. It was a terrific night, and I know that the …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr CONLAN: I know that the Chief Minister can search deep into his conscience and even he would probably have to admit that because we did speak to each other briefly throughout the course of the evening. He had his jacket off very early and was dancing on the stage to Silverchair, which was fantastic. Seriously, it was a great evening. There were 320 people, I think, at the Brolgas. I concur with the Chief Minister about Matt Turner; it was a fantastic achievement.
The Royal Flying Doctor Service was, once again, nominated for Most Significant Attraction and the Chairman’s Choice, a fantastic part of Central Australia and the Northern Territory. The MacDonnell Range Holiday Park is unstoppable, picking up their award for about the fourth or fifth time in a row. CATIA boss, Peter Grigg, who has come across from Kununurra, has been in town for five or six weeks and he collected the award for CATIA, which is, of course, is soon to be Tourism Central Australia.
Paul Ah Chee and Sylvia Wolf took out the king Brolga Award for this year. It was fantastic for them to win the Chief Minister’s Perpetual Trophy.
It was a terrific night. Bill and Jan Hayes and Sally gave a fantastic talk, as the minister said. He even mentioned in his speech that perhaps he would be a great asset to tourists in the Northern Territory. He is a real character and it just rolls off the top of the tongue. All in all, Bill and Jan at Ooraminna, have a fantastic spot and a great night had by all.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I did not attend the Brolga Awards but I believe it was a great night and some of you had a really good time. Let me say, though, it was historic in that so many of the Alice Springs tour people won awards. It is a great indication of how healthy the tourism industry is in Alice Springs in Central Australia. We have to take off our hats to people like Paul Ah Chee who has been flying the flag for so long, and Brendan Heenan at the MacDonnell Range Holiday Park who has done so well.
Matthew Turner is a fabulous young man. If any of you ever have the chance to meet with him, do so because he personifies young people who can achieve in the face of adversity. I take off my hat to Matthew. His award was great.
Ooraminna is a great place. Any of you ministers who are looking to have a function in Alice Springs and are wondering where to have it, consider Ooraminna. Jan Hayes is a fantastic host. It is a credit to her. We had the Territorian dinner there not long ago and it was outside; it is a beautiful venue. They deserve an award for what they have done for tourism and for Central Australia.
Minister, like you, I wish all finalists the best of luck at the national level. It is an indication of ‘we can do it’. We should be promoting tourism and getting behind all the people who are working their butts off to make a living. I congratulate everyone in Central Australia and the rest of the Territory who were finalists in the awards. It is a great effort.
Australia Business Arts Foundation
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arts and Museums): Madam Speaker, last month I had the pleasure of meeting with the CEO of the Australian Business Arts Foundation, or AbaF, Jane Haley, along with Susan Benham-Page of the South Australian chapter of AbaF. It was a valuable meeting. Since the election of the Labor government in 2001, I and my predecessor as Arts minister, have been active in encouraging links between the business sector and the arts sector here in the Northern Territory. We have done this in the belief that important and mutually beneficial partnerships can be formed between these two sectors. In many areas, we recognise that business and arts sector partnerships can do far better than government is ever able to do.
AbaF was established in 2000 by the federal government to do just that: build real and enduring connections between business and the arts. AbaF operates in each state through state-based networks of businesses called chapters. However, there are thus far no chapters established in the Northern Territory or the Australian Capital Territory. However, the South Australian chapter of AbaF, with the support of AbaF CEO, Jane Haley, has been making forays into the Northern Territory holding training workshops for the arts sector, as well as quietly encouraging business links with art organisations and working on business planning and supplying members of governing boards.
AbaF is not a funding body as such, nor is it narrowly involved in encouraging direct financial support from business to the arts, although that is an important part of its advocacy. AbaF’s three programs are:
(1) partnering, in which AbaF promotes and builds links between artists, art organisations and local government with business organisations;
(3) giving, looking at ways business might be involved in donating and making grants to the arts sector.
The Northern Territory business sector is very small compared with other jurisdictions, and the kinds of businesses we have here have often not traditionally seen the value of links with the art sector. While there are some wonderful examples of business sponsorship to the arts already in the Territory, we would like to see this expand in both size and nature.
As a result of my initial discussions with AbaF, we are committed to assisting in building a chapter of AbaF in the Northern Territory. At this stage, AbaF is interested in funding a part-time position for AbaF here in the Territory. I have committed to providing in-kind support for that position and am prepared to discuss other forms of support.
The initial model we have discussed would build on AbaF members from the South Australian chapter who also have significant business operations and branches here in the Northern Territory. Those branch offices and operations will be encouraged to form the nucleus of an AbaF chapter for the Territory. It will not happen overnight; it will be an organic development. However, it will be a welcome addition to the arts landscape here in the Territory.
Each year, AbaF holds prestigious national awards honouring best practice and great successes in developing relationships between the business and the art sector. These national awards flow from state-based awards, and I am sure that there will be support from both sides of politics here in this Assembly for the establishment of a Territory AbaF chapter. I am certain we will share the hope that examples of business and art partnerships which will, in the future, feature in those national AbaF awards.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for her report. Yes, we certainly support a chapter being established in the Northern Territory. There are so many artists who do not have the skills for business planning or marketing their products. It is very important that they have assistance. There are a lot of individual enturpreauers in the Northern Territory who are perfectly skilled in doing it, but I definitely support the establishment of a chapter here. I look forward to having a briefing on the matter.
Defence Trip
Mr VATSKALIS (Defence Support): Madam Speaker, I report on my recent visit to Brisbane to meet with the senior management teams of two companies, Australian Aerospace and Haulmark Trailers Australia.
Australian Aerospace is the only helicopter manufacturer in Australia and New Zealand. It is wholly owned by Eurocopter, one of the world’s largest manufacturers of helicopters and part of the EADS group, which is the largest aerospace and defence company in Europe. Australian Aerospace is the manufacturer of the Tiger Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter which Defence is acquiring as part of an extensive helicopter replacement program.
Seventeen of the fleet of 22 helicopters will be based in Robertson Barracks with 1st Aviation Regiment from 2008 onwards. The value of the Tiger acquisition and sustainment program is well over $1bn.
Australian Aerospace will deliver through-life support for this fleet for 15 years and more. Australian Aerospace has confirmed that deep-level through-life support maintenance and routine maintenance for the Tigers based in the Northern Territory will be undertaken in Darwin. They have established a workforce at Robertson Barracks and are now preparing to receive and support the helicopters when they start arriving next year. Another company, THALES, which is a partner with Australian Aerospace in the Tiger program, will also establish a team at Robertson Barracks to support the simulator training.
The Tiger helicopter is very advanced technology. They have been described as ‘flying computers with weapons on board that can really upset your day’. They are considered to be the most advanced aircraft based in Australia and the most advanced helicopter in the world.
My reason for visiting Australian Aerospace was twofold: to strengthen the Northern Territory’s relationship with this company and their commitment to undertake as much as possible of the through-life support for the Tiger helicopter in Darwin; and to receive a briefing on the Tiger program and explore what the opportunities might be for local industry participation in the through-life support activity.
We do not have a significant aerospace sector in the Northern Territory compared with other states. However, Australian Aerospace has confirmed that they are looking to engage with suitably accredited small businesses that can deliver specific support. Such support could be in the areas of delivering tools, consumables, rotables, calibration services, non-destructive testing and minor composite repair. The company is also interested in working with registered training organisations to access apprenticeship candidates.
They are also working with Army to provide a small number of transition training aircraft with ‘glass cockpits’. The EC-135 is a very popular civil-type aircraft which is in great demand around the world. These aircraft will be operated in Darwin as part of the Tiger program, and Australian Aerospace’s preferred aircraft operator for this aircraft will need to establish operations in Darwin and utilise support from local businesses. Australian Aerospace is also investigating the potential for developing a major warehouse facility in Darwin to be the point of import and domestic despatch for repairable items in their aerospace pipeline.
During the visit I was accompanied by Mr Andrew Jones, Executive Officer of the local branch of the Australian Industry and Defence Network (AIDN); Mr Neil Ringshaw, Chief Operations Officer of the Industrial Foundation for Accident Prevention; and Mr Greg Haigh, Chairman of the Board of Accrete who also represented RANms.
I was pleased to see, as part of Australian Aerospace’s briefing, that they confirmed the ARH Underwater Escape Trainer is to be based in Darwin, and the company is working closely with Accrete to establish the training capability, including provision of the device for training the Tiger crews.
As I said earlier, this helicopter is very advanced technology. My department has previously facilitated discussions between Australian Aerospace and Charles Darwin University to explore whether a relationship could be pursued between the two organisations. It is worth reflecting for a moment on the considerable economic contribution that the relocation of 1st Aviation Regiment from Queensland to the Territory is delivering:
$82m infrastructure development at Robertson Barracks;
To round off my trip to Brisbane, I visited Haulmark Trailers to advance my discussions with Mr Spencer Grammer, Managing Director, and Mr Mike Ireland, General Manager of Haulmark. Haulmark is now the preferred tenderer to provide over 3000 trailers to be manufactured and supported. Naturally, many of these trailers will be for the Army at Robertson Barracks.
I was very impressed by the professionalism, enthusiasm and tenacity that this company has displayed through the lengthy tendering period. Members of Legislative Assembly will have noted some earlier media articles announcing that Haulmark has committed to establishing a $10m facility at the Defence Support Hub to manufacture the trailers and deliver through-life support for those trailers to be based in the Northern Territory.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, we were struck by the minister’s report. We thought it was curious, with respect, given that you brought on a statement about Defence and Defence-related issues last night, which is still to be debated in parliament today. I am compelled to ask why it was that you did not include what you have just said in the statement. It is a mystery to us. I feel certain, however, that is a mystery to you. Perhaps, Madam Speaker, this says much about the new leadership team.
I was asked a question by journalists last night: ‘Do you think there has been a brain drain now that the member for Fannie Bay and the member for Nhulunbuy have stepped out of the picture?’ ‘Yes’, in essence, was my reply.
These people, despite not being perfect, and they have heard from me over the years about their imperfections at length, at least, I thought, had a measure of intellectual competence, the likes of which is not matched, and not matched by a country mile, by the new leadership team,. Why am I saying this? It is because the strategy team has not worked itself out. They have not worked out that there is an opportunity, milked by government traditionally under the old leadership, to put government’s best foot forward.
Instead, we see an effort by the minister, no doubt taking instructions from the leadership group. I do not know how he voted in caucus. Perhaps he is as unhappy with the new leadership and other ministers as everyone else in the Territory. In any event, it is very interesting that you would present this report. I believe not all goes well for government. However, I only have about 13 seconds left.
It is curious and brave for you to talk about Defence and support, given that your new Chief Minister, a failed minister, was not able to get on with providing the Defence support hub.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for his report. It runs on from yesterday’s statement. I have not gone through the strategy he gave us yesterday yet, but I presume it is part of the same strategy. It is important to the Territory that we attract as many industries, either from our own industrial base or from interstate to the Territory, and work through the through-life support programs for all the equipment in the Defence area, especially the Tiger helicopter squadron. Anyone living in the rural area these days will often see the Tiger helicopter squadron flying past; they do it on a regular basis.
You mentioned the helicopter underwater escape facility. That raised a question as to what has happened to the facility at Berrimah and whether that still exists. Will that complement what the Defence Forces are doing, or will this be a separate facility all together?
On another issue, and this is one I am sure Knuckeys Lagoon people would be asking you, minister: will there be any move to look at reducing the traffic issues that surround Robertson Barracks? People do not have a problem with the Tiger helicopter squadron coming to Robertson Barracks, but with that comes extra people, extra traffic and extra noise, and complaints from the Knuckeys Lagoon people. During the federal election, it was stated by Mr Tollner that he would provide some funds to go towards rerouting Campbell Road. I believe Mr Hale also said that that would happen. It would need support from the NT government and the Litchfield Shire Council, so I am interested to know whether the government will support some changes to the traffic from Robertson Barracks because with all these extra facilities, traffic will only get heavier.
Mr VATSKALIS (Defence Support): Madam Speaker, if you need any proof that the Leader of the Opposition had no clue about Defence and Defence Support, today is a very good example. Yesterday’s statement was about strategy; today it is about the reality of things that happen here. I know you are upset. I know you are dumbstruck about the loss of your party during the election, and the loss of the Prime Minister’s seat. The surprise will continue today when you find that one of your mates, Dave Tollner, will lose his seat. You probably will not be very upset about it, because we know what David Tollner thinks about the Leader of the Opposition, which he made clear in public.
However, once again I point out that yesterday was a strategy statement; today it is about reality. I will be very happy to provide a briefing. I know you will not take a briefing, and I know that you have not even bothered to meet with industry in the Territory. We also know what the industry thinks after your ludicrous performance yesterday afternoon in this House.
Land Release
Ms LAWRIE (Planning and Lands): Madam Speaker, I report on the Northern Territory government’s current land release strategies. The government strategically releases Crown land for residential purposes to meet projected population needs. The city of Palmerston has been the foundation of suburban growth over the last 15 years. Bellamack is the next suburb to be developed and is well located on our road network, and only 4 km from the services of Palmerston Town Centre.
It is important that housing opportunities are provided to all Territorians, and 15% of the Bellamack lots will be retained for first homebuyers, affordable and public housing. The approximate development area of Bellamack is 90 ha, with a potential yield of over 700 lots. Over 20% of the total area will be retained as open space and will include formal parks, drainage reserves and remnant vegetation.
The expressions of interest for the development of our new suburb attracted great interest from the development industry. Thirteen submissions were received by the closing date of 2 November, and the evaluation panel is currently assessing the submissions and will shortly report to government with a short list of proponents. Those on the short list will be invited to come forward with detailed development proposals.
The government is releasing Bellamack by creating three development leases to provide competition in the marketplace. There are two residential lease areas and one commercial residential lease for the development of the neighbourhood village. The first lots in Bellamack are expected to be available towards the end of 2008.
Government recently announced the rationalisation for the operations of the Berrimah Research Farm. This means that the majority of land is surplus to our requirements and is ideally situated halfway, between Darwin and Palmerston, for urban development. The Department of Planning and Infrastructure has prepared preliminary concepts for development that will see the northern most area of the site of some 20 ha being made available for light industry on a range of lot sizes. The design is such that it provides an extension of the existing industry and appropriate buffers for the development of the balance of the site. Approximately 80 ha are available for residential development, a mix of densities, including medium density unit-type housing. Together with single dwellings, this site will also provide around 700 dwellings with an expected population of 1800.
This government is committed to providing for first homebuyers in the Territory. This site also has potential for affordable housing and social housing. In all, some 20% of the present farm site will be available for both formal and informal open space. It will have its green zones. Government is more than aware of the declining affordability of housing nationally. The release of this strategically located parcel, together with Bellamack, and combined with the developments at Lee Point and elsewhere, will provide additional land supply and, importantly, choice for those in the residential market.
In Alice Springs, the government entered into an indigenous land use agreement with the native title holders in April 2004 to enable the Larapinta Stage 4 residential development to proceed. Titles to 40 residential lots at Stirling Heights, the first phase of Larapinta Stage 4 land release, were issued in February 2006, with all blocks being sold off the plan. The second phase on Albrecht Drive was sold under a development lease by public auction on 8 November this year. This development will provide a further 38 single dwelling lots and one multiple dwelling lot to the Alice Springs market. This is great news for the people of Alice Springs who want to build their own home.
The Larapinta blocks will be available for purchase off the developer’s plan early next year. The lease requires the developer to sell six serviced blocks back to the government for release for first homebuyers under the HomeNorth Scheme. The government will also purchase the multiple dwelling block to be developed for seniors public housing.
The release of blocks for residential housing is part of the Mt Johns Valley subdivision in Alice Springs is also a step closer, with the advertising of tenders for the commencement of headworks for Mt Johns Valley. The Northern Territory government has committed $1.3m to complete this work. The initial release at Mt Johns is expected to deliver at least 70 blocks into the Alice Springs market. Negotiations with native title holders are progressing well. Into the future, Mt Johns Valley is expected to provide up to 600 residential lots.
Our land release strategy strikes the right balance; it meets housing demand while safeguarding the existing property market. The last thing homeowners want to see is a decline in their property values.
Kevin Rudd made several announcements on housing affordability and has promised to fast-track the release of Commonwealth land for residential development. We will be talking to the new Labor government to identify opportunities for the release of Commonwealth land in the Territory.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, at the outset there is difficulty responding to this with some seriousness because it was not so long ago that this minister and this government, who proclaimed their great announcement that they were going to release land, were obstructing any argument calling on them to release land. They used one set of arguments to resist the call to release land, and this very minister stood in this Chamber and, apparently sincerely, believed that position until Cabinet chose to take an alternative position which was, in fact, the need to respond to what families are calling for.
These are families, people who have children, who have no hope of getting into affordable housing. There was the minister over there with one particular line, sincerely, apparently, believing it. That is why I find great difficulty in this. You can stick to your lines as though you do believe it and, then, when there is a decision change in Cabinet, then you espouse the alternative position and equally sincerely hold that position. What is true? What is reality? Who knows? It is a game.
The fact is you were asked a series of questions, minister, on this matter and you are unable to answer them. Can you tell us when the first house will be released in Bellamack? How much will it cost for that home? You were asked those before and you fluffed around the place. You are a pretty good performer in parliament but, when we are looking at the reality and the truth, we are finding there is a fair gap between what you say and what is endeavouring to be discovered. How much will it be for that house? How much will an ordinary person, an ordinary family man, a mum and dad, need to earn to be able to support that kind of cost? We have not had those sorts of answers. I am disappointed to have people coming up to me at the markets being so excited based on the advertisements that this government run, which are in fact fallacious ...
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, the overall time for ministerial reports has expired.
Reports noted pursuant to standing orders.
MOTION
Referendum on Local Government Reform
Referendum on Local Government Reform
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move the following motion: That -
- This House calls upon the Chief Minister to live up to his comments yesterday that the majority of Territorians support the local government amalgamations by conducting a referendum on the issue.
Was it not an interesting day yesterday, Madam Speaker? The new Chief Minister said on radio that most people in the Territory supported Local Government reform and amalgamation. Indeed, in today’s Northern Territory News the following is reported:
- The Chief Minister dismissed rural residents’ call to halt local government reform because he said the majority of Territorians support the change.
He went on to say:
- ‘I understand there are a whole range of views with the issue, but the majority of people support the reforms’.
We, and indeed so many others, were disappointed and stunned – mind you, there have been a few astonishing things happen in the last couple of days – and genuinely shocked to hear that level of arrogance from the new Chief Minister. This is the bloke who said in his first media conference or in his early media interviews, that he wanted to ‘reach out to Territorians’. He backed himself and, indeed, has been backing himself for some time, into a corner. He thinks that he is going to do a significantly better job than his predecessor. The Chief Minister has assured all and sundry that he is reaching out, is going to do things differently and, by implication at least, be a better Chief Minister than his predecessor. That remains to be seen in a number of areas.
This government does not have a mandate from Territorians to embark on the radical reform that has been embarked upon, and any suggestion that it does is just wrong. This was not an issue that came to light, in any way, shape or form, prior to the 2005 election. As has been said in this place on more than one occasion, we and the many other Territorians support in-principle reforms. Some of the reforms are good; we make no bones about that.
However, the method of reform is wrong and reeks of arrogance for this reason: the minister and Chief Minister said that this is what they where going to do; they announced their plans and then they said they were going to consult. That is a curious way for a government to conduct itself. I refer members to what the new Leader of Government Business said in this place on 28 August this year:
Do not impose something on a people without at least giving them a chance to have their say in whether they want it’.
A truer word has never been said, Madam Speaker, and I heartily congratulate the new Leader of Government Business for her comments in that regard. It is an arrogant government that says: ‘This is what we are going to do and, by the way, we are going to consult you’.
Hence why it is that the amalgamations in particular and the process of a method of reform that the government has embarked upon have been met with universal condemnation. Indeed, we have to date seen a steamrolling by the government. Just because the member for Fannie Bay now sits in a different chair does not alter the fact that, collectively, government, and in particular Cabinet, has a lot to answer for and has, it can fairly be levelled, acted disgracefully in relation to this issue.
We have seen this government steamroll over objections from, and let me list them: the Cattlemen’s Association; the Chamber of Commerce; the Minerals Council; the Territory Construction Association; the Australian Trucking Industry Association; the NT Business Council; the Northern Land Council; the Alice Springs Town Council; and the Darwin City Council. These are groups, oft cited by government ministers in this place and outside as being peak bodies, impressive bodies, and ones to whom government members refer when it suits them. What has government done in light of these organisations’ opposition to the reforms? The government has tried to fly under the radar; they have tried to water them down. I know that they have been meeting with key organisations. I also know that government has indicated to them on several occasions that, yes, they will take their concerns into account, but hang on until the federal election, hang on until this, hang on until that. Now, Madam Speaker, we are in a position where the government will introduce legislation tomorrow that will give effect to the reforms arrogantly imposed by this government.
Well, you cannot have it both ways. Hypocrisy does not work well in life or in politics. Any government worth its salt would have to listen to these organisations. Let me repeat them, Madam Speaker: the Cattlemen’s Association; the Chamber of Commerce; the Minerals Council; the Territory Construction Association; the Australian Trucking Industry Association; the NT Business Council; the Northern Land Council; the Alice Springs Town Council; and the Darwin City Council. Impressive groups, and groups that should be taken notice of, one would have thought.
Over and above that, here is a bundle of the petitions that have been tabled in parliament. There are an enormous number of people who have put their names to these petitions. We see petitions in this place regularly. What we do not see is a bundle like this. The only bundle I have seen that has been bigger than this was the bundle tabled in respect of the government’s ill-fated decision to sell the TIO. All of us know that this is a hell of a bundle of documents. This is a hell of a bundle of signatures. This a lot of Territorians who are expressing their displeasure, and I suppose I am being polite, about the process of government reform that the government has embarked upon, and the actual nuts and bolts, to the extent that the nuts and bolts are understood.
There have been drafts of documents left, right and centre. There have been seriously mixed-up messages coming from people in government. In relation to local government, even yesterday it was curious, and we noted with great interest in my office when we heard the new Chief Minister say that we, the Territory, miss out on funding and in particular road funding for unincorporated areas. Not true, Madam Speaker. I think he said it before; I do not know why he has such a block with this issue. The fact is that the Commonwealth provides road funding to areas incorporated or not. $12m was allocated from July 2005 in the Territory unincorporated areas. Things are not going well for the new Chief Minister.
Either way, the fact is that the community is getting mixed messages from government. Hard-working Territorians have taken the time to sign a petition. Key industry groups are exhausted. Why do I know this? Because they talk to me. You know that they talk to us. They are exhausted and frustrated with their efforts and endeavours to get government to see sense. That would explain, would it not, why some of these organisations banded together and embarked on a significant advertising campaign? We do not see in the Territory many advertising campaigns from many community groups or bundled together chunks of community groups, but we saw it here. We also saw it with the TIO issue.
I would have thought that, for an all-knowing, all-seeing new Chief Minister, this would be an opportunity since he said he wanted to reach out, to do as his predecessor has been urged for some time; namely, to stop, listen and start again. This is the new Chief Minister’s opportunity to listen to concerns of ordinary Territorians. He can stop the process now. He can engage in genuine, and I stress genuine, consultation with Territorians and Territory ratepayers and then put a proposal for reform before the people at the next Territory election. That is a prudent course of action, particularly, one would have thought, for a new Chief Minister. Over and above the key interest groups and industry bodies and the petitions, we should not forget that it was during the last sitting we saw a couple of hundred cars circling this building on the roads that surround it, protesting ...
Mr Knight: It was not organised by you, was it?
Ms CARNEY: I have not seen …
Mr Knight: It was not organised by you.
Ms CARNEY: Well, if the member for Daly would be any good …
Mr Knight: You are asleep at the wheel. You did not organise it, did you?
Ms CARNEY: … he would have been a minister. He would have been a minister.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr Knight: You have done nothing. You are asleep at the wheel.
Ms CARNEY: Bring it on, sport, bring it on.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Mr Knight: You were asleep at the wheel. You did not organise it. You did not organise it.
Ms CARNEY: You would have been a minister. Bring it on, sport, bring it on.
Mr Knight: You did not organise it did you? You have done nothing. Nothing.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order, member for Daly!
Mr Conlan: It does not matter who organised it.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, member for Greatorex!
Mr Knight: The shadow minister does not even know where parts of the electorate are.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr Conlan: The fact is they were there; it does not matter who did it.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Madam Speaker. It does say a lot, an awful lot, about the member for Daly that he was beaten to the ministry by the members for Millner and Sanderson. You must be feeling awful. You must be feeling just awful. Mind you, there is an up side to everything because now the minister for Primary Industry, the member for Drysdale, I reckon I know who he would have voted for, can claim not to be the worst minister in the Territory Labor government. Good luck to him because we know he was very upset after the last Question Time. In fact, we know was very upset after the last question. However, Madam Speaker, I digress …
Dr BURNS: A point of order; Madam Speaker! Under Standing Order 67, the Leader of the Opposition is digressing from the subject. Let her get on with it, and let her address her comments through the Chair instead of trying to cause trouble in this Chamber.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Leader of the Opposition, if you could direct your comments through the Chair and stay as close as possible to the motion which you have put to us, thank you.
Ms CARNEY: Yes, thank you, Madam Speaker, I will certainly do that.
A couple hundred vehicles were circling around. I know we have seen some protests in and around this building over the years but, none, I would have thought, that demonstrated the depth and feeling as on that occasion. People went to great lengths to attach signage and so on to their vehicles and around they went. There was another public meeting in the last sitting and my colleague, the member for Greatorex, the shadow minister, went to that. There have been other community meetings. I went to one not so long ago.
Is the community really concerned about this? Yes. Should our government, or any government, be doing things differently? Yes. Is this an opportunity for the new Chief Minister to stamp his authority on his government, on his Cabinet? He has clearly failed to do so in the first 24 hours.
We invite him to step up to the plate, as it were, and stamp his authority on his government today. Have the courage to go to the people. Go to the people; the people are talking. Is it not a fundamental proposition that when the citizens whom we all represent are becoming very active in the community with their protests and their condemnation, for even a garden variety politician to take notice of that? I think it is.
This is certainly no garden variety issue. It has significant implications, and those implications have been discussed in this Chamber before. Unless the new Chief Minister steps up today, those implications will continue to be discussed for years to come. It is a challenge, Madam Speaker. I know that there are challenges in politics but the new Chief Minister has been plotting for 15, 18 months. We know. Everyone knows he has had the numbers for a long time. Why it is that he did not have the ticker to challenge? I do not know. Far be it for me to comment.
However, we are now in the situation where this man can make a mark. He will command the respect of his fellow Territorians and the opposition if he stands up and says: ‘Yes, you are right. On the Richter Scale of issues, this is a really significant one that we, the government, and me as Chief Minister, will look at again’. We know that you know that it has not been done well …
Mr BONSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The Leader of the Opposition is again eyeballing government members. She is staring right at us. Could she please …
Madam SPEAKER: I am sorry, I …
Mr BONSON: She is eyeballing the government again. Could you please ask her to direct her comments through the Chair? I have just had breakfast.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Millner, please resume your seat. Leader of the Opposition you may, of course, look where you wish, but if you could direct your comments through the Chair.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Madam Speaker, I will. What an interesting couple of days in federal politics it has been.
In any event, I know that others will talk. I look forward to hearing their contributions. I look forward to hearing a sound and sensible argument as to why it is that government will not support this motion. If the Chief Minister really believes what he said yesterday and, of course, with this bloke there is always a difference between what he says, what he does, and what he says he believes. However, if he wants to stand by his comments of yesterday that the majority of Territorians support the local government amalgamations, he will allow a referendum on the issue. That is the challenge we put to the new Chief Minister. We wait with nervous excitement to hear from him so that he can tell us why it is he will not do it, or rise to the challenge and do it. We look forward to hearing from him.
Debate adjourned.
PLANNING AMENDMENT (DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS) BILL
(Serial 130)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Ms LAWRIE (Planning and Lands): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill now be read a second time.
Unlike any other jurisdiction, the Northern Territory Planning Act currently requires all development applications to be publicly exhibited. The only exceptions to the requirement for exhibition at this time are premises intended for short-term accommodation for persons requiring privacy, such as escaping domestic violence. The mandatory requirement for exhibition was introduced on commencement of the Planning Act of 1993 and was largely the result of pressure from some community groups claiming that the public was excluded from the development assessment process because it was uninformed of proposed developments.
Public exhibition currently requires the erection of a notice on-site, the pink sign, and an advertisement in the local press including a locality map. Any person may lodge a submission relating to a development proposal within the two-week exhibition period. It is common in other jurisdictions for the requirement for exhibition to relate to the nature of the development proposed. Minor proposals, for example a home occupation, may require no exhibition or merely notification to adjoining owners, while more significant developments that could be expected to have a broader impact on the amenity of a locality are more broadly exhibited. The continuing requirement that all development applications be publicly exhibited is an unnecessary cost burden and delay for many developments, and imposes a similarly unnecessary administrative burden in the assessment process.
This bill proposes that the planning of the amendment to allow for certain development applications to be exempt from the current mandatory public exhibition. This is achieved primarily through the introduction of a regulatory power, to the section of the act relating to notification of and consultation regarding development applications. The provisions of the proposed bill will also allow for development applications for the establishment or change of user premises for the accommodation of people requiring privacy and applications for the consolidation of land to be exempt from the climate of public notification.
A permit is required to consolidate land, amalgamate two or more parcels of land, anywhere in the Northern Territory. Consolidation of land is most frequently required as a consequence of new development that proposes construction across existing lot boundaries. The requirement to consolidate is often a condition of a planning permit necessary for a development to conform to building regulations. While the issues relating to the requirements of service authorities are equally important for consolidations, as for subdividing to create two or more lots, consolidations raise no implications for other land. The requirement to advertise an application to consolidate lots is, therefore, considered superfluous, again, doing nothing but adding time and cost to the proposal.
In addition to the exemptions relating to public notification, the bill contains a number of other consequential amendments which are necessary to give effect to the proposed exemptions and to clarify procedures as a result of primary changes. The proposed exceptions to the requirement for public notifications have been structured in a way as to ensure that any third party appeal rights that may currently exist under the Planning Act are not impacted by the proposed amendment. Applicant appeal rights as they currently exist are, likewise, unaffected by the amendment.
It is not proposed to alter the method by which more significant applications are notified, nor is it proposed to alter the requirements to notify the local authority or council if the application happens to fall within a council area.
The subordinate legislation specifying the classes of development application affected by the amendment act is currently being prepared. It is intended, at this stage, that only applications for variations to the side and rear setback requirements for single dwellings and ancillary structures such as carports, garden sheds, etcetera, and industrial uses on industrial zoned land that does not abut another zone, will be included under these provisions. It is important to note, however, that even if further application types are included in this subordinate legislation, the provisions of the amended act limit such application types to those that are considered not to have a significant impact on existing and future amenity of an area.
Prior to the commencement of the Northern Territory Planning Scheme in February 2007, an application for variations to setback requirements for single dwellings and ancillary structures such as carports, garden sheds, etcetera, on one lot were, with the exception of Tennant Creek and Alice Springs, not determined under the provisions of the Planning Act but, rather, the Building Act via the Building Appeals Board. An application to the Building Appeals Board required the homeowner to approach their immediate neighbours seeking their approval for the proposal. There was no requirement to advertise the application either through the press or with a sign on the site.
As a consequence of building setbacks now being administered through the Northern Territory Planning Scheme, any application that could vary the requirement attracts the full procedure of public notification under the Planning Act. The associated fee of $130 plus advertising costs of $240 has increased the end cost to the consumer for no discernable benefit. In recognition that a reduced building setback may have amenity consideration for adjoining owners, notification of an application could be more reasonably achieved by notification to the owner adjoining the boundary for which a setback variation is sought. Where the variation is for the setback from the street, in the case of a corner lot or primary street, there may be an argument that the proposal be more broadly advertised on the basis of potential effect on the streetscape generally. Hence, the subordinate legislation will not propose such variations be exempt from the requirement for advertising.
Experience demonstrates that, within industrial zones, the public exhibition process very rarely generates a submission from a member of the public. This is primarily because the use itself is permitted, and the need for consent relates only to the variation of the physical nature of the development. Most often, such variations relate to the building height or car parking requirements. The continuing requirement that such proposals be advertised cannot be seen as performing any useful function. The subordinate legislation will exempt such applications from the requirement for advertising.
I am confident that the proposed changes to the Planning Act will benefit the whole community, especially the end consumer or homeowner who may expect a reduction of the costs associated with an application for developments of a minor nature.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and I table both the bill and the explanatory statement.
Debate adjourned.
TRANSPORT LEGISLATION (DRUG DRIVING) AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 132)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Ms LAWRIE (Infrastructure and Transport): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The bill I introduce today will implement another important phase of the government’s Road Safety Package. The bill creates offences for driving under the influence of drugs, and powers to require blood tests in the case of accidents or where the police officer has reasonable cause to suspect a person is driving under the influence of drugs.
National drug-taking data reveals that 87% of drivers drove soon after using drugs. Recent drug use studies have also shown that cannabinoids are present in a significant proportion of drivers killed and injured in road accidents. Also, results from the Victorian drug testing program after 12 months of operation reveal that one car driver in 40 and one truck driver in 69 are driving under the influence of drugs other than alcohol.
NT Police have advised that a pilot study carried out in the Territory as part of the Drug Use Monitoring in Australia, or DUMA, project revealed that 29% of people detained by police for driving offences tested positive to illicit drugs.
There have been a number of serious accidents in the Northern Territory, some involving fatalities, where the police know drugs were a feature of the accident but have not been able to confirm suspicions or press charges because the Northern Territory has not previously had the power to test those involved in crashes for drugs. Currently, the power to test blood from those involved in crashes exist for alcohol but not for drugs. The bill will address this shortcoming.
All other states and territories in Australia have moved progressively, over many years, to introduce strong measures to send a clear message that it is unacceptable to take drugs and drive. The Northern Territory is the only jurisdiction in Australia that does not have the power to test blood from those involved in crashes for drugs. This is unacceptable. Why should the wider community in the Territory have to put up with drivers taking drugs and driving on our roads, with apparent impunity from the consequences of their behaviour? I am also aware of a culture in the NT that exploits the fact that police do not have the power to require a person at high risk due to drug taking to submit to a blood test.
The key road safety measures to be implemented as part of this amendment bill are:
provision for the collection of blood samples to test for drugs and other substances from persons involved in motor vehicle accidents;
power for police to require a blood test where an alcohol test and a saliva test are inconclusive; however, the police officer must reasonably believe that an offence has been committed. This situation should occur where the police officer believes the person, by continuing to drive, would pose a danger to the public. The police officer would be required to arrest the person for the purposes of a blood test;
a person arrested for the purposes of a blood test may be unable to drive for 24 hours following the test. The person may be subject to an immediate suspension of their driver’s licence for 24 hours. The suspension is unappealable and the police may issue the person with a notice establishing the suspension;
a list of drugs is included in a schedule to the Traffic Regulations. The first part, Part A, will establish drugs prohibited to be used in any capacity whilst driving. The second part, Part B, comprises the prohibited drugs morphine, methadone and amphetamines used in the treatment of narcolepsy and attention deficit disorder. However, a defence prosecution will be available if these drugs have been taken in accordance with directions from a medical practitioner. The defendant must be able to satisfy the court that he or she was in the care of a medical practitioner and the drug was taken in accordance with a prescription or specified dosage;
the defence will not be available if the prosecution establishes that the level of impairment observed was not consistent with the specific dosage; and
the bill provides that drug analysis results can only be used for the purposes of offences against the Traffic Act and not in evidence proceedings some of the Misuse of Drugs Act.
The right of an individual is also protected in circumstances where police compel the person to undergo a blood test. Currently, when a blood sample is taken to determine the blood alcohol content level in a person’s blood, the person taking the sample may make approximately half the sample available to the person from whom it was taken for independent testing. The provision is now also applied in cases where samples are taken for drug screening purposes.
It is intended that first offences of drug-driving will operate in a similar fashion to the recently introduced penalties for low-level drink-driving offences; that is, a first offence may only attract a traffic infringement notice issued by police. The TIN will be counted as a first offence, and second or subsequent offences will be subject to the same penalties as for low-level drink-driving offences on repeat occasions.
The penalties for persons charged with drive under the influence offences, will be the same as for exceed 0.08 blood alcohol content penalties. DUI offences are based on existing offences in the Traffic Act and requires police to prove impairment in the court.
During drafting of the drug-driving provisions, it became necessary to rewrite Part V of the Traffic Act that deals with blood alcohol content testing offences and penalties. The new Part V recreates the drink-driving provisions from the current act. The only major changes in regard to applying the two strike policy agreed for low-range drink-driving penalties to zero alcohol drivers - passenger vehicle drivers, drivers under the age of 25 who have not held their licence for three years, and truck drivers - who will be subject to licence sanctions should they re-offend within three years of the first offence. This will place these drivers on the same footing as other motorists attracting low-range 0.05 to 0.08 blood alcohol content offences.
The redraft of Part V presented in the bill has resulted in much clearer enunciation of alcohol- and drug-driving provisions. I am sure honourable members will support this important road safety initiative announced by the Chief Minister in November last year. The community and, in particular our children, have a right to expect that they should be safe from drink- and drug-drivers on the road, and that they have the support of the law when it comes to the appropriate penalties for those who transgress.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and I table both the bill and the explanatory memorandum.
Debate adjourned.
TABLED PAPER
Care and Protection of Children Bill – Amendment Schedule and Draft Bill
Inclusive of Amendments
Care and Protection of Children Bill – Amendment Schedule and Draft Bill
Inclusive of Amendments
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Child Protection)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I table two documents relating to the Care and Protection of Children Bill and I will make a short statement.
I present Amendment Schedule No 23, Care and Protection of Children Bill 2007 Serial 112, and Care and Protection of Children Bill 2007 Serial 112 draft bill inclusive of proposed amendments contained in Amendment Schedule No 23.
Madam Speaker, the Care and Protection of Children Bill establishes a contemporary and comprehensive approach for the promotion of children’s wellbeing. The bill reflects the central case of children and families in our community, emphasising the value of children to society, the importance of family wellbeing and the need to support the capacity of families in the community to care safely for children and allow them to develop their potential.
This legislation has been a long time in its development, not surprising since it is replacing a law that is nearly 25 years old, or most of the life of the Northern Territory Assembly since self-government. It has gone through wide-ranging consultation and debate over the three years. It has taken into account findings of the Little Children are Sacred report. It has, more recently, gone through a period of negotiation. Since introducing the legislation at the August sittings, I have received numerous oral and written representations from stakeholders and interested parties. This has importantly included the commitment and involvement of the Leader of the Opposition, the Law Society, and the Ombudsman.
As I said in those sittings, because we are dealing with people who are damaged, sometimes horrifically, our every action and inaction can have consequences that are profoundly difficult to predict. We are dealing with imperfect human beings in an imperfect world, administered by an imperfect state. It is for that reason I have been pleased to receive this input to changes that improve and enhance the Care and Protection of Children Bill. It has been welcomed by Cabinet.
The goodwill, care and commitment of those who have contributed to these amendments is a demonstration that such important legislation is beyond the usual cut and thrust of the political process. It is something that we have tried to achieve in a broad, but bipartisan, fashion. To this end, we have accepted some fundamentally important amendments to the bill, particularly in regards to ministerial responsibilities. We have not accepted all the amendments. On these, I guess, we will have to agree to disagree. However, I give this commitment in parliament: we will commence a review process for the legislation in 12 months. We recognise that, as the legislation beds down and as the courts interpret the new act, the legislation will have to be adjusted. No one could sensibly pretend otherwise.
In addition, as was made clear in the recent briefing on this bill to the Law Society, we will encourage ongoing involvement in the evolution of the care and protection of children legislation, especially through groups such as the Family Matters Forum. We will encourage stakeholders to be involved in the development of regulations necessary to making this law workable. We will encourage people to consider becoming involved in membership of the Child Death Review and Prevention Committee, as well as review panels established as a consequence of this legislation. We will encourage people to welcome and assist the new Children’s Commissioner when he or she is appointed.
Furthermore, my department will have an ongoing interest in the promotion of an understanding of the new act. This will include continuing professional development courses for lawyers dealing in the complex area of child protection. We will also work towards ongoing briefings to the health sector. Indeed, this will begin as early as this Thursday with a briefing to the executive of the Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance of the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, I will now supply clarifications behind the amendments which will be considered in committee. Since I last presented the bill, I have instructed Family and Children Services to provide further briefings on the legislation to key stakeholders with an interest in ensuring the safety and wellbeing of all children. As I said earlier, a number of proposed amendments to the bill were raised during these useful exercises. I report that after serious consideration, Cabinet approved a number of those amendments to the bill. Although the core concepts of the bill have not changed, the amendments strengthen the existing provisions to provide clarification around the intent of specific clauses. They also make more explicit the minister’s role and responsibility, and the responsibility of the Territory government.
Part 1.2 describes the meaning of the act which is to provide for the care and protection of persons under the age of 18 years, referred to as children in the bill, with provisions for the care and protection of certain young people between the ages of 15 and 25 who have been children in the CEO’s care. There has been a consequential amendment to the ‘Overview’, clause 5, contained in this part of the act which involves the insertion of the word ‘the minister’ in response to the introduction later in the bill outlining the minister’s powers.
Part 1.3 of the bill includes the guiding principles to assist in the interpretation and implementation of the act. Clause 7 of the bill had made mention of the responsibility of society as a whole to safeguard the wellbeing of children. While this government has very strongly indicated that child protection and the wellbeing of children must be considered as a responsibility of the whole of society, it was felt that this clause should be replaced by one that more explicitly identified the role of the Northern Territory government as the formally constituted political entity that represents the people of the Northern Territory and that has the responsibility for reflecting, promoting and enforcing the values and expectations of the people of the Northern Territory. The buck stops with the government and it is only right that this is reflected in the legislation. However, changing this clause in no way changes the government’s view that all of society has a responsibility for promoting and safeguarding the wellbeing of children and supporting family.
A minor amendment has also been made to clause 8, the provision reflecting the role of family. Henceforth, reference will be made to a child to be ‘removed’ rather than ‘taken away’ from her or his family if there is no other reasonable way to safeguard the child’s wellbeing. This phrasing is in line with other international and national child protection terminology.
Part 1.4 describes an expanded range of key concepts including when a child is in need of care and protection and parental responsibility for the child. The act quite clearly includes reference to child sexual abuse as a key form of abuse that may have a significant detrimental affect on a child. However, it was felt that the provisions of the act could be strengthened to more clearly demonstrate this government’s commitment to preventing the sexual abuse of children. First, it was felt necessary to have an explicit link between the broad concepts of sexual abuse and the criminal offences that typically result from it. To that end, a definition of sexual offences is provided in section 13 which linked to the definition provided in section 3 of the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedures) Act. Further, the reporting of both sexual abuse and sexual offences is incorporated in the mandatory reporting obligations of the act, which I will discuss shortly.
Second, to further strengthen the definitions relating to the harm and exploitation of children in sections 15 and 16, an amendment has been made to the definition of ‘Harm to child’ (section 15). Sexual abuse has been explicitly linked as a key form of harm to children along with other forms of exploitation, as listed in section 15(2)(b), together with the existing reference to sexual abuse that is provided in section 16, ‘Exploitation of a child’. The example provided of the harm caused to a child exposed to physical violence under section 15(2)(c) has been amended to make it clearer that children’s exposure to parental domestic violence is a key form of such harm.
There have also been a number of small amendments to this part to clarify and strengthen the act. First, recognising that children need care and protection, an amendment has been made to section 20 such that this phrasing ‘care and protection’ which reflects the title of the act itself is incorporated into the key clauses that relate to the care and protection of children. It is a semantic change, but I feel it is important in that it demonstrates the government's intent to both care for and protect children.
Second, under this same clause 20, the criteria of when a child is in need of care and protection have been simplified and rewritten to improve their utility. Under this clause, a child is now in need of care and protection in the following circumstances:
that a child has or is likely to suffer harm or exploitation because of the acts or omissions of a parent;
the parents of the child are dead, unable or unwilling to care for the child, and no other family member of the child is able and willing to do so, or
no one has effective control of the child and the child is likely to harm himself or herself or another person.
We have removed a reference to the parent’s failing to care for a child in recognition that, sometimes, parents are unable to care for a child through no fault of their own; for example, parents incapacitated by a motor vehicle accident. Rather than having failed to provide care, this clause frames the need for care and protection around a parent’s unwillingness or inability to care for a child.
Third, in order to be clear about who has the parental responsibility for a child, an amendment has been made to sections 21 and 22 such that parental responsibility for a child is linked to a person who is entitled to exercise the powers and rights, and has the responsibility for care and control of the child.
Chapter 2 is concerned with the safeguarding and wellbeing of children. It also lists the power of the minister in relation to delegating the powers and obligations to the CEO for the administration of the act.
Part 2.1, Division 1, defines the obligations of members of the public to report cases of children at risk of harm or exploitation, and ensures that the minister, the CEO and authorised officers have the powers, functions and responsibilities to ensure the care and protection of children.
Clause 24 has been amended to include references to the minister in relation to ensuring the available functions and powers are delegated to authorised officers. Reference to the reporting obligations of those in child-related employment has been removed from clause 24(a) as a result of amendments to clause 25 that I will shortly describe.
These days, it is common practice across Australia to frame child protection or child welfare legislation around the delegated powers of the CEO or equivalent executive positions, as that person effectively has the day-to-day management of the powers and functions of the act under the direction of the minister. This, too, has been our intent. However, it became clear that, while the minister’s role and responsibility for the legislation is implicit in the act, people outside of the legal profession were unclear as to what powers and responsibilities are held under the new act.
To resolve this issue, a new clause 24A has been inserted to define clearly the minister’s powers. This clause emphasises the importance and priority the minister places on the care and protection of children, and the role of families and communities in a child’s life. It explicitly defines the powers that may be exercised by the minister, including the ability to do anything for the adoption of a cooperative approach between familles, agencies and other public authorities, or any other individuals or organisations in relation to the care and protection of children, and making policy guidelines for the exercise of a power or performance of a function by the CEO under the act. It is also clear that the CEO must have regard to the policy guidelines in exercising of the power and performance of the functions under this act, and must comply with the minister’s direction.
Division 2 describes the general obligations about reporting. The section outlines reporting obligations. The attempt here was always that the new act would continue the broad mandatory reporting obligations provided under the Community Welfare Act. Further considerations of section 25, ‘Reporting obligations’, has led to some amendments to ensure that it reflects the provisions of the Community Welfare Act, and to make it simpler and easier to implement.
First, section 25(1) has been amended that a person is guilty of an offence if she or he believes, on reasonable grounds, that a child has been or is likely to be a victim of a sexual offence or, otherwise, has suffered or is likely to suffer harm of exploitation, yet fails to report that belief to the CEO or the police. This clause makes it clear that any person in the Territory who suspects a child is being, or may be, abused or neglected has to report the matter for investigation. This is very clearly spelt out. It does not matter if the harm or the offences are committed by a parent, a friend, a stranger or someone working with children, any reasonable belief has to be reported. As a result of this change, it has been possible to remove any specific references to the reporting obligations of those in child-related employment (that is, to delete section 25(2)) which has been included to emphasise the specific obligations of those working with children to take action when confronted with abuse.
Second, there has been a consequential amendment to the clause, ‘Protection of person making a report’, section 26. This ensures that all persons who make a report of suspected harm or exploitation, or of a sexual offence committed against a child, are explicitly protected from civil or criminal liability.
Third, a minor amendment has been made to the clause relating to what happens when the CEO receives a report, section 28. Section 28(2)(a) refers to the person who made the report. This new phrasing has been used, rather than ‘maker of the report’ to bring it in line with child protection terminology.
Fourth, there has also been a consequential amendment to the provisions relating to the duty of other persons relating to reporting obligations, section 29, to align it with the appropriate part of section 25, ‘Reporting obligations’.
Division 3 establishes the power of the CEO to make inquiries and to investigate reports. This division provides the CEO with greater powers to make inquiries if there are concerns about a child’s wellbeing, and to seek information from a range of agencies involved with the child or the family. Clause 33 contains provisions relating to the giving of information for inquiries to the CEO or police when they are conducting a child protection investigation. The categories of persons who are required to give information have been amended to broad the scope of who must provide information if requested. Parents and another family member must now give information about the child when an inquiry is being undertaken. This amendment was made so that, in cases where a parent or a family member is knowingly hiding a child from police or FACS, or knows of a child’s whereabouts when they are hidden, they must disclose that information or face a criminal sanction.
Similarly, an amendment was made to allow for regulations to describe which persons must provide an authorised officer access to a child as part of an investigation, clause 36, without informing the parent. This allows for the authorised officer to be able to sight the child and discuss with them the allegations of abuse. Obviously, parents or family members should be excluded from such requirements.
Division 6 describes the circumstances when the CEO may take a child into provisional protection. However, stakeholder feedback was that the example contained in clause 50 that was meant to highlight these powers was inaccurate or ambiguous. It has been amended to make it clearer as to the intent of the provision.
Part 2.2, ‘Children in CEO’s care’, defines and makes provisions for a child in the CEO’s care. A new requirement is introduced that requires a care plan to be developed for each child in the CEO’s care, and provision is made for regular reviews of these plans. Division 4 of this part requires the CEO to enter into a placement arrangement for a child in care. These arrangements may be made with the parent, another family member, or other individuals approved of by the CEO. A child is to be appropriately informed about a proposed placement arrangement. A consequential amendment was necessary to include clause 80, relating to parents to be informed about placement arrangements for a child in the CEO’s care, as it has effect on the provisions contained in the obligations of the CEO for an order, clause 134.
Clause 134 was written such that a carer - that is, a person providing daily care and control of the child, such as a departmental foster carer - has the obligation to inform parents of the child’s care arrangements. This was felt it placed too much responsibility on the carer and that the obligations should rightly sit with the CEO, and the clause has been amended accordingly. The amendment of clause 134 led to a change to clause 80 to ensure that the CEO’s obligations were evident in clause 80 as well.
Part 2.3, Division 3, ‘Court Proceedings’: legal advice was taken before determining that penalties for a range of offences under the act. However, one consequence was that in two clauses the penalties to be applied were, in fact, less than was incorporated in the provisions of the current Community Welfare Act. This government remains determined that sanctions for breaching this act will be taken seriously. Amendments have, therefore, been made to the provisions relating to clause 96, ‘Restrictions of publications’, and clause 98, ‘Restrictions on attendance’, to align the penalty units with those of the current Community Welfare Act: 400 penalty units or two years imprisonment.
It is also worth noting that some stakeholders criticised the penalties included in these sections for being too light when applied to agencies or body corporates. There seemed to be a misunderstanding of the law. Under the Interpretation Act, the penalty that applies to an individual, in this case 400 penalty units or two years imprisonment, is multiplied five times when applied to a body corporate. Thus, the penalty for an agency that breached these provisions is 2000 penalty units, not 400.
Subdivision 3, ‘Protection order’, has provisions for the CEO to apply for the court for a protection order if the CEO reasonably believes the child is in need of protection and the proposed order is the best means to safeguard the child’s wellbeing.
As noted earlier, clause 134 has been amended such that the obligations to inform parents as to what arrangements are made for their child when removed from their care is now clearly made the responsibility of the CEO, not the carer, and the clause has been renamed The obligations of the CEO for an order.
One concern that has been identified is that clause 137, ‘Court may adjourn proceeding’, severely restricted the opportunity for the court to adjourn proceedings and, in fact, did not appear to allow for adjournments for extending, varying or revoking an order as per clauses 135 and 136. Amendments have been made. Adjournments can now be granted for an assessment order or protection orders, and these include adjournments. For extending, varying or revoking existing orders as defined under section 135 or section 136, the court must still, to the greatest extent possible, avoid granting adjournments. If the court does grant an adjournment, it must consider what is in the best interests of the child to whom the proceedings relate and be satisfied that there are strong reasons for doing so.
Part 2.4, ‘Transfer of orders and proceedings’: this part sets out the provisions and conditions that enable child protection orders and child protection proceedings to be transferred between the Territory and other jurisdictions.
Subdivision 1, ‘Transfer by the CEO’: the provision pertaining to the review of decisions, clause 158, was amended to allow for a person to be given 20 working days instead of the proposed 10, during which time they could apply to the court for a review of a decision. The review is to assess the merits of a decision and the grounds specified in the application. Extending the time frame to make such an application gives parties to proceedings more time to consult their legal representatives, which is particularly relevant for people living in rural and remote communities.
Subdivision 2, ‘Transfer by court’: an amendment was made to the provision relating to the service of application, clause 160. The CEO is now required to provide a copy of an application by the CEO for a transfer of child protection proceedings to the child if he or she is at least 10 years of age and the CEO considers he or she has sufficient maturity and understanding to comprehend the transfer and its consequences. A copy must also be provided to each parent of the child and also anyone who was a party to the proceedings relating to the home order, other than the CEO.
This amendment ensures that the child, taking into account the prescribed conditions, and other relevant parties are aware of the application by the CEO to transfer of the child protection order interstate. This will also allow the child to voice their wishes in relation to the application to transfer of the child protection order. It should also be noted that this clause does not prevent the CEO from providing a younger child with a copy of the order if the CEO feels the child is of sufficient maturity and comprehends the proceedings.
Subdivision 3, ‘Transfer of child protection proceedings’: clause 165 lays out similar provisions for providing parties to proceedings with copies of an order transferring proceedings to another jurisdiction. Similar amendments have been made, as were made to clause 160, to ensure the subject child is provided with a copy of the order if aged 10 years and subject to prescribed conditions. Again, this clause does not prevent the CEO from providing a younger child with a copy of the order if the CEO feels that the child is of sufficient maturity and comprehends the proceedings.
Chapter 3, ‘Prevention of harm and exploitation’: Part 3.1 defines a range of agencies or settings where screening will become mandatory for both paid employment purposes and for people who wish to work voluntarily with children. Clause ‘188, Decisions on applications’, defines the offences or criminal history that will preclude a candidate from obtaining a clearance certificate. Clause 188(6) was amended such that the sexual offences that may be prescribed are linked to the definition provided in clause 13 and, therefore, is linked to the definition of offences provided in section 3 of the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act.
Chapter 4, ‘Regulation of children’s services’, Part 4.1, ‘Preliminary matters’: this act provides for the increased regulation of children’s services to ensure that children cared for away from their families are provided with a reasonable quality of care and safety. Clause 223 defines ‘children’s services’ under the act which will be licensed or regulated as they are providing children’s services to the Territory’s children.
In order to ensure that there is no ambiguity in relation to the act and the Education Act, amendments to this clause have been made. Any reference to an educational institution as defined under the Education Act has been removed from clause 223(3)(d), and clause 223(4) deleted. The intention is to make it clear that government and non-government agencies who are running education programs such as preschools for children aged three to five are not defined as children’s services under this act. However, if a non-government agency is providing childcare services for children aged three to five years and being paid the childcare benefit for each child by the Australian government, then that service would be defined as a children’s service and would fall under the licensing provision of this act.
Part 5.3, ‘General offences’: clause 300 defines the offence of disclosing a child’s identity, except in circumstances that are set out in the bill. It is forbidden to publish any material which might identify a child who has been taken into the CEO’s care and for whom an application for a temporary protection order, assessment order, or protection order has been made. An amendment to this clause ensures that information that would clearly identify a child involved, whether as a victim or not, in a sexual offence, or a child alleged to have been involved in a sexual offence, is also unable to be published. It does not restrict a child when they grow up from publishing their own memoirs or autobiographies, or reflecting on the experience. This clause is designed to prevent the child from being identified by others.
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of the two daughters of the member for Katherine, Mandy Prescott, who is visiting from Boston and Trish Wachtel, and her son, Jack, and daughter, Jorja, from Jingili. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Care and Protection of Children Bill
(Serial 112)
(Serial 112)
Continued from 22 August 2007.
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, I remind you that at 11.50 am I will be asking you to pause. You may continue your remarks after Question Time this afternoon.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I will be surprisingly brief. I thank the minister for providing the amendments in the form where the amendments are easily identified. That is of great assistance so, thank you. I did receive some amendments a few days ago, but in that format it is much more helpful for all of us.
Madam Speaker, I am not sure that very many people in the Northern Territory would recognise this as an historic day. This is an historic day. The Community Welfare Act, I understand, and certainly the minister’s second reading speech said that it, commenced in 1984, so that makes it 23 years old. It has served the Territory reasonably well for that period. I commend the minister on acknowledging that in her second reading speech and it is worth repeating today. She said in her speech that the act:
- … took a … positive step forward by acknowledging the damage down by these misguided policies and practices, recognising the importance of family, community and culture within Aboriginal society, and ensuring that Aboriginal children removed from their families because of concerns about their safety would, wherever possible, be placed with their extended family or other Aboriginal community members.
Not bad for the Northern Territory in 1984, Madam Speaker, not bad at all. It is also the case, and worthy of acknowledgement, as the minister did:
- The Community Welfare Act was also the first Australian legislation to make the reporting of suspected child abuse and neglect mandatory by all members of the population. It has served Territorians well.
Indeed, it did. I say again, not bad for the Territory in 1984. We have often been cited as the leaders in the field in mandatory reporting and other child welfare provisions.
It is, in a sense, saying goodbye to an old friend today. As a former lawyer who worked in this area, I worked with it a lot, so it is saying goodbye to an old friend. I know that many in the legal profession will share with me a level of sadness, but great joy, that we are saying goodbye to our old friend.
It is important for me to say that I have wanted this legislation changed for many years. My eyesight is not as good as it used to be. There is a visitor in the gallery, Colin Dyer, whom I welcome back, who has had an interest in this legislation. If my memory serves me correctly, when I was a lawyer, having spoken at some length to a Territory Health minister, I believe it was Steve Dunham at the time, I think you were one of the public servants with whom I had some discussions.
I have been, even before politics, of the view that this legislation needed to be overhauled. As I was preparing my comments the other night, I thought I would have a look at what I said my maiden speech on 16 October 2001. To some extent, I gave a wish list of various amendments or reforms the government should make in its first term. In relation to the Community Welfare Act, I said:
Arguably, there is no greater responsibility for governments than the protection of children. Given my extensive experience in this area, I know that a number of specific reforms must be made to the Community Welfare Act if government is to better protect the rights and interests of children. This is above party politics, and I now give notice of my preparedness to work with the Attorney-General and the minister for Health, Family and Children’s Services in order to effect important reforms in this area. I will not outline all of the amendments I suggest, simply because there are too many, however, I will be submitting a number of detailed proposed reforms to the Attorney-General in the future and I implore him to consider them.
I provided a copy of that submission to a staff member in the Attorney-General’s office. I do not know what became of it. Labor had not been in office very long, so I will not be surprised if it was genuinely misplaced. I should say that the very submission I prepared and gave to the Labor Attorney-General’s staff was the same submission I prepared for the CLP and gave to Steve Dunham when he was Health minister, which I believe was early in 2001. I prepared that submission because I recall speaking with Steve Dunham in remarkably forceful terms about the need for the act to be changed in a number of respects. Unfortunately, what I prepared back then was not taken up. I have told many people, and I think Colin was one of them, that I do not care who amends the Community Welfare Act, as long as someone does. Therefore, while this government has talked about changing the act from about 2003-04, the fact is they have now done it and, for obvious reasons, I am very pleased that they have.
I did work in the area; I know it reasonably well. I repeat the fundamental proposition that I made on 16 October 2001 in my maiden speech: there can be no greater responsibility for governments than the protection of its children, our children. I was pleased when I saw the bill when it was introduced in August.
I have talked to the minister at length about the bill. Our discussions have been frank and reasonably fruitful. I do not propose to outline those discussions on the Parliamentary Record, because not everything politicians do and say needs to be published or publicised. It is the case that some of the changes I proposed to the bill have been made, as is evidenced by the amendments we see today. I thank the minister very much for her pragmatic and courteous approach to our discussions.
I must, however, say on the Parliamentary Record that there are still many more parts of the bill that need to be changed. I say that even before the amendments and the bill that we pass today will filter down to the people who work in the area. Some of the changes are not insubstantial, and lengthy redrafting is required. I have conveyed this to the minister before today, but thought it appropriate to say it for the purposes of this debate. It is disappointing that today we are going to pass legislation about child protection that is less than perfect. However, I emphasise that I have adopted what I regard as a very pragmatic approach to this bill and our support of it today.
Despite my concerns, we will support the bill. First, Madam Speaker, it is because some of the changes, though not all, I had discussed with the minister have been made. Second, and perhaps more importantly, there is a spirit of goodwill between the minister and I about the bill and the issue of child protection. I am confident that, together, we can get it right, but it will take some time and significant effort by us both. However, I feel certain that we can do it. Therefore, although I am a little disappointed, some progress has been made as a result of our discussions, I commit to working with her when the redrafting occurs which, I believe, should be sooner rather than later. But I commit to working with her.
I genuinely and very sincerely thank the minister for, as I said, the pragmatic and courteous approach she has taken in relation to this matter and the very constructive relationship we have built up on this issue. It is the most constructive relationship I have had with a minister of the Labor government since I have been here. Thank you and I wish you well.
______________________
Visitors
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of staff from the Department of Family and Community Services, and also Mr Colin Dyer, who is known to me and was, in fact, an advisor to me when I was the Health Minister and Minister for Family and Community Services. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I also draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of students from Year 7 Marrara Christian College, accompanied by Ms Sarah Livingston. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
_______________________
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 Parliament House program for visitors. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Care and Protection of Children Bill
(Serial 112)
(Serial 112)
Continued from earlier this day.
Ms McCARTHY (Arnhem): Madam Speaker, it is, indeed, a great pleasure to be able to support the minister’s Care and Protection of Children Bill. I would like to reflect a little over the last four to six months in regards to many of the issues that have come about over the care and protection of children, starting first with the Little Children are Sacred report. I know the member for Araluen, the Leader of the Opposition, mentioned in her response this morning how historic today is in regard to the Care and Protection of Children Bill. There are a number of issues of historical significance today.
The first area that I focus on is to draw attention to the good work of the minister with her statement and her dedication to wanting to see the lives of our children in our communities and across the Northern Territory improve for the better. It is evident when you read through the amendments of the Care and Protection of Children Bill just how compassionate the minister is in wanting to see these changes genuinely work for the better on the ground.
I would like to start with the Little Children are Sacred report and quote from Pat Anderson and Rex Wild who put a tremendous amount of work in to the last 12 months going around to 45 communities to listen to the concerns of families, individuals and to children as they travelled across the Territory. Throughout this report that we refer to – and it seems to be referred to many times by politicians right across this country and, indeed, media commentators and organisations who want to make any references to the federal intervention that has taken place. This is what it is all about: the Little Children are Sacred report. I bring the Assembly back to these points to remember why it is that we are on the road that we are, and what it is that we are trying to achieve.
Rex Wild and Pat Anderson said:
- The need for children to be protected against all forms of exploitation because of their vulnerability and immaturity first appeared in the 1924 League of Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, proclaims that childhood is entitled to special care and assistance. The United Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child (1959) further promotes the need to extend particular care to the child.
The adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1989 provides a clear statement of the rights of, and special treatment for, the child. The preamble of the Convention on the Rights of the Child reiterates the declaration by stating that the child, by reason of his or her physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection. The convention also states that in all actions concerning children, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.
When I look back on this, and I had a good look at how it is we have come where we are, I remind the parliament that it is because of the Little Children are Sacred report that we come together here today to push for changes. One of the main things that I am especially excited about when I look at this bill is the Commissioner for Children. I have to say, on reading through the papers, that it is that particular aspect of this bill that I am absolutely enthusiastic about, because I know for a fact, in particular in my communities in Arnhem, that our children need to know that there is a way forward for them. Our families need to know that we, as a government in the Northern Territory and, indeed, this parliament of the Northern Territory, is putting out exactly what it says it is going to do; that is, create a genuine and sincere future for our children out there.
The Commissioner for Children is a first here, and it is going to be a momentous task for whoever that person is going to be and, indeed, a special task for that person. I put to the parliament and, indeed, the minister, the way I would like to see that role played out on the ground for our children in the communities.
The first thing begins with education, and I am not talking just about schooling here. I will get to that in a moment. This is about the promotion of the Commissioner for Children. We need to ensure that this particular role of the commissioner is a role that is well understood right across the Northern Territory; that even the youngest of children is aware that they have someone who is looking out for their welfare, their concerns. That there is someone a parent, a sister, a brother, or an elder in the community who has a concern with the way any welfare agencies are working, or not working in this particular case, can go to, very similar, I suspect, to the Ombudsman for Health and other areas where we have Ombudsmen. We do need to have this Commissioner for Children, a task that is fundamental in ensuring that our children do have a real chance to become the people that we want them to become with the opportunities that every child needs to have in this country. That is the right to be able to sleep at night safely, to have a bed, to know that they are safe in a home that does not have a leaky roof, broken doors, holes in the windows that allow the rain to come in in the Wet Season or the dust to blow in in the Centre storms in the middle of the night, or snakes, animals or creatures of any kind that can come in to make that home an uncertain place for that child.
These are the rights of any child in this country, and in our communities, those rights are no different and no less important for those children. It is the right of knowing that that child can get up in the morning and go to a school where teachers want to be there and are able to teach those children in an environment and a classroom that is adequately resourced for those children; where a teacher can give the amount of time that is required for that child so that that child can grow and have those opportunities. If a child is speaking a number of different languages, they should have the access to be able to learn a Western education without being told to sit in the back of the room simply because they do not understand English.
I place so much hope in this commissioner, Madam Speaker. I place so much hope that, whoever this advocate is going to be for our children, that advocate must have the tremendous support of this parliament and, indeed, the whole NT community, because we are going to need so much help here to make the biggest inroads that we need to make to turn this around.
If we want to talk about the historical aspects of today, we only need to look at the last 48 hours, the last three or four days, to realise how quickly things can change. In this case, things are changing. We have Prime Minister elect, Kevin Rudd, in Canberra and, for the Northern Territory Labor government, that is the most wonderful position to have: to know that we can now proceed to talk with a government in Canberra which will meet us in partnership, meet us halfway, and will listen to the parliamentarians of the very Territory that they have intervened into. We have been given incredible hope by this change.
One of the things that happened on the 21 June this year, was the former Prime Minister, John Howard, pushed his way into the Northern Territory and said: ‘This is going to happen’. The bush members of this parliament went out to all our communities, not to drive fear into our communities. We went out to our communities to explain as best we could the 500 pieces of paper in legislation that went through the federal parliament without so much as discussion or inclusion of the Aboriginal people of the Northern Territory. We had to go out there because the fear that was there was not put there by the bush members of this parliament. The fear was out there because, when any intervention takes place in this country, it is much bigger than blaming it on one or two people; it is about the massive social and political change of this country’s landscape.
Nowhere in the history of the Northern Territory have we had a major intervention on this scale. Because of the different complexities of that intervention, dealing with alcohol, housing, health, local government, and leasing of land, all of these issues centring around our communities, we needed to ensure we could best explain what was going on. Let me tell you, Madam Speaker, one of the things that we knew about this intervention is that something had to happen for the better. Something had to happen for the better for our communities. Every person knew this. You did not have to be a certain colour, a certain age or live in a certain place to know that we are in crisis in those communities, and we need to do something to make a difference out there.
However, what was missing within that recognition of that need, was that it does not matter when you make a decision and you think that it is the right decision for a particular group of people; what matters is: have you included those people? Have they been included in the discussion? Are they included in the process? Are they included in any discussion and dialogue about how they see the future? On all those points, no discussion, no inclusion, no dialogue, no consultation. What that does to people, and it does not matter who they are, is that it disempowers them to such a degree that there is no hope, no sense of self-respect, all dignity is taken away from them, and any feeling of empowerment is absolutely squashed in the process.
How can that be a good thing? How can taking the dignity away from people, disempowering people to such a degree, be any good to anyone? I am filled with incredible hope because we have a Deputy Chief Minister who is putting forward a bill with absolute compassion, who knows that on the ground this is vital. It is more than just social and political change. This is at the core of the humanity, the humanness, the human nature of each one of us; when you strip people of their fundamental rights to speak for themselves, to take away what little they have.
In my communities alone in Jilkminggan, Manyallaluk, Barunga, and Beswick, those communities sit there in stunned silence. Manyallaluk, Barunga and Beswick have lost their CDEP and what little money they will have from that. Of 200-odd jobs that came through CDEP, 45 or thereabouts are supposed to be full-time work. We are supposed to be grateful for that? What happens to the remainder who have no money whatsoever? Of the 200, 45 have full-time jobs. We are only three weeks away from Christmas; what do they do for their children?
The people of Manyallaluk want to get into Katherine; the nearest store to them is Katherine. They have to get a taxi, which costs about $300 to $400. How much money do they get on CDEP? Well, they do not get CDEP any more. How is Christmas going to be for those kids? I heard after this federal election that the Howard government at the time used this intervention as a political means of getting themselves in power. Yet, we in the Northern Territory parliament had desperately wanted so much to work in partnership with them in the hope, in the really vain hope, that we could make a difference. Now, they are gone, the winds have changed, the cyclone has swept through Canberra. They are gone. Do you know who is left behind? Those little kids there, they are left behind. Their parents are left behind. Who is worrying about them now?
With school holidays soon, departments are closing up to go on their Christmas break, and people have their plans to go away somewhere. But for these kids, they have nowhere else to go. They have no money to go anywhere now.
At the national NAIDOC rally, the first and only thing I said about the intervention on the record is this: after all this money, and there is a hell of a lot of money that has been thrown at the Northern Territory because of this intervention, there is one thing I do ask Prime Minister-Elect Kevin Rudd: do not touch that money. Do not take one dollar away from this intervention. Do not touch it. That money needs to go exactly where it is needed. The difference this time, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, is that we are going to help you find a better way to do this for our people, a way that is inclusive, not exclusive; a way that empowers, not disempowers, that reaches out and gives back in return.
At the NAIDOC rally I said the greatest tragedy that could come out of this federal intervention when the eyes of this country were upon us, where millions of dollars were being suggested at the time to be thrown at us, and the eyes of the world were watching what was going on here in the Northern Territory, would be that nothing changes for the better. It is incumbent on every single politician in this House and every single politician in the federal parliament to pull together and ensure we do not leave those people in Manyallaluk, Barunga and Beswick alone, deserted, helpless, and vulnerable. It is a situation that we, as a Labor government, find abhorrent. We have sworn to defend the most vulnerable and disadvantaged in the Northern Territory. We, as a parliament, must remind every parliamentarian in Canberra of their duty to the most vulnerable and disadvantaged. I am certain that our federal members, Warren Snowdon and Senator Trish Crossin will be doing just that.
With regards to the vote that happened out in the bush, even with the great sense of disempowerment out there, was a small breath of hope. I drove to Ngukurr for the mobile polling and I pulled in at Urapunga on my way. As I pulled into Urapunga I had to cross the Roper River, then the Wilton River and, then, there was Ngukurr. I talked with all the community members. ‘How are you all going? How are you feeling? How are the children?’ We had major issues there with the children and the school. The last time I had spoken to the staff and the students at that school was only two months ago. I said to them: ‘Do you know that if a child does not come to school for more than three days of the term once the quarantine starts here, there will be a 100% of your money taken from you?. Do you know that as a parent? Do you know that if your child does not go to school for more than three days, you will not have any money? Your monies will be taken away from you? Instead, you will have a 100% in a voucher system to go to a shop. Do you know that?’ ‘No, I do not know that’ said the families to me.
My worry was for the teachers as well as the families because, if there is no communication there, then the teachers get blamed if they have signed off the kids are not at school. Then, the parents come wondering why they did not get the money. All of this is a part of that intervention. Now we have an opportunity to talk to the new Prime Minister of this country and say: ‘If you are going to do this, you have to do this well’.
We need interpreters, we need language, we need information and communication. If we are going to help our children, we need these things placed in each of our communities to change, give hope and maintain that hope for the future. Set up these agencies in our communities that will help, so that this Commissioner for Children knows that he or she has their finger on the pulse in places like Barunga and Beswick, or down in the Centre at Papunya or Mutitjulu. I am putting so much hope in this Commissioner for Children, and I am putting much greater hope in this parliament, that we do not let this federal intervention be the greatest tragedy that ever occurred in the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, in closing, I say that, for all children in the Northern Territory, any of these changes that will create a better life for them in the obligations of agencies, the needs of the CEO, the requirements of the CEO to explore, to investigate, to ensure that the children are being cared for, looked after adequately, safely and are receiving the full entitlement that they should as an Australian child in this wonderful country, that we all look for equality, dignity and respect. I commend the statement to the House.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I do not intend to talk about the intervention. I believe that is another matter for another day. However, I congratulate the government on introducing this bill. It has been a long process. I thank the officers for their patience and their opportunity for us to comment on it. I guess the proof will be in the pudding when we see what happens. The most important thing is: how many children have you saved? How many children have you rescued by your intervention, or have you turned a blind eye? I hope you do not do that. Perhaps this awareness has been raised to such an extent now that everyone will keep that in mind. As an ex-teacher and ex-principal, I see the number of children that have been rescued because of the intervention through mandatory reporting by teachers, and there is some satisfaction in knowing that.
I ask the minister about a few parts of the bill. I am not quite sure when you have the powers of the CEO, does it set a time limit at all for the CEO to respond? Quite often, one of the frustrations of people who do report things to FACS is the length of time it takes to process or to respond. It can be due to all sorts of circumstances. However, quite often, there are dire consequences if there is not a process that enables the system to move quickly. When the minister is responding, I hope she can give me some sort of response on that.
I also want to know whether this bill covers mandatory reporting of children in child-related employment. Quite often, you see children who have huge responsibilities or, in my mind, are being exploited. Does this bill, in fact, cover that aspect of child-related employment as well?
I say these things because it is such a huge bill; I must admit I am not completely au fait with all of it. I doubt whether anyone is because there have been so many amendments and changes as we have gone along that I admit the minister probably knows very easily the answers to some of the questions I may be asking.
As far as I am concerned, child protection is a right. It is a right for every child in our community. Although, sometimes, it puts us in terribly difficult positions, I believe it is very important that we take on that responsibility, no matter what children they are. It is so easy to not want to notice, or not want to get involved but, along the way, we really need to be involved.
In the previous welfare legislation, in section 80 of the NT Community Welfare Act, there was a duty of minister to hear complaints. This has been raised by the member for Nelson who, unfortunately, is at a funeral again today. He has raised the issue of some foster children who were taken away from foster parents. I am sure the minister is probably familiar with that particular case. His concern is that, sometimes, foster parents are put in situations by vexatious claims on the parts of neighbours or relatives or whatever. He wants some reassurance that those foster parents also have a right of reply, or right of appeal, to speak to their case. Without going into details about that particular case, perhaps the minister can respond. Is there written into this act the same as is written into the Community Welfare Act the right of appeal by foster parents?
There is a couple in Alice Springs, Doug Mellors and his wife, who have been fostering Aboriginal children for years and years. They do a tremendous job. I noticed in the act it talks very much about placing children in the same family or a family that has that same culture. However, quite often in Alice Springs we find that is not so. Even though I know FACS tries so hard to do it, we often need to be aware that, sometimes, that is not always the best option. Sometimes, the best option is to find them people who will take these children in and love them as their own. That particular couple, who are quite elderly now, are an amazing example of what people can do and how they can change children’s lives. If anyone should be rewarded for their efforts over many years, it should be this particular couple. I would hate to think how many children have passed through their hands and they have cared for in such a loving way.
Minister, if you can respond to me about the right of appeal of foster parents who may be put in a situation where they are accused of not doing the right thing. In this particular case you know, the children were taken away, even though the children themselves were desperate to stay in that situation. Sometimes, the voices of children need to be heard a lot more loudly than we give them credit. Children are not fools and they very much understand what is going on.
I remember a case where a young girl would occasionally just become so difficult to handle. She would do extreme things and we were all tearing our hair trying to find out why she would do such outrageous things. It was, obviously, her way of crying for help. It eventually came out that, every time she acted in this way, it was after an incident of sexual abuse by her stepfather. We take a while to recognise the signs and symptoms of a harmed child. It is not easy for every person on the street to be able to identify that, because they really do not recognise the signals that are happening. It is all part of a process of making people very sensitive to the world and the families around us. I, like all of you, get extremely frustrated at times at what I see as injustices occurring and the silence coming from the authorities or from those who should be intervening.
I hope this act puts everyone on notice: people in the community who can identify what is happening; the services available; the CEO; the minister; and the Children’s Commissioner. It is a big step you have taken, minister. I believe that, probably as time goes by, loopholes may appear in this bill that may need to be corrected. However, I am quite sure you have us with you with the intent and the spirit, because we certainly do want to ensure we put in legislation that provides a better life for children out there.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Care and Protection of Children Bill. Not only as the member for Macdonnell, but also as a member for this parliament and the Chair of the Select Committee on Substance Abuse.
Members will be aware of the committee’s report which was tabled during the October sittings, and debated both then and yesterday. It was the culmination of a long process of inquiry during which the committee met with, spoke to and heard many people who are dealing with these very issues on a daily basis, both in Central Australia and the Top End. The result was that the committee has made a total of 15 major recommendations, many of which cut across the very essence of what this bill is meant to achieve.
In speaking to the bill, I wish, in the first instance, to say how strongly I endorse the provisions of the bill and how keenly I appreciate its importance for the welfare of my people and that of the people of the Territory. Extension of the requirements for mandatory reporting is important, so also to increase clarity of the roles and responsibilities of persons required to report instances of child neglect and abuse though two other new internal review processes and the establishment of a Children’s Commissioner, as well as the Child Death Review and Prevention Committee, and the newly clarified responsibility of the CEO of the department administering the act. These, amongst other things, allow for enhanced flexibility, tailoring solutions to suit particular circumstances, and provide better, clearer lines of authority. These are all the things that will empower us to protect all our children who are the future of the Northern Territory. There is nothing more significant we can do in our lives than that.
In the second reading speech, the minister noted a high level of injury suffered by children in the Territory from various causes and, to my mind, unacceptably high infant mortality rates. We all know that this applies especially to indigenous children, and it is an enormous tragedy and indictment upon our society. I believe the bill represents a powerful set of interlocking measures which will create better protection for all children in the Territory and an enhanced set of formal processes that signal to everyone involved the way to do the right thing by some of the most vulnerable and precious members of our society: little children.
That is why it is so important that we all in this Chamber, as well as in our dealings with the federal government, give this bill our unanimous support. In this and related matters we need to put our differences aside so that we can deal with the current crisis, a crisis which reflects badly upon each and every member of Australian society. As the saying goes, bad things happen when good people do nothing. Let us be good people who do something. Let us end the ongoing tragedy we see here in the Territory. I do not think there is anyone here who doubts my passion on this matter.
Today I am inviting all my fellow members to share that passion and act upon it, for we know that this is so important for the welfare of the whole Territory, now and into the future. We are all aware of the present crisis. It has been put on the front page, where I believe it rightfully belongs. By recent events, our hearts and our compassions must be engaged. However, looking into the longer term we also need to fix these things for the most hard-headed of reasons. If you look at the demographic structure of the Territory population, it is as plain as day that the Territory has an expanding young indigenous population and an ageing non-indigenous population. We need to expand our tax base to make that sustainable, and the only way we can do that is to get more of these young people into productive work and give them a reason for believing in their right to a positive future.
The Northern Territory, like the rest of Australia, is experiencing skill shortages that are on record as a major barrier to growth. We need those young people; they are a major resource for the Territory. We would be fools if we did not find a way to make the most of them. It is on their shoulders that the Territory will rely in the years to come. However, they will not be able to rise to this expectation if we do not live up to our responsibilities to look after them now.
Yes, this bill is very important. This was impressed upon me through my involvement in the work of the Select Committee on Substance Abuse. Members will be aware from reading our report that there are many things we found which have a strong bearing on the welfare of children and families in the Territory; in particular, those occasions when we heard about young kids who slipped between the net and came to harm. Hearing these stories was one reason why the select committee has been so strong in recommending enhanced levels of coordination between agencies. It also lies behind the recommendation that agencies do whatever it takes to recruit to key positions which, together with other service providers, creates a continuity of care for young people affected by substance abuse.
There are many children and young people in the Territory who are hugely affected by substance abuse, directly or indirectly. Even around Darwin, they can be seen on the streets and often causing havoc at all times of day and night, simply because they do not have a safe and secure place to go that is not wracked by substance abuse and all it entails. Their right to security and an expectation of a positive future in life is impacted upon by substance abuse, as well as those other issues which combine to create dysfunction in the community as was comprehensively reported by the committee. No one in this Chamber should, by now, have any doubts about the importance and severity of those risks. The select committee found that children and young people out there in the community face huge challenges; that so much money in communities spent on drugs and alcohol is just one of the negative consequences they face. When that happens, lack of proper nutrition compounds problems with housing, education, health and employment. We found that these all add up to a set of structural factors that put these young people, and particularly the women who care for them, at significant risk of harm.
Of course as the Little Children are Sacred report so clearly showed, alcohol is a direct factor in the high rate of child abuse. That, too, must add to our resolve to fix substance abuse in the Territory; to put in place comprehensive arrangements that reduce supply, limit harm and treat people dependent upon alcohol and other drugs. These are tried and tested ways to reduce substance abuse, and the Territory has the good fortune to have many people out there putting them into practice. They need our support and the message needs to be spread throughout the Territory so that we can make some concerted progress on the problem.
Drawing attention to these issues does not take away from the intention of the bill before the Assembly today, rather, it complements it. However the select committee argued in its report, we also need to add to it to fill in the other gaps if we are really serious about the welfare of children and young people. Children and young people, together with their carers, need a reason to hope and not to turn to drugs and alcohol. They need opportunity in front of them so they can choose to lead meaningful lives, opportunities that others in our community and others in mainstream Australia may take for granted. All our children and young people should take these things for granted; it is what we owe them. We can do nothing about this. We can provide more continuity in funding, distribute our resources more effectively based on better information, the good people and strong programs out there will be in a better position to follow through. With better and easier access to funding schemes, these programs will be able to do more prevention work leading, again, to better outcomes. They can build on their successes and so can the young people in their care.
Here we are talking about breaking down cycles and building a future for our children. The select committee’s report suggests it is important for our efforts as government to achieve better coordination when it comes to substance abuse in the Territory. It is also important that local communities are fully involved in matters that affect their future. Keeping community ownership is critical to achieving success, whether it be with substance abuse, education or employment. That is the way of the future, the way to a Territory that sees its children growing up proud, resilient and healthy, well equipped to take their rightful place in our Territory and Australia of the future.
This bill on the care and protection of children is important as a package of measures designed to work together to make inroads on a difficult problem. It is a model for how we should go about tackling such things. It also fits in to a bigger picture - a picture we need to keep in mind if we want things to be better for our young people. We all know that young people should grow up and, when the time comes, bury their elders. However, too often, elders have to bury the young. As often as we do that, we bury our future.
I call on all my colleagues here in the Assembly to stand behind not only this bill, but other solutions we need in order to overcome this present crisis. Then we can put things how they should be, with our young people looking forward to their place in a better Territory.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I want to talk about Aboriginal children with disabilities that are abused, and young Aboriginal girls with disabilities who are abused. I have often asked myself: where are those children’s rights? They are already debilitated in communicating in society and the way they present themselves. I know of such a girl, where she has been abused on many occasions. I often ask myself and other people: where are their rights?
I close by saying something and putting it on record. I am very happy to hear the minister’s strong support for the condemnation of any individual organisation that stands in the way of protecting children from sexual or other abuse. It is so important that the expectation is that all evidence is followed and all people involved are forced to work cooperatively to bring these perpetrators of abuse to our vulnerable children to justice. I ask the minister again to reiterate her stance and place on public record that any person who stands in the way of protecting our children, either directly or indirectly, should be condemned and should not be in places of power within communities, within families or within government, federal, Territory or local. People in power have a great responsibility to protect the vulnerable, the young, and innocence of our children. I commend the bill to this House.
Ms LAWRIE (Planning and Lands): Mr Deputy Speaker, I join with members of this parliament in congratulating the Minister for Family and Community Services for seeing a passage today, which is an historic day, of an incredibly important, critical piece of legislation that, by its name, absolutely indicates its intent. It is about the care and the protection of our children. As we have heard in debate today in this Chamber, this legislation has been a long time coming. However, I know, as the minister who previously has had carriage of this, we absolutely wanted to get it right. This is critical legislation and, I believe, one of the most important pieces of legislation that we have seen in this House, certainly since I have been a member since 2001.
The consultation has been extensive. Extensive consultation really does reflect the important nature of this legislation. There have been information sessions right around the Territory with all the stakeholder groups. The draft bill was released for discussion. Some 70 groups made submissions. There have been numerous subsequent meetings with groups such as the Law Society. We had Professor Dorothy Scott, an eminent expert nationally, overview the legislation and give us recommendations. Professor Dorothy Scott gave the legislation, in its draft form, a very positive tick, but had some very constructive advice on where it could be improved even further, and those improvements were taken on board.
Then the legislation was delayed to allow the Little Children are Sacred report to come down with its recommendations so that we could assess how those recommendations would affect the legislation.
There has been a lot of debate in the Chamber, but what I propose to do is step us back through now what the legislation contains. This new legislation offers a more comprehensive approach to the protection and prevention of harm to children. The key differences to the current act are the strengthening of provisions to support families to care for their children. It extends support for young people leaving care and it gives powers to move a child to a safe place. The powers under the act are vested in the CEO and not the minister. However, the minister retains overall responsibility and powers. The Northern Territory government’s responsibilities and the minister’s powers are defined.
It introduces a screening system for child-related employment. It broadens the scope of regulated children’s services. It provides for the establishment of review teams to examine the operations of the child protection and care system, and a committee to review child deaths. It introduces guiding principles to assist the interpretation and implementation. It provides for the establishment of a Children’s Commissioner. It maintains universal mandatory reporting of any suspected child abuse and neglect, both harm and exploitation, or where a sexual offence is suspected of being committed. Anyone reporting in good faith is covered for any criminal or civil liability.
The providers of child-related services must ensure staff are trained and know about their reporting responsibilities. It maintains the Aboriginal child placement principle. It maintains provisions about the safe employment of children.
The statutory child protection activity within the act ensures that the act allows for a broader range of responses to: reports about a child believed to be suffering harm or in need of protection, or where there is concern about a child’s wellbeing; make inquiries and conduct investigations; coordinate assistance and arrange a mediation conference; take a child into provisional protection or temporary custody; apply for an assessment and/or protection order; place children; and monitor and review their care.
The act makes it clear that service providers must give information to FACS or police when they are conducting inquiries or investigations. It makes it clear that FACS has the ability to share information with NGOs and other government agencies involved with the child or family, where it supports the protection of a child. It gives new powers to police and authorised officers to move a child to a safe place. It gives new powers of restraint, search and seizure.
Regarding children in care and the court processes, this new legislation puts some current policy requirements and best practice standards into legislation. It provides for mediation and case planning. It maintains the family matters court. It makes it an offence to publish family matters court outcomes or proceedings, or to publish the identify of a child involved in an alleged or proven sex abuse matter.
Review teams are to be established to review the operation of services under Part 2, the child protection and care provisions. Review teams can make recommendations to the CEO and monitor the implementation of those recommendations. The membership of the team is defined in the act and accountability measures for the child protection system.
An important aspect of this legislation today provides for the young people who are leaving care. Currently, support to a young person who has been in the guardianship of the minister ceases when a child turns 18. The act extends an offer of support to a young person who is leaving care up to the age of 25.
Importantly, it provides for screening for child-related employment. The act makes provisions in relation to the range and scope of employment, the obligations of the employee, the obligations of the employer, and clearance by the screening authority. Categories of child-related employment are defined in the act. Employment arrangements include: acting under contract; being a member of a board of management; and a volunteer of an organisation or services that perform child-related activities. Parents volunteering for a group where their child is a member are excluded provided there are no overnight stays. Contact with children includes physical, verbal, written or communication through electronic means such as telephone or Internet.
The screening authority will receive information, make the decision and inform the applicant whether they may enter into child-related employment. Exemptions and appeals processes will exist. Generally, they will assess on the basis of whether the person poses a risk to children, but prescribed offences mean automatic exclusions; that is, no clearance. The authority will be auspiced by police and will be known as Safe NT. Safe NT will conduct and assess all employment-related criminal history checks in the Territory. Fees for all criminal history checks will be the same: $50 for employed persons; $5 for volunteers.
Importantly, the act provides for children’s services to be regulated. Children’s services are defined as: services provided to children of less than 13 years; and away from the child’s usual place of residence; and provided by a person who has been given the responsibility to care for the child; and provided as an ongoing operation for more than two hours a week. The following children’s services are required to be licensed: childcare centres and non-government kindergartens; outside school hours care; agencies brokering home-based care, that is, family day care schemes, disability and education group homes, and private home-based childcare agencies.
The following children’s services will have to register with a licensed officer or the department: an individual home-based carer; the provider of short-term care provided in close proximity to parents such as crche at the gym; the provider of time-limited childcare for a specific event under five days; for example, childcare at a conference. Some children’s services in specified locations, predominantly in remote areas, can operate if they have an agreement with the department. These are JET crches, childcare centres, and outside school hours care.
Importantly, the act provides for the establishment of a Children’s Commissioner. The Children’s Commissioner will be an independent statutory appointment for five years, renewable. The role of the commissioner will be to investigate complaints regarding services provided to a protected child; monitor how services respond to the commissioner’s findings; monitor this act as it pertains to protected children; monitor the implementation of government responses to the sex abuse inquiry; and annual and other reports to be tabled in the Legislative Assembly by the minister.
Also importantly, the bill provides for the establishment of a Child Death Review and Prevention Committee. It will research all child deaths from all causes. It will maintain a database. It will make recommendations regarding appropriate policy, and a report will be provided to the Northern Territory government and tabled in parliament. There will be about 10 to 16 members on the Child Death Review and Prevention Committee that will be convened and supported by the Department of Health and Community Services.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank those in the gallery who I know have given an enormous effort to ensuring that we have this legislation before the House today. There is an enormous commitment by the Department of Family and Community Services to providing a contemporary and robust child protection system in the Territory. They have done the best that they could do with welfare legislation that was not contemporary. The legislation that we have before us today provides them with a range of tools, powers and, importantly, checks and balances within its own system to improve the safety of our children and, importantly and specifically, the safety of the children who are in the care of the system. It provides support for children who are leaving the care system. We know that children who have been in the foster care system often underachieve in education, and often go on to lead very constructive lives and outcomes. Providing that ongoing support through to the age of 25 is critically important to giving them the best chance at life.
The government has responsibilities here. We have a responsibility to continue to resource the child protection agency, to continue to provide support in the non-government sector, to extend those supports right across the Territory, which the government has been doing and will continue to do. It is critically important in ensuring that we have the right supports within our remote communities, particularly because they are, at that point, the most vulnerable regarding the conditions of poverty in which many people live.
This is a comprehensive change to the way we protect our children in the Territory. It has not been rushed. It has been considered. It has passed through several different iterations taking on board the information and advice coming back from people intrinsically involved in it; for example, the Law Society and others. The professionalism and dedication I have seen from the staff of the Department of Family and Community Services has been exceptional and I sincerely thank them for their commitment. I thank the staff who have worked in the minister’s office as well, because they have put an enormous amount of energy and dedication into achieving what we will, hopefully, see today, which is the passage of the legislation.
I commend the minister for starting the process. It is quite appropriate that she be the minister to complete this. We all know a robust child protection system is an evolving system. It is a system that embraces contemporary practice. It is a system that provides training, professional development, support, extension of services, and involves a robust interchange between advocacy groups which, by nature, need to exist, for example the Foster Carers Association, and to work with people at that grassroots level.
It is my hope that the tools in here provide the professionals in the agency with an improved system. I am fairly confident of that. I also hope that the government continues its reform agenda in caring for our children. Again, I am fairly confident of that, particularly with the Deputy Chief Minister at the helm.
However, at the end of the day, the care and protection of our children is everybody’s responsibility. A system is only as good as the society in which we live. Yes, we have mandatory reporting in the Territory. Yes, mandatory reporting will continue. However, the system relies on everyone in every community not allowing children to be abused. If anyone is concerned about a child they should report that to the Department of Family and Community Services or, indeed, the police, because there has been a sea change in how government can respond.
We have a task force which is combined resources of police and the FACS intake team. I challenge someone to say that there is a report that goes unanswered, because we have a robust task force. The links now that exist between police and the intake team mean that there is the investigation grunt to follow through on those notifications; there is the information shared between those agencies that has meant a greater understanding of the risk involved in each of those notifications. It is up to every single member of the Northern Territory community, whether they live in a remote community, in our regional centres, or in our urban centres. Do not walk past a situation where a child is at risk. We have a system that has been resourced to take the notifications and follow up. Today, with the passage of this, we have the contemporary legislation and framework in which to more appropriately deal with those notifications.
Madam Speaker, I commend the legislation to the House.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Madam Speaker, I support the bill before the Assembly. I recognise those members of the department who are here to see this bill passed. It is important legislation. The legislation in this area has not had such a major revision as this for quite some time. I believe everyone in the area would accept it is well overdue.
Provisions such as this and major rewritings of areas of law provide the opportunity to incorporate the updated best practice in any area. This bill provides for the best practice principles in the area of child protection.
I acknowledge the statements of other members of the Assembly, especially the opposition who have given their support to this bill as a whole notwithstanding there may be some particular areas where they have differences. I believe the Assembly is united and unanimous in the view that this is a vast improvement on what was previously available. It is a credit, as other speakers have said, to the dedication of staff who have done the groundwork. It is also a credit to the parliamentary draftspeople, because pulling together threads of an area such as child protection and turning that into legislative clauses is no mean feat, especially when you look at the size of this particular legislation and the difficult areas that it covers. The body of work behind it is certainly a veritable mountain. I am sure, even if this is a large bill, that the amount of work that has gone into it is probably quite small by comparison with that effort.
The Martin government, and now the Henderson Labor government, have always been committed to consultation with community and stakeholder groups. I understand that, between July 2003 and February 2005, there where several phases of consultation, including the distribution of the draft bill. The level of consultation is reflected in the fact that there are many amendments that have been made to the first draft, and even the draft that was first tabled here as part of the second reading speech. That consultation goes on. I am positive that there will be further revision. As this bill becomes an act and enforced, and we see it in operation, there will be further amendment that is needed. The area that it deals with, if nothing else, guarantees that it will need continuous observation to see what its effects are on the ground and to ensure that it delivers the promise of the objects of the act set out in clause 4.
I understand the board of inquiry made some specific recommendations, and these were implemented through the legislation, new provisions providing for child-related employment screening; a Children’s Commissioner, which I believe is an extremely important step; and the Child Death Review and Prevention Committee.
The new legislation offers a more comprehensive approach to the protection and prevention of harm to children. From the briefing I received, and from as much an attempt to get across this act that you can really make in the short time I have had it before me, some of the key differences, I understand, are the strengthening of provisions to support families to care for children; extending support for young people leaving care; and giving power to move children to a safe place. I do not claim to be an expert in this area, not even close, but I believe the area of support for young people in leaving care has been an area that has need more attention. As I said, there are many great steps forward in this and one of those, particularly, is that extension of support for young people, because it is difficult for them coming from a position of care and then trying to build and regulate their life without that support mechanism.
The establishment of review teams to examine the operations of the child protection and care system, and a committee to review child deaths, will have an impact in ensuring that our legislation meet the needs that it describes; that it has the positive effect that we hope. I listened to the contribution of my colleague, the member for Arnhem. If you read through reports like Little Children are Sacred, you realise that what many children in the community, thankfully, have is not available to all children in community. There are a great many who do not have that protection and care that others enjoy. It is important social legislation to try to provide that and, at the same time, not disrupt unduly family relationships.
There has been a raft of changes through a number of Australian jurisdictions in regard to those who are employed in areas involving the care of children. This legislation incorporates that. We live in a time where the issues, dangers and care is required around the appointment of people working with children. Our society has become more aware of those problems; the need to ensure proper screening and that appropriate people can still obtain the employment, and that the system attempts to guard against those who may not be appropriate. Unfortunately, the media has been littered with stories where safeguards have not been enough. I do not need to talk about those instances for too long. However, just how careful we, as a community, need to be with the people into whose care we are placing our children is much better recognised now than it was in the past.
I congratulate the minister and former Minister for Family and Community Services for producing this legislation. Again, I thank the staff at Family and Community Services for their hard work and input. I hope it provides the extra protection that it is designed to provide. I will certainly be most receptive to hearing from people on the ground as to how they have seen its operation, once it has been in place for a little while and we can assess it. Congratulations to the ministers. I commend the bill to the House.
Mr CONLAN (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, I have been feverishly making notes throughout this debate. Unfortunately, I have not made enough notes to really do this legislation justice when you look at the amount of effort that has gone into it by the department. Have a look at some of the bills that have been put before us over the last day or two, the transport amendment bill and the bill for the Planning Act, and then have a look at the size of the Care and Protection of Children Bill and the amount of effort that has gone into it. I could speak all day and still not do this justice. I congratulate the minister and the department staff who are here today on their efforts in putting this together.
I echo the thoughts of the Leader of the Opposition who said it is an historic day for the Northern Territory: the first time since 1984 that we have some new legislation to deal with this very serious issue. Obviously, the opposition supports this legislation. Again, I congratulate the minister and her department on the effort that they have gone to.
I have listened carefully to the debate and we agree and support all the comments made. I will respond to the comments by the member for Arnhem, who articulated very well the point that, with regard to the federal intervention, the very worst thing to come out of that federal intervention would be that nothing has changed, or that nothing will change. Despite criticisms of the intervention, if nothing has changed, then what is the point?
I know that the unseated minister, former federal Indigenous Affairs minister, Mal Brough, had a unique ability to rub people up the wrong way, but I do not think that you could doubt his commitment to the children of the Northern Territory. I echo his and the former Prime Minister, who has pleaded with our new Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, that he continue with this. As they both said in their concession speeches on Saturday night, it is not for them and it is not for some ideology, but it is for the children of the Northern Territory.
In my short time in the House, about three or four months, there has appeared to be a common theme in almost every single debate, despite what that debate is, and that it that it is the care and protection of children. If we do not have safe, healthy and educated kids, then we do not have a future as a society here in the Northern Territory. It seems to be an underlying theme in just about every debate and is, obviously, emphasised beautifully in this bill today.
Regardless of where our children live, whether it is in a remote community or in the suburbs, they are vulnerable, easy targets for predators, sexual and physical predators, and therefore they must be protected. These gutless predators are always finding new ways to abuse our kids. It is an ebb and flow, and that is why I welcome the review in 12 months by the minister to have a look at this and look at ways to improve that legislation if, in fact, it does need improving.
I have not gone through the bill as carefully as the Leader of the Opposition and, hence, my short time on my feet here today. However, I do believe her when she says that more work needs to be done. That is why I welcome the minister’s commitment to review it in 12 months time. No doubt, she will be talking to the Opposition Leader about that to see if there are ways that the act can be approved.
Madam Speaker, I wish them well. I am not on my feet long enough to do this justice, but I congratulate the minister and the department for the bill for the care and protection of children. Congratulations to the minister, and I wish her well.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Child Protection): Madam Speaker, as I said earlier, and certainly the former Minister for Family and Community Services and my colleague, the Leader of Government Business, said, getting to this point has been a long process. However, what we have arrived at today is just not a cold piece of lifeless legislation. It is a living document which will continue to grow and develop in the future. It is a living document because so many Territorians have put so much energy and passion into its creation across countless consultations, meetings, arguments and negotiations.
It has covered public servants from many different agencies, as well as representation and input from a plethora of non-government organisations, community groups and individuals. Thanking you all individually would be impossible. However, it is worth placing on the record that public and industry forums in 2003 in Alice Springs, Darwin, Jabiru and Palmerston involved many people. By 2005, 43 participants were involved. By 2005, participants in forums in Darwin, Ali Curung, Alice Springs, Hermannsburg, Borroloola, Jabiru, Katherine, Palmerston, Tennant Creek and Humpty Doo grew to over 420 people. Written submissions responding to the initial discussion paper in 2003 numbered 26 and, for the discussion draft in 2004-05, the list of written submissions grew to 60. This legislation is a living document because many Territorians put their hearts into such an important issue.
I thank all the individuals, organisations and public servants who made such valuable contributions. I could go through many of them, but thanking them all individually would be impossible. However, I do want to start with naming a few people. I, too, acknowledge Colin Dyer because I know of his long commitment to children’s services. I want to start with Barbara Kelly and the work that Barbara has done since the very start of this. She is pretty much the one who gave birth to this project. I thank and acknowledge Barbara before this parliament.
I also want to thank Anthony Burton from FACS who did a fantastic job. As the minister and also the former minister, for your leadership, your contribution to our office, we thank you. I thank Helen Crawford, Lee-anne Jarrett-Sims, David Richardson, Hilary Berry, Sylvia Cecchin, Kelvin Currie, Adam Tomison and Jenny Scott. In the Department of Justice, I also thank Robert Bradshaw and Jenni Daniel Yee. I am breaking a promise because he told me I should not mention him, but I want to give special thanks to Paul Wan from Parliamentary Counsel for the three years of hard and complicated work that he should be very proud of. When we were going through the second lot of amendments, meeting with Paul and just talking through and negotiating, these lawyers in Parliamentary Counsel can be hard sometimes. I acknowledge Paul Wan for the latest lot of amendments and what he has pushed through.
Before I get to all of my colleagues in this Chamber that contributed, I do thank you, Barbara, because I know the many times that we had discussions on this very early at the beginning. Going around the Territory and starting it, you have done a fantastic job. To see the end result from everybody within the department who has had a part to play in it, you have come up with a very contemporary, very fantastic piece of legislation. We know that we are going to have to, at some stage - and that is the commitment that I gave to this parliament - amend in 12 months time or look at what does need to be amended.
I thank the Leader of the Opposition for her summing up and her support, as I know she is fully committed to the issue in relation to child protection. The same as her, our private discussions will remain that. One thing is obvious: we both give full commitment to this. On both sides of this House, there is no one in this House who is not committed to doing our very best to legislate in favour of the care and protection of our children. As I said when I was presenting the amendments, I know there are some things that we are going to disagree on with detail. You did say that you wanted more work done. A lot of work has been done. As I said, and I made this very clear to parliament as well as to stakeholders outside of parliament, I am committed totally to looking at the review and the workings of the act 12 months after we have had it in place. While we agree to disagree on the details of this bill, we remain committed to truly making it work.
I was pleased that the member for Arnhem raised the issue of the Little Children are Sacred report and the insistence in that report to international human rights law as the basis of what we must do towards the care and protection of children. Similarly, I endorse the member for Arnhem’s passionate support for the Children’s Commissioner, and the absolute need for all Territorians to know of the existence and the work of the commissioner. I, too, place great faith in the potential work of the commissioner, and place utmost importance in the independence of the commissioner, and the role of the commissioner in reporting to parliament.
The member for Arnhem pointed out the obvious potential we now have with the federal Labor Rudd government in responding, in a constructive way, member for Greatorex, not in a destructive way. Let us move forward in a constructive way to re-making the intervention, even if it is called a generational plan for indigenous people. There has to be a better, more strategic way. This is what I often kept saying to the former federal minister, Mal Brough. If it is about protecting children, let us look at the areas where we do need to protect children - alcohol, grog in our communities and towns is a major issue. The scourge that is use and abuse of marijuana is another area that causes a lot of heartache. I am not against any parts of that intervention that goes towards protecting our children. We have a strong legislative framework in place, such as this bill. As I gave my commitment to the Leader of the Opposition, as we go along, when we put the Children’s Commissioner in place, we will have a look across the implementation, because the department has worked out an implementation plan as to the stage-by-stage months of the various initiatives under the act that we need to put in place. Once that gets going, we should be able to look at where the gaps are and what needs to be tweaked to make it a bit more workable.
We are all on the same page, and we all want to achieve the same thing, so we just need to work through. The former federal minister accused me of being out of touch with my community. I believe the last federal election result showed just how far he was out of touch with his community. However, this is not about politics. I believe that, in his own mind, he did want to fix up and look at the issue of indigenous affairs. I actually thanked Mal Brough when I saw him one day. Like the members for Arnhem and Macdonnell, I thanked him for putting indigenous affairs back under the national spotlight because, too often, our remote communities and some of the Aboriginal issues are forgotten.
My words regarding what I think about the intervention have been twisted through the media. I know what I think about the intervention. I have always said that the imperative is to save our kids. It is to protect our kids. I have no problems. I share the member for Arnhem’s hope, and thank her for her passion that she brought into this debate today.
She is right, the money promised from the federal government as part of the intervention must remain here. However, we do need to talk to Kevin Rudd and the Rudd Labor government in Canberra to direct it in a constructive and sustainable way which will ensure real long-term solutions in our remote communities.
I also appreciate the member for Braitling’s concerns. She raised with me the time limits involved in responding to reports of child abuse. This is something that will be very much based in regulation and policy settings as the act develops, and based, of course, on experience. We cannot legislate for timetables when we have kids who are facing real and imminent danger. These kinds of decisions must be based on assessment of danger, wherein policy will determine that the most pressing and urgent cases will be dealt with, with the greatest of urgency. It is also policy that will need to be the most amenable as well, to advise and input over time, and not something that can be set in concrete for all time.
With regard to her inquiries about carers and the standard of carers, let me assure her that the regulations under section 77 of the act will well and truly allow for both the voice of the carer to be heard, alongside ensuring that the standards of caring are properly met. I remind her also, in the context of section 10 which refers to the paramount importance of any action being made in the best interest of the child and the need to take into account the effect of any change in circumstances of the child and its best interest.
All of us agree with the member for Braitling that there will be loopholes that will appear at some stage in the regulations. I did say this morning none of us can pretend otherwise, which is why we agreed to review the process after 12 months. With foster carers also, member for Braitling, you can raise that issue with the Children’s Commissioner.
For the member for Macdonnell on her contribution to this important debate and, in particular, her concern for interagency cooperation in dealing with issues such as the effect of substance abuse on kids, in clause 44 of the bill, at a case level the CEO will be able to pull together multi-agency responses to dealing with the specific case. Under clause 24A, the minister is able to do anything necessary to bring together agencies to deal with the problem at a systematic level relating to care and protection of children.
The member for Macdonnell is absolutely right; we must break the cycles of substance abuse, violence and disempowerment which is critical to a far safer future for our children and younger people. She also made the point that, too often at the moment, we are burying our futures by neglecting our young people. I endorse her sentiments about perpetrators of child abuse and the absolute need to bring them to justice.
I thank my colleague, the member for Brennan, for calling attention to the work and the level of consultation that has gone into the creation of this bill right through to the stages of final consultation amendments that we are about to deal with at committee stage. I will deal with that a bit more in the third reading speech. Suffice to say, many hundreds of people have been involved in this process.
The member for Brennan also drew attention to the new look at continuing to support people over the age of 18 to 25 after they pass from formal care arrangements. He rightly points out that the Child Death Review and Prevention Committee will have a long-term impact on the care and safety throughout the community, and not just those in care. The member for Brennan also highlighted the far more thorough going through approach we have in the new law towards screening of people involved in child-related activities.
I thank the member for Greatorex for his support for the bill and, indeed, the support that is coming from the Leader of the Opposition and the opposition generally. Again, I assure him that the 12-month review will happen. Today, I have been informed that when the Community Welfare Act was passed in 1984, the then minister, Ian Tuxworth, promised a similar review of that act. That is a long time. Member for Greatorex, I can assure you this will not happen in this case.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Clauses 1 to 4, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Clause 5:
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 23.1.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 5, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 6 agreed to.
Clause 7:
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Mr Chairman …
Ms LAWRIE: Mr Chairman, with your indulgence, I propose to speed things along. After having a brief discussion with the Leader of the Opposition who has been supportive of this legislation, I propose one way of dealing with these amendments is for the minister to table the entire amendment schedule and for members of the Chamber to deal with them as a whole and move through the committee stage appropriately. I move -
That clauses 7 to 344 be taken together and that the remaining amendments circulated by the minister in the Schedule of Amendments No 23 be moved and debated together and one question be put for the several amendments at the conclusion of the debate.
Mr CHAIRMAN: The motion by the minister is that all the amendments …
Mr WOOD: Mr Chairman, could I ask you, if this is done in the way you have put to the House, is there still room for questions in general on a section of the bill?
Mr CHAIRMAN: If we are going to do that we need to go back. Would you prefer …
Mr WOOD: Just to save you time, could I just ask the minister …
Mr CHAIRMAN: How about you just ask the questions and we will take it from there.
Mr WOOD: For the sake of flexibility, I ask the minister where in the bill is there any reference to carer’s right of appeal, and there may not be, where they have lost their children; their children have been taken away by the department? Is there a clause in there, which I could not see, which gives a carer right of appeal against the CEO’s decision to take the children away?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Member for Nelson, the member for Braitling asked that question on your behalf. Clause 77 of the bill will allow for both the voice of the carer to be heard alongside ensuring that the standards of care are properly met. There is also clause 10 which refers to the paramount importance of any action being made in the interest of the child and the need to take into account the effect of any change in the circumstances of the child and its best interests. Member for Nelson, I have said to the other members that I have given a commitment that we will look at this act in 12 months time. We will look at where those loopholes are, and give that commitment to addressing some of that. That commitment has been given to the opposition, and also to you.
There will be a welcome addition to this bill which is the recruitment and putting in place of a Children’s Commissioner. That will also be an avenue in which foster carers and children would be able to approach the Children’s Commissioner with any concerns that they might have.
Mr WOOD: Just one more question on that clause. What protection is there against a vexatious claim? In other words, if someone lodges a complaint, which the bill requires them to do, is there a mechanism that would test to see whether the claim is a fair dinkum claim or a vexatious claim?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Member for Nelson, I know that you have been looking at a particular case pertaining to this. As I said, no system is ever perfect, but there are some good, professional staff with integrity who do their best. There are set regulations and policy guidelines which staff working in this area need to address. I know that not everyone is happy. This bill allows for those responses to go back after the investigation. I know one of the concerns that you raised with me was that there is no response time or feedback as to where things are standing. Some of this bill and addresses some of those issues. There are always going to be issues regarding that. The CEO is putting a more streamlined process in, effectively, and getting the day-to-day operations of that act implemented in the department. The minister is still taking that responsibility; those professionals who implement that act will be ensuring that that happens.
Motion agreed to.
[Editor’s note: See Minutes of Proceedings for amendments to clauses agreed to.]
Amended clauses agreed to.
Remainder of the bill, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments; report adopted.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Child Protection): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
I thank the Leader of the Opposition for her cooperation and bipartisan support. Protecting children is very important to all of us, so I thank the opposition. I thank all my colleagues.
Finally, member for Nelson, we will place great expectations on the Children’s Commissioner. The Children’s Commissioner could also get that complaint, look at it to see whether it is vexatious and then decide not to go ahead. There are those levels of what you will be able to do.
I thank the department. They have done a fantastic job. Child protection and children’s services is never an easy area. It is a harrowing area, and often it is a thankless area. Often, in the media, all you see is the headlines. Yes, they are harrowing, it is terrible, and we never want to see what happens with a lot of the children. All too often, it is quite easy to pass the buck and to blame somebody else. Regarding the department and everyone who works in it, when people get to that point that the department should have done this or the department should have done that, it is easy to blame public servants for the failings. All of us have a role in ensuring that our children are protected; that when we see something, we do report it and we do not just talk about it, because that is what has been, fundamentally, the biggest mistake, particularly in a lot of our Aboriginal communities, where the Chinese whispers or when people talk about it, and we do not do anything. The issue of matters being too culturally sensitive has been the biggest buck-passing exercise for a long, long time where people have not wanted to grab the issue by the throat to ensure that our kids are protected.
Thank you, Leader of the Opposition. Thank you, members for Greatorex, Nelson, and Braitling; my colleague, the former minister, had just as much passion and commitment as I do; all of my parliamentary colleagues, the members for Brennan, Arnhem and Macdonnell who contributed. Thanks to Adam and Jenny Scott. Thank you Paul Wan. Thank you all for your contributions.
Let us get this bill into practice.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
WATER AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 121)
(Serial 121)
Continued from 18 October 2007.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Madam Speaker, the amendments before us today are designed to comply with the National Water Initiative by improving transparency and accountability. First, I thank the minister’s department for organising a briefing for me at reasonably short notice on Monday. I really did appreciate that; it clarified some points that I needed to have clarified. Thank you, minister, for organising it.
Transparency and accountability are so very important in many areas of our daily lives and in the way business is carried out, and the issuing of water licences is no different. My research has indicated that these amendments are well and truly lagging behind the National Water Initiative by three to four years, so they are welcomed at long last by industry members. I also believe that the Northern Territory government was allocated funding several years ago under the initiative to implement these amendments, so that has clearly not been met to this date. In the past, there has been some strong concern that, due to the lack of accountability and transparency, there were licences issued through the back door, so to speak.
The current government and other agencies lean towards corporates as a way of the future. The majority of applicants for water licences throughout the Northern Territory are smaller growers and, obviously, they feel threatened by the larger corporates. The perception of any favouritism towards the corporates must be eliminated. The amendments to the act being debated today will eliminate any doubt to future water allocation applications and licences issued by improving the application procedure.
I have sought advice from the small growers and the Northern Territory Horticultural Association which represents a huge number of growers, from corporate down to the smaller operators, and they welcome these amendments and say they are long overdue. These amendments improve the law as the current provision to issue a licence in section 45 is limited in its instruction as to how or why a licence should be issued. While this amendment is very much running behind the times in relation to our obligations under the National Water Initiative, it is welcomed by industry.
My understanding from the briefing is that, in future when an application is made to the Water Controller for a licence, he will be required by this new legislation to give notice publicly via print media. The notice gives 30 days for any submissions to be lodged against the application. Also, minister, I did not clarify this: with this application, does there also have to be a notice of intent placed on the public property boundary as there is in the Planning Act? Do they have to give advice?
Ms Lawrie: No.
Mrs MILLER: They do not? I just needed that clarified to see ...
Ms Lawrie: They do not have the pink.
Mrs MILLER: Oh, you do not have the pink? I did not know if you had to give notice and you were giving it publicly …
Ms Lawrie: Just to clarify, a letter to all neighbours.
Mrs MILLER: A letter to the neighbours? Right, thank you.
This legislation amendment does not affect the issue of meters on bores because these amendments do not go to that particular issue. In fact, under section 70 of the current act, the minister already has the power to direct meters be placed on bores. However, I would like the minister to clarify a couple of points for me in her reply. The reason why government was installing meters on bores in the first place was to gauge the quantity of water usage from each bore, and to be able to calculate the demand from each aquifer and, in doing so, have knowledge of the amount of water available for future use. There is certainly nothing wrong with wanting to gain information to be able to prepare for the future. The concern most people are bringing to me is: are they going to be charged for the quantity of water taken from each bore? I know in the past that the government has said no, it will not be happening. However, there is still concern in the community that that is exactly what will happen. With the issuing of licences and then the meter readings, what else are they going to do with them after you have done the meter readings and ascertained the quantity coming from the aquifer and the quantity being used by each property owner? There is concern out there.
What I would really like to hear from the minister in her summing up is that she could reaffirm that there will be no charges for those people who are having their water metered. It will be very reassuring for everyone who has a bore meter on their property to know that government still commits to no charging for the amount of water that is going through that meter.
I am sure the member for Nelson is going to have some additional comments in relation to meters in his response …
Mr Wood: No, no.
Mrs MILLER: He is not today? I was looking forward to his response. I thought he might contribute something in that area.
Madam Speaker, I support the Water Amendment Bill, but I just need some reassurances from the minister that there will not be any charges.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, the member for Katherine was trying to preempt my speech. I am sure there is a standing order in here somewhere that says you cannot preempt the next person’s contribution! Be that as it may, meters have been brought up in this debate. I thank the minister for introducing this bill. It is a very important bill. I also had a thorough briefing from the department, and I thank the department for that briefing.
Obviously, we need to have some regulation over the use of water. Gone are the days when we could just pump water willy-nilly, even if we are in an area where we do have a lot of water. We are developing the Territory. Some areas are developing faster than others and, because of that, we need to be wary of how much water we take out of the ground. What the bill is doing is very timely.
When you read the purpose of the bill; that is, to improve transparency and accountability – how could I ever go against such an object? That is something I know we all want. We are going to improve transparency and accountability in relation to requiring community comment to be sought on application for licence to extract water; requiring reasons to be published for a grant or refusal of that licence; and establishing a public register. That is very important as part of the overall strategy of water management in the Northern Territory.
I suppose what I saw as an anomaly is that this will only apply, basically, for water that comes out of areas that are covered by water allocation plan or, in the case of Litchfield, bores that extract more than 15 litres per second. If a station wants to put down a big bore, it does not need to get that licence. I am not saying that that is necessarily a bad thing, but we have, to some extent, an anomaly that people in certain areas will be required to licence their bores and other people in other areas will not have to do that. You will have water allocation plans in Katherine, so people who are extracting water out of there for commercial reasons will have to have a licence; in Litchfield, if they take out more than 15 litres per second. However, if you took Litchfield again, if someone had 10 litres per second, they do not have to have a licence. If you are on a cattle station and you want to pump 30 litres per second out of a bore, out of groundwater not surface water, you do not require a licence.
I suppose, with time, some of these things might be looked at. Some of them might be impractical. If you have a station about half the size of Victoria and you want to put a bore down, it is hard to see the sense in trying to ring up the neighbour and say: ‘Do you have any objections?’ He might not like the fellow and say: ‘Well, I will fix him up, I will not agree to his bore’. Whatever we do in the future has to be done with commonsense as well. You do still have these little anomalies, especially in Litchfield.
I touched an interesting area during the briefing; that we are going to have a register. I remember raising the issue of how much water does Power and Water pump out of their bores in the rural area. The word came back to me ‘commercial-in-confidence’. Well, if the register is going to be a register, it should be open to the public to see what any bore that is required to have a license is actually licensed for. To some extent, I would like to see a record of how much water is actually pumped on a per annum basis so we do have some idea. At the moment, I know people in the Litchfield area do get concerned about the amount of water that Power and Water pumps out. What we get is generally: ‘Well, we pump out about 40% or 30% of the total amount of water in the aquifer’. We would like to know what that is and whether it is necessary. Whilst it is good to have the register, I believe all people who are licensed should be required to have the details of that license on the register. I do not think ‘commercial-in-confidence’ with Power and Water will get anywhere because they happen to have the monopoly. I am not sure who they are competing with.
The other issue is where we go in the Darwin region. Obviously, there is concern. We have the CSIRO presently looking at the values of the Howard River. It is good that they are doing that. To some extent, even though we might be looking at regulating the amount of water, the land that surrounds the east Howard bore field has nearly finished its potential to be subdivided. You have nearly reached the limit of 2 ha blocks that normally take a bore in that area. Therefore, even though the government might be looking at a Darwin Water Advisory Committee, by the time that is set up and ready to make some recommendations, the area around the Howard bore field will probably come, to some extent, to the end of any more bores.
There are other areas in Litchfield where people want to extract water such as the Humpty Doo area, especially Humpty Doo south. There are areas where the subdivision was knocked back simply because they could not get approval for the amount of water that would be required to have bores in that area meant it could not be recharged. The issue of meters has been a touchy issue in the rural area. As the member for Katherine said, I have a number sitting against my bore. It has been there for quite a while. I am waiting for the meter; I am not sure when it is coming …
Ms Lawrie: We will get one around to you, Gerry.
Mr WOOD: Thank you very much, minister. My bore will be metered, and I am quite happy to do that.
I do believe that people are caught between the two concerns. There are lot of people out there who realise now, and this is not 10 years ago, that we are going to be careful of our water resource. At the same time, there is a fear that, eventually, although the government said it will not charge, governments change and policies change. I know that the minister can give me all the guarantees in the world, and that is fine, I accept that. I tell people that both the then minister for Power and Water and the then minister, I think for the Environment, who, I think had Natural Resources at that time, both said quite clearly that they would not be charging for water. That is fine. This government might not be here in five or six years’ time. People do have that fear.
Whilst this has to happen from the government point of view, when something like this comes out, or when I hear on the Country Hour that they are going to meter bores in Katherine on land over 0.5 ha. If I am listening to that in Litchfield, it is weird. Whilst this has a lot of good content and there is good reason for doing what you are doing, and I understand that this will be part of water allocation plans etcetera, at the same time, you have to realise people do not always understand what this is about. It would be good for the government to put out material explaining to people what this is about; what the government’s goals are in relation to the National Water Initiative and how this is all fitting into that; and more information about what is happening with the Howard River.
If people are involved in all those sorts of things and understand, I believe you will get less resistance. I am not saying you will get rid of all the resistance, but people will have a better understanding. The more we can tell people about the resource, and what that resource is needed for; many people do not understand that if you pump water continually, your rivers will dry up because we lower the water table earlier every year because we are pumping a lot of water. The Howard River will not run for as long as it used to. Some of the lagoons will dry up. I do not believe people always necessary make the connection between pumping water out of the ground 35 m to 95 m down, and why the Howard River is not running in August. After the CSIRO, for instance, has finished its work, perhaps we should have some forums and explain some of those things.
We have had that before but, again, from the government’s point of view of bringing the people along. As the minister said, transparency and accountability is important. However, I believe education is important as well. People say the water comes from New Guinea, as is often said, or it comes from South Africa, as I have heard some people say. There are myths out there and sometimes it would be good for the government to reinforce some of these good reasons that we need to protect our water resources.
I thank the minister for the bill. What they are doing is certainly important. I do take note of the minister’s last sentence which I could apply to the issue of local government. She was talking about water management, and she said we need to get it right and what we are doing we are doing in an open and transparent manner and, more importantly, we are doing it in partnership - I am not quoting verbatim here - with the community who depend on the ability to access water resources for economic, social, cultural, environment and prosperity. The issue of openness and transparency, and doing it in partnership with the community, not only applies to the Water Act, it applies to many things the government does. That applies especially to the changes that are being brought forward with local government reform.
Minister, thank you for sponsoring the bill. I am interested to know what the next stage after this is. What does the government have in mind? Do you have a timetable for other reform matters; for instance, the Darwin Water Advisory Committee? When will we see it and who will be on the committee? Do you have any other plans for future changes to the use of water in the Northern Territory?
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I only have a few comments. Much of what I was going to say has been already said. It is interesting because with everyone’s thoughts and minds on water conservation in Australia generally, here we are in the Northern Territory and we have access to water that is almost unrestricted. I was quite amazed to learn that the department or the government has no idea how much water is pumped out over the Territory in different areas, that metering is voluntary, so we really do not know how much is being pumped out on pastoral areas, on town basins, and on rural areas. I would have thought, in this day and age, minister, when we are all so acutely aware of conservation and we really do go into it, government would be thinking about establishing how much is being used.
In Alice Springs, for instance, one of the schools pumps water out for their oval at St Philip’s. The golf course pumps water from the town basin for their golf course, obviously, and they are more than happy to know that they do not have to pay for that water that they do collect for the simple reason they have to maintain the bores and pay for them in the first place, so there is a large cost there.
However, in your second reading speech, you stated: ‘A formal review of the act will be completed by late 2008’. I just wondered whether this is the start of something big. Perhaps you could give us some indication of what other changes we are likely to see over time. Will metering become compulsory? Will there be a charge? I take it this bill actually introduces that there can be a charge for licences although. at the moment, there is no charge for licences whatsoever. I take it also that it is more for large users than the smaller domestic-type users? Let us face it, there are a lot of them around the Territory that do that. Just give me some idea, minister. Will we eventually be metering all bores? Will we eventually be charging for water? Will we eventually have to license all users and all bores? Is this the way the government is going? Is this the way you see that we will actually be responsible for our use of water?
Ms LAWRIE (Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage): Madam Speaker, I thank the members opposite for their support, essentially, of the Water Act amendments we have before us today. I will step through what the amendments actually are, because the debate went right off the amendments into other areas of water management.
The amendments deliver an important first stage of an election commitment to review the Water Act and are a significant step towards guaranteeing transparency and accountability in statutory decision-making with regard to water extraction licensing. The over-allocation and over-use of water for consumptive purposes is a major cause of river degradation and lack of water security in every other Australian jurisdiction. As a signatory to the National Water Initiative, the Territory has particular obligations to water reform. These include requirements to put in place: transparent contestable processes for considering and reviewing approvals; sound information available to all sectors at key decision points; full public access to water entitlement registers; and open planning processes and careful monitoring of the performance of water plans with regular public reporting.
A simple set of transparency and accountability provisions are, therefore, proposed by way of amendment to the act and Water Regulations. The proposed amendments build upon the intent of the existing provisions and would see: the discretionary objections-based process for surface water extraction replaced with a non-discretionary public notification and comment process; the existing provision for a register enhanced by creating a public register containing relevant licensing information to facilitate water trading where water allocation plans have been declared; and an obligation on the controller to publish a statement of reasons for either granting or refusing a water extraction licence. The proposed amendments are not complex and add no entirely new processes to the act but, rather, they refine and remove discretion to dispense with existing processes. A requirement to give reasons for decisions is consistent with much Territory administrative law, especially in relation to applications for licences or entitlements in which there is a legitimate public interest.
There have been a few red herrings swimming around the House this afternoon, and I want to indulge in some plain speaking to clarify just exactly what the bill before the House does. The proposed amendments are not complex and add no entirely new processes to the act. They will amend the current act to require advertising of applications for water extraction licences, publication of decisions of the Water Controller and the reasons for these decisions, and establishment of a public register of water extraction licences. These changes improve accountability and transparency and enable the management of what we are becoming increasingly aware is a finite resource.
This bill does not introduce circumstances that would allow charging for extraction for domestic purposes. This does not provide the Power and Water Corporation with any special rights or entitlements. It does not create a situation where small farmers are going to be forced out of business by large commercial operators buying up water rights. This bill, plain and simply, provides for improved accountability in the management of water and the involvement of the community in decision-making about water allocation. As a signatory to the National Water Initiative, the Territory has particular obligations to water reform. The simple provisions included in this bill allow us to progress these requirements. There is no conspiracy here, no hidden agenda; just simple improvements.
In relation to the member for Braitling’s inquiries about the water use, I can advise that in your region we are the most advanced in water allocation management plans. We have a water allocation committee being put in place and we are more advanced in Central Australia in knowing exactly what water is available, what water is currently being drawn upon and used, what are the predicted water uses in Central Australia, and how those water uses will be able to be met.
What we do know in Central Australia is that, with the current usage rates and predicted usage rates to include expansion for domestic and, for example, horticulture, that there is enough water for 100 years. It is the Labor government that has put in place resources to ensure that we start to get a far greater understanding of exactly what water is in the Territory, both in the arid regions - and we have really been focusing significantly on the arid regions first, for obvious reasons; they are more vulnerable to that finite resource - but also in how our surface water interacts with aquifers and how that then interacts with our living rivers. An enormous amount of resources have been put in place to ensure that we start to understand our water resources and just what our means are of ensuring that we are not destroying our finite resource of water in the Territory, and that we manage our water needs appropriately.
Regarding the furphies about the meters on the bores in the rural areas of Darwin, we did not put them in place to start charging people. We put them in place to understand the water extraction of those areas. Plain and simple, this is an amendment to the act to provide for transparency and accountability, which is a very important thing.
For all the other bigger picture questions and issues, I am happy to provide a comprehensive briefing to the member for Braitling. I really encourage a comprehensive briefing as well for the member for Nelson. It is such a critical issue for the Territory that we do roll out our water allocation plans, our water allocation committees, and we put those in place. We have created the framework, we have put resources in place to do it. We have boosted the resources available to the agency to understand the water and the use of the water. We have a closer working relationship between our agency and Power and Water. We are giving no special favours to Power and Water. Any application for exemption to the public register would be considered by the Water Controller in the same manner as any application, and Power and Water would be required to demonstrate commercial disadvantage from publication in the same way any other applicant would. There are a few furphies floating around the Chamber this afternoon, but this is very clear, simple amendment to the act to provide for transparency and accountability.
I thank agency staff: Chris Weeks, Ian Lancaster, our Water Controller, and John Gilmore, for the efforts they have taken in bringing these appropriate amendments before the Chamber today. It is good to see that we have some sensible legislation; very clear, very concise, very targeted in improving the transparency and accountability of the Water Act.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Ms LAWRIE (Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill now be read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MOTION
Note Statement - Growing Industry
Capability to Support Defence
Note Statement - Growing Industry
Capability to Support Defence
Continued from 27 November 2007.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Madam Speaker, I am very keen to talk on growing industry capabilities to support Defence in the Northern Territory. People may be aware that when I was elected in 2001, I had to travel throughout my electorate and find out what the people of my electorate were all about, explain who I was and try to make a connection with them.
Within the boundaries of my electorate is RAAF Base Darwin, which has been there for many years as all long-term Territorians know. There are approximately 400 houses there for Defence Force families and about 126 single men’s quarters. There are 930-odd people there, not counting children. It is quite a large part of my constituency and it makes up about 13% of those people who are enrolled in my area.
In 2001, I came into contact with this group of individuals who have, since 1990 and right back to World War II, played an important role in the history of the Northern Territory. I welcome the minister’s speech. When you look at the startling facts of the impact, not only on the economy of the Northern Territory but the sheer numbers of individuals coming here, you realise what an important role that the Australian Defence Force families play within the Northern Territory economy and society.
What I noticed when dealing with these constituents of mine was that many of the people living on the RAAF Base are young families, young Australians between the age of 18 and 35 mostly, married or de facto couples with young children. They have been posted here to the Northern Territory from all over Australia. When you talk to them about their lives and where they come from and what their family backgrounds are, you can see that the Army offered these individuals an opportunity to travel throughout Australia to places far and wide. One of those places far and wide is the Northern Territory.
They all say that they love coming to this posting. They believe that Darwin is one of the better cities that they travel to, if not the best. The main reason for that is the way that they are treated by the general public. They believe that they are actually very much welcomed in the Northern Territory, particularly in Darwin. I heard stories about how other cities treat the Defence Force families and, without a doubt, it is my belief that most of the Defence Force families love coming and staying in Darwin.
The single biggest issue is that they are a long way away from their original homes and are separated from their extended families and, with young families and young children, it puts a lot of pressure and burden on the family unit, particularly if a Defence Force member is posted overseas. Many of the postings are all over the world but, of course, the two high-profile destinations that many of the Territorian Defence Forces are going to are Iraq and Afghanistan.
During this period of time, I suppose over the last six years that I have been representing this group, there has been a number of issues that have come up. I have spoken with previous Defence ministers and the current one about ways that we can help these families settle into the Northern Territory and make them feel a part of what the Territory is about, and what opportunities the Northern Territory government and the people of the Northern Territory can get out of this relationship with the Territory.
That is why I welcome the Northern Territory Defence Support Industry Development Strategy. I know the minister has put in a lot of hard work, developing a 10-year plan is not easy. I note that the President of AIDN-NT, Mark Smith, compliments the Territory for its effort in attempting to build relationships, and stated that he is committed to that relationship and this ongoing strategy.
I would like to touch on the minister’s message simply because this record will be sent to many of the Defence Force families in my area and I would like them to know what the message from the Minister for Defence Support is. He stated:
- The Northern Territory government recognises the importance of supporting the Defence presence in the Northern Territory. This presence offers opportunities to develop the Northern Territory’s Defence Support industry and to grow and broaden the Territory’s economy. Establishing this Northern Territory Defence Support Industry Development Strategy is an exciting step in the development of the industry.
The Northern Territory government has been proud to support AIDN-NT during their development phase of the strategy, and will continue to support AIDN-NT in its implementation of the strategy. The strategy supplies the launching pad and articulates the priorities and directions that the Northern Territory industry, with the support of the Northern Territory government, must address, over the coming decade, if it is to optimise its engagement in the Defence Force sector. The success of the strategy will largely rest with the industry, and I encourage everyone to contribute to its formulation, and those with an interest in the future of the industry to contribute to implementation’s strategic directions.
The minister touched on the fact that nearly 10% of all Australian permanent Defence Force personnel are base in the Northern Territory - an amazing amount. Almost 13 000 Defence personnel and families reside in the Northern Territory, making up about 6% of our population - an amazing statistic. He goes on to talk about the skills that they bring, and what their families, their wives and partners, bring with them. Often they are teachers, nurses, childcare workers, shop assistants, secretaries, start small businesses, are skilled tradespeople, and the list goes on and on.
The minister also talked about the Defence contribution regarding its spending. It is an amazing figure when you have a look at it. Recurrent expenditure in the Northern Territory in 2005-06 totalled $954m. Close to 50% of this comprised salaries paid to Defence personnel. The flow-on effect of Defence salaries as private consumption expenditure continues to be an important contributor to the Territory’s economic turnover. In simple terms, these individuals are paid by the Commonwealth government, they buy products from the local shops, clothing shops, grocery store, etcetera. They go to events within the Northern Territory, whether they are sporting events or social events, and they expend their money within the general economy and, of course, this has a fantastic stimulation effect.
The minister touched on the fact that Defence has recently outlined its plan to spend an estimated $250m over the next five year on infrastructure. Of course, one of the areas that they are going to build on and have an important effect is in my electorate. That development and refurbishment includes the RAAF bases of Darwin and Tindal, and the Army base at Robertson Barracks. If you have a look at the sheer numbers of living areas under the project called ‘Single Living Environment and Accommodation Precinct’, you will see the construction or refurbishment of 3535 living accommodation units for single personnel Australia-wide at an estimated cost of $1.2bn, with 918 of these units to be upgraded located at Larrakeyah Barracks and Robertson Barracks. That is a huge number.
At the new housing developments of Lyons and Muirhead, which the minister described as groundbreaking initiatives, over $170m has been invested by the Defence Housing Authority in Lyons alone. We are talking about large dollars being spent by the Defence Force in the Territory economy so it is in the best interests of the Northern Territory government and the people of the Territory to work with the Defence Force. I know that will continue.
I will briefly touch on a couple of other matters. Over my time as the member, what I saw was that the Commonwealth government was committed to moving people to the Territory, but not necessary flexible in the way they accommodated people’s needs to remain in contact with people in other states or overseas. One of the big campaigns that I worked on throughout my area, and I was happy to be successful with, was getting Broadband from Telstra within the RAAF Base. It was a campaign that took between 18 months and two years. What it meant was that people living on the RAAF Base could not, in real time, communicate over the web with personnel in Afghanistan or in Iraq, or Melbourne, Sydney or Perth, because Telstra did not have a Broadband Internet connection in that area. After about a two-year period of lobbying intensively with the assistance and support of the RAAF Base, we were able to get the federal minister for Communications to commit to delivering broadband to the RAAF Base. This was a fantastic achievement, not dissimilar to this strategy which outlines how we are accommodating RAAF and other Defence Force personnel in the Northern Territory.
The last thing I will comment on in support of the statement is the phases of what occurred. It was interesting that, in the strategy on page 9, it states the AIDN-NT and the NT government agreed on a need for an industry development strategy. They then went on to scanning of Defence and Defence industry environment, and having a look at what was actually happening. They looked at the Defence White Paper 2000 and the updates, Defence Capability Plan, Defence Industry Sector Plans, Defence and Industry Policy Statement 2007, NT Economic Development Framework and the NT Jobs Plan manufacturing strategies. From there, they went to the production and national distribution of the discussion paper, which resulted in group consultations with Defence and Defence industry. Of course, this led to one-on-one consultations with key stakeholders which included Department of Defence, Department of Materiel Organisation, Defence Science and Technology Organisations, Defence support groups, NT industries, prime contractors, and the Charles Darwin University.
As a result, the strategy prepared a draft industry development strategy which was then commented on by AIDN-NT, the Department of Business, Economic and Regional Development and further consultancies. This led to test compatibility with the pre-existing Defence and Industry policies, the test acceptance by Defence and Defence industries, and the realisation of the strategy itself. That is where we are here today. With the support of the minister for Defence in the Northern Territory, and the President of AIDN-NT, we have before us here today this fantastic opportunity for all Territorians, for the next 10 years, to make the most out of the Defence spending. The families that come up from all over Australia and commit to the Territory lifestyle can only be applauded. I look forward to working with the families and the people of the RAAF Base in the coming years.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend the statement to the House.
Mr VATSKALIS (Defence Support): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank my colleagues for the comments on our Northern Territory Defence Support Industry Development Strategy. Defence Forces are going to be in Darwin and the Territory for a long time. The Air Force, the Navy, the Army are going to be here because there are strategic reasons to be here; not only to protect our strategic assets, but also to protect and to respond to very immediate possible threats in our region. Our region is not a very stable region. A lot of things are happening and will continue to happen. Of course, in view of the climatic change that will hold our planet to ransom, there might be need to intervene for other countries where disasters hit, or there will be civil unrest or war.
I thank the members for their comments; however, I have to say I was extremely disappointed with the response from the Leader of the Opposition, who would choose to play politics rather than to make a valuable contribution to the debate. It is obvious the Leader of the Opposition has no idea about Defence, or the Defence industry here in the Territory. She could not respond. I accept the fact that she did not have time to read the Defence Support Industry Development Strategy. However, it would not take long to pick up the phone and speak to the industry. In the previous weeks and months, for your information Mr Deputy Speaker, I have been informed by reliable sources that no such contact ever took place with the Leader of the Opposition.
I would like to respond to some of the comments she made. She said she would like us to report back in 12 months. Well, I am pretty sure by now that if she had read the documents, she will know that included in this document is a clause that says that there will be a report to the minister and to the industry every six months.
In addition to that, her claims about the previous Defence Support Minister and current Chief Minister are ludicrous and outrageous. If she had bothered to research the issue of the Defence Support Hub she would have found out the real story, instead of making up stories yourself.
I advise the House that in 2005, the then Minister for Defence Support, the member for Wanguri, identified the need for the establishment of first, a strategic industrial block of land to meet the needs of the industry. That announcement was made by minister Henderson and a 60 ha parcel was identified near the Robertson Barracks. This location was supported by Robertson Barracks and Defence itself. Minister Henderson travelled extensively around Australia to meet with private contractors, the companies, the Defence Department, in order to promote the Territory as a place to do business. Let us not forget that the Army, Air Force and Navy have significant platforms that they are utilising here in the Northern Territory. The Armidale class patrol boats are in Darwin and there is an agreement for them to be serviced in Darwin, which is a gain for us.
In 2006, minister Henderson went on a road show to Sydney to meet with THALES and Tenix, and then to Brisbane to meet with Australian Aerospace, and Adelaide to meet with BAE Systems and General Dynamics. In 2007, I took over as the minister for Defence and I continue the same tradition; I travelled extensively. At the same time, an environmental management plan was required for the Defence Support Hub and the draft plan has been developed. A subdivision now has been approved in the Litchfield division for the Development Consent Authority. This happened in August this year. In addition, the Land Development Corporation is working with DBERD for registration of interest in the land, with advertisements going into the southern papers recently.
We have four expressions of interest and the latest one is Hallmark Trailers. Hallmark Trailers is a company that is the preferred tenderer to provide trailers for the Defence for the next 15 years. The rest of the expressions of interest will be taken up as the Commonwealth announces the winner of various tenders. Unfortunately, the previous Commonwealth Defence minister delayed awarding any contracts and, now, with the change in government, we hope things will progress much faster.
A lot of things have happened since 2005 with Defence Support. In addition to that, even the member for Nelson admits that there are people laying electricity cable. The government has also allocated $2m for the establishment of services in the area.
Yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition waved a photograph of trees and water and said: ‘This is the Defence Hub’. Well, from the previous records, I doubt very much this was actually a true picture. I remember a leaked document, member for Johnston, which was waved around on a previous occasion and with a top secret …
Dr Burns: A copy of a leaked document.
Mr VATSKALIS: A copy of a leaked document! As a matter of fact, the copy was handwritten. Not to mention today’s graph which was so badly done that if you were a statistician you would die laughing. As a matter of fact, that graph shows a decline for about four years and only an increase in crime in the last two quarters. Therefore, I am not very confident about what the Leader of the Opposition and the opposition members present in this House. I take it all with a grain of salt. It was unfortunate for the Leader of the Opposition that, during her very peculiar performance, members of the industry were in the public gallery watching. The comments that came to me were not very good.
I thank the member for Nelson for his contribution. I note his concern about the wetlands, and would like to advise him the environmental management plan will address his concerns. Also, he wanted to know who is going there. The people who will be going there will be Defence-related industries or people who are related with this industry to service the Defence Force platforms.
The relationship which has formed between the Northern Territory government, Robertson Barracks and my department is excellent. While discussions occur with Robertson Barracks, the decision of who is going to be located where and when rests with the Territory government.
This document is a document that puts in place what can happen, what will happen, what we want to happen within the industry for the next 10 years. It is a great document; I am very proud of it. It was done with the industry, through the industry, but is owned by the industry. We are very happy to help and work with the industry to address the six key areas of workplace development: building business capabilities, leading industry opportunity, profiling and promoting industry capability, developing strategic infrastructure, establishing regional partnerships, and research and development. It is important to have strategic focus on assisting development in the Northern Territory business capability. As I said before, the Defence Force is going to be here for a long time.
The Defence Force has very complex platforms. They require technical expertise and a specialist workforce which we currently do not have in Darwin and we want to develop. Questions have been asked regarding the Defence Force already servicing their vehicles down south. The answer is it may be true but, unfortunately, that does not happen in one centralised area. While we have the Defence personnel in Darwin, they are not very happy to lose platforms and equipment for a significant period of time when they need it. Therefore, we are very keen to work very close with Defence and the Army, Air Force and the Navy to minimise the time that these platforms will be absent from the barracks, the airport or the port, and to maximise the return for the industry here in the Territory.
Defence contracts are unique because they have very long life periods, about 12 to 15 years. If we manage to acquire a Defence contract here in the Territory, that means for the next 12 to 15 years companies can plan ahead, train a workforce, organise apprenticeships, invest in equipment, resources and establishing workshops, and that will not only benefit them but it will benefit the Territory as a whole. The government is working very hard to deliver. We listen to industry and are working closely with industry. Very often, when we travelled down south to meet Defence Department personnel, the minister, or to attend different conferences, we ensured that the industry was with us.
It is a great document; it is a document that sets the parameters for developing the Defence support industry in the Territory. I thank very much my department and AIDN-NT for their contribution and their support. They supported us to develop this strategy; they supported us flying down south and arguing for the Territory. We give them a commitment we are prepared to support, and we will support them in their endeavour to attract more contracts here in the Territory.
Motion agreed to.
ADJOURNMENT
Dr BURNS (Health): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Deputy Speaker, I was not expecting to start so early tonight.
I want to talk about a fairly special lady who has, unfortunately, just passed away. That lady is Val Utley from Yeltu Park which is south of Katherine. Val died suddenly just recently and her funeral was in Katherine Friday of last week. It was attended by a large number of people and it was testament to the popularity of this lovely woman that there were so many people there. I asked the family if I could have their permission to read into the Parliamentary Record parts of her service which I thought were very special, which highlighted how much she was respected and admired. They have given me permission to do that and, so, it is with great pleasure that I do that. I first of quote what her brother, Peter Jackson, said:
- Hello to the relatives, friends and acquaintances of Val Utley. My name is Peter Jackson and I am the younger and only brother of Val, together with our sister Barbara. I would like to tell you of the Valerie that Barbara and I knew as we grew up during our school years.
Our Mum and Dad, Vera and Allan, had a romantic beginning to married life. Vera was working on a property at Mundubbera, (Qld) with her parents, when she obtained a house duties job at a farm at Lamington, outside Beaudesert (Qld), some 5 km from the Jackson Farm. My wife Margaret and I have seen the room our mother stayed in during the 1934–35’s. Our dad used to court our mother by horseback, riding over the hills during rain etc - very romantic. There were cricket days, tennis days, Saturday dances in the local hall, picnics etc - all good times.
Our parents were married in Beaudesert in 1935 (almost a suburb of Brisbane now) and Val was born on 9 August 1936 at Beaudesert Hospital.
The Jackson family farm at Woodstock consisted of Grandma, Grandad, our Mum and Dad, plus three other brothers and three sisters - so it could not support this many people, especially as it was a small dairy farm with cream only sold to the butter factory.
So Mum, Dad and baby Val went off into share farming for the next 12 months at Kin Kin (Sunshine Coast). Here Barbara was born in 1937 at Pomona Hospital.
Soon after, Grandad decided to retire from the farm to Manly, a seaside suburb of Brisbane, and hand the farm over to the sons. For a while, Mum, Dad, Val and Barb went back to Woodstock to work on the farm. Val attended the Chinghee Creek State School for a year. In 1939, Mum was pregnant and stayed at Grandma’s at Manly, and I was born in April 1939 at Manly Hospital and we both then returned to Woodstock.
Our Dad volunteered for the armed services and went to Syria, where he was killed on June 11, 1941 at Damascus – it was only an 18 day war in Syria.
So Mum was now a single mum, with three young children and little financial support. With help from Grandad, she purchased a house in suburban Dutton Park in Brisbane. I was to learn later on that our mother was a very independent and capable person, and this reflected on to Val. We three were enrolled at the local St Ita’s Convent, about 100 m up the street. I can recollect Val walking us up to school - I was only in Prep 1 - with Val and Barb in the early grades.
Our Grandma Jackson died in 1942, and Grandad sold at Manly and brought next door to us, thus giving Mum some support. Also, our two aunts lived there who were able to help also. So to us three children, life seemed normal. We would walk up to the main road and watch the convoy of war planes being transported to Archerfield Aerodrome. We would spend our free hours doing simple things - sliding down the hill opposite the house on big palm fronds, playing games on the verandah, listening to the pelting rain on the tin roof and, near Christmas or birthdays, check out the bedroom wardrobes for the hidden presents.
During this time, Val had to have her tonsils out and she nearly bled to death. She was seriously ill, and needed injections to stop the bleeding. She was ill for nearly 12 months and missed a year of school. She was kept down a grade and thus, Barbara and Val were now in the same grades at primary school - much to the continual annoyance of Val, to have her younger sister in the same grade as she was!
Around 1948, Mum sold up the house and bought a corner store at Spring Hill in the city. This was not the upmarket suburb it is today, and so Mum put us into boarding school for a couple of years - Val and Barb to St Michael’s at Clayfield (Brisbane), and me to Nudgee Junior at Indooroopilly (Brisbane). Where the shop was situated is now a large block of business units. Not much can be remembered during these years at boarding school, except school work and discipline.
It may have also given Mum a chance to review her future and to find another partner in life, as she remarried during 1950, after selling the shop and buying a house at Graceville in suburban Brisbane. We exited the boarding schools, and experienced the freedom of attending the local state school for the next two years.
Polio was rife at this stage, and our stepfather contracted this disease, but not severely. As Mum was working five days in the city, and we were banned from school for three weeks (isolation), Val looked after us during the day and even prepared meals for us all. It seemed to be natural to us for Val to be in charge.
Val completed her Scholarship (Grade 7) and, after a while, indicated an interest in Mothercraft Nursing. She commenced training at the Cilento Clinic in Brisbane and graduated in due course. This gave her the training and ability to care for children mainly on remote properties, but could be anywhere in the state. Jobs were organised by the clinic, and Val moved around the state over the next few years and was enjoying the work.
I came across Val in Townsville in 1957, where she was working for a doctor, looking after his children. He had asked Val to go to Italy with them for a holiday, and Val was keen to go overseas, being 21 years old. Val had a week’s break between jobs as she had to shift south to a new family.
At this time, our Mother and Grandma wanted to travel to Atherton Tablelands to visit a relative on a property there. They talked Val into spending a week there with them. This was to change Val’s life forever. While on this visit, the relative decided on a picnic day, and invited also a young fellow who was working on a neighbouring property - Barry Utley. Val didn’t seem too interested at first, but a date at the movies followed, and soon Val was smitten, with an engagement soon announced.
Gone was the overseas trip! Gone was the Mothercraft Nursing! Val dumped everything and married Barry the next January (1958). And so, like her mother some 25 years before, Val and Barry’s romantic beginning to married life had begun.
They began their life together totally involved with each other, with a deep love and understanding that has lasted nigh on 50 years. Life has not been easy for them - from the beginning when they headed off to work, losing two homes by fire on the Tablelands, and suffering many hardships, setbacks and disappointments that were to follow. During these times, they reared and education four wonderful children, and their deep love and affection for each other never wavered over the years.
Val was always optimistic, cheerful, and forgiving in her nature. She collected friends and maintained those friendships for life. Val will be missed by all those who knew her, especially her soulmate, Barry. May she rest in peace.
That eulogy by her brother was followed by comments from Nola Sweetman from Katherine. She said:
- Thank you, Peter. Val and Barry were married and so began their life together.
- As I look around, I believe more than ever now that to be very happily married as we know Barry and Val were, you need to get the balance right. Without ever discussing it, they fell into their roles; the roles they have adhered to for their entire marriage which lasted just two years short of 50 years.
Barry worked hard on the land without ever complaining. He helped Val and spent as much time with her and the girls as he could spare. Val cared for their four lovely children, did the cooking and cleaning and spent as much time on the land helping Barry as she possibly could without ever complaining. Personally, I have never known a lady to work as hard for as long as Val did.
Barry told me that Val and the family were his life. Val was his wife, his lover, the mother of his children and, finally, the best mate a man could wish for.
Maybe I am skipping ahead too fast. Let’s go back to when they first married. Barry said there were no jobs in Brisbane and he was willing to do anything so he took his new bride to a sheep station at Middleton which is near Winton in Queensland.
Val thought it might be a good idea not to have babies straightaway. ‘We’ll wait for a few years and get established’. Fate decided otherwise, and as Val was suffering from severe morning sickness, Barry took her to Topaz in the Atherton Tablelands where they were closer to medical help should she need it. Their first daughter, Sheron, arrived just 10 months after they married.
Before the baby arrived, and with Barry out bush, there was a crop of beans which needed to be picked every three days, so Val picked the beans, had the baby and talked the doctor into letting her leave the hospital early in order to pick the next lot of beans.
Over the next 10 years, Val and Barry leased two dairy farms and Barry worked in a saw mill and did scrub cutting.
When Roxie arrived, Val still needed to work and decided that if she was on the tractor cultivating, the safest place to leave baby Roxie was in a box at the end of the row. Sheron, who was then three, thinks that her mother probably took her on the tractor with her.
Sheron, Roxie, Glendon and Bev were all born over a period of 10 years and, during that time, Val and Barry moved from Topaz to Abergowrie near Ingham where, for six months, they both cut cane manually. Again, it must have been a back-breaking job for a woman, although the girls told me that whatever job Val undertook, she did it willingly without ever complaining.
Val also made beautiful bread. She would knead it and then put it outside on the concrete septic to rise.
Home life, as the girls recalled, was very happy. When one of them had a birthday, Val made a crown for them out of a Weetbix box, which they would proudly wear all day. They were ‘queen for a day’.
Val instilled the love of reading into the children. They had lots of books. Reader’s Digest books arrived regularly and they all read well.
In 1969, the family moved to Anthony’s Lagoon where they did fencing and yard building, and between 1972 and 1975, they did the same at Tanumbirini, about 150 km from Katherine. To drive to Katherine to shop was a big adventure for the girls. Val would pull over on the highway opposite the CSIRO where the girls changed into their good clothes. I think many of us here today could relate to that.
Mostly Val would sift through catalogues for their clothes, shoes and presents. The girls remember fondly how Val would trace around their feet with a pencil before she ordered new shoes.
With Christmas fast approaching one year, Val told the girls that due to the work commitments she and Barry had to complete, they would postpone Christmas until January. On Christmas Day they had a nice meal, but without the trimmings or presents but, true to her word, they had a brilliant late Christmas Day in January. A visitor arrived and wondered what on earth was going on with Christmas paper everywhere and party hats on. The girls vividly remember both Val and Barry playing hide and seek with them in the dark. As there was no radio reception, Val, Barry and the children played records, their favourites being Slim Dusty, Rolf Harris, The Seekers and Nana Mouskouri.
In 1975 they moved once more, this time to manage Sunday Creek, where they worked cattle and fenced. Later they owned Sunday Creek. I asked the girls whether they had ever heard their parents argue. They thought long and hard and then laughed. Roxie said: ‘The closest dad ever got to losing his cool with mum was when they were putting in a wooden strainer post and mum was giving dad instructions as she lined it up with an eye. An example: “Barry, a little bit this way, a little bit that way, now twist it around a bit, no, the other way.”’. Finally when Barry was exasperated Val said it was perfect. You could not have put a cigarette paper between the joints. Some time later, a man was complimenting Barry on a perfect fit on the post joint. Barry told him that Val was the perfectionist, not him.
About this time, Shane came into their lives. He needed support, direction and someone to love and look after him long term and Val stepped straight in and gave him her unconditional love. Once she had committed, there was no way she would give up.
Val and Barry thought of this young man as their son and the girls called him their brother. It was right at this point that I met Val. She had enrolled Shane at St John’s College in Darwin and we enrolled our son, David, soon after.
Mr Deputy Speaker, there are some other things I do want to introduce to the Parliamentary Record, and there is some wonderful poetry. I will continue this tomorrow night.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Mr Deputy Speaker, I take the opportunity tonight to conclude with the usual greetings and thanks to people who have helped me throughout the year, and to give a bit of report card on what has happened in the Braitling area. It is very important for people to realise that, as an Independent, I can achieve and have achieved, and life is so much better in Braitling. They may not be big things that you get done for people but, every time you help someone, even with a small thing, it is better for their lifestyle.
I put on the record my thanks to Robyn who has been my faithful electorate officer for so long and does a tremendous job, has great PR with people and knows so much. She is down south at the moment. I am hoping she will have a very happy Christmas with her family in Adelaide. I thank her for everything she has done.
At the moment Kerry Gadsby is filling in for Robyn. Kerry is an amazing lady. She has MS, but she lives her life to the fullest. She certainly never lets that stop her in any way. I appreciate that she is always available to come in when we need her on short notice.
I also have an enormous number of people who use my office in Alice Springs. There is something like 22 groups which use it at some stage for meetings, and there is also another 20 groups which use our facilities. I will not go through them all, but they give us tremendous support and great feedback. The fact that they are there in the office, going in and out all day, means that we do have a very lively office. I tell them that they are more than welcome to continue to use our office in that way, because it is taxpayers’ money; it is there for them.
I also want to thank the public servants in Alice Springs and Darwin. They must shudder sometimes when I ring them up, but they are so good in the way they give me an answer, or very polite when they tell me they cannot. I appreciate all the assistance they give me. I must make special mention of Territory Housing in Alice Springs. At the moment, I know they must shudder every time our office rings up about a problem in public housing. However, lately they have been so cooperative they have actually resolved some of our issues. We have had three issues in one week. One was an elderly person who was getting a shower installed instead of a bath. You all understand that when many of the public housing units were built they had baths installed. Gradually, over time, you get a shower put in for an elderly person who cannot manage. She came in quite distressed because she had been put into a motel while they were doing the work which seemed to drag on forever. We rang up housing to let them know of the situation and the next day she was back in her unit. It is little things like that that count.
We had a fence built around a house that was giving problems and was a bit of an eyesore. That may seem a bit silly to be hiding it, but it gives privacy to the people in that public housing as well as privacy to the neighbours. I say to the minister, the no grog signs have been a good success in Alice Springs because they have helped some public housing tenants say no to their visitors. That has been a plus because we have quite a few in our area.
I also want to place on record my thanks to Caroline Cavanagh, the research officer the member for Nelson and I share. She does a tremendous job because, quite often, we are so involved with our electorate work we do not sometimes pay as much attention as she would like to the legislation that is coming up. She always prepares very well for sittings and she lets us know when there are briefings and is of tremendous value. I respect her for her knowledge and the way she goes about her work in such a professional way.
It is always difficult when you say thanks to people that you miss someone. I must say the Legislative Assembly still has probably some of the best people around employed here. The cooperation and the work they do to ensure the Chamber runs so well and smoothly is a credit to them, particularly under the guidance of Mr Clerk, who is not the best at the moment. I can see he is suffering quite a lot with the flu he has. We must place that on public record.
As well as that, I need to pass on my seasons greetings to all the colleagues in this parliament. Sometimes, they might think of the independents as a bit of a pain in the neck but, at least we are here to do our job and that is what is good about it.
I started off by saying I was going to give a bit of a report card for the Braitling electorate. Let me just say we have some bicycle paths built, and I thank government for doing that. We have a BMX track in a park. With the assistance of town council and volunteer parents, it is now a great little place for young people to go and ride their bikes in the middle of Braitling. We were lucky to get the short-term accommodation dongas stopped. We were worried they were going to be placed in our electorate but, through negotiation and a lot of assistance, we managed to get that stopped. We have had a lot of success in our schools. Living Waters sent a group of children over to compete at the national level in a problem solving program and they had a wonderful time. Everyone was surprised at the extraordinary talent they had. That was great.
Braitling Primary School also had three students who won prizes in the Alice Springs Wearable Works of Art. Braitling really embraced this particular part of the Alice Springs Festival with children, teachers, and parents getting all in together and ensuring that they are planning again for next year as well. Well done to Braitling Primary School.
We have concerns still about ANZAC Hill High School. We say to the minister: you may have messed up a really good school by suggesting that it may not be open past 2008. I know the parents and the staff and students have done a lot to encourage other students to enrol in this particular high school so that it does maintain its numbers. That is our concern; what is going to happen after next year?
Another plus was that lighting was installed at one of our North Side shopping centres which was very dark. We were having a lot of problems with itinerants and drunks. Thanks to the Northern Territory government and council again, we have improved, better lighting on the crossing and the are has been redesigned so there are not dark spots or big shrubs and trees where people can actually sit and drink. It is a much better and safer place because of that.
We managed to get the Telstra tower that was going to be placed within the Desert Park stopped. That is still going to go ahead, but the placement of the site will be a lot more sensitive to the residents’ needs in the Larapinta area. I have met with Telstra and discussed how we can go about it, and which locations would be the best suitable for this particular tower.
We had a good meeting on community patrols. We now have a working group looking at that and, hopefully, that will be able to start very shortly.
As I said earlier, we are pleased with the Alice Springs Town Council and their trial of recycling cans.
One of our other problems that we are still concerned about is the speed in our residential areas. People have continually complained about hoons, and the fact that many of our residential streets still have the 60 km/h, whereas possibly they could certainly be down to 50 km/h and, in some cases, even 40 km/h.
We are very pleased with the announcement that a seniors village is going to be built at the end of Albrecht Drive after the successful auction of the land. I believe that was the third time it came up for auction. People are really pleased that a managed seniors village will be built there. It is a great concept, because the other seniors villages we have in Alice Springs have been really great.
I could go on and on but, as you can see, we have had great success with many things in our electorate. Is it any wonder then that we do manage to keep a close contact with our constituents? They are not backward at all in being able to come forward and ask us to help them in any way. Sometimes we can; sometimes we cannot. We know that. Sometimes we can send them to people who can. Sometimes we have to say: ‘This is in the too-hard basket’. But, at the end of this year, I would say that we have had a very busy time just helping our people in the electorate and I look forward to doing it next year as well.
I will tell you a little about a young lad who umpired at the MCG on Grand Final day. This was young Jacob Dean. Jacob was chosen as the Territory rep to umpire down there. He was only 13. I just found it amazing that this young lad was able to do this. I will read a little of his letter that he sent. Jacob said:
- I don’t know where to start to tell you about the awesome time I had in Melbourne. When I was picked to go, I couldn’t believe it and I thought they were playing a joke on me. I think if I tell you all the things I did for the first time, you might understand how great this trip has been for me.
It was the first time I ever flew on an aeroplane, visited Melbourne, travelled on a tram, went through spinning doors at a fancy motel, was game enough to eat croissants, was a guest at the AFL world, met Dipper and got his autograph, was involved in a huge parade, went inside the MCG, went to the grand final match, umpired on the MCG hallowed ground, barracked for Geelong, met great umpires from all around Australia.
There are so many things I did that were the best and the first. When I ran through the tunnel on to the MCG, my heart was pounding so hard that I could hardly believe I was really there. I have never seen so many people in all my life. It won’t matter what year it is or how old I get, the thoughts of that Grand Final day 2007 will be with me forever. How awesome is that?
And how awesome is young Jacob to have done that? I wish him well in his future sporting career, because I am sure he will do so well. I just wanted to share that with members because it is one of the success stories of young people, and we sometimes forget young people can do so much.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish you well for Christmas. Seasons Greetings to you and your family, and to everyone else in the building. I am sure we will all appreciate having a break. I am going to Adelaide to spend Christmas with my daughter, her family and my granddaughter. As well as that, my son and his two young girls will be joining us there, so it should be quite an exciting time. I really like to get together with family. It is the time where you feel as though family is so important. When you live in the Territory and you live so far away from them, you sometimes forget just how special they are
Mr Deputy Speaker, I hope I have said thank you to everyone. If I did not please, those people I missed out, just accept the fact that I wish you well. I am sure that you will enjoy my Christmas card when you receive it.
Mr KIELY (Sanderson): Mr Deputy Speaker, I have the pleasure tonight to take this opportunity to recognise, thank and place on the public record the good work of the community groups, individuals and friends who have helped me support the people of Sanderson over this last year.
Mr Deputy Speaker, 2007 for me was a far better year than 2006, as everyone will agree. I knuckled down, put my shoulder to the wheel, and really got into the community and worked with people around Sanderson to make our area such a better place to be. However, I could not have done it without a lot of help from the minister’s offices here in Parliament House and the ministers and all their staff, particularly the Territory Housing Minister, Mr Elliot McAdam and his staff. Because of all the Territory Housing homes that we have in the area, that is always a big issue. I thank staff at Territory Housing and the minister’s office as well as at the regional office, who have been of great support to the people of Sanderson throughout the year. I acknowledge their efforts in making families around Sanderson far happier over the course of the year.
I also thank the ministers and my colleagues for getting behind some election promises that I made which came through this year for my electorate, such as the money to allow renovations at the Anula school, much needed renovations that the staff and students have been wanting for many years. We also had some urban redevelopment money passed over to Darwin City Council for the Wulagi shops. I was very pleased to see the completion of Dante Road through the Marrara complex, as well as the continued efforts by the Darwin City Council, thanks to the funding money provided by the NT government, to get the footpath/running track/safety track around the ring road of Abala Road. These are all great things. There is more work to be done in Sanderson as far as those items go, but progress is really good.
I also take this opportunity to thank Mr Allan McGill, Mr Bendan Dowd, Mr Mark Spangler and all the rest of the staff at Darwin City Council for their assistance in helping get this work done. It is important that the different levels of government work together. I am pleased to say that I have a pretty good relationship with Darwin City Council, and Alderman Mitchell, so we are able to get things done at Sanderson. I wish each and every one of the staff of Darwin City Council a very merry Christmas, and thank them for the work that they have done for the people of Sanderson over 2007.
I want to mention an area on which we are working more closely with Darwin City Council: laneway closures. I am hopeful that, over 2008, a number of laneways in Britannia Circuit, McMillans Road, and one down by Howley Crescent and Union Terrace will be closed. Mr Denis Fields at Howley Crescent has been trying hard, working with the people around there and Alderman Mitchell, to try to get that laneway closed. It seems bogged down a bit. The people at Britannia Circuit also have some laneway issues, and we are working with them. It just seems to have hit a bit of rocky road. I understand the council has put through a number of closures. Perhaps some of them are in there now. If not, if we cannot get full-time closures, perhaps we can look at getting the temporary closures next year that the council seems supportive of. I would like to get on to that.
I also thank my wife Marie and our children, Ned and Clair, once again, for giving me a fabulous year. It is always great to be around your family. My family, it is fair to say, are just a hoot. They are really good fun. Ned and Clair are just booming along. It is a pleasure to watch them grow. It is good to watch them grow with all the other kids in the street. I am very fortunate that I live in a cul-de-sac with, I think, about 10 kids who live in that street and visit us. All the families get along and each year we see these children grow. I tell you, if this is the sort of population that we are growing up in Darwin, then I would say that in my old age I am going to be pretty happy to be sitting there in the yard knowing that we have some pretty good citizens running around the place. The parents of all these kids put in, look after them, feed them well, and the kids are respectful. Every family in our street needs a pat on the back. I would like to think that all the families in Eureka Court are typical of all the families around Darwin. They look after and love their kids. They are great kids in our street and in Anula, and I am very fortunate to live in the neighbourhood.
I wish all my neighbours a very merry Christmas. Ed and Anne down the road are doing a booming trade every Saturday with their wafer business. All these people add to the ambience of the neighbourhood. It is something that I treasure and I know that the people around my neighbourhood and my electorate also treasure.
I also acknowledge a couple of new CEOs who were promoted during 2007 whom I know personally. Dr David Ashbridge is the CEO of Health; and Mr Andrew Macrides has picked up the executive boss’s job at Power and Water. I have known both of these gentlemen through my previous life. I worked for both of them in either the Commonwealth or the NT Public Service. These are men of great character, integrity and intelligence and capacity and, rightfully so, they were made executive officers on their merit. These two men are locals and it is really great to see local people getting through to the top jobs. This sends great messages to the public sector. I hope to see in the future more and more local people hitting the top rung of our NT public sector and in our private enterprise.
I also thank all the people – well, it is impossible to thank all the people who have helped me over the year - but particularly Teng and Michael Murray, who are always there to help out, and Barbara Baggley. I just cannot say enough about that little group of people. They would be the core who come in and tirelessly assist. We have lots of regular people drop into the office. They know who they are; I will not burden Hansard with a whole list of names. Merry Christmas to you and I hope you have a great 2008.
I thank and extend my Christmas wishes to the following organisations and associations for their continuing support of the electorate of Sanderson: the Darwin City Brass Band, led by Robbo, the wonderful couple Frank and Coral Roberts, and Elaine, Iris, and the whole lot. The Darwin City Brass Band comes out annually to Anula Park to play for people in the park. It is just a wonderful little annual event that we have started with the Anula Neighbourhood Watch. We all get in there and it is a fabulous time. I wish them and all the band members - and I will be seeing them shortly - a wonderful Christmas.
We have great community leaders. There is John Rivas every year, and I should just put him on to the permanent list of people to thank because this man and his officers and committees of the Filipino-Australian Association just do so much. It is always worthwhile to thank these people. Fele Mann and King Roman, all manner of people in the area are always helping out. The golf club is just across the road from me. We have Bruce Sampson and his committee at Darwin Golf Club. They are great supporters of the work that I do and they are always happy to help out either with their annual functions, or if we need a quick meeting area. I thank them and Judy at the club for all the work they do. They do not ask for any thanks, they just do it out of community spirit, and for that I am very grateful. I acknowledge the good work of the Darwin Golf Club; they fit well into the suburb and support the community very strongly.
I also acknowledge the support of business people in and outside the community who help us year after year whenever we have community events. Their contribution is very much appreciated, especially donations towards awards, raffles, prizes and performances. I mention Stephanie and Kim Lin from Northlakes Chinese Restaurant; Kalotina Kotis and her fabulous team of professional hairdressers at Kut-n-Kurl Salon in Northlakes Shopping Centre; John Lay of Darwin Enterprises, Sharm Bali of Territory Care, Support and Services; Ian Kew at Darwin International Airport; George and Tania Enterprises, Darwin Airport Resort; Hingston’s Chinese Restaurant; La Paez, the Anula Fish and Chip shop; Wulagi Fish and Chip shop; the Malak Supermarket; Brumby’s; Red Rooster; Subway Northlakes; and my neighbour in the Northlakes Shopping Centre, Judy Williamson at the Northlakes Newsagent. It is a pleasure to come to work every morning and to run into Judy. She has spirit and energy and is down to earth. She will call a spade a spade and will let you know whether you are performing or not and I value her conversations. It is something to look forward to every morning.
We have an interesting cross-section of public groups that regularly meet in the Sanderson Community Rooms for public meetings; namely, COGSO; Darwin Athletics; Australia-Africa Friendship Association; Marrara Dragons Soccer Club; Carol Wallbank from the Christmas in Darwin Association; our regulars, Anula Neighbourhood Watch - and I look forward to working with them years into the future; Terry Denton and his team from Racehorse Owners of the Northern Territory; Kerrie Read from the Alzheimer’s Australia; Darwin Gymnastics; Veteran’s Affairs; Jay Collins and his team at South Darwin Sporting League; and the Rotary Club of the Northern Territory. We also get numerous casual bookings and I feel privileged to be able to assist them in any way I can. Merry Christmas to all those groups and it is great to see.
We have three schools in the Sanderson electorate and I am sure that members must be tired of hearing me talk about them. However, they are fabulous schools, with fabulous staff and fabulous kids. You just cannot use that word enough as far as I am concerned when it comes to Sanderson. Each is very similar in that they have highly competent professional and caring teachers and staff supported by active, diligent and thoughtful school committees. The principals of the three schools in my electorate are Sue Fisher at Wulagi, Sandy Cartwright at Anula and Russell Legg at Sanderson. They all do a good job and are all permanent principals. I look forward to working with them well into the future, should I be lucky enough to be around.
My sincere gratitude also goes to the parents who serve on the various school committees. Their dedication always amazes me. Nothing seems to be too much trouble with fundraising activities, care of school facilities and extracurricular activities. They are such great people and are so generous with their time. In Sanderson High School this year’s school committee members were D’ellise Kaitaanpaa, Denise Thomas, Lisa Lock, Michelle Sa Pereira, Lynn Wanganeen, Fatima Tam, Elizabeth Rumler, Tabitha Robinson, Cassandra Hodges, Marilyn Galt, Janet Schmidt and Kim Hill.
There was also in Wulagi School there’s Johnny Chugg, James Lantry, Nicki Arbon and parent members Chris Harris, Penny Kirby, Susie Thomas, Jodie Green, Veronica Turbin and Kirsten Cridland. Teacher representatives over there are Andrew Schulz, Margaret Kerle, Fiona Oliver and Jim Kensey.
The Anula School Committee comprises Jo Glennon and Elizabeth Lohmeyer, Haidee Brown, Leanne Noble and Sharna Ray. The parents’ representatives are Felicity - no, Felicity and Andrew Baxley moved on, but they were there very early on in the piece - Michael Rollo, Verena Graham, Kathie Stoll and Dorothy Iji, Robin Lawrence, Denys Spencer, Cassandra Yaxley, Ben and Tania Lockwood and the preschool representative was Kylie Sullivan. To all the teaching staff, parents and students at Sanderson, I wish each and every one of you a very merry Christmas and a happy new year.
If I do not mention my Electorate Officer, Therla Fowlestone, I will have every Electorate Officer in the Darwin area and probably across the Territory phoning me up and saying: ‘You ungrateful elected member, you! You have the person here in your office who is keeping you going and is keeping your shop open, servicing the community every day. She is the one who is the winner in that seat’. Rather than face their wrath, I will say, yes, you are right and I am acknowledging her. I send a big merry Christmas to Therla, her friend and mine over at the Johnston office, Judy, and to Kon’s office and Delia’s office, and to Matty’s office. We have to appreciate that all these Electorate Officers put in a lot of work for us elected members. I cannot stress enough how much I value Therla’s input. She is very valued by the community for the role she plays. I will be relying on her more than ever now that I have been fortunate enough to come into town here to work.
I take this opportunity to wish all my caucus colleagues a very merry Christmas, and for all the support that they have given me over this year. It is because of them I feel that I am qualified to now be entering Cabinet. I could not have done it without the support of my colleagues. Talking of support, I particularly acknowledge the good work, the valued work, the much appreciated work - not only by me, but by all my caucus colleague members and by all the communities of the Northern Territory - of the previous Chief Minister and the previous Deputy Chief Minister. Of course, we are talking about Syd Stirling and - a mental block, I do not remember …
Members: Clare Martin.
Mr KIELY: Clare Martin. I do not believe that! Clare and Syd have done so much for this Territory. I guess when the time comes we will give them a full and glowing report. I just say that they read the time, they took the opportunity, and their contribution, which will be written down at a later time, is just marvellous. I particularly wish them and their families a great Christmas and a great holiday break.
To all the staff at the Legislative Assembly, thanks a lot. You are a tremendous mob to work with. I look forward to next year. Oh, yes, the special people who I cannot just name. Thanks everyone. Merry Christmas to you all and we will see you all in 2008.
Mr KNIGHT (Daly): Mr Deputy Speaker, it is with much sadness I acknowledge the passing of Robert Poulton from Adelaide River. Robert died in September aged 76. Robert was a well-known Territory character who had an opinion on most things. He was a regular contributor to the Letters to the Editor page. He wrote hundreds of letters conveying social, political, environmental and human rights issues.
Robert drove the first road train into Darwin after Cyclone Tracy. He was also a drover. He will be remembered as a real character and bushman. I extend my condolences to his friends and family. I received, from time to time, a couple of letters from Robert and they were quite humorous. As elected members, we regularly send out letters to our constituents, and the way the electronic system goes, it will attach names together. Mr Poulton shared a house with a mate of his, I will say, and it joined their names together. Mr Poulton wrote me a very nice letter saying that he was not gay. There was no problem with that at all, but it was just a quite humorous. The last one I received was this year after a parachute jump I did. It appeared in the paper, so he wrote me a letter. There is actually a joke contained within the letter, and I will not repeat it. However, it is quite humorous, mixing up parachutists and prostitutes. Anyway, goodbye to you, Robert, you made your mark on the Territory and you will be long remembered.
I would also like to acknowledge the passing of someone I only met several years ago, Val Utley. Val was a fabulous lady. She was a wonderful Territorian who worked so hard out bush. We came to know her for her struggle with opposing the nuclear waste dump at Fishers Ridge. Her property was adjacent to that. Val was devoted to her husband, Barry, and my condolences go to Barry. I know he was absolutely besotted with her, and I do hope he continues on at Yeltu Park where he is from, and that we will also put a stop to the nuclear waste dump there.
It is also with sadness to see Jeremy Greaves leave St Paul’s Church in Katherine this month. Jeremy, his wife, Josie, and children are moving to Darwin. Jeremy has been appointed the new Dean of Darwin’s Christchurch Anglican Cathedral. Jeremy and Josie are active members of the community and contributed so much to the Katherine region. I know they will be missed. Jeremy presided over a number of funerals I attended. He is a wonderful pastor and I believe the Darwin community will be enriched by his presence here.
I also congratulate Ian Rowbottam. ‘Rowie’, as they call him down there, who is the coordinator of the Roper River Landcare group, for winning the prestigious Alcoa Community Worker Award in the recent Environmental Awards. The Alcoa award was won by Ian and the Roper River Landcare group for their work with rangers from Ngukurr, Minyerri, Bulman and Jilkminggan. It is really well done, Rowie. You certainly do a great job for that community.
Now to some school awards. The Mataranka Primary School award for September went to Jessie Sullivan. Jessie was award the ‘You can do it, Emotional Intelligence Award’, for her recent hard work. Congratulations Jess, you certainly seem to be doing great down there. Hello to your grandparent, Jim, whom I have had a bit to do with over years.
At Woolianna School, I sponsor an award each month. The November award went to Hayden Long. Congratulations Hayden. He received this award for the positive effect he has had on the junior students in the school. Hayden is always prepared to help the students, whether it is during sporting activities or when they are in a classroom, where he acts as a peer tutor. Hayden is keen to share his knowledge and can be often found mentoring other students in the school. Hayden is an accomplished sportsman and also gives willingly as a volunteer for the sport and recreation activities such as swimming carnivals at the Nauiyu community. Hayden inspires other students to greater efforts. Congratulations, Hayden, and keep up the good work.
The Woolianna School will be a middle school next year, from Transition to Year 9. This should mean an increase of approximately 15 students. As a consequence, the school will get a new classroom and a third teacher. Congratulations, that is a great effort for that community. At the moment, they have two classrooms, and approximately 40 children enrolled, so that fabulous.
A special mention should go to Kaitlyn Ah Fat, the Woolianna school captain, who has fulfilled her duties diligently and represented her school with pride. Kaitlyn is the first school captain for the Woolianna School. Congratulations to Kaitlyn.
The new school playground will have a shade cover placed over it in the next couple of months, thanks to the Commonwealth government’s Investing in our School Grant. Congratulations to school staff for getting that application in.
I also highlight the hard work of the Woolianna School staff: Petrina, James, Petrina’s husband, Nadine, Sharon, Brendan and Teresa. They are a great school group. I have been there several times and they really love the environment they work in, and it shows with the outcomes they get with the children. They have achieved great attendance rates this year. They consistently encourage the students to be enthusiastic learners. Thank you, and look forward in seeing greater developments with the school in 2008.
Pine Creek School is very busy this week preparing for their Christmas concert and fete, which will be held next Thursday, 6 December. Thank you to the staff at the school who work very hard during the year. They work particularly hard to put on the school concert and fete. Thank you to Carmel, Mez, Kimand, and Bunny. Thank you also to the tutors at the school: Colleen, Sebastien, Lacrissa, and Christy. I hope it all goes well on the night. I hope to get there, and I am sure it will.
The Douglas Daly School Student of the Month Award for November went to Daniel Reed, who is in Grade 2. Daniel has been working hard at school, especially with his homework. He is a superstar speller and very good at maths. He gives 100% at school. Congratulations to Sian Phelps and Ben Hart, who won first prize in ‘Our place is safe’ drawing competition run by the Salvation Army’s flying padres, David and Jennie Shrimpton. Sian and Ben won $100 worth of books. Grace Phelps won second prize in her year and won $60 worth of books. Some budding artist are coming out the Douglas Daly region. Congratulations to those again.
Also in the Pine Creek community, I congratulate Kelly Burgemeister, who was crowned 2007 Rodeo Queen at the presentation night at the SKYCITY casino in August. It was rumoured that Kelly wore a dress for the first time - and also the last time. Kelly took home a tiara and belt buckle as part of her first prize. The Pine Creek Queen also does a great job driving the school bus from Pine Creek to Katherine. Well done, Kelly, its good to see great things are coming out of Pine Creek.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the graduation of Year 12 students from the Taminmin High School which I attended with you the other night. It certainly was great to be in the new building that has just been constructed. I acknowledge those recipients: The NT Board of Studies Academic Excellence Award was won by Rosaline Ho; the Indigenous Excellence Award was won by Joel Abbott; and it is great to see them being acknowledged. The Australian Defence Force Leadership Award went to Andrew McDevitt. The Ted Warren Citizenship Award, a much prized award, was won by Damon Hunt. The Rotary Community Service Award was won by Stacey Lee-Cannons. The Caltex Best All Round Award was won by Andrew McDevitt, and I you will hear that name a few more times this evening. The Taminmin Old Scholars Award went to Cal Kennedy, and was presented by a former member of the House, Peter Maley. The Litchfield Shire Council Scholarship went to again Andrew McDevitt. The Northern Territory Open Education Award went to Daniel Honey.
There was a great many awards that night and all the students need to be congratulated. I will just run through the subject awards. For Art, the Academic Excellence Award went to Megan Malan. The Biology Achievement Award went to Cal Kennedy and the Academic Excellence Award went to Eileen Lim. The Early Childhood Studies Award for Achievement, Sarah Hayden, and Academic Excellence Award, Bonnie Hageman. The English Communications Achievement Award went to Kelly Colliver; and Academic Excellence within that category went to Rosaline Ho. The Food and Hospitality Achievement Award went to Tenielle Burns and the Academic Excellence Award went to Emily Arthur. Geography - Chynna Colvano and again Rosaline Ho. The Information Processing and Publishing Achievement went to Kelly Colliver and Academic Excellence to Rosaline Ho. Integrated Learning to Beau Hennessy and the Academic Excellence was to Christopher Rhodes. Legal Studies went to Cal Kennedy and Academic Achievement to Bonnie Hageman. Maths Application to Bonnie Hageman and in that same category the Academic Achievement went to Lee Lee Ling. Modern History went to Cal Kennedy and Carlia Husband. Nutrition Studies went to Emily Arthur in Achievement and Academic Excellence went to Megan Malan. Outdoor Education went to Rebecca Flynn in Achievement, and Andrew McDevitt in Academic Excellence. Physical Education went to Michelle Menadue in Achievement, and Andrew McDevitt in Academic Excellence. Physics went to Joel Abbott in Achievement, and Rion Dickson in Academic Excellence. Psychology went to Aiden Mitchell in Achievement, and Andrew McDevitt in Academic Excellence. Small Business went to Lee Lee Ling in Achievement, and Academic Excellence to Rosaline Ho; and Tourism went to Kelly Colliver in Achievement and Bonnie Hageman in Academic Excellence.
Congratulations to those students. I think the member for Goyder would concur that these are fabulous kids coming out of the rural area. We do hope that they think about furthering academic education at university.
Taminmin prides itself in the technical area as well, having a technical college there. That is just as noble a pathway as the academic line. Congratulations to those kids - they are near adults now. I hope they do well and I hope they stay within the rural area community.
I would like to just lastly acknowledge my electorate officers Jo Nicol and Mary-Lou and Toni Coutts and my new electorate officer, Sharon McAlear. I cannot do this job without those ladies. They make it much easier for me. My sincere thanks to Jo, Mary Lou and Toni for all the work they have done over this last year for me, and I welcome onboard Sharon. I look forward to a great relationship in this role.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, this evening I recognise two indigenous women who have committed so much to Aboriginal education in a remote Aboriginal community. One is Linda Anderson at the Papunya School. She served 17 years service in Aboriginal education. It was a great honour to present her with the Northern Territory government Education minister’s recognition last Wednesday. I presented that on behalf of the Education minister who is now the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory. I place on record that Linda is a very committed person to Aboriginal education. It shows from her record of 17 years of commitment from an indigenous person to our people’s education. We have recognised her for that service. That shows that Linda has a great commitment and compassion to work in the education arena for our people. I encourage Linda to make sure that she continues to work in that area of education.
She is a very committed, loving woman who loves children. She takes in other people’s children as well who are homeless and parentless. They live on the outstation with her. She is Executive Principal of the Papunya School and has been for the last five years. I also say thank you to all the committed non-indigenous principals and teachers who have committed so much of their time into Linda’s qualification and education as well. Batchelor College is one institute that has put in so much to Linda’s profession. Linda had the commitment to not just do it for a couple of years. To do it for 17 years is a huge commitment in a remote Aboriginal community. I congratulate Linda.
There is another lady in my community as well, Patricia Phillipous who has committed 10 years of her life to Aboriginal education. I want to say thank you to Patricia as well. Patricia, like Linda, is very committed to Aboriginal education and takes in all the children who are homeless as well so that, between them, they share the burden of taking in all the children and looking after them and ensuring that every child in their family group or their clan goes to school five days a week unless they are sick. When they have community meetings, she is always encouraging the community and parents in Papunya to make sure their children go to school. These two people really recognise that education is an important part of us making choices and moving on in our life, and a great avenue to open other doors. I congratulate both Linda and Patricia.
There is also one non-indigenous lady I want to thank her for her commitment to Aboriginal education, and that is Tricia Smith who has worked down at Kintore and Mt Liebig. She works at Yulara College and I know that she has just received a transfer to move to Darwin. Tricia has been such a wonderful woman in Aboriginal education. She has been committed and she has so much compassion for young indigenous students. She is always there pushing them and telling them that education is important and they should go to school. Sometimes, Tricia, you become frustrated like everybody else does. Keep up the good work and I hope that our loss in Central Australia is a big gain for the Top End. I hope my colleagues here in the Top End of the Northern Territory welcome you as we have for years, Tricia, I really hope that you have a successful career.
I would like to also recognise my Electorate Officer, John Rawnsley, for the commitment that he has shown in the year that he has worked with me after the illness of my Electorate Officer, Rhonda. I take this opportunity also to place on record Rhonda’s commitment to Aboriginal people and to me as a member. I hope that Rhonda has a successful year ahead. I place on record, Rhonda, you will always be my sister and I love you.
I thank John for his commitment in taking over from Rhonda. John and I worked really hard during the federal election, doing the Eastern Plenty and all the way to Finke, and the western side as well, in my own community and Mt Liebig, Haasts Bluff and Papunya.
I thank all those committed people in the federal election in my electorate. My thanks to Alison and Douglas at Haasts Bluff. Thanks to Walter, Jarrod, Lance and Syd at Papunya. I also thank Warren Snowdon’s Electorate Officer, Tom Shard from Canberra, for the little trip he did with me and his commitment to the federal election for the member for Lingiari. I also thank Mildred and Carl at Hermannsburg. These people really showed their commitment to the federal election. I also thank all those people who turned up at the federal election, because these people were committed to make a difference in their vote, and they all showed up. I congratulate those people and say: keep up doing this kind of stuff, because you can only send a loud, clear message through your voting. You have the change that you wanted.
I commend my constituents in my electorate of Macdonnell. I also send a big thank you to Theresa Nipper at Areyonga and that I hope things start looking up for you, Theresa. I know that your husband, Phil, is really sick. Just keep praying, and hope things start working out for you. Thank you again for helping at Areyonga. Thanks to Judy also at Areyonga.
I also put on record my appreciation to Dorothea Randall at Mutitjulu and Judy Trigger, and say thank you to those women who are so committed to keeping operations open and operating at Mutitjulu. I hope that things can start improving and looking up for my constituents at Mutitjulu.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016