2004-08-18
Madam Speaker Braham took the Chair at 10 am.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I remind you of a decision by the House Committee. We raised the question of whether flags would be displayed in the Chamber, and the committee agreed that it is not appropriate. I spoke to the Leader of the Opposition this morning and asked him to remove the flags from opposition desks. I ask him again.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I ask if you could consider extending the provision of flags to members of the opposition bench.
Madam SPEAKER: That will have to go back to the House Committee for a decision. The House Committee has made a decision on flags. That is what I have said clearly to you twice now. If you wish to have flags, the matter has to go back to the House Committee.
Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker, out of respect for your position, I will remove the flag.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you very much, Leader of the Opposition, and I request all members …
Mr MALEY (Goyder): Madam Speaker, may I speak to your direction?
Madam SPEAKER: You may.
Mr MALEY: Madam Speaker, I will, of course, comply with what you have said. However, may I place on the record that I am proud of the flag and our colours. It is not just because I was born and bred here, but because the flag and its colours symbolise our independence. To direct me to hide the flag, remove it from my desk, in our parliament is, to say the least, grating and very disappointing.
Madam SPEAKER: I just want to say …
Members interjecting.
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: Excuse me, no comments from anyone. I have the floor, thank you. I remind members that this is a Chamber. We need to maintain the dignity and the status of the Chamber. At times people approach me and ask: ‘May I wear this?’ or ‘May I do that?’. I am always willing for people to do whatever they want. It is usually for a specific reason or occasion, and then it is done. Opposition members made their point yesterday. You are all members of this parliament and you clearly understand your role and the need to preserve the dignity of this House. That is why I have asked you to remove the flags. I have ruled on the matter.
Mr HENDERSON: Madam Speaker, I ask that the member for Goyder withdraw that statement, which was tantamount to challenging not only your authority to make the ruling, but self-indulgent to say that he will comply but disagrees. That is tantamount to challenging a ruling from the chairman. I ask the member to withdraw his statement.
Madam SPEAKER: I chose to ignore it because I noticed that the member for Goyder did, in fact, remove the flag, and that is what I asked him to do. I thank opposition members for their cooperation. If, in future, you wish to bring anything into this Chamber to display, you know the rules. Now we will get on with our proper job.
Ms MARTIN (Fannie Bay): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 710 petitioners, praying that the Northern Territory Open Education Centre not be closed, and the Rapid Creek centre be maintained. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
Madam Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Madam SPEAKER: Before we continue, this is an extensive petition. A copy is being circulated to honourable members, and the Deputy Clerk will read a summary of the text of the petition, and the prayer, and a full copy of the text of the petition will be included in Hansard. However, because it is very lengthy, you will understand that it will not be read in toto.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 654 petitioners praying that the Northern Territory Open Education Centre not be closed and the Rapid Creek centre be maintained. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
The petition is identical to the petition presented by the Chief Minister, and I do not propose to move that it be read.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 199 petitioners collected over two days praying that the house lot size for Defence houses in the Lee Point development are 800 m. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
Madam Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 131 petitioners praying that development of the waterfront project is not at the expense of areas of history and heritage value to the Darwin community. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
Madam Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Assisting Chief Minister on Young Territorians, Women’s Policy and Senior Territorians): Madam Speaker, I am delighted to report to this House that the Martin Labor government’s 26th Community Cabinet was held in July in the Jabiru region of my electorate. In particular, I want to focus on the women’s forum that the Chief Minister and I attended, along with over 60 women from the region.
As members are aware, Community Cabinet is an initiative of this government that enables Territorians, regardless of where they live, to interact with ministers and senior departmental staff. It allows them to inform government first-hand of issues that are of concern. The Jabiru Region Community Cabinet presented many such opportunities and members met with large numbers of local people.
The Community Cabinet began at Gunbalanya where ministers met with elected representatives and the staff of the Gunbalanya Council, as well as health and education workers. Following the welcome by the traditional owners and dancing by the famous Yam dancers, ministers engaged with the council, members of which were very passionate and constructive in their feedback.
They raised ongoing concerns regarding their children and young people and the community’s desire to re-engage them, educate them and keep them healthy and free of substance abuse. There are some wonderful initiatives in Gunbalanya and the school has been nationally acclaimed for the claymation film The Echidna and the Turtle. I especially want to acknowledge Esther Djayhgurrnga, the Principal at Gunbalanya School. She is one of the few indigenous principals in the Northern Territory and co-Chair of the Learning Lessons Implementation Steering Committee. Esther is an inspiring role model for her people and, in particular, young indigenous woman.
After the meeting, ministers met with various groups in the community: the minister for Education visited the Gunbalanya Community Education Centre; the minister for Police caught up with the officers stationed at Oenpelli Police Station; the minister for Arts visited the world-famous Injalak Art Centre; the minister for Primary Industry inspected the meat works; and the Minister for Parks and Wildlife met with rangers from the excellent Demed Rangers program, which has a men’s and, more importantly, a women’s ranger program.
Jabiru was the next stop and a very busy program kept ministers active for the visit. As mentioned, the Chief Minister and I attended the Women’s Forum, an essential aspect of the Community Cabinet process, where women from very diverse backgrounds in the region were able to raise issues of importance to them. his was the fifth Women’s Forum and, like previous forums, the women were passionate and committed about the issues that concern them and their communities. It was an excellent forum which may lead to the formation of a regional women’s group that can talk to government and other stakeholders on a regular basis.
Women from Gunbalanya also attended and feedback has been very positive, with the women enjoying the exchange of ideas and support for the Jabiru community. What is apparent - and I am heartened by this - is that with each Community Cabinet, particularly the Women’s Forums, there is increased response and participation by indigenous women who no longer feel isolated or excluded. I will be attending the women’s meeting at Gunbalanya in September to help them progress their issues into actions.
All ministers met with the newly elected Jabiru Town Council. The Chairperson, Tanya Simner, and the council are certainly enthusiastic and eager to work with government to cement the future directions of Jabiru township. The Minister for Local Government had a useful meeting with Yvonne Margarula who is leading the way in that region. Yvonne is with the Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation, which is playing a leading role in the development of new and sustainable economic development opportunities for the people of the Jabiru region.
Ministers listened to the concerns of the Jabiru region and have a real commitment to look at and address what is important to the people. The day concluded with dinner at the Crocodile Hotel, where large numbers of locals were able to informally mix with ministers and their staff. It was a successful evening, enjoyed by all who attended.
All in all, this Community Cabinet was well received by the people of the Jabiru region. I commend the Martin government’s commitment to take government to the people of our far flung regions.
Finally, the Gunbalanya Open Day is being held this weekend. It is always a fantastic day and I urge all members to attend.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for her statement. It is refreshing to see someone other than the Chief Minister make an attempt to illustrate to the women of the Northern Territory that this government cares about them.
However, it is appropriate to remind members that this government abolished the Business Women’s Consultative Council, without consultation. It also abolished the Women’s Advisory Council with some consultation but, curiously, adopted the least preferred option of the submissions that were made. I think four out of 16 respondents were in favour of this Community Cabinet option, which is, in essence, a ‘come one come all women of the Northern Territory’ whenever Cabinet meets somewhere other than Darwin. It is not good enough. It does not replace the direct links that organisations like VWCC and Women’s Advisory Council had with the government ...
Mr Henderson: Very well received.
Ms CARNEY: Well, if you are proud of it, and you are an idiot, but if you are proud of it then you should hang your head in shame ...
Members interjecting.
Ms CARNEY: What you know about women’s policy, mate, could be written on the back of a matchbox.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Araluen, please withdraw that comment.
Ms CARNEY: I withdraw that, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, in response.
Ms CARNEY: I have not finished Madam Speaker. I still have some time left.
Madam SPEAKER: I thought you had. You turned your back to the Chair.
Ms CARNEY: It was interesting that the minister did not refer to any domestic violence matters. I note that the Domestic Violence Strategy, released in December 2002, stated that:
Given that under the government’s very own crime statistics, there is an increase in physical and sexual assaults, predominantly on women, I would like to know what is happening with the Domestic Violence Strategy, and whether the government is capable of coming up with any new and innovative responses. To date all we have seen is incompetence.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Family and Community Services): Madam Speaker, as I mentioned - and perhaps the member for Araluen did not hear me - this was the fifth Women’s Forum held. Hundreds of women have attended. You can criticise and be negative but the women who have participated have responded that this is the first time that they have re-engaged with government.
I advise the House - and the Chief Minister will confirm this - that not a single woman has said that they believe there are too many women in parliament. I mention this because it is an issue of great debate on the other side of the House. We do need more women in parliament. I urge women not to be disheartened by the much publicised position of the CLP and that they put their hands up to represent their communities at all levels of government.
Mr HENDERSON (Asian Relations and Trade): Madam Speaker, today I inform members about my recent visit to Indonesia and Malaysia. This was an important visit for strengthening ties with our neighbours in West Timor, Bali and Sarawak.
I was accompanied by Mr Bruce Fadelli, President of the Northern Territory Chamber of Commerce who, as always, provided excellent advice and assistance throughout the delegation. In Kupang, I was pleased to meet with His Excellency, Mr Piet Tallo, Governor of West Timor and Mr Sam Lerik, Mayor of Kupang. The reinstatement of the Darwin to Kupang flight by Airnorth and Merpati Nusantara Airlines is an important link in the relationship between our two jurisdictions. However, it requires two-way traffic to really succeed.
I joined with Governor Tallo in lobbying the federal government to ease the issuing of visas to Australia by establishing an Honorary Australian Consul in Kupang. I am disappointed to report that the federal government has ruled it out, and one only hopes that common sense will prevail in the future. This is very important. To apply for an Australian visa West Timorese have to travel to Jakarta at great expense to personally appear at the Australian Embassy. It then takes approximately three days for a decision to be made. I will be contacting Airnorth to see if they are happy with the federal government’s decision, and urge all members of the parliament to use whatever influence they can to get an honorary consul in Kupang.
Members may recall the Timor eight ball competition played between Territory residents and the citizens of Kupang. With the reinstatement of direct flights, the players are again lining up competitions. As a sign of friendship between our regions, I was pleased to present Mayor Lerik with a pool cue on behalf of the Darwin Eight Ball Association. They compete for a great trophy which I have in my office. The member for Millner brought in a delegation from the Darwin Eight Ball community, and I was pleased to advise them that the Territory government will co-sponsor, with Airnorth, a Kupang Eight Ball team to travel to Darwin for a competition.
From Kupang, I travelled to Bali, where I again met with His Excellency, Dewa Made Beratha, the Governor of Bali. The Governor reported that tourism numbers have improved significantly in 2004, and he is looking forward to an even greater increase in 2005. It is great to see the Darwin/Bali yacht race back on the sailing calendar, with nearly 30 yachts competing in July. However, the Governor is still concerned about our federal government’s rather harsh travel advice warning Australians about travelling to Bali.
I was privileged to be given a tour of the new Australian Memorial Centre at the Sanglah Hospital by the Director, Dr Gusti Rudiartha, and was pleased to learn that a number of Territorians are working on the project. Following discussions between myself, Mr Fadelli and Mr Ketut Alit, President of the Bali Chamber of Commerce, the Territory Chamber of Commerce and I will be pursuing new trade and exchange opportunities between the Territory and Bali in education, training, health services and tourism.
I also met with the staff of Indonesia’s Director General of Customs and Excise to advise them that the Territory government will continue the Indonesian customs facility trial until mid-2006. The government, in conjunction with the Indonesian authorities, is working on the opportunity to expand the current service beyond the eastern Indonesian ports to all Indonesian ports. The Australian exporters who currently ship to Indonesia from other ports have a value-added service available to them in Darwin which complements the railway and further enhances the Territory as Australia’s Asian gateway.
In Kuching, Sarawak, I was honoured to be welcomed into the private residence of the Chief Minister, His Excellency Pehin Haji Abdul Taib. The Chief Minister expressed keen interest in developments in the Northern Territory’s LNG arena and Gove’s new alumina plant. He was impressed to learn that in early September I will lead a Territory business delegation to Bintulu Sarawak where one of the regions largest LNG plants is under construction.
With Territory business the AustralAsian group of companies recently signing a memorandum of understanding with the trading hub Bintulu Port in Sarawak to operate a shipping line from Darwin, there are real opportunities for exporters to use the AustralAsian trade route into Malaysia and onwards. We are close to seeing a new shipping link from Darwin to Bintulu, and then hub from Bintulu to the rest of Asia, up to Hong Kong and China.
I was also hosted by Sarawak’s joint Chambers of Commerce at a business forum with approximately 50 business people in attendance. This provided an excellent forum in which Mr Fadelli and I promoted the Territory’s major infrastructure developments and investment opportunities. This delegation provided the opportunity to further develop the Territory’s business and trade relations, and an opportunity to foster new relations with the governments and business communities of West Timor and Sarawak.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, it is a bit embarrassing for the minister to stand up and outline a catch-up exercise, particularly in relation to the eastern provinces of Indonesia.
I note the absence of any report on a visit to a port in Kupang because, on my visit there in January, they had no knowledge of the conclusion of the construction of the Darwin to Adelaide rail. You also made no mention of the massive reconstruction and redevelopment of the port in West Timor. I also note that no mention was made of a visit to the Chamber of Commerce in West Timor, which expressed a clear desire to sign a memorandum of understanding with the Northern Territory Chamber of Commerce.
There was no mention of the initiative of the Palmerston community in terms of its Palmerston/Kupang sister city relationship in developing a dialogue to establish a child health clinic in Kupang. I also notice no mention - and I am sure you were lobbied on this – about the re-establishment of a real relationship between the Northern Territory and the eastern provinces, principally Nusa Tengarra. There was no mention of the soccer competition, and I am sure Piet Tallo and Sam Lerik would have mentioned this to you, minister.
With regard to the Honorary Consul, what lobbying or discussions were held with regards to visiting the port of Bali rather than having to travel to Jakarta? I would be interested to hear those responses from the federal government.
I take this opportunity to remind honourable members that it was this government that showed no vision whatsoever when the rail arrived in the Northern Territory. You had no representation from the eastern provinces to demonstrate you have a vision to use the infrastructure of the rail to connect with the regions …
Madam SPEAKER: Your time has expired, Leader of the Opposition.
Mr MILLS: You did not even have the consul visit at that celebration.
Dr BURNS (Transport and Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, I report to the House on progress towards major upgrading of Territory fishing infrastructure that this government has committed to undertake. As members would know, a total of $1.5m was committed by the Martin Labor government to improve recreational fishing infrastructure; an initiative that has been very well received by the recreational fishing community. Amateur anglers will be pleased to know that this year, the third year of the program, the government has allocated even more funds towards such infrastructure in recognition of the major part that fishing plays in the Territory’s unique outdoor lifestyle.
Madam Speaker, $500 000 of these funds were allocated for Buffalo Creek boat ramp. Works are now complete and include the installation of an 11 kV powerline extension from Lee Point Road, an additional 37 car parks, security fencing, security lighting at the car park, a walkway to the boat ramp and a barbecue area. Importantly, it is planned to have a caretaker operating at the Buffalo Creek ramp from the end of September.
As members will no doubt be aware from the signs along Tiger Brennan Drive, the Dinah Beach boat ramp is currently being upgraded at a cost of $700 000, which will greatly improve the amenity of this facility. This work will involve doubling the width of the current ramp and the number of car and trailer parks. Some in the media have described it as a ‘super ramp’. Work is planned to be completed in September 2004 and the ramp will not be accessible between 16 August and 12 September 2004.
An allocation is planned for improvements to the Palmerston boat ramp to provide electrical reticulation to enhance security at the car park. Subject to resolution of the scope of the works with Palmerston City Council, work is expected to commence shortly.
My colleague, the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries, has received public submissions for further recreational fishing infrastructure. The outcome of these submissions has been the development of plans for new ramps at Borroloola and Mule Creek, providing improved access to the McArthur River, which we closed. At the end of this term of government there will be two rivers closed not just one - McArthur River and Adelaide River - a great achievement.
Funding for these important projects was flagged in the 2004-05 budget, as was $500 000 for a new boat ramp to be built in the Victoria River district. It was my pleasure a fortnight ago to visit that area and inspect the new site for that boat ramp which will be greatly welcomed by tourists and locals alike. Many people drive by this particular area, but with a $500 000 boat ramp and tourists who want to enjoy the gorge as well as fish, it will become a great attraction for the Victoria River region. I am proud that this government has done this.
Other work such as the Mandorah boat ramp is already complete and more infrastructure is planned for other regions. Consequently, Territorians and visitors alike now have more opportunities to safely launch and land their boats. The government is currently undertaking discussions with traditional owners in the coastal area opposite the Peron Islands so it can be accessed by recreational anglers under a range of controls acceptable to all. It is a very complex matter but I am quietly confident that we can work through those issues and bring results and benefits to all concerned.
The government maintains 24 boat ramps located across the Territory as well as platforms, wharves, jetties and artificial reefs that support recreational angling for the benefit of Territorians and visitors. This government understands just how important fishing is for many in the Top End and throughout the Territory. We are always proud to support this activity. We recognise it is a lifestyle that people want to preserve and enjoy. We are encouraging that and proudly helping the Territory move forward.
Mr BALDWIN (Daly): Madam Speaker, I am glad to see that the Labor government is following a fine tradition set by the CLP in developing infrastructure for recreational use in the Northern Territory, particularly by amateur anglers. It is very important that a program such as one the minister has outlined is continued. It is great to some of the projects actually coming on board. Your promise for Dinah Beach was that it would take you two years. It was in last year’s budget; it is in this year’s budget. Now we can see the work finally starting only because of good lobbying by the members of the opposition.
Members interjecting.
Mr BALDWIN: The members for Karama and Sanderson were parading around saying: ‘We have got you a new ramp’. What a pathetic show that was. What a con job! As I said, it follows in the great tradition of the CLP to provide this sort of infrastructure.
I raise an issue about Point Stuart. When are you going to fix the Point Stuart ramp situation? When will that operator be able to open his tourist show out there? When are you going to solve the issues surrounding the boat ramp at Point Stuart? You can answer that in your reply.
When are you going to do the Palmerston platform that has been lobbied and has been an idea of the local members and the Leader of the Opposition …
Mr Burke: Promised. At the local elections, they said the money was in the budget, that Vatskalis had promised it.
Mr BALDWIN: Absolutely! Do not come waltzing in here proclaiming that you have all these good toys for recreational anglers. Let us fix the things that need doing right now. Use the ideas we give you by all means, but get on and do them. As for you closing the McArthur River, what a laugh! We closed it, you reopened it and then you closed it again. What an absolute joke!
Dr BURNS (Transport and Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, in relation to Point Stuart, it is a complex matter. We are trying to work through these issues along with La Belle and access to the Peron Islands. We made election commitments and I am working hard to ensure that we fulfil those commitments.
The member can rave on all he likes about the McArthur River. Mike Reed declared the closure of these rivers in an autocratic fashion, with no consultation with your own mate, Peter Manning. So do not talk about disorder or lack of communication! You mob have a lot to answer for.
In the time remaining, when I was out at Victoria River, I did manage to wet a line. I caught two barramundi. They were a bit small; I threw them back. It is a very beautiful part of the world and this government is proud to announce that boat ramp being designed and constructed out there. It will be a boon to the whole district.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Family and Community Services): Madam Speaker, today I will talk about child care in the Northern Territory. Good, affordable and available child care is very important and nowhere is it more important than in the Northern Territory. The NT has the highest proportion of families with dependent children and a higher proportion of working two parent and sole parent families compared with the rest of Australia. Territorian families are more mobile and have less extended family support.
In the lead-up to the last election, the Martin Labor government acknowledged the pressures faced by families in the Northern Territory, promising Territorians an increase to the child-care subsidy by $7.50 per child per week. This promise was fulfilled on 1 July 2002 when the weekly Child Care Subsidy was introduced.
The Northern Territory is the only state or territory government to supplement the Commonwealth’s Child Care Benefit for all licensed child-care centres. We recognise that the Howard government is not meeting their clear responsibility, but we will not sit back and let the Territory family suffer. In the Northern Territory, licensed child-care centres now receive an additional $20.20 per child over the age of two years of age, and an additional $27.37 for every child under two. Since the Martin Labor government made this increase, there has been a 19% increase in child-care places in the Northern Territory. This compares to stagnant growth nationally - clear proof that the increased subsidy works. A 19% increase means more than 500 children are now in child care compared with two years ago, an outstanding success.
However, we recognise that our subsidy alone is not sufficient to meet unmet demand in all areas of the Territory. In light of this, I recently announced a $910 000 initiative for new child-care initiatives. The initiatives were far reaching and included support for remote and urban communities. This included:
a package of $140 000 to Karama Primary School to increase support services and facilities for families with a focus on parenting assistance;
a package of $140 000 to Maningrida Primary School to support parenting and children’s early learning, particularly young mothers;
I have since visited several of these communities and they are very grateful. In Kintore, it was stressed to me just how helpful this money will be and what will be done. In Katherine, the extra $300 000 has been very warmly welcomed, and I know the child-care waiting lists there are too long. I have been informed that, on 29 July, the steering committee for the Katherine Child and Family Precinct met to progress this project. I am aware that the member for Katherine also attended this meeting, and I welcome her enthusiasm and support.
Last week, I invited 20 child-care centre directors from across Darwin to Parliament House to hear their views. One of the things we discussed was the Early Years Framework, which is a joint strategy with the Minister for Health, the minister for Education and I to provide integrated and holistic services for children and families. At the meeting, it was agreed to set up an ongoing forum between child-care directors and those relevant departments.
Madam Speaker, although the Northern Territory government does not have the ultimate responsibility for child care, we have taken on board the issues raised and we will see what we can do.
Ms CARTER (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for her report. Child-care issues are something that I know all of us as local members are concerned about. I have been delighted over the last few years to see private enterprise coming into the fore with regard to the provision of child care. Just off my border in Woolner, two private child-care agencies are being established which will certainly go someway toward meeting the need for child care in the city.
As the minister quite correctly said, in the Northern Territory a subsidy is paid to child-care providers, and this is used to encourage private enterprise to establish child-care centres. It was a wonderful CLP initiative, and it is great to see that it is continued to this day. It will certainly be something that the CLP will be supporting when we one day return to government.
I bring to the minister’s attention the issue of child care in Alice Springs which is short of child care. I will be interested to hear what is being done to provide more places. I know some effort is being made in Katherine, but I am advised about 60 child-care places are still required, which is quite a substantial amount. It puts quite a lot of stress particularly on families. For example, at Tindal and places like that, where both parents want to work, it becomes a real problem when child care is not available and parents do not have the extended family that some people in Darwin enjoy. This puts a real blockage to both parents being able to go back to work. It would be good to hear what is being done, particularly in Alice Springs, and what is being done in Katherine to address a continuing need.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Family and Community Services): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Port Darwin. I acknowledge that she does have a real interest in child care. I am also aware that she recently received a briefing from my department regarding some of our activities. I acknowledge there are some issues which have been raised with me in respect to Alice Springs. I have given a commitment to organising a meeting there similar to the one held in Darwin last week. That meeting was attended by all child-care centre directors, both from small private operators to the bigger franchises and relevant agencies, to go through some of the issues together. It also needs to be kept in mind that we need to involve the Commonwealth. We can do so much but the Commonwealth needs to be part of the process.
Child care is not just an issue in the urban centres. We recently went to Nhulunbuy which has experienced many problems, as has Jabiru. There are huge issues in other townships as well.
Madam SPEAKER: Your time has expired, minister.
Reports noted pursuant to Sessional Order.
Bill presented and read a first time.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The purpose of this bill is to reduce the trauma experienced by child witnesses and other vulnerable witnesses such as adults with intellectual disability in criminal proceedings for sexual offences, and improve the quality of evidence from those witnesses in criminal proceedings.
In December 2003, I announced a new Sexual Assault Task Force in response to government concerns about some spiked increases in the number of sexual crimes. The primary focus of the task force is reducing the level of sexual offences across the Territory through the development of a targeted whole-of-government sexual assault prevention plan. The task force is currently investigating Northern Territory data; researching police and legal responses across Australia; exploring service models, particularly in relation to indigenous survivors; and gathering information on issues facing the reporting, investigation and prevention of sexual assault in remote areas.
The task force has also been looking at recommendations of the 1999 Law Reform Committee Report on the investigation and prosecution of sexual assault, including the proposals for specialist training for prosecutors, legal and judicial officers working on sexual assault cases, and the provision of facilities for vulnerable witnesses in Territory courts.
While I am looking forward to the task force presenting the prevention plan early next year, this government is not waiting until that time to put in place some measures necessary to protect those vulnerable members of our community. The Northern Territory has both a high rate of reported sexual assault and a high attrition rate of sexual assault cases in the criminal justice system. Very few reported cases actually result in a formal disposition by the courts. In 2001, the police reported a total of 263 cases of sexual assault with a clear up rate of about 69%. In the same year, only 11 sexual assault cases reached a formal conclusion in the Supreme Court. Out of those cases, seven were pleas of guilty, two resulted in acquittals, and two resulted in a guilty conviction.
There are concerns that the existing processes for prosecution of sexual offences have a significant negative impact on complainants of sexual assault, and whether cases are successfully prosecuted. This is supported by Australian research which indicates that the legal system systematically disadvantages children who report sexual assault.
The bill provides for children and other vulnerable witnesses to give evidence by pre-recorded statement, introduces time limits for the prosecution of sexual offences, abolishes oral examination of children at the committal proceedings for sexual offences, and introduces new provisions into the Evidence Act regarding the questioning of witnesses, and child witnesses in particular.
In regards to disallowance of question and principles to protect child witnesses, a comparison of the existing Northern Territory laws with those in other states indicates that current Northern Territory laws to protect witnesses, including child witnesses, from inappropriate questioning is limited.
The bill proposes a new provision for the Evidence Act which will permit a court to disallow a question that the court considers to be misleading, confusing, annoying, harassing, intimidating, offensive, repetitive or phrased in inappropriate language. In determining whether to allow a question the court must have regard to the age, maturity, cultural background and any mental, intellectual or physical characteristics of the witness. The provision will apply to all witnesses, including children, and replaces a provision in the Evidence Act that was more limited in its application. The new provision is more practical in approach, in that it recognises that different witnesses have different needs, attributes and levels of understanding.
The bill also proposes to introduce principles that the courts must take into account when dealing with child witnesses. These principles would provide guidance for the courts in the exercise of their discretion in relation to child witnesses. The advantage of placing principles such as this into legislation is that prosecutors, judges and magistrates are alerted to the issues that must be considered when a court is exercising its discretion in relation to the questions put to a child witness. They provide material for submissions and decision by the judicial officer in relation to questions to a child witness that minimise the grounds for an appeal from a decision to exclude a particular question. These principles are also consistent with, and relevant to, the proposals to record the evidence of children and fast-track the prosecution of sexual assault cases and other existing provisions in the Evidence Act regarding vulnerable witnesses.
In regards to evidence of vulnerable witnesses, a 1999 report by the Northern Territory Law Reform Committee on laws related to the investigation and prosecution of sexual assault in the Northern Territory, recommended the introduction of alternative means for children to give evidence in sexual assault prosecutions so that the statements of children recorded by videotape could be used instead of requiring the children to give oral evidence at the trial. The bill implements that recommendation.
An analysis of sexual assault cases heard by the Northern Territory Supreme Court over the last three years shows that one third of the cases involved victims who were children under the age of 18 years. Recent Australian research that examined the experiences of children who gave evidence in criminal proceedings for sexual offences, found that a significant number of children who had been through the process of giving evidence would not report sexual abuse again. The comments from children who participated in this research indicated a widespread belief that the process was not worth the trauma suffered.
The Australian Law Reform Commission inquiry into children and the legal process recommended the introduction of legislation to permit the entire evidence of a child to be taken prior to the trial and videotaped. Recent research conducted for the Criminology Research Council on the experiences of child complainants of sexual abuse in the criminal justice system indicated that the Western Australian model, where the evidence of children is recorded at a special pre-trial hearing, has been successful in contributing to a reduction in trauma experienced by children during a prosecution.
The proposed amendment provides options for the prosecution to present the evidence of children under the age of 18 years, and other vulnerable witnesses such as adults with an intellectual disability, in cases involving sexual or violent offences. They permit the prosecutor to adduce pre-recorded evidence of the witness instead of the vulnerable witness giving oral evidence at the trial. The prosecutor has the option of presenting the witness’ evidence-in-chief in the pre-recorded statement, or recording the whole of the witness’ evidence, including cross-examination, at a special pre-trial hearing of the court. This will allow the witness’ evidence to be captured at a relatively early stage in the proceedings, and helps to prevent trauma to the witness as a result of last minute rescheduling of trials or re-trials.
It is anticipated that the court will develop guidelines in relation to this provision to assist parties to use this provision effectively. The Supreme Court already has facilities necessary for the recording of a witnesses’ evidence at a special hearing.
The bill also proposes to use out of court, or hearsay evidence, in sexual offence prosecutions that involve a child. In these cases, the court will have the discretion to admit evidence of a child’s statement to another person if the court considers the evidence is of sufficient probative value. For example, this will permit the court to admit evidence of a child’s initial disclosure of sexual abuse and for that to be part of the evidence of the offence. Under the current laws of evidence such statements cannot be admitted as evidence of the offence.
The rights of an accused person are protected by the provision that an accused person cannot be convicted solely on the basis of hearsay evidence admitted under the provision. The bill also proposes that a court must be closed when a vulnerable witness gives evidence in relation to a sexual offence.
The bill proposes amendments to the Justices Act which will abolish the oral examination of children at preliminary examinations held in the Magistrates Court, also referred to as committal proceedings. In prosecutions for sexual assault offences children are often required to give oral evidence which includes cross-examination at both a committal hearing and a trial. While the Northern Territory Justices Act provides for a procedure for written statements to be used as evidence in committal proceedings, the defendant can require the attendance of a witness to attend and to give oral evidence. This is invariably the case in committal proceedings for sexual offences.
Traditionally, the procedure of calling oral evidence at committal and permitting cross-examination of witnesses is justified on the basis that the accused is entitled to be appraised of the full extent of the Crown’s case and the evidence. Committals have also been identified as having an important role in giving protection from unwarranted prosecution. However, changes such as the establishment of independent Directors of Public Prosecutions, the introduction of formal and public guidelines in relation to prosecutorial discretion, and the full disclosure of the prosecution case, also provide protection from unwarranted prosecution.
The trend of law reform across Australia in this area indicates that the traditional procedures, such as a full oral committal hearing are being re-evaluated and there is recognition of the need to balance the legitimate rights of accused persons with the protection of victims of crime, particularly child victims. Most Australian states have now either modified or abolished oral examination of children in committal proceedings for sexual offences.
A recent Australian study of the experiences of children in sexual assault prosecutions, found that cross-examination of children at committal is often more harsh than at an actual trial, and that intimidatory cross-examination at committal increases a child’s fear of the trial.
There are indications that inappropriate, oppressive or lengthy cross-examination of children occurs in committal proceedings in the Northern Territory. At a recent committal hearing in Alice Springs, a child was cross-examined for two days for a charge under section 131A of the Criminal Code, Unlawful Sexual Relationship with a Child. The child was cross-examined, even though she had given birth to a child as a result of the alleged offences at the age of 14 years and the accused had confessed to police of having sexual intercourse with the child on five occasions.
In its 1997 report on Children in the Legal Process, the Australian Law Reform Commission recommended that child witnesses should not give evidence in person at committal proceedings and that, instead, the child’s written or electronically recorded statement should be produced as evidence.
This bill proposes to abolish oral examination of children under the age of 18 years at committal proceedings, formerly known as preliminary examinations in the Justices Act. Evidence of the child will only be given by written or recorded statement and the child cannot be cross-examined. This means that the child will only be required to give evidence on one occasion rather than at both the committal hearing and trial.
Abolishing oral examination of children in committal hearings for sexual offences will have other benefits as cases will be heard more quickly and will use fewer resources in the Magistrates Court.
Amendments to the Oaths Act are necessary to ensure consistency between this act and other provisions proposed by this bill for the use of evidence recorded by audiotape, video or other audio-visual recording means. The proposed amendments will not authorise the use of these statements in court proceedings, but will permit their use when they are otherwise admissible in proceedings.
The introduction of time limits for the prosecution of sexual offences was recommended by previous Northern Territory reports into sexual assault laws published in 1992 and 1999 to deal with the problem of lengthy delays, which may cause further trauma for victims of sexual assault. I am pleased that this long-standing recommendation is now being implemented by this bill.
The fast-tracking of sexual assault prosecutions was also recommended by the Coroner, Mr Cavanagh SM, in the findings concerning a case of a youth suicide in Alice Springs. In this matter, the Coroner concluded that the deceased’s lengthy interaction with the criminal justice system as a victim awaiting the finalisation of proceedings was a stressor that contributed to her decision to take her own life.
An analysis of sexual assault cases finalised in the Northern Territory Supreme Court over the last three years shows that there are significant time delays in many criminal prosecutions involving sexual assault or child sex abuse. One-third of finalised cases involved child victims, and many of these cases took more than 12 months from the initial proceedings in the Magistrates Court to final deposition in the Supreme Court. In cases involving adult victims, the time delays were even more significant, with many cases taking more than two years to be completed.
Data produced by the Australian Bureau of Statistics indicates that the median duration for sexual assault and related offences in the Northern Territory Supreme Court is 44 weeks. This is significantly longer than the median duration for property offences at around 18 to 20 weeks, or homicide and related offences at 35 weeks.
Delays in the prosecution of these sexual assault offences means that the quality of evidence from victims is compromised and victims experience further trauma as a result of the drawn out legal proceedings. National and international experience in this area highlights the need to ensure that cases of sexual assault are dealt with as quickly as possible.
The proposal will introduce time limits for the prosecution of all sexual offences. Proceedings in the Magistrates Court and in the Supreme Court must be completed within three months. The provision includes a discretion for the court to extend the time period where this is necessary.
Fast-tracking of sexual assault cases will not cause any significant problems in the administration of courts, due to the relatively low number of cases coming before the Supreme Court. In 2000-01, only 11 out of the total of 331 finalised cases in the Northern Territory Supreme court involved charges of sexual assault as the principal offence, and most of these - in fact, seven - proceeded by way of plea of guilty.
The amendments to the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act proposal will provide a definition of sexual offences to be used in this act, The Evidence Act and the Justices Act. The definition includes all sexual offences contained in the Criminal Code.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, I take this unusual but, I am told, legitimate step of making a few comments before I adjourn this bill. I am advised by a couple of my colleagues that I am able to do so.
Madam SPEAKER: Do you want to make this your second reading speech?
Ms CARNEY: Yes, with a view to continuing …
Madam SPEAKER: If you like, you can make your comments and then seek leave to …
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I assure the Attorney-General that he does not have anything to worry about.
In his speech, the Attorney-General quoted some figures from 2001. He said there were 263 sexual assault cases in the Northern Territory. Eleven of those cases made it to court - seven were pleas, two were acquitted, and two offenders were convicted. I add to those, the following figures: in 2002-03, the Territory’s crime figures record 419 sexual offences. For the same period, the ABS Criminal Reports publication, says that only 33 of those cases went to court. Of those 33, eight were acquitted, 23 were pleas, and there were, again, only two convictions in contested matters.
I raise this because it is a very serious issue, and important for all of us to get this right. I know the Attorney-General feels strongly about it, and he knows that I do as well, which is why, no doubt, he extended me the very kind offer of a briefing on this bill, which I had a week or so ago.
As I understand it, a large amount of the content of the bill is based on a body of research that is done in some other jurisdictions in Australia and internationally. Therefore, there is a global push to improve the court processes for victims.
However, the main point I wish to make is that this bill is essentially based, or has regard to, the evidence of children and other vulnerable witnesses particularly – on the basis of information I received at the briefing – witnesses, or victims with intellectual disability. Given the figures the Attorney-General quoted, and the figures that I have added, it appears to me that the area of sexual assaults in the Northern Territory is very serious. We know it goes beyond children and affects adults, particularly women.
I urge the Attorney-General to consider – perhaps announcing when the bill next comes before parliament – commencing an inquiry, similar to that initiated in March this year by the South Australian parliament, into sexual assault conviction rates. I have asked him about this before, but I do so again with some passion and great sincerity.
I am yet to look at the bill in detail and it may well be that some of the difficulties with prosecutions will be addressed in it. If so, that will be great, and I will be the first to applaud.
As legislators, there are lessons we can learn from the South Australian parliament’s inquiry. If the Attorney-General does not have that inquiry document I am happy to show it to him. Some of the issues raised in the document are these: under the heading of ‘Possible Inquiries’, there is a list of questions which include:
what are the barriers to reporting sexual assaults?;
is the prosecution process properly explained to the complainants?; and
These are some of the matters that the South Australian committee will inquire into.
Attorney-General, I simply ask you to consider commencing an inquiry. All of us in the Northern Territory can benefit. If our collective objective is to come up with good laws for the Northern Territory and to assist women and children giving evidence then, surely, an inquiry like this would complement the aims and objectives that I understand that you and your government are committed to achieving.
Madam Speaker, with those comments, I seek leave to continue my remarks at a later hour.
Leave granted.
Mr VATSKALIS (Mines and Energy): Madam Speaker, I move that so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Tanami Exploration Agreement Ratification Bill 2004 (Serial 242) passing through all stages at these sittings.
Motion agreed to.
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr VATSKALIS (Mines and Energy): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
I have much pleasure in introducing the Tanami Exploration Agreement Ratification Bill to the Legislative Assembly. The need for this bill has arisen due to the impending expiration, on 12 September 2004, of the current agreement between the Northern Territory government and Newmont called the Granites Exploration Agreement.
Newmont approached the government in 2003 to extend the Granites Exploration Agreement. On advice from the Northern Territory Department of Justice, it was determined that there was no provision to allow an extension without passing specific legislation. There is a desire by government to facilitate Newmont’s aggressive exploration and development program of the Tanami region of Central Australia.
Members will be aware that exploration for minerals is a necessary precursor to development or continued existence of a mine. Mineral exploration is a long drawn-out, technically difficult, expensive and time-consuming process. Risk of failure is high, but the chance of success is enhanced by:
the prospectivity of the exploration area,
Balancing the period for which a company is licensed to explore an area against their performance - as judged by expenditure, the quality of the exploration work as seen on the ground and in their regular reports - and the success of that exploration, is one of the difficult tasks carried out by the government. Exploration in the remote, arid areas of Australia is particularly difficult due to the deep weathering of the ancient geological terrain, the remoteness from infrastructure and supplies, difficult communications and, sometimes, inclement weather conditions.
The Tanami Exploration Agreement Ratification Bill sets in place an agreement which establishes Newmont’s right of access to existing and future exploration licences in the Tanami region for a period of 10 years. It should be indicated at this point that the Tanami Exploration Agreement Ratification Act ratifies a new agreement which successfully updates and replaces the pre-existing Granites Exploration Agreement.
My comments today are guided largely by the rationale presented by the government of the day when introducing the 1994 Granites Exploration Agreement Ratification Act.
The Tanami exploration agreement between Newmont Australia Ltd and the Northern Territory government is not unique. It represents recognition by the government that this company succeeded in becoming one of Australia’s largest gold producers. Newmont has successfully developed major gold mines in the Northern Territory and operates the only two major gold processing plants in the region. It has also discovered high grade gold deposits at Dead Bullock Soak and Groundrush, which are now being mined. Several additional significant gold prospects have also been identified in the Tanami region for potential development.
The previous agreement, the Granite Exploration Agreement between the Territory government and the then North Flinders Mines Ltd, was commenced in 1994 and afforded North Flinders Mines with the opportunity to explore and develop a region in the vicinity of the Granites Gold Mine in a logical and progressive way. North Flinders Mines has now been acquired by Newmont Australia Ltd. The vision, technical expertise and persistence of these companies continues and has resulted in recognition of the Tanami region as the Northern Territory’s major producing gold region and one of the key prospective gold fields in Australia.
To date, about $200m has been spent on exploration in the Tanami by North Flinders and Newmont. Current plans include an annual expenditure in the Northern Territory of about $8m on greenfield exploration, in addition to about $2m of brownfield exploration, and expenditure and some $200m per year in operational costs of the mining and milling operations.
Newmont has a capital investment of over $150m in the Tanami operations with processing facilities including the Granites Mill and the Tanami Joint Venture Mill. It has an annual gold production in excess of 600 000 ounces from these mills and this figure is expected to be surpassed this year. It employs over 700 people, many of whom are based in the Territory, and engage with some 250 Territory businesses with further flow-on effects to the Territory economy.
Since inception, the Tanami operations have generated revenue for the Territory, by way of royalties, of approximately $62m with $11.5m paid in 2002-03.
Newmont is also committed to indigenous employment. Indigenous employment reached 20% in 2002 and currently runs at about 15%. It is also actively engaged in contracts with local indigenous businesses, sponsors cultural activities and invests in a lot of community infrastructure injecting some $5m a year in to the local communities.
The Northern Territory government, through its agencies, will liaise with Newmont to facilitate maximising training and employment opportunities in this region. The benefit to Newmont afforded by this agreement is constrained by conditions related to expenditure and tenure rental that exceed those applicable to other Territory explorers. The benefit to the Territory is the continued high level of socio-economic benefits instilled in to the region.
The basis of the Tanami Exploration Agreement is that Newmont will, within an agreement area of 20 000 graticular blocks, approximately 64 400 km2, be able to hold granted exploration licences or exploration licence applications up to 10 000 blocks throughout the 10-year term of the agreement. In return, Newmont will guarantee to expend a significant amount on exploration. This guaranteed expenditure level is defined in the agreement as $600 per granted exploration licence block multiplied by the number of granted blocks. This amount will be adjusted annually taking into account the Consumer Price Index. Regionally, there has been an average annual exploration expenditure of approximately $475 per block by all explorers. This means that Newmont could spend an extra $1.2m per year above the average expenditure in this region.
The agreement also requires higher tenure rental than is required under the current Northern Territory Mining Act. For example, under the Mining Act the first year rental is set at $10 per block increasing to $40 per block in year four, whereas in the agreement the rental is set at $50 for the first year, increasing to $98 in year four. Because this land is Aboriginal freehold, in accordance with the Aboriginal Land Rights Act the Territory foregoes these rents which are on-paid to traditional owners through the Central Land Council.
The relatively high expenditure level and the rental requirements will encourage Newmont to carefully manage the tenure within the agreement area. This may lead on to early relinquishment of land which could then be picked up by other explorers.
The Tanami Exploration Agreement is subject to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. All the exploration licences covered by the agreement are on land held as Aboriginal freehold by the Tanami Land Trust, some of which were originally granted following agreement between North Flinders Mines and the Central Land Council.
The Central Land Council has been fully appraised of the negotiations of the Tanami Exploration Agreement and supports the agreement. Newmont and the Central Land Council will adjust existing agreements to account for the terms of the Tanami Exploration Agreement.
Let me briefly review some of the Tanami gold fields history, which was described at the time of passage of the original Granites Exploration Agreement Ratification Act. For new members of this Assembly, including myself, this will be of interest and a salutary reminder that an area is never fully explored. Repeated exploration efforts seeking different models of mineral occurrence and using newer and more sophisticated exploration technology continually surprises us with new discoveries, further enhancing prospectivity and longevity of the original development.
The Tanami region, and the Granites in particular, is one of the more remote mining localities in Australia. Gold was first discovered at the Granites in 1900 by Mr Alan Davidson who, while prospecting by camel, discovered gold in outcrops at what was later called Chapmans Hill.
The deposit was worked for a short time by Mr Stewart who extracted approximately 200 ounces of gold from alluvial deposits and quartz veins. The hardships endured in those years must have been daunting for the rewards they won and the early rush to the area was severely curtailed by the extreme shortage of water.
Further discoveries of gold were made by Mr Jim Escreet at Bullakitchie in 1932. The mine was purchased by C H Chapman who successfully worked there and later made a new discovery at the site called Shoe. Production of over 10 000 ounces of gold occurred over the next 20 years. Exploration in the area by major companies was not lacking in those years, with a number of companies being floated to take part in the gold rush. Most fizzled out without success.
Subsequent exploration by a number of major of companies during the 1950s through the 1970s did not find a sufficient grade of gold to develop a vision of a major gold field in the region. In 1975, North Flinders Mines applied for its first exploration licence covering the area of the Granites. It had to wait until 1983 to commence work in the area, delayed by the need to sign agreements with traditional owners.
Drilling at the East Bullakitchie and Shoe prospects delineated high grade ore shoots, which led to the construction of the modern Granites Gold Mine. The mine produced its first bar of gold on 1 July 1986. North Flinders Mines pursued an aggressive exploration program on this original exploration licence and, following the signing of further agreements with traditional landowners, additional exploration licences were granted in 1998.
Gold was discovered at what is descriptively named Dead Bullock Soak later that year. Over the next few years, additional ore bodies were found and given such colourful names as Triumph Hill, The Villa, Furmarole, Avon, Callie, Colliwobble Ridge and Sleepy Hollow.
It is this exploration success and the desire to capitalise upon the full potential of the Tanami region that the government has agreed to enter into this new agreement allowing Newmont to explore for an extended period on a stable tenure basis.
There is a lead time of between three to five years from a mineral discovery to mine development, and continuous access to ore is required to ensure operations continue. It is essential that we must do everything reasonable to ensure that ore is available for continued operation of existing infrastructure to sustain the flow on effects of employment and local industry in the region.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to the Assembly.
Debate adjourned.
Bill presented and read a first time.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Environment and Heritage): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The purpose of this bill is to protect the Northern Territory from becoming the dumping ground for the nation’s nuclear waste. It is about protecting the environment of the Northern Territory, the health of Northern Territorians and the industry of the Northern Territory. It is about protecting the wonderful reputation the Northern Territory has as one of the most pristine places on earth. The intention of this bill is to prevent waste from outside the Northern Territory being transported into the Northern Territory and stored in the Northern Territory.
In the event that a national nuclear waste disposal facility is proposed for the Northern Territory, the bill provides the minister with the capacity to seek an injunction to prevent such action. If works on a facility have already been taken, the minister may authorise action to remove the facility and make good any environmental harm. This bill does not relate to the transport, storage and disposal of radioactive waste produced within the Northern Territory.
There already exists a range of acts that cover this. The Mining Management Act places environmental and safety controls on uranium mining and waste disposal. The Radioactive Ores and Concentrates (Packaging and Transport) Act controls radioactive products from uranium mines after they have left the mine. The Radiation (Safety Control) Act places safety controls on radioactive substances such as those used in laboratories and hospitals. Parliament has already determined that this act is to be replaced by the improved provisions contained within the Radiation Protection Act.
The Radiation Protection Act applies to less than 1% of the nation’s nuclear waste. None of these wastes are high level waste. Some 90% of Australia’s nuclear waste derives from Commonwealth activities and, in particular, the operations of the nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights run by the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, or ANSTO. It is this waste, which includes the highest grade nuclear waste in Australia, that this government does not want to see dumped in the Northern Territory.
The issue of radioactive waste disposal has been a national issue for almost 30 years. Up until recently, the Howard government has consistently maintained that a single national repository for radioactive waste was the best and safest option. They embarked on a protracted search around Australia for the best site. They determined that it was in South Australia, and then sought to impose it on the people of South Australia who very vocally opposed it. The Parliament of South Australia also opposed it. They have passed legislation similar to this bill, and so has Western Australia. However, then the Prime Minister got cold feet, and there is a federal election and marginal electorates have to be saved.
On 14 July, the Prime Minister announced that the Commonwealth would abandon its plan and instead establish a single disposal facility on Commonwealth land that would house the Commonwealth’s radioactive waste and the nation’s intermediate level waste. States and territories could manage their own low level radioactive waste themselves and, according to the Prime Minister, this was all South Australia’s fault for opposing the facility in the courts and winning.
Notwithstanding that the signs clearly illustrated that South Australia was the best spot for any such facility, the Prime Minister announced that the new Commonwealth facility would not be located in South Australia after all. We all know South Australia is off the Commonwealth’s hit list because there are some marginal electorates. We know that the federal government is looking for a site on Commonwealth land - although not necessarily on land that they own at the moment - and while the Commonwealth will not announce their intentions until after the election, there can be no doubt that the Territory will be under consideration.
In South Australia, there was almost unanimous opposition to the proposed dump, especially from politicians. Unfortunately, that is not the case in the Northern Territory. In the Northern Territory, we do not have a bipartisan, unconditional opposition to being the home of this national nuclear dump. Clearly, this situation makes this bill even more important if we are to prevent this occurring.
The CLP member for Solomon has suggested that it is the obligation of the Northern Territory to be the home of this dump if his own federal government determines that the Northern Territory is the best place. The CLP member for Solomon gave the green light for Canberra to dump their waste in the Territory. He has not been rebuked by his party. He has not been rebuked by the Leader of the Opposition. He clearly has the support of his party and the support of the CLP opposition and its leader …
Dr Lim: Have you asked Bob Collins what he did in his report under the Keating government?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: This government’s position is absolutely clear. The Territory produces less than 1% of Australia’s radioactive waste …
Dr Lim: Ask Bob Collins what he did in his report.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Greatorex, allow the minister to finish her speech.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: We are happy to manage our own radioactive substances, which are at the lower end of the scale, but we are not willing to be the dumping ground for the rest of Australia. The Chief Minister has written to the Prime Minister indicating this position, but this bill goes further. It will send a clear signal to Canberra that Territorians do not want the nation’s nuclear waste, and that they are in for a fight if they choose to proceed. The legislation proposed in this bill will be one of our strongest weapons in this fight.
It might seem obvious and self-explanatory, but it is important to outline why the government opposes a nuclear waste dump in the Northern Territory. First and foremost, it is the responsibility of any government to act on behalf of the people, and it is clear that the people of the Northern Territory do not want this dump. The Northern Territory is known throughout Australia and the world as one of the last great wildernesses. Our clean and green great outdoors has a pristine reputation. A nuclear waste dump does not just compromise that reputation - it destroys it. Not only do Territorians not want this nuclear dump because they care for the environment and their health, they love the lifestyle that our environment provides.
Industry also is threatened, especially tourism which is such a vital component of industry and employment in the Northern Territory. Leading figures in the tourism industry have already spoken out in outrage at the message being sent to potential tourists by the member for Solomon. It is not only tourism. The Minerals Council has come out and also voiced their opposition to the facility, particularly in relation to its impact on exploration.
Representatives of our two biggest industries oppose this dump, yet the CLP and the member for Solomon have ignored this. They have argued that there might be some money in it for us if we agree to take this dump. It would have to be an enormous amount of money to compensate for our tourism industry. Tourism is our biggest employer - a nuclear waste dump will never be able to compensate for that. The economic cost of a nuclear waste dump on the Territory will clearly outweigh any small benefits, and we should not put our industry and jobs at risk in such a short-sighted way.
We should also not take at face value the proposition that the best option is to put this waste in a single facility thousands of kilometres away from its source of production or use. The handling and transport of these wastes presents a significant additional risk factor. I am not arguing that there would never be sound reasons for consolidating this waste at a regional scale, but transporting it across the continent seems unnecessarily risky, and the arguments in favour of doing it are certainly not compelling.
This is particularly apparent when we look at comments from the major source of these wastes, ANSTO. In public comments and submission to a recent New South Wales parliamentary inquiry, ANSTO is reported to have indicated that it safely stores its current nuclear waste, and can continue to do so in the future. If this is the case, then why move it?
ANSTO seems to be having a bet both ways. One is left wondering whether their desire to move their waste to a single national repository away from Sydney has more to do with enhancing public acceptance of a new nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights than it does about proper waste disposal. In fact, as 90% of Australia’s nuclear wastes are currently stored at Lucas Heights I could, perhaps a little provocatively, suggest that it might make more sense for the remaining 10% of wastes to be transported to Sydney.
I am sure there is a presumption in people’s minds that a national repository will do away with the need for local storage, so that the increase in risk from transporting the waste across Australia might, to some extent, be offset. Unfortunately, however, this is not the case. Under the Commonwealth government’s previous proposal – and, one might presume, this latest proposal - the waste would be shifted every two to five years. Therefore, instead of doing away with storage areas, we end up with more. The bottom line for Territorians is that, even if we host the national facility, we would still need storage close to the point of production or use because the truck simply would not be visiting the national dump weekly.
In stating the Territory government’s position, I am very aware that radioactive materials provide important benefits to Territorians and the wider Australian community - in nuclear medicine, mining technology and research. Some have sought to couple the acceptance of these benefits with acquiescence to a national waste disposal facility wherever the Commonwealth government may choose to put it. This argument clearly does not hold at several levels. If we accept the benefits of nuclear medicine, then absolutely we have a responsibility to manage the wastes that are generated in the Territory. However, it certainly does not automatically follow that we should blindly accept a national waste disposal facility where the arguments in favour of such a facility simply do not stack up.
Furthermore, the proposition that the waste generated from Lucas Heights is the necessary by - product from our access to radioactive substances for medicines and research, is not universally held. Other technologies are available for producing at least some of the radioactive substance used in medicine without the use of nuclear fission. Certainly other developed countries access these products without a domestic nuclear reactor.
Clearly, there is a strong case for at least having a thorough look at minimising the generation of these nuclear wastes before we blindly accept that we need to look for a hole in the ground somewhere. Nuclear medicine will not become any less available to the community if we do not have a national nuclear waste dump. Our clear responsibility lies in safely storing and disposing of the wastes generated in the Territory. In many cases, this means near the site at which it is produced or generated.
To this end, my colleague, the Minister for Health, recently introduced a major overhaul of the regulatory regime for radioactive substances by introducing the Radiation Protection Act. If, as a result of this debate, some inadequacies come to light with respect to the existing management of radioactive substances, then this government will not shy away from fixing any problems. This is, after all, why the new legislation was introduced. The Leader of the Opposition, in a media release dated 28 July, called this legislation ‘a meaningless political stunt’ and seemed to be almost pleading with the Commonwealth to exploit the fact that we are not a state, and overrule this legislation. Worryingly, the member for Solomon, a member of John Howard’s government, has also pointed to the capacity of his government to overrule the Territory government.
Let me make it very clear that the Northern Territory government has an absolute mandate to introduce this legislation. The Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act makes it clear that the disposal and storage of hazardous, dangerous waste is the domain of the Northern Territory government. The Prime Minister, when speaking on this issue on 19 July, ruled out taking advantage of the fact that we are not a state when he said the rights of the Territory will no less be respected than the rights of other parts of the country. The rights of the Territory would clearly not be respected were the Commonwealth to overrule this legislation.
This bill legislates to prohibit a nuclear waste dump to the full extent of the Territory parliament’s capacities. It would be wrong for me to propose that this bill, when enacted, would offer some sort of cast-iron guarantee that there will not be a nuclear waste dump in the Territory - it does not. The capacity of the Territory to regulate Commonwealth instrumentalities has limitations and the Commonwealth can, if they wish, remove our right to legislate on this matter. Both South Australia and Western Australia have similar legislation, with similar limitations. Although the CLP member for Solomon is trying to make sure the Territory is an easy target, this legislation ensures we will not become a soft touch.
This bill sends a strong message to Canberra that if they want to override the Territory on this issue, they will do so against the express wishes of Territorians.
I commend the bill to honourable members
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I seek to make a few remarks before the shadow minister adjourns debate.
There are times when this House descends into high farce. I would suggest to you that what we have heard this morning is an example of that. It is indicative of the fact that a junior minister is now taking the lead on an issue that has been the subject of pronouncements of the Chief Minister in the past. It reminds me of the old adage that the monkey is loose while the organ grinder is absent. That is, essentially, what we have here. However, what is important is that the seriousness the government places on this legislation is indicated by the status of the minister who is presenting it. That is the first thing I would say.
My second point is that I would emphasise my agreement with the Leader of the Opposition that this is a cheap political stunt! In fact, when I chose to make comment when this issue was first raised, the media representatives I talked to said they were not interested because they thought it was simply that – a cheap political stunt.
The government will try to make mileage of it. I suggest to the minister that she may have been handed a bit of a problem here because, if you want to bring in this sort of legislation and you want a mature debate on it, let us have it. Firstly, let me say that I have only had time for a cursory glance at this legislation - which the minister pronounces to protect Territorians – and it says in clause 5 – and note this:
The minister stands in this House and purports to present legislation, carries on with gobbledegook and, somehow, thinks the average Territorian is so dumb that a junior minister is now going to be the protector of their welfare, whilst the Chief Minister is noticeably absent because she does not get herself involved in cheap political stunts.
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker! The member for Brennan well knows he cannot draw attention to a member’s presence or otherwise in the Chamber. I ask that he withdraw the comment.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, please withdraw the comment about the …
Mr BURKE: The Chief Minister is absent from presenting the legislation! I have made no reference to the Chief Minister being – in fact, I will say that the monkey is here and the organ grinder is absent. So in that regard, I am at fault for suggesting that the Chief Minister, the organ grinder in this case, is absent.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Brennan …
Members interjecting.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Brennan, could you withdraw the statement that the Chief Minister is absent, please?
Mr BURKE: I withdraw.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you.
Mr BURKE: It is very important when the minister gives her media statements about the fact that she has now introduced this wonderful legislation, she addresses clause 5 straight up, which says: ‘disregard all of the second reading speech because in clause 5 of the act it says this law matters zip insofar as it is inconsistent with any law of the Commonwealth’.
Do not suggest for a moment to anyone that this law protects Territorians against onerous or dominant Commonwealth action which, I might add, the Commonwealth has not suggested. Rather than suggesting that the Commonwealth is going to establish a nuclear dumping facility in the Northern Territory, what they should be addressing, and what this debate will address when it comes on, is what the Commonwealth government has said - that the states and territories are responsible for the disposal of their own wastes.
If you want to bring in this legislation, firstly we want an informed debate on how this Labor government currently disposes of its own radioactive wastes in the Northern Territory. If this debate is to be informed, it is the responsible action of the government to produce papers in this Chamber to inform us of the current status.
I request the minister provides all the information. I want the names and locations of current storage sites in the Northern Territory. I know where there is one. Rather than worrying about what the Commonwealth is going to do, there is one right next to Casuarina shopping centre - isn’t there, minister? You are the minister for the environment. How about the Minister for Health? There is one right in Royal Darwin Hospital. It is about 30 feet from patients’ beds. I would like to know, minister, what is the capacity and standard of storage of that facility? I would like to know, minister, what audits you have done on your own facilities?
If you want to bring debate in to this Chamber, I will be demanding that the minister demands of this government …
Members interjecting.
Mr BURKE: It would nice to be heard in a bit of silence. I listened to the second reading speech in silence.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Could we all just settle down? There is too much shouting and yelling going on.
Mr Kiely: It is another shot at the leadership.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Sanderson, did you just hear me?
Mr Kiely: Yes, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: All right. It applies to you to.
Mr BURKE: Madam Speaker, I will be demanding - and I believe it is the only responsible action of this government - that they produce in this Chamber the location of every radioactive storage facility currently in use in the Northern Territory, under whatever act or legislation they are currently supervised.
To be assured of the standard and quality assurance of those sites, I would like to know what audits the government has conducted since it has been in government. I would also like produced in this Chamber any report that has been done for the Northern Territory government in the past 10 years relating to the storage of radioactive waste in the Northern Territory. I know there is at least one.
Minister, if you want to stand up here and be the protector of Territorians let us just lay down, for everyone’s benefit what the current situation in the Northern Territory is; what reports have been produced for the Northern Territory government over the last 10 years; and what audits are in place on the current facilities that we have in place in the Northern Territory, so that we can all approach this debate from an informed position.
Sadly, minister, your second reading speech does not provide any scientific evidence on which to conduct the debate. I also ask you this: the Vice-Chancellor of Charles Darwin University, Dr Helen Garnett, who is a nuclear scientist ...
Dr Burns: No, no. She is a microbiologist. Get your facts straight.
Mr BURKE: Has a background in nuclear science …
Dr Burns: She is not a nuclear scientist. Get your facts straight.
Members interjecting.
Mr BURKE: If you want to denigrate the Vice-Chancellor of Charles Darwin University …
Dr Burns: I am not denigrating her. Look at her CV.
Mr BURKE: I ask this: why are you getting so upset?
Members interjecting.
Mr BURKE: This is supposed to be a very serious issue that you want ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Brennan, would you speak to me.
Mr BURKE: I am actually bemused that the government is so sensitive. On the one hand, they ask for Territorians to be protected against onerous action by the Commonwealth, and yet they seem to be very sensitive about just answering some simple questions for this parliament. I will repeat them again. Detail to Territorians every location of every radioactive facility in use in the Northern Territory. Detail to Territorians any report that has been produced for the Northern Territory government over the last 10 years relating to the appropriateness or otherwise of how we store radioactive waste in the Northern Territory. You might also add an addendum to that: what have you done since you have been in government to improve that situation which will give us an informed basis to deal with our own responsibilities? I would like to see the Northern Territory government produce a paper - I suggest Dr Helen Garnett as she would be eminently capable of producing such a paper - to inform this parliament of exactly what we are discussing, concerned and worried about: what are the implications of what could happen to the Northern Territory and what are the wastes that can be stored? Dr Garnett might want to do an audit herself of the way we currently store our own wastes in the Northern Territory.
Finally, I would ask the minister to reply to clause 5, which says the legislation provides no protection against any act or law that is passed by the Commonwealth …
Mr Bonson: It is called the Australian Constitution.
Mr BURKE: ... and more than that, it says …
A member: You are weaselling.
Mr BURKE: Have you read this? It has been on your desk for about the last 15 minutes.
Dr Toyne: Yes, we have read it in detail.
Members interjecting.
Mr Bonson: And we still have not heard what the CLP’s policy is.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Millner!
Mr BURKE: I am used to the childish chatter that comes along. We are highly paid politicians. Staff are employed to produce this legislation.
A member: What’s your position? Give us your position?
Mr BURKE: You not sit there like a monkey and listen to the second reading speech and say: ‘Oh, that sounds good’.
A member: Give us your position.
Mr BURKE: Here is the legislation. It has been on your desk for the last 15 minutes. If you want to make a comment, make an informed comment.
Members interjecting.
Mr Ah Kit: Stop being provocative.
Mr BURKE: And you cannot say anything, minister. You are still trying to figure out the difference between a starving hippo and a fat hippo.
Members interjecting.
Mr BURKE: Madam Speaker, I apologise. They provoked me.
Madam SPEAKER: You should withdraw some of those remarks that you have made that are unparliamentary, and address your remarks through me. You do not call people the sort of things you have been calling them. Withdraw them. Get on with your debate and address your remarks to me.
Dr Toyne: Well, withdraw them.
Madam SPEAKER: Did you withdraw?
Mr BURKE: Which remark? I am sorry, Madam Speaker, I am happy to withdraw.
Madam SPEAKER: You know you were making remarks across the floor ..
Mr BURKE: I said that the minister is still trying to figure out the difference between a starving hippo and a fat hippo. What is so bad about that?
Madam SPEAKER: Yes, but you got into a debate where you called them certain names.
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member for Brennan referred to either the member for Millner or the member for Sanderson as a monkey. That is unparliamentary and he should withdraw.
Madam SPEAKER: He did.
Mr BURKE: I said that you do not sit there like monkeys, but if it is offensive to you, I apologise and withdraw.
It is very important, Madam Speaker …
Members interjecting.
Mr BURKE: I do withdraw.
Madam SPEAKER: Speak to me, member for Brennan.
Mr BURKE: Thank you Madam Speaker. I want to emphasise clause 5(2) of the legislation - and it is very important - which has a qualification to say this act has no capacity to effect any law of the Commonwealth, and it goes on to say:
(2) This act does not apply in relation to –
I ask the question: is the Commonwealth a legislative authority, and is Lucas Heights a facility owned or operated by a legislative authority?
Mr Baldwin: One would think so.
Mr BURKE: One would think so. The point I want to make is that this is nothing more than a cheap political stunt railed out by a minister who has been given the notes and the front task, who will prove to be suitably embarrassed, and tries to promote legislation that by a quick reading of clause 5 has no capacity to protect Territorians whatsoever.
A responsible government should be talking to the Commonwealth and understanding exactly what the Commonwealth’s position is, and we know what it is. Territorians should know also, that the choosing of potential sites around Australia, including the Northern Territory, came from the Keating Labor government. The position of the Prime Minister is clearly this: states and territories are responsible for their own wastes. You satisfy this House that you are attending to our own wastes; you produce the documentation that …
Ms Scrymgour: I said that. Didn’t you listen to any of that? Didn’t you hear me say any of that? You chose to only - you have selective hearing.
Mr BURKE: Very sensitive. You have a glass jaw.
Ms Scrymgour: You are being sensitive.
Mr BURKE: Finger pointing as well.
Ms Scrymgour: Why don’t you support it? Do you support it or not?
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: I think she has the floor, Madam Speaker.
Mr Baldwin: Don’t get too toey.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Brennan …
Ms Scrymgour: I am not getting toey. You are the ones who are getting toey. That is why you …
Madam SPEAKER: There is too much cross-Chamber chatter. Let the member for Brennan finish his remarks.
Mr BURKE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. The opposition intends to approach this debate in as mature a fashion as we are able.
Following a quick reading of the legislation, I have given a couple of examples of where, prima facie, it fails miserably. I have asked the government if they are genuine in their endeavours. Has the government convinced Territorians that they have been attending to - through audit and by appropriate safeguards with world practice standards - our own wastes in an appropriate manner, and that they will continue to do so? Put all that information on the table, together with a paper from Dr Helen Garnett, or someone similar, and inform honourable members of the situation so that we can have a suitable debate.
Madam Speaker, I seek leave to continue my remarks at a later hour.
Leave granted.
Continued from 17 June 2004.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, to put the minister’s mind at ease, I will, at the outset, advise the House that the CLP will support the bill. Having said that, there are many comments I want to make about the bill, which I feel does lack some substance.
The Labor Party came into government trumpeting loudly that they would establish, and I quote:
This was quoted from Paper 407 tabled on 18 June 2002.
Well, this government is 12 months late, just like it has been with many of its promises. At least this one is here and, hopefully, there are no backflips - or maybe there will be. We are the second last jurisdiction to introduce teacher registration, just pipped at the post by New South Wales. The only jurisdiction yet to introduce teacher registration is the ACT.
As almost the last jurisdiction to introduce teacher registration, I would have thought that this government had every opportunity to introduce the best model of teacher registration available. South Australia has had it since the 1970s, and I would have thought you would have studied how it went about bringing teacher registration on board. Disappointingly, this is a common garden variety proposal. When it had the opportunity to introduce best practice teacher registration legislation, this government has introduced one with the barest of minimum requirements.
What is the purpose of introducing a teacher register? I suggest to you that a teacher register is to bring about professional status for Northern Territory teachers. It is to weed out undesirable persons from the teaching profession. It is to ensure that our teachers are professionals who continue to aspire to the highest standards of teaching our children. I am certain that this is what all parents aspire to - to have professional teachers of high quality, teaching their children in a safe environment.
Speaking of safe environments, I move to the section in the bill regarding criminal history checks for teachers. The bill requires that all teachers in the Territory have at least one police check in the time that they remain as teachers in the Territory. Many teachers recruited over recent years have had to provide a criminal history check on application to teach in the Territory. I am advised that the government will now pay the cost for the criminal history check for any teacher currently employed in the Territory who has not had one done previously. That is fine. I also understand that any new teacher now applying to teach will have to go through the Teacher Registration Board and provide a criminal history check themselves.
I ask the minister whether the government’s promise to cover the cost of the criminal history check applies to teachers in non-government schools, because in the in the bill, it is not clear.
Mr Stirling: Yes.
Dr LIM: Thank you very much, minister, for that interjection to say that the government will cover the cost of police checks on all teachers in the Territory in government and non-government schools. I am sure the teachers in non-government schools will be very pleased to hear this, and I thank you very much.
The criminal history check is only as good as the day it is issued. A person, after a criminal history check is issued, could commit the most heinous crime the next day and no one would be any the wiser until the person is prosecuted. I was advised at my briefing that DEET will be a participant in CrimTrac, a national crime tracking system which will flag a warning to anyone using the system if a person on the database has a criminal history. Well and good.
I was also advised that, once they have had their police checks done, all the teachers will have their names logged with CrimTrac so that any indictable offence, anywhere in the country, will be flagged within the system to DEET, which will then report such flagging to the Teacher Registration Board. That is commendable and an efficient system, but there is no indication when it will happen. It is just a hope that DEET will be with CrimTrac at the start of the first term of next year. I suggest to the minister that he makes sure that will definitely be the case. If not, then he leaves the system open to a potential flaw.
I look forward to the minister coming back to this House at the start of the first term of school next year to tell us that DEET has linked up with CrimTrac. If there is no likelihood of such a move, then I suggest that provision should be made to have regular criminal history checks for all teachers - say at a five yearly interval. You could have one or the other. If you have CrimTrac, I am happy to go along with that because that will be a good system. However, if you cannot guarantee that, then you have to have some other system available so we can have continual checks on our teachers over certain intervals. You could introduce that amendment to the legislation if you know by early next year that DEET is unable to link up with CrimTrac in that reasonable time.
Another issue which the minister should address is complaints made against teachers. Under the current system, a complaint against a teacher is made to the school principal. The principal then assesses the matter accordingly and by due process. Under this legislation, a person can complain against a teacher directly to the Teacher Registration Board. Natural justice would require that the board seeks a response from the teacher; however, there is no mechanism in the bill to say that the board needs to inform anyone else.
It is important to ensure that the board advises the employer or the school principal of the teacher who is the subject of the ongoing investigation. The parent or person making the complaint would be aware of the investigation but not the employer or principal. That will fail the system badly.
I now come to matter of mutual recognition that this legislation allows. The minister, in his second reading speech, said:
I understand mutual recognition to mean that a teacher registered in the Northern Territory would have registration rights across the country and New Zealand and, similarly, teachers from other jurisdictions have registration rights in the Territory subject to a criminal history check.
The privilege of mutual recognition comes with a responsibility in the Territory to ensure that our teachers are of high quality. Remember that once a teacher is registered here, the teacher can have every expectation that the registration is perfectly portable across the country and across the Tasman Sea. A teacher registered in a Darwin school can teach at any of the schools in Darwin and, say, at Yuendumu and the reverse will also apply. That teacher can expect that his or her qualification is recognisable in Sydney, Adelaide or Auckland. Therefore, we have to ensure that our registered teachers are of a standard that is acceptable interstate and overseas. Any other position will be untenable. We cannot afford to have any jurisdiction, including New Zealand, refusing to accept our registered teachers because they assess that our teachers are not of their standard.
This brings me to the quality of our teachers. Again, I refer to the minister’s speech about quality. He wants the Teacher Registration Board to promote the profession, to establish professional standards for teachers based on broad consultation, and regulate the profession through qualifications, etcetera. I have no doubt that teachers in the Territory are of a high calibre, but in terms of quality, in his second reading speech, the minister espoused that the Teacher Registration Bill will:
Sadly, I see that this bill fails the very aspirations that the minister spoke about. As a former teacher, I would have thought the minister would have considered his words and the bill very carefully. Clause 3(2), Objective of the Act, declares that its objective is to establish a Teacher Registration Board to register persons as teachers and to facilitate the continuing competence of teachers in the Territory. However, nowhere in the bill does it describe what it will do to facilitate the continuing competence of teachers, nor was it described in the minister’s second reading speech.
This bill is simply to bring about a register of teachers and ensure they have had a police check at least once during their career as teachers in the Territory. As for quality of our teachers, I do not see the bill doing any more than ensuring that teachers are four-year trained. In regards to two and three-year trained teachers - and some members in the Chamber are in that category - the teacher registration flyer states that they will be entitled to full registration, provided the application is endorsed by the principal or manager. Consequently, a teacher with two or three-years’ registration who fills in the registration application form has to ask the school principal to sign off on it. If the principal agrees to do so, that person will then be registered by the Teacher Registration Board.
Obviously, if a teacher with two or three years’ training has been teaching since the time of their qualification, and the principal has no issue with that, there should not be a problem. But, if the principal refuses to sign the application, what happens to the teacher? It is a double-edged sword for the principal. The fact that a principal refuses to endorse an application means that the principal has some issue with the teacher. Therefore, you have to ask why the principal has allowed the teacher to continue at that school for such a long time. Importantly, the flyer states that the endorsement should be automatic, unless a teacher is subject to inability or disciplinary measures.
There are issues with two- and three-year teaching qualifications but, through the normal course of events, hopefully, things will float through quite simply.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Greatorex, could I interrupt you for a moment? As you probably know, we have a number of visitors here for the lunchtime launch that I am hosting. Would you continue your remarks after Question Time?
Dr LIM: Yes, Madam Speaker, to comply with what we need to do.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Greatorex.
Dr LIM: I will reserve my right to continue later.
Debate suspended.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I wish to draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of a delegation from the members of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, United Kingdom Branch. The members of the delegation include the Rt Hon Helen Liddell, leader of the delegation; Sir John Butterfill MP; Sir Sydney Chapman MP; Mr Alan Meale MP; Mrs Diana Organ MP and Mr Richard Organ; Sir Nicholas Winterton and Lady Anne Winterton, who are both MPs; and Mr Andrew Tuggey, who is the Delegation Secretary from the CPA. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I congratulate the Department of Legislative Assembly for the excellent exhibition that has been put together today. Special thanks to Anna-Maria Socci, who has been in charge of compiling the exhibition. The photos were outstanding, and a great commemoration of this building. I thank also those members who attended our ceremony today.
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonnell): Madam Speaker, for the sake of completeness I will start again.
I move that this House censure the government for their outrageous conduct in their fanatical pursuit of Owston Nominees, and particularly Warren Anderson; and for the reckless indifference they have shown to the proper processes of justice in the Northern Territory; and for lying to this House and Territorians about their role in pursuit of this matter.
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I seek a point of clarification. This matter is currently listed before the Supreme Court in Western Australia. You made a ruling earlier on during Question Time for members to be very careful in their comments given that this issue is before the courts. The terms of reference for this censure motion directly go to one of the proponents in the litigation. One Warren Anderson has been named specifically in this motion before the House. I ask you to consider whether this is in breach of your previous ruling that this debate should not occur in the House.
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, speaking to the point of order.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes, but I will seek some advice from the Clerk on this. What is your point of order?
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, if you look at the terms of reference of the censure motion, I have actually adjusted it to accuse the government, not specifically an individual member of the government. I believe that this censure motion should proceed for the purposes of maintaining proper justice and the operation of proper justice without ministerial interference in the Northern Territory.
Madam SPEAKER: It is very hard to make a judgment when I do not quite know what the debate will be about. My previous comments stand: you should be very careful of what you say. I will ask the attendant to distribute these notes that I have on sub judice convention so members can read them.
Perhaps some of the wording of that motion may have been implicating by naming Warren Anderson. This sort of implication might be a problem. If we go ahead with the censure motion, would you please be guarded in what you say because, remember, it is still before the courts. I would like a copy of the motion to read.
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, at the outset, it is clear that the government is going to try to interfere at every opportunity with this particular censure motion because they do not want to hear what is contained in it. Therefore, I seek leave to table something I was going to table much later in the censure debate. It is an e-mail from David Coles to several staff members in his own department.
Leave granted.
Mr ELFERINK: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I will table that shortly.
We have reached a fascinating situation where the minister is refusing to answer even simple questions in relation to his conduct, and the way he has behaved in relation to a prosecution conducted in the Northern Territory. I direct members’ attention to the media release issued by minister Ah Kit on 9 November 2003. I quote from the release:
It is interesting to note the date on that, because they were the first comments made publicly by the minister for animal welfare.
It is very curious that the minister was clearly aware of this much earlier in the piece. He had already been in discussions, obviously, with Mr David Coles, the CEO of the department, because on 16 October 2003 Mr Coles had written this e-mail to several members of his staff. It is worth reading the whole e-mail into the Hansard record as several parts of it have to be revisited. The subject is ‘Tipperary Letter’:
It is curious because, if you look at the original media release, this e-mail was issued seven days after he says he received advice from Mr Freeman. Although he does not mention Mr Freeman’s name on 9 October, the fact is we know it is Mr Freeman as he is named in this e-mail. We know the source of information is Mr Freeman because he was the star witness in the prosecution, which subsequently failed. We will revisit Mr Freeman shortly.
There are several aspects to this particular e-mail which are of great concern. One is that the minister stood in this House yesterday and lied about the fact that he had received no advice from the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The DPP comes under the control of the Department of Justice. I remind honourable members of the words uttered in this House yesterday by the minister, and the minister repeated them in the House today. What did he say?
And he goes on.
That is clearly at odds with what his own CEO was saying he was going to do. Do we know that the minister was talking to the CEO? Absolutely. Why? Mr Coles’ e-mail says: ‘The minister may wish to make this matter public’. Here was an opportunity for the minister to grandstand because he was going to knock over a high profile person. Of course he was aware. Do you think that the CEO of the department would launch a high profile public prosecution without advising the minister? Not a chance. Do you think that a CEO of a department would launch into a prosecution without advising the Director of Public Prosecution’s office, or the Department of Justice? Not a chance. Of course, the Department of Justice was advised, and consequently the DPP. How do we know that? Because there was an e-mail from the CEO of the department saying that the matter was going to be referred to the Department of Justice.
Curiously, the minister comes in to this House and says: ‘No, we did not go to the Department of Justice. We contracted out. We sought independent advice’. Who did they go to? Da Silva Hebron, a firm of solicitors, and they secured the services of Elizabeth Fullerton SC. For those people who are unaware of who she is, she has to be one of the most gun QCs in Sydney, in fact, in Australia. She comes with a price tag guesstimated in the order of $7000 a day. The minister advised this House today when the member for Nelson asked how much this little prosecution cost that it was somewhere in the order of $120 000, and there are a few bills still to come. I will be very fascinated to find out what the rest of those bills are. Do they include hotel bills, hire car bills, aeroplane bills? I think not. I would suggest to you that the price that is being paid is going to be much higher than anything this minister will ever admit to.
However, they get a gun QC from Sydney to prosecute this case. It would be curious to know if the minister is prepared to table the travel itinerary for that particular QC. He tells us that she briefed the witnesses prior to the case, therefore, I would be curious to know on what date she arrived. I would like to see her travel itinerary as I would be surprised if she would have had time to brief the witnesses before the case. And if she did brief the witnesses before the case, I have a sneaking suspicion that she would have discovered some of the aspects that came up during the cross examination. It does not take a rigorous and thorough cross-examination to run into the two issues that Mr Freeman fell over on.
Indeed, I draw members’ attention to the an article which appeared in newspapers on 5 August 2004, and I quote from that article:
On 7 October 2003, Mr Freeman, the star witness for the prosecution, finds out he is going to be sacked. He wants to buy the animal collection in question and he is in charge of looking after them. He sits down and thinks about it for two days and all of sudden decides that there is not enough feed to feed those animals, and telephones the Northern Territory government. There should be a little alarm bell ringing for the minister and investigating officers by this point. Why should there be a little alarm bell ringing? Because it should be time to start doing some digging. The minister tells us it was not him, it was his public servants who investigated at Tipperary where they found there was no food. I would be curious to know exactly what the extent of that investigation was. I would put money on it …
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Earlier in this contribution, the member for Macdonnell said that he was tabling, and was given approval to table, an alleged e-mail. It has not been tabled yet, and I would ask him to table it.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes, he has it now.
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, I have just handed it to the attendant. I need the document and he is photocopying it as quickly as he can.
I am very curious about what happened next. The two staffers - or however many staffers - from the department or the welfare authority go to Tipperary and who did they speak to? Were I investigating it, I would speak to the person who made the complaint, which I am sure they did. Doubtless they were shown around and they were, I guess, shown some empty sheds and told there was no feed, which is what they recorded.
The minister thinks: ‘Oh, here is an opportunity. I will step in and start providing feed’. No problem with that at this stage. He starts supplying feed, but then the investigation seems to run a little flat. Why does it run a little flat? Because the minister has decided to make the investigation public within seven days of it commencing. Why do I know that? Because it is in the e-mail from Mr Coles.
In seven days, Mr Coles says the minister may wish to make the matter public. Absolutely, of course, he wants to make the matter public. Within seven days, we presume that the minister has decided that he is going to commence a prosecution. Indeed, I would suggest from the flavour of the comments made by Mr Coles in that e-mail, that is exactly what they were planning to do: launch a prosecution. However, they had to line up their ducks.
The problem is that the minister, in his enthusiasm to protect starving animals, an enthusiasm that he certainly had not shown on a prior occasion when his own property in Katherine had a starving horse on it and he had no interest in pursuing ...
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member is making unsubstantiated claims against the minister. The minister explained earlier in Question Time that he took immediate action to address that issue, and I ask that he withdraw that.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Continue, member for Macdonnell.
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, he simply did not engage in a prosecution and, as the minister responsible, he could have ordered one in the same way that he ordered one in this instance. That is the problem.
Mr Dunham: Big difference.
Mr ELFERINK: Big difference. The minister says that he finds animals starving to death a matter of personal distress. That is in his media release of 9 November. Why does he not prosecute a person with a starving animal on his own property in Katherine, when within a week of an investigation starting into a high profile person he is already looking for ways to make political mileage out of it? That is a very interesting question indeed, and it is not one that he has answered.
Within a week the minister has decided that it is time for a prosecution. He has not called in anyone from the CIB at this stage, although he is already thinking about making it public on 16 October. ‘We need the CIB as quickly as possible’, says Mr Coles. What was the result of that investigation? Will the minister table the CIB investigation into the matter in question? It would be very interesting to see exactly what steps were taken.
What happens next? Charges are laid and the whole thing turns into a circus because they make a complaint about some 1800 animals against three sections in the act and they suddenly realise that it is very difficult to pursue the case. So the whole thing, 1800 animals starving to death, is reduced to one case - one case only. What is that case? One rhinoceros starving to death is the allegation. We have gone from 1800 down to one.
By this stage, of course, the minister has made all sorts of public comments. For example, on the AM program of 14 November 2003 - we are talking about national media - Mr Ah Kit says this:
So the government said:
The minister is on radio and in the newspapers telling anybody who will listen, parroting the one source of information he has, and that is Mr Freeman, the manager, whom he refers to on the AM broadcast on that particular day. Based on that, the minister launches into a prosecution. That prosecution is overseen by the Department of Justice. How do I know this? I telephoned Mr Anderson, who asked me to speak to his lawyer, Mr Jeremy Giles. I spoke to Mr Giles and I asked him to tell me about the prosecution. He said: ‘Oh yes, there was a Department of Justice officer …’. I did not get a name from him but it was a Department of Justice officer overseeing this particular prosecution.
The minister stands up in this parliament and says: ‘Oh, no. We never sought advice from the Department of Justice’, when Mr Anderson’s lawyer is telling me there was a Department of Justice officer overseeing the case, or keeping an eye on the case. That is very interesting. I wonder who has the best motive to tell lies? I believe this matter did go to the Department of Justice and section 13(d) of the Director of Public Prosecutions Act states:
Section 11(1)(b) of the DPP act states:
(1) The functions of the Director:
One would think the coherent approach in government would be that the very able QCs in the Department of Justice might be able to run a summary prosecution. That is the other important issue you have to remember: we are talking about a summary offence. This matter was heard on a complaint, not on information. In terms of court proceedings that means it is heard in a lower court. It is a small matter. It is not something that needs to go to trial in the Supreme Court. Television footage confirmed it was indeed heard in the lower court. The matter is heard on complaint, yet one of the best gun silks in Australia was flown in from Sydney to prosecute a summary offence.
This is not starting to look like somebody who wants a prosecution. This is starting to look like somebody who is getting awfully nervous about some of the things that he has had to say. We have to speculate a little as the minister, when asked some pretty straightforward questions in this House today, lied. He deceived this House and went out of his way to avoid answering questions that he did not want to answer.
The minister now has to go down the road of pursuing this case. He is obviously talking to his CEO who is ultimately a lawyer serving the government and will do whatever the minister directs. It is on the record that when a CEO does something of which this government does not approve they put out a media release condemning that CEO. These CEOs and public servants are now starting to live in an environment of what I would describe as fear; therefore, of course they are going to be very concerned.
The question is: why? Why would the Minister for Community Development go down this path so vehemently, so destructively and so recklessly? I will tell you why: because it suits him. It is in the nature of this particular minister to engage in vindictive conduct; and that is what he has done. His approach to this has been so rash that, within a week of being advised, he had already decided to make the matter public. By 9 November they were making it public. Why? For no other reason than to be vindictive.
Here is a lesson for the people of the Northern Territory. We have a government which is prepared to actively involve itself in the prosecution of cases before the House. We have a Chief Minister who is prepared to pronounce guilt, in spite of the fact that the courts, through the normal hearing process, have discovered a person to be innocent. We have a government which has threatened - and I remind members of the quote:
That is a threat:
The message is clear to the people of the Northern Territory: if this government wants you, they are going to get you. That is really the message that you can draw from this. When a Chief Minister says:
This is the real message coming from here: this government does not care about the judicial process of the Northern Territory. It does not care about truth in this House.
The Chief Minister was lying here today when she said there was an action, when there clearly was not. She stood up in this House and told lies to us as well. This is the most outrageous action you could possibly engage in, and this government is still sitting here and laughing. I ask those backbenchers who are sitting here today: do they really want to continue to support what is clearly a government that tells lies and is clearly a government prepared to use threats to get its own way?
This minister, damned by the e-mail of his own CEO stands condemned. Why is he damned? Because it clearly demonstrates that he has interfered at every level in that particular e-mail. Yet, we find this government sitting here laughing and joking, and thinking that this is just a great joke. It is not a great joke.
I also point out that this government, in defence of this minister, has decided to protect that minister from civil litigation by paying for his costs. That is curious, isn’t it? There was a Cabinet decision for a former Chief Minister which said, in the process of doing your job, you will get covered in case of litigation. Guess what? This Cabinet turned around and said: ‘Nope, we are not going to protect that former Chief Minister. Stuff him! He can go and pay his own costs’.
They were going to be wonderfully perfect and they were never going to get sued for anything. They were warned at the time that one day one of them was going to get sued. Well, guess what? That time has come and what do we find? The government rallies around its minister and says: ‘Oh, there is litigation coming’. I believe it is an act of unspeakable bastardry …
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! That is offensive language, and I ask that it be withdrawn.
Madam SPEAKER: That is very unparliamentary, member for Macdonnell. Please withdraw it.
Mr ELFERINK: I withdraw it, Madam Speaker. It is simply unspeakable that they have the audacity to sit there and say: ‘We deserve protection that no other people deserve’. They claim to be the friend of Territorians but what they are proving themselves to be, is highly arrogant.
They had a wonderful opportunity today to apologise for their conduct. They relied on a court case which was predicated entirely on the statement of one person who was thoroughly discredited; easily discredited in the courtroom under a summary investigation as being a witness who was totally unreliable. As one person put it to me, the guy would probably have testified to the existence of Santa Claus if he thought it was going to help sink Warren Anderson.
This government’s excitement, its desire to go out and passionately attack Mr Anderson, has landed flat on its bum.
Madam SPEAKER: Watch your language!
Mr ELFERINK: Mr Warren Anderson has demonstrated the courage to say, ‘No, I am not going to cop this’, which has cost him upward of $200 000. How many other people living in the Territory when this government decides to go after somebody and fly up a silk to prosecute a summary offence is going to have $200 000 lying around to protect themselves? This government has acted in a reprehensible way. They have lied to this House, they have been deceitful and they have cheated.
The Chief Minister and her minister have besmirched the good name of an innocent man and they have failed to correct their own statements and shortcomings. They should be condemned for it. I urge all members, right thinking and honest members of this House, to support this censure motion because it goes to the very heart of good governance and the legal system in the Northern Territory.
Mr AH KIT (Community Development): Madam Speaker, I refer members of this Assembly to my comments during Question Time and I will repeat those comments for the benefit of members.
Charges in the Court of Summary Jurisdiction were withdrawn on 5 August 2004 against Owston Nominees No 2 Pty Ltd controlled by Warren Anderson. As a result of information received from the manager of Tipperary Wildlife Sanctuary last October, a government employed veterinarian and an animal welfare officer investigated the supply of food to the animals at the sanctuary. The officer reported that there was insufficient quantity of food available at the time of his inspection to feed the animals. The matter was brought to the attention of the Animal Welfare Authority. Feed was supplied to the sanctuary by the government during the period 10 October 2003 to 11 November 2003. There was 112.68 tonnes of hay provided at a total cost of $29 211.60. A further order for pellets was made on 22 October 2003 at a cost of $1320.
Letters were sent to the owners of the animals on two occasions, 16 October 2003 and 21 October 2003, seeking immediate action to address the situation. The owners did not provide feed for the animals. As a consequence of the investigation into the information given by the manager referred to earlier, and because there was an insufficient quantity of food on hand when the animal welfare officer inspected the sanctuary, legal advice was obtained as to whether prosecution action was appropriate.
The solicitors advising the government sought the advice of independent counsel; charges were laid consistent with that advice. Due to the complexity of the case, one of the country’s leading prosecutors with experience in similar matters, a Senior Counsel of the Sydney Bar was engaged to lead the prosecution on behalf of the Animal Welfare Authority. After speaking to the authority’s witnesses, the Senior Counsel advised that the case was based on reasonable grounds and that in her view there was a clear case to answer.
During the hearing of the charges, the key witness of the prosecution underwent a lengthy and probing cross-examination by counsel representing the defendant. The cross-examination and re - examination of the witness was completed on 4 August 2004 when the case resumed after an adjournment. At the conclusion of the evidence of the key witness, the advice of senior counsel and other lawyers representing the authority was that a finding of guilt was unlikely. Acting on that advice, the authority properly withdrew the charges. The company made no application to the court for its costs. I repeat: the company made no application to the court for its costs.
The matter was launched in the public interest and when it became clear that the prosecution was not likely to lead to a conviction, it was dropped, again in the public interest. It is not yet possible to provide a final figure for the cost of pursuing this case. Invoices totally $120 000 have been paid. There are some yet to be received. The owner of the animals, Owston Nominees No 2, was invoiced and all accounts for feed have been settled as at 10 March 2004.
Enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act requires that the owners and carers of animals take their responsibilities seriously. Where owners appear not to take that responsibility seriously, it is incumbent on those responsible for the administration of the act to take action.
Madam Speaker, I believe that the opposition is acting irresponsibly in this matter. The authority received independent legal advice to prosecute and the authority prosecuted. That was the responsible and appropriate thing to do.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Madam Speaker, I thought it was appropriate today that we stood with such pride in the Main Hall of this wonderful Parliament House and talked about Tipperary Investments and its involvement in its construction. It happens to be that the gentleman we are discussing today was involved in the construction of this building, which seems to be a little bit strange, doesn’t it?
I want to talk about what happened in my relationship with the Warren Anderson affair since I have been elected to parliament. This prosecution occurred shortly after I became the member for Katherine. Prior to that, I was interested in purchasing or acquiring the animals for a sanctuary in Katherine. That sanctuary would have provided a much-needed economic boost to the community through tourism and employment. This prosecution was launched toward the end of extensive negotiations I was having with interested parties about developing the sanctuary very close to Katherine. Despite the fact that the idea was considered laughable by some members of government, it was positively considered by the Katherine community and would be of benefit.
Negotiations were under way with a local vet who was a member of the syndicate who had been to Tipperary several months prior to this prosecution and inspected the animals. At the time I started discussing with him the formation of the syndicate, he said that the animals were in an extremely fit and healthy condition, there was plenty of food. At that stage, of course, we had not even reached prosecution. He said that, as a matter of fact, he considered the animals fat.
Early in December, I visited Tipperary Station with David Gifford from Whirl Tree Station to inspect the animals with a view to continuing negotiations to purchase and relocate them to Katherine. Whilst I am not a qualified vet, I can recognise the difference between a fat hippo and a skinny one and a fat rhino from a skinny one. That is exactly what I saw. I was left in no doubt that the animals were perfectly healthy and in no danger of dying of starvation. On a scale of one to five in fatness and health, they were four, which is considered fat. We viewed all the animals, including the herd animals. Some were near the end of their life and possibly needing to be culled, but the general wellbeing of them was extremely good, which was evidenced by the great number of young animals we saw.
Shortly after this visit, the gentleman who was the key witness in the prosecution case came to see me in Parliament House. He wanted to talk to me about acquiring the animals for his own use. He did not have the financial means to acquire them. However, he had a collection of what he said were letters of support from different organisations. They were so fanciful. I think there was even one from Elton John saying that he would financially support him. These letters were not signed or dated, or on letterhead. This was the sort of person who was actually talking to members of …
A member: Jack’s pack.
Mrs MILLER: Yes, Jack’s Pack I guess we could call them - the minister’s pack, putting together a prosecution case against Warren Anderson. Quite frankly, I could not wait for this gentleman to leave my office because I found him quite creepy …
Ms Lawrie: Lucky you are under privilege.
Mrs MILLER: I am under privilege and I have no hesitation in saying it …
Ms Lawrie: Yes, and you are abusing it.
Mrs MILLER: I figure that the person who made these claims that the animals were without feed, and had no money to purchase them, had nothing but an ulterior motive in saying what he did.
It is hard to believe that the Minister for Community Development’s advisors and informers had any conversations with this gentleman prior to the prosecution. If they had, I believe they certainly would not have gone ahead with it as he was not a credible witness. There was absolutely nothing he said to me that could or should have resulted in a prosecution. I can only wonder what the motives were for the Minister for Community Development to continue on regardless.
At the time negotiations commenced, the parties interested in establishing the sanctuary at Katherine believed they had several months to relocate the animals. Unfortunately, due to the decision by the Minister for Community Development to proceed with the animal cruelty charge against Warren Anderson through Owston Nominees, the whole process was derailed. Quite understandably, Warren Anderson negotiated a sale agreement with another Territory station which was able to act more quickly than the syndicate - which was still being formed - to reach a sale agreement. It goes without saying that the people of Katherine were extremely disappointed that the opportunity for a new venture was taken away from their community.
What intrigues me is that the Minister for Community Development acted quickly to lay charges against Warren Anderson through Owston Nominees, without proper investigation, yet I know of several cases of alleged animal cruelty which have been reported more than once and not one prosecution has been made in relation to some of these very serious charges. Why was there such a rush to prosecute Warren Anderson at whatever cost? Minister, did your decision have anything to do with the fact that Warren Anderson has such a high profile? Do we have one law in the Territory for alleged cruelty of animals by the wealthy and another for the not-so-wealthy? That is the message this has sent out. What particularly concerns me, is the fact that the evidence shows the Minister for Community Development contrived with others to manipulate the dates of stockfeed delivery so as to concoct this prosecution against Warren Anderson.
Madam Speaker, I rest my case. This has been a failed prosecution. I also find it extremely embarrassing, and would like to see how you are going to get out of this one, minister.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I do not normally speak on censure motions. However, I believe this one requires some comment. Members of parliament may or may not know that, when I first signed up for parliament, I signed a form which said I would oppose any no-confidence motions in the government, unless there was a proven case of corruption or gross public maladministration.
At this stage, I am not sure whether there is a gross public maladministration case to answer, but I am very concerned about what I have heard today. Madam Speaker, I also take note of the advice you have given me on sub judice convention, and what the member for Macdonnell has given us as a motion today.
As you will have gathered from the questions I asked today and yesterday, I am seriously concerned about what has happened. I will not vote on this motion. I will rest my case as I believe there is more information to come out which we need to hear. I am concerned about who made the decision to prosecute and on what advice; who made the decision to drop the charges; who did the checking; and who did the background on these charges before they were first introduced. I am also concerned about public comments made, which I have here from various media files.
Madam Speaker, I am taking on board your advice as I am certainly not experienced enough to challenge what I see here under sub judice. However, I believe it is the right thing for me to say that there is something wrong here and it needs a lot more investigation. I have not seen enough evidence today.
I am always concerned when I see motions that include ‘lying to this House’. To me, that is an extremely serious statement and I would not vote for that section of this motion unless I was 100% sure that was the case. However, I am certainly concerned that what happened has cost taxpayers a lot of money. I have always believed that government should be very careful in the administration of our taxpayers’ taxes and we have already heard that $120 000 was spent on this case. Therefore, even though I will not vote on this particular motion, people will get the gist of where my support is.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, the progress of this debate has certainly reminded me of why we have courts and sub judice conventions which put some constraints over the way in which affairs are conducted in this House. For members’ benefit, I will read out the pertinent section of the sub judice convention which was distributed by Madam Speaker. It is this:
There are very good reasons for these conventions - what we pay our judiciary and our magistracy to do is to get beyond idle or ill-informed conjecture about what motivated someone to take a particular action; whether the laws of our jurisdiction have been contravened; whether the evidence to that effect or to the effect of what motivated people was believable, or could be weighted in a certain way. In other words, the court offers an objective process of testing the evidence that would substantiate an allegation of an offence. They also offer an objective process by which what people say around the community about each other can be testimony in the context of some sense of fairness and justice, both to the benefit of victims of defamation and to the perpetrators of defamation.
My colleague, the Minister for Community Development, has read out a factual account of what happened in the first of the court cases that have occurred as a result of this matter. That factual account tells members, in detail, what led to the court action taken by animal welfare; and the basis on which the authority proceeded to take that action which was not based on ministerial urgings. It was based on the opinion of an outsourced legal firm - not by the DPP as wrongly asserted over there. We had further opinion from a senior counsel brought in from New South Wales who has a background in this type of enforcement action. There was a clear process as to why this action was taken, which has been outlined today.
You can conjecture all you like about what my colleague might have felt, or thought, or said to himself, or to anyone else, around this action being taken. However, the facts are, and have been tested for all to see through a court process, that there was a legal opinion sought and given; there was a decision made, not by the government, but by the agency to proceed to a court action; the court duly heard the quality of the evidence that was available; and on the basis of the evidence not being seen to be capable of leading to a prosecution, the action was dropped. That is not uncommon in our court system. It happens on many occasions where evidence that was thought to be there, on testing was not going to provide the basis of the prosecution. The comments around this debate today have been drawing a fairly long bow on much of this.
If you need any other evidence of the difference between a legitimate court action and a kangaroo court which we have seen here, you only need to go to the actual wording of the censure motion that was brought forward today. Can you imagine initiating an action in a court action and having this sort of language thrown at the accused? ‘The outrageous conduct and fanatical pursuit of Owston Nominees’; ‘Reckless indifference that they have shown to the proper process of justice’; and ‘The lying to the House and to Territorians’. Can you imagine that sort of language leading any court into an objective process? What we are talking about here, is like the old cowboy films where the poor bugger is locked up in a cell …
Madam SPEAKER: Watch your language, minister.
Dr TOYNE: … awaiting a trial - in fact, To Kill a Mockingbird is a good example - and along comes the lynch mob. ‘Let us forget about the evidence or whether the person has their day in court; just string them up straight away’. That is what this exercise sounds like today. I know for a fact that it is not progressing the cause of justice one iota to be proceeding on this sort of line.
There is another court case potentially pending. Writs have been served before a Western Australian court. That makes this matter sub judice under a civil action. We are constrained on what we can say about this matter, as indicated by my colleague and certainly by the Chief Minister during Question Time. We cannot enter into conjecture about matters that could potentially come before the court if a defamation action proceeds.
We are playing by the rules. We are conforming to the conventions regarding sub judice and we will continue to because I, for one, as Attorney-General, am not going to see this House turned into a kangaroo court where we are going to cut across the due process of the justice system and where we deny, or attempt to deny, proper justice to any person regardless of which side of the House they belong, or the matter at hand. People should have their day in court according to the proper principles of justice and we are going to do everything we can to make sure that is not contravened by what happens here.
Madam Speaker, I move that the motion be put.
Motion agreed to.
Madam SPEAKER: The question is that the censure motion be agreed to.
The Assembly divided:
Ayes 10 Noes 13
Motion negatived.
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The censure debate having just concluded, this document has only just been seen by me, and I would like to have more information on its derivation. However, I would point out to the House, that there have been many occasions where we have talked about matters that are on foot in the courts. I believe it is a matter for the judgment of the Speaker, and I agree that if there are areas where we stray they should be tested.
This is a major departure from where we have been in this House over many years, where matters on foot in the courts have been discussed. I can recall, for instance, where I talked about a case before the Power and Water Authority. I gave much the same answer that it was a matter before the courts, and the now Chief Minister’s retort to that was, ‘Gutless, gutless’, for those who want to look it up on the Parliamentary Record.
My point is this: it provides a very convenient hidey hole if the government can say: ‘There is a threat of litigation, or there is litigation, I am not going to talk about it’. I believe with the separation of powers, this House has very different parameters to the court system.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Drysdale, I advise you that those notes were prepared for me as Speaker on a previous occasion when we had a court action which had been referred to in the House. They were given to me for advice in my discretion. I felt they were worthwhile to give to members today, particularly as we were discussing a case which I have since learned is listed for 1 September in the Western Australian Supreme Court. That is where it came from and that is what it has been used for in the past. I have used my judgment whenever anything has been referred to, but we are talking about cases that are before courts, not cases that are over.
Mr DUNHAM: Therefore, the document is merely useful rather than a prescription?
Madam SPEAKER: It is not a standing order. They are notes for the Speaker to use in her discretion when making judgments. It is like other notes that I have when there is a question of order of some sort that I seek additional information on - as I have seen you do when you go to your second or third edition of the House of Representatives Practice.
Continued from earlier this day.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, prior to the luncheon adjournment, I was talking about equality of our teachers, and had referred members to the Teacher’s Registration flyer, which indicates endorsement should be automatic unless a teacher is subject to inability or disciplinary measures, and for teachers who are two and three-year trained. Once a teacher is registered, according to clause 39(1) of the bill, the extension of registration each year is automatic on application by the registered teacher. That is it. Every year, you put your application in and it goes through. But, in the minister’s own words uttered in August 2002, he said:
In his second reading speech, the minister further reinforces that by speaking about the board establishing professional standards for teachers based on board consultation, etcetera. Having said that, the minister then introduced this bill and one of the functions of the registration board listed in clause 11(e), only gives the board the authority to liaise with the Department of Employment, Education and Training for professional development of teachers. That is hardly giving much power to the board to enhance teacher quality. All they can do is talk to DEET.
I am not a teacher, but I would assume there is a differentiation between primary and secondary school teachers. I might be treading on dangerous ground - or difficult ground more than dangerous ground; I repeat, I am not a teacher – but I would assume that it is rather difficult for a subject specialist in secondary school to teach a primary class. I would also assume it would be somewhat easier for a primary school teacher to teach in a secondary school area. However, either teacher could seek professional development, which would allow either to move from one area into another more smoothly.
What about the teachers who are not four-year trained who have come from areas of industry - music teachers, tech teachers - but have an innate ability to teach? I am sure many school principals have known lots of people who have not gone through the formal process of being trained as a teacher, with a great innate ability to teach. They make the best instructors that I have come across. There must be some sort of flexibility in the legislation to allow these people to teach and, perhaps, achieve teacher status or teacher registration, and not having to remain as an authorised person to teach.
The CLP supports teacher registration; do not get that wrong. We do support teacher registration, but we will produce a system that will enhance the professional standing of Territory teachers. We will introduce a system of professional development for teachers. We will explore a system that will have the capacity to weight the type of professional development undertaken by a teacher, formally recognising the professional development undertaken. Then you remunerate the teacher accordingly. That way, you say: ‘Here is a professional development structure. You go do it, we will recognise what you have done, and then we will reward you for having done it’. With this system, the better teacher you are, the greater the rewards.
To give a practical example; as a doctor my professional body conducts professional development courses. They measure the value of each course, giving relative weight to its training and counting that as points. Then they say you will be given a three-year period to accumulate, say, 10 points, which will satisfy the learned bodies that you have done adequate professional training during that period of three years. An example, I received today by e-mail this reminder from the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners of which I am a member. It says:
So, there are systems already in existence that provide proper professional development. I understand that in consultation this was a fairly major issue. I would like to see it being brought back. I know that nurses, for instance, have continued to work in their professional area to obtain their registration, and with professional development can become higher qualified nurses with higher financial rewards.
Finally, I want to address a concern that has been expressed to me by many people about the impact of the Secondary Education Review on teacher registration. The implementation of the recommendation to a quality services agency will subsume this legislation. I am asking the minister to explain where he sees the Teacher Registration Board bill fit into the recommendations of the Secondary Education Review, or as it is now called, Priority Education. The Secondary Education Review was written on the premise that some 3500 remote, indigenous students have missed out on secondary education, but that is another debate to be had at another time.
When you come to the report, this tome, some 400 pages, or 350 pages of - I will call it something else later on - I refer you to Chapter 12. It talks about quality and accountability and the recommendations contained therein, that chapter which is relevant to our debate today. Recommendation 44 says that:
This agency will …
There are several dot points and I will read those that are relevant to the Teacher Registration Board:
incorporate the role and responsibilities of the proposed Teacher Registration Board to advise on those appropriate to be registered as teachers and the quality of their work.
This recommendation impacts directly on the Teacher Registration Board bill and I wonder where we go from here. In his second reading speech the minister makes no reference to this at all. People in the community have been wondering what has happened and the minister has continued to be silent about it. He says: ‘I have to consult with the people’. He said nothing about it, absolutely nothing.
Mr Mills: No leadership.
Dr LIM: No leadership. He has mismanaged the whole process of this particular document. I will leave that for debate for another day.
There are many weaknesses in this bill. It is a common garden variety bill that does little for teachers. If this government is serious about lifting the professionalism of teachers, they will ensure that the concerns I have raised will be addressed adequately and satisfactorily so that teachers see themselves as the proud professionals they are.
Teachers are probably the most important professionals in our community. They are responsible for the wellbeing, academically and technically, of our children and providing a safe environment in our schools. Therefore, we have to pay due attention to their needs and professional development so that we can continue to improve the educational outcomes for children in the Territory.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I am pleased to support the minister on this bill today, which is a matter dear to my heart. It goes back to the time when we were in opposition and I had shadow Education responsibilities, and to negotiations that I had with the AEU - particularly with Robert Laird, who was the secretary at that stage - regarding a Teacher Registration Board and its establishment within the Northern Territory.
On settling the policy that we took into the last election, I announced the broad outline of what is in this bill at the AEU Annual Conference. This received huge applause from the 200 to 300 people attending, so I am pretty sure that teachers out there are going to welcome this legislation. It does move the status of the profession on in the Northern Territory by providing an independent body to represent it on matters of professional accreditation and the quality and nature of professional practice. These are very important matters for teachers as a profession to have a focal point. Teacher registration does that which is why the AEU was very keen to see a board introduced in the Northern Territory.
A major objective of this legislation is to deal with monitoring and overseeing the quality of our professional teachers and their professional practice. One very important aspect is to have an organisation that can act as a watchdog over serious malpractice on the part of teachers in a role that parallels the role of police and our courts regarding any criminal elements to actions taken by teachers as members of their profession. It is important to have that dimension of professional scrutiny on the behaviour of teachers, given that they have a major duty of care and a position of trust in respect of the students for whom they are responsible.
In the provisions within the legislation, sections 55, 56 and 57 provide mechanisms for the board to follow up on allegations regarding serious misbehaviour by teachers, whether that is allegations of sexual assault and paedophilia, common assault, or some other form of malpractice. It is very important to understand the impact of a teacher’s behaviour on a school and its community.
I am a person of some authority on that topic. During the period I was a principal in Territory schools, unfortunately, I had no less than three people who were subsequently found to have been paedophiles. I can certainly report that, when you are a principal and parents or community members come to the school and report that one of your teachers is interfering with their kids, it is probably the most difficult professional situation any principal and the school community can be in. In my experience, the teachers become polarised around either their support or objection to the accused staff member. This can be extraordinarily ugly when it occurs in the daily life of the school. The community is looking for immediate support for the parents who, quite rightly, have high levels of concern and anxiety about what might have happened or might still be happening to their kids.
That is a very volatile situation. It is one that cannot be left to sort itself out. Going back to the 1990s, it was not unknown for the Education Department to move an accused teacher from one community to the next, rather than dealing with the allegations and any associated problem that might prove to be borne out by the evidence. We cannot afford to have that sort of fate visited on our communities or our schools. We have to have a very forthright approach and mechanism to respond to allegations, not weeks after, not even days after - hours after the allegation is made in the community there has to be a response.
I have spoken to my colleague, the minister for Education and, in line with the policy document that we brought forward at the last election, I believe we can get a good process in place where appropriate people can be at the site of an allegation quickly enough to cut out any further damage or loss of trust in the community, save the staff from the volatile and often destructive reactions people have when one of their colleagues is in that situation, protect the teacher if the allegations are false, and certainly protect the kids from any further potential harm. It is important to know how this is going to work in the field. I welcome the minister’s undertaking that we can work on the actual mechanisms by which this legislative framework can be put into action to protect kids, teachers and communities. This is an incredibly important aspect of this legislation.
I believe the education community, generally, will welcome this. I take note of the member for Greatorex’s comments regarding professional development. It is important to have an independent professional body involved, and that is certainly provided for in the way that this board will operate. We can look forward to having a new mechanism which will stabilise the recruitment and retention of teachers. It gives far greater certainty and status to the practice of teachers in the Northern Territory.
For all those reasons, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I welcome this bill today and its debate in the House. It is a very important step forward.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I advise the minister that I agree with the concept of a teacher registration board and act. It is long overdue for a profession such as this and the ACT is now the only state or territory not to have one.
As an ex-teacher, and because of feedback I am getting from teachers, there are issues I wish to raise with the minister, if he could provide me with some answers. Some teachers are feeling nervous because they may suddenly find themselves not eligible for registration for all sorts of reasons. When I started teaching, I had a certificate, but continued my professional qualifications throughout my career and now have a diploma, a degree and a graduate diploma. However, there are many long-term teachers who have not done that and are still less qualified, but are no less a good teacher because of it. With the nervousness that is there, my main concern is that we might be discouraging these teachers from staying in the Territory. I hope this is not the case.
Sometimes, I question the products that the universities send out to our schools. As an example, when I was 16 and had finished my matriculation I was too young to go to Teachers College, and was given a student traineeship in a school. In that 12 months, I learnt to teach. It was not when I went to college where they told me about the theories, religion and multiculturalism that made me a good teacher. The good teacher was when I was actually in the classroom on the ground with the students. I have always been grateful that I was given that opportunity to do those 12 months before I ever went to Teachers College. It certainly stood me in good stead.
This particular act – and I just hope we are not going into over-regulation. I always …
Mr Stirling: Richard does not think there is enough.
Mrs BRAHAM: I believe that we should not have too much red tape which bogs down professionals who are doing a good job. I believe we have to be careful that we do not get bound up.
You are creating a bit of a monster. You are going to have an EO1, AO6, AO3 to run this particular board; 12 board members with a chairman. You are going have travelling allowance; accommodation, air fares - you name it. You are creating a monster, are you not? For what reason?
I would like to see some things in the act that are not there, although may be in the regulations. For instance, you talk about minimum qualifications and an accredited course. However, in the definitions in the act there is no definition of what the minimum qualifications are and what an accredited course is.
I hope that where we are going will allow room for innovation for introducing different types of teacher accredited courses, other than just university courses. We could look at mature-aged people in our schools who do not have qualifications and their on-the-job training could count towards some sort of diploma or degree, because often they are very good teachers. I believe we should be thinking about offering teacher traineeships, almost like an apprenticeship that we have now where apprentices do some work in schools, some on the job, but they still get all their theory done as well. I was hoping there would be opportunities to be innovative and not stick to the same tried and true accredited university course. Even though I realise that is a little aside from this act, I hope, minister, you will keep that in mind because it is certainly something worth having.
I know of a principal who has a person working for them who is not a trained teacher. The principal spent many hours a week with this teacher - who is an excellent teacher now - training them on-the-job. It has been a very successful relationship. It is in a private system, and I know that the principal would hate to lose this particular teacher because of his affinity with students, his dedication to his job, and the way he is able to pass on information to the students. We do not need to be so locked in to an accredited course. We need to think a bit more laterally about that.
I also question the functions of the board. They seem very broad when you look at the objectives of the act. You talk about the board developing and improving professional teaching standards, and developing competencies of teachers during early stages. I would have thought that was the job of the Department of Education. I would have thought teacher development would be their role, not the board. I am not quite sure how the board fits in to that particular section.
You say that registration has to be implemented by February 2005, and this also involves criminal checks for every teacher who has been employed prior to 1996. You are talking about 1800 teachers out of 3000 who, as yet, have not had criminal checks. I am well aware that we have to be very careful of anyone who works with young children and we now have criminal checks for people working in child care. I am not saying we should not have criminal checks, but there is nervousness out there amongst some very experienced teachers who have been around for a long time who may have past misdemeanours -unrelated to child offences - which may cast a cloud upon them within our system, although they have passed on from those events which happened perhaps 20 or 30 years ago. Criminal checks need to be treated with sensitivity. I would hope that all information is confidential and does not in any way mar the good reputation of any teacher presently within our school system.
Could the minister reassure me that the demands made upon the police to carry out these 1800 checks will not disrupt their normal operations? That is a lot of checks for the police to do in a short period of time. Will it affect their normal day-to-day operations, or can they just press a button and get an answer? I hope also, minister, that if they are not completed by February - and you are asking for a lot to be done within six months - no teacher will be stood down or disadvantaged due to this overload. I would hate to think any teacher is disadvantaged because of the bureaucracy that you are creating.
I note that a change of address notification must be given with 28 days or a penalty applied; something I have discussed with your office, minister. I know the amount of effort required for a teacher to move from, say, Papunya to Maningrida. The last thing on their minds is probably notifying the board that they have moved. It is not a priority for them. The priority is to make sure they transfer family and belongings successfully, and settle into their new school and class. I suggest to the minister that if they overlook notifying the board, they are not doing it on purpose, therefore, to penalise them is unrealistic. You have to put a penalty there and that is why I put forward an amendment to change the notification period to 90 days; a figure I feel more acceptable. Remember, also, that the department would have this information on their files if they transferred a teacher. It is not as though they are disappearing.
There are other organisations which require notification of change of address, for example the Electoral Commission, but no penalty is attached for not doing so. It was the penalty which prompted me to bring forward the amendment. I ask all members to support it as it recognises the distances and difficulty of moving around the Territory. Particularly, it recognises the need for teachers to be able to settle into a new school and class without the hassle of having to register with the board.
I also ask if annual re-registration will be made easier with a renewal notice being sent out, similar to getting an automatic notice to renew your driver’s licence or car registration …
Mr Stirling: The answer is yes.
Mrs BRAHAM: I have had representations regarding severance of people who have not had teacher qualifications and I am pleased the act enables them to continue teaching. However, I am concerned that the teachers who have to seek authorisation through their principal every year may feel that they are being devalued or unrecognised for their efforts. I want to be able to give an assurance that the fact they can only be authorised every 12 months is not an impediment to their career or profession. There are many teachers who do not have teacher qualifications, including some of the TAFE teachers who come into our secondary schools, as well as some of the teachers in private schools. They need to have that reassurance.
It was unfortunate there was no provision for an exemption within this bill for registration rather than just authority, to be based on the strong recommendation of the principals. I know it goes against what you are trying to do to set a standard for teachers, but the Territory is unique. In the 1960s when I arrived, we had one-year trained teachers. We had two-year trained teachers. I guarantee there are people out there who are still at that level. You may think it is not a good thing, but I say they are probably still doing a good job.
I also ask whether people working in office positions, such as student services, curriculum, and head office, have to register? Does it mean they do not have to register until they go back to a school, or do they automatically become registered under the system?
Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the move for registration of teachers. I believe we have some of the finest teachers you can get in our schools and that our schools are a credit to the staff who are dedicated to their profession. I would be dismayed if this process becomes so arduous that it discourages many of our lesser qualified teachers and they leave the Territory. We need to encourage them. We should ensure that, whatever the process, it is not confronting to our professionals, it does not question the professionalism of our teachers and it is sympathetic to the situation of teachers teaching in the Territory. I support the bill.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Mr Deputy Speaker, the opposition supports the legislation, but I reflect on the passage of this over my time in the Chamber. As shadow minister for education, I raised the issue a number of times of the status of our teaching profession and the need to enhance the quality of the profession. The minister would listen sympathetically and say: ‘Wait until we get the Teacher Registration Board. I understand what you are saying. It is a debate held at every level of consideration of education issues, not only in the Territory, but nationally and internationally. Do not worry; wait until we have the Teacher Registration Board’. We were promised a massive four-wheel drive, and we received a Mini Moke. It is not able to deliver the expectations raised in any of the discussions about how, in a radical way, we move the status of the teaching profession forward. How do we do that? During those discussions over the last three years, I was led to believe this mechanism would allow that to occur.
What we have is an adequate mechanism for registering teachers which I thought was the base level requirement: a means of registering teachers to strengthen the quality control over qualifications, and so on, within the teaching profession. We went further than that in our discussions and considerations of how we elevate the status of the profession in the eyes of the wider community. That is directly linked to professional development. I find that component, that opportunity has been lost. The minister might say: ‘No, it is referred to,’ but it is referred to in such a manner that it has no bite to it. That, to me, is the traction which is going to take the teaching profession from where it currently is - how the teaching profession feels about itself, and how it is viewed in the wider community - as we start to provide adequate and well-crafted professional development that is clearly recognised and rewarded and the profession moves forward.
That is where we need to put our attention. Some may not want that within the profession. I understand that the education union - I do not know this on direct authority - started to moderate that component of the Teacher Registration Board so what we end up with is simply a registration board. It provides the appropriate safety mechanism in terms of is this teacher who is teaching my child qualified? Yes, we can work that out. Does that teacher have a criminal record that I need to know about? That screen is there, but there are far more serious issues to attend to and we have lost that opportunity. I am saying, and echo the member for Greatorex, that we will go further with this mechanism to provide that component.
I focus on this area because of a paper written by Dr Kenneth Rowe of the ACER, entitled, The Importance of Teacher Quality as a Key Determinant of Students’ Experiences and Outcomes of Schooling. I read this last year and it impressed me immensely. With all the discussion about recommendations and innovative ideas in the education review, the comments made in this paper, are an important reminder of where we should be focusing our attention. I thought that the Teacher Registration Board would provide the mechanism to deal with that central issue. I read an extract from Dr Rowe’s paper:
That is where we must strike, with clear focus and determination, to deal with that issue. I agreed with your federal leader, Mark Latham, on this aspect that:
Through the Teacher Registration Board and the clear recognition of professional development, and reward for professional development, we have the means of affirming the effort that the profession takes to strengthen the quality of the profession, to learn more as a teacher, and that it be recognised and rewarded, so the profession informs and strengthens itself. To find that component has become much quieter, is a serious concern - an opportunity lost.
The members for Braitling and Greatorex have raised important points in this debate, but it is the broader issue of how we use this legislation to raise the status and increase the quality of the teaching profession that we need to focus on. Those issues have not been properly addressed, and what we have is simply a Teacher Registration Board. We have lost an opportunity. It will be taken up with appropriate policy from the CLP to ensure that the teaching profession is enhanced and the quality improved, so that the outcomes of education which are most clearly linked between a quality teaching profession and the interface that the profession has with a student, will bear the greatest result. That is the focus of policy formation for the CLP.
One issue, which may have been raised earlier, is the cost of a police check. Will that be compensated for, for non-government teachers?
Dr Lim: I asked that, and the minister said yes.
Mr MILLS: You asked that? Okay. I note that the professional development component of this legislation, as outlined in the second reading speech, says it has the capacity to liaise on behalf of teachers. I believe it is inadequate.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I am coming from a different point of view than previous speakers. I am not a teacher, although I was under the hand of teachers for many years. Whilst I welcome the new legislation, I also believe there are areas which could have been better looked at. We are missing an opportunity to do things that would not only improve the teaching profession, but hopefully rub off on the children they are teaching. I thank the minister for the opportunity of a briefing on the legislation, during which I raised some of the points I am about to make.
Why is registration not automatic following completion of a teacher training course? I would have thought registration would be included in the teacher qualification. Someone has spent four years training and has a piece of paper saying they are a qualified teacher. They know they can teach well, but are unable to do so because they are not registered. Surely the police checks and whatever else, should have been done so that registration is automatic upon someone qualifying as a teacher? It seems to me that if someone has gone to all that trouble training, they should automatically get registration.
I welcome the section on the authorisation to enrol unregistered people. That is a good area that can be expanded on. I have said before that there are opportunities for older people in our communities to teach in schools. I have said that with special regard to males. Everyone is aware that there is a shortage of males in the teaching profession. Older people who have retired, or who have been made redundant, often have a lot of life experiences and qualifications behind them. If they go through the correct channels - that is, have a police check and tests to see if they have the right attitudes to be able to teach because that is important - I believe they should be able to be registered. This is an important section in the legislation and should be expanded on at a later date.
The member for Braitling asked why unqualified people could not eventually be registered. There is a clause in the bill which leaves that fairly open. I refer to the pamphlet which says something like teachers can be registered subject to certain courses. It was fairly vague on what those courses would be. The idea of authorising an unregistered person to work in schools could be combined to advance those people to fully qualified teachers, through undertaking courses while they are teaching. It would encourage authorised people to enter the teaching profession if they knew they could eventually be registered. If you have to be registered year after year, this could work against this idea.
Another concern I have is where students leave school, go straight to teachers college and then straight to teaching in schools. I have mentioned this situation before and I do not think it is ideal. Within our registration of teachers there needs to be some way that a teacher cannot teach in a school unless they have been employed for a period of time in another occupation. Recently, I spoke informally to the CEO of the teachers’ union about this. He said one option might be for the government to provide funding for a trainee teacher to work, say, six months in another industry. This a good concept as it would broaden the vision of young people coming through the teaching profession. It would be good for them to know what kids are in for when they leave school and try to find a job. I believe this is an opportunity that is being missed. There are scholarships available through the Commonwealth for improving one’s education by entering the workforce, but that is usually for teachers who are dealing with a specific part of the workforce, or a specific skill that is required. My suggestion would allow all teachers who have not been employed in another occupation to gain experience in other areas and that is healthy for our teachers.
I am also concerned at the size of the board. I realise it is supposed to represent a lot of people, but when you consider what the board is for, you have to ask why it has to represent all those people? Basically, it is there to register teachers. The police checks, surely, are done by the police and, if something comes up negative you do not need 12 people to tell you a person should not be employed - it is there; according to the rules, you cannot be employed.
You also do not need 12 people to tell you if a person has the proper qualifications, or whether they have paid their fee. I know there are other functions and I take note of what the member for Braitling said, as to whether some of those should be done by the department or the university – that is up to debate. However, it does appear to be a large board and I wonder if the reason for the registration fee is to cut down its costs which are expected to be $440 198 in 2008-09 whilst only receiving $180 000 back in registration fees. I always fear the size of the bureaucracy in the Education Department when we struggle to get teachers in schools, especially music teachers. I would rather work on a slim registration board – this is a cricket team with a 12th man included. It is a pretty big board, and I am not sure we need that many.
It seems to me that you are automatically registered as a teacher for the rest of your life as long as you pay $60, so why bother with re-registration? What is the purpose of that registration except to raise revenue? It seems a pointless proposition. However, if that registration has something that says: ‘Yes, we as a board have checked your ability to teach. We have taken note that you have improved some of your qualifications,’ or ‘We believe your standards have dropped and want you to do some extra courses, but will register you again for another year’, that is acceptable. It is acceptable if there are some components of improving one’s skills, of checking whether those skills are still relevant and are still being delivered in a proper manner. I can then see the point of having a $60 re-registration fee. But except for raising money, I cannot see the point of having an automatic registration. It does not make sense.
When I get my car registered, every year I do not just hand over $450. It has to be taken to the MVR to see if it still goes. If it is rusty, I have to have the rust taken out. If the tyres are bald, I have to get the tyres replaced. I am not saying that teachers are like rusty old cars, but if we are looking at improving our standards or at least keeping our standards to the level they are today, then we have to have a carrot with that re-registration.
There is an opportunity we have missed. I take on board what the member for Greatorex said, that there is professional development, but it is not only professional development. Once we had school inspectors. I have never known why they were abolished because the idea of a school inspector was a good one. Basically, you are making sure, on the ground, that the teachers are delivering what they are supposed to be delivering. Inspectors were neutral; they were not the principal. You might say that the principal does that job, but the principal is part of a school and it would be a fairly hard job for someone who works with those teachers day in day out. A school inspector went around as a neutral person and checked that the teachers were doing their job as required, the curriculum was being taught and the skills were there. If we are not using that system, then use the registration system to maintain, improve and encourage teachers to do a better job. That is not saying that they are not doing a good job, but we need to make sure that standards are not dropping below a certain level.
Finally, I would like to mention Batchelor College. I notice in the flyer which was sent out, there is an apology. In The Northern Territory Teacher Registration Board, Bulletin No 2, it said that the Bulletin had failed to acknowledge the Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education as one of the two major providers of teacher education in the Territory. That gives rise to the question of how indigenous teacher qualifications fit into the registration. I imagine a registered teacher is a fully qualified teacher. I may not be right, but my understanding of indigenous education teachers is that they can only teach at certain schools because their qualifications are not as high as someone who has gone through university. Therefore, can they be registered under this scheme, or are they registered under the authorisation? This is worth an explanation.
I support the idea of registration. I also support what the members for Greatorex, Braitling and Blain have said: that there is an opportunity to use this registration as a way of improving professional excellence, you might say, in the sphere of teaching which is very important. We must maintain and improve our standards if we are to teach and bring children up in Australia which, as a famous prime minister once said, is going to be the clever country.
Mr STIRLING (Employment, Education and Training): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the members for Greatorex, Stuart, Braitling, Blain and Nelson for their comments in what has been quite wide-ranging input, above and beyond the teacher board. Many of the comments were pertinent and I am always attentive when the member for Nelson speaks about matters of education, as he does come from a solid, commonsense basis in terms of what should work and what would be good. I will finish my opening remarks in relation to the support from members which I appreciate. I also appreciate the support from the opposition in relation to the bill overall.
I pay credit to the member for Stuart who developed this policy paper long before the last election was held. It was put forward as Labor party policy, in the event a Labor government was formed, that we would have a Teacher Registration Board. Therefore, the origins of this derive from the member for Stuart in his time as shadow spokesperson for education. In that sense, three years on after the election, it remains very much his bill and he has been involved with the development of it.
I will go to some of the issues raised during this debate, starting with the comments by the member for Nelson which are last and freshest in my mind. He spoke about having a mandatory type of intervention between the time the student leaves secondary school, goes into tertiary education to obtain teacher qualifications, and then back in the classroom without a break. This not an uncommon practice and, in fact, our scholarship system encourages Year 12 students to get a teaching scholarship to become teachers and then go back into the classroom.
I am always reminded of an incident in 1982 when I was relief teaching in the south-east Queensland area, at little coast resort called Bargara which was nestled in the heart of the Queensland sugar cane industry. I turned up at this delightful little primary school, about 15 km out of Bundaberg on the coast, nestled in 12-foot high sugar cane. The principal met me on arrival and said that the teacher had left a teaching program, so just go in. ‘It is a Year 4, nice little group, good kids, you will be right; just follow the teacher’s program’. Come mid-morning at this little school, where the sugar cane trolleys ran straight past the building - many of the mums and dads of the kids would have worked in the sugar industry - and, lo and behold, when I get to the social studies part of the day, the lesson plan is ‘the story of cane’. I nearly wept because, if there was one thing these kids knew and understood, it was the story of cane. Their families’ lives revolved around it. Their dads worked shift work. You could smell the cane and the molasses in the air from the crushing mill down the road. They lived it, they breathed it, and here was a teacher going to give them the story of cane. Well, I did not. Instead, I gave them a lesson on the three levels of government as they operated in Australia.
This left me feeling something was wrong in the system and, on inquiry - I was not snooping but I was interested in the background to it – I discovered it was a Bundaberg-born, fairly young teacher, who had only left to attend teacher training in Townsville. As the Queensland system required, she had gone west, out to the bush, to teach for a couple of years, hell-bent on getting back to Bundaberg, where she had been born and educated, and wanted to teach. I thought this was a very narrowing educational process. I felt for those kids, in the sense that there was not going to be a lot of mind-expanding stuff going on in the classroom with a teacher of that ilk.
Therefore, I have always been attracted to, in some way, mandating world, life and work experience outside the classroom. You have preschool, transition, primary, secondary school, off to uni or college, teaching qualification, and back in the classroom - a young person who has never worked or seen industry or business, and how it operates on a day-to-day basis. Maybe we resolve this by simply working with the department to see how we can adjust it, and what it means in terms of discrimination. If you mandate it before they get the scholarship, they may disappear, or find something else they want to do, rather than come back to teaching. This is fine for the individual, but we could lose a quality teacher in the process, so there has to be a balance. I am taken with the idea, and if the member for Nelson keeps saying it, we will have to act on it some time, because he is right in part.
The member for Nelson also raised older workers, people with trade backgrounds or from other professions, coming into teaching, and how you might get them across the board in terms of a teaching qualification. If you refer to the bill - I will also pick up issues raised by the member for Greatorex - under clause 11(d), the board is required to:
That gives the board responsibility for liaison with Charles Darwin University and Batchelor College to structure appropriate training courses for teachers.
That sort of area could apply to late entries, and the people you are talking about coming across. RPL - recognition of prior learning process – could be picked up under that. For a person who has been doing TAFE instructing for a long time, that sort of prior learning and experience has to be taken into account, weighed up on merit, and worked toward, and contribute to, the qualification the person is looking for in order to get across the line with teacher registration. It is a process that works very well in the United Kingdom as a recruitment initiative. Our institutions have to offer these sorts of courses, without the person having to do a four-year degree, so that you can get them up to the mark. They could be authorised to teach, anyway, without the qualification.
It has to be done in a lot of areas. An example I came across recently was a music teacher in a school who was teaching violin. From memory, she had been a violinist in the London Symphony Orchestra. What a wonderful gift for that school - a violinist from one of the great orchestras of the world teaching a small group of students violin. Not a teacher, but I do not think you are going to jump up and down and say: ‘We are not going to let you near our kids’. She is a wonderfully gifted musician who will be able to take a small group of students through, and master what is one of the trickiest instruments in the world of music - wonderfully skilled. That person will have authority to continue to teach.
At another school I was in on Monday morning, in Year 1/2 a couple of people came into the room to take the next lesson which was RE, religious education. They were not trained teachers, but have been going to schools, and this school in particular, for many years. They are going to be authorised to teach by the principal. We do not want to lose the skills and attributes of people like that who come into the classroom and offer whatever expertise or value that they are adding to the curriculum. This was referred to as a ‘monster’ by the member for Braitling, and referred to as a ‘Mini Moke’ by the member for Blain, so I am not sure what we have. Perhaps it is more a medium-size Holden, but it is not going to roll over these kinds of practices that are well established and add value to our system.
I will be all over the place while I try to pick up the different points made by members. The member for Nelson talked about teachers in industry. There was such a program in the Northern Territory, which ended five years ago. It was modest funding: $42 000 for the final year which paid the relief cover for two week placements, or contract employment to cover ten week placements. There is currently a Commonwealth program that funds careers advisors to work in industry and the focus is work experience for students. I am prepared to look at that again, particularly for those people who have responsibility for career advice. They need to be right up to the mark in terms of emerging careers, new job opportunities and the type of qualifications and pre-requisites that are required to get into those newish industries. CPI would have added something over five years; $40 000 or $50 000 a year is not a lot for the value you might get from such a program. I thank the member for Nelson for raising that issue.
It is not a demand we put on other professions, but people do feel quite strongly that because they are working with and developing children, teachers ought to have a broad view and knowledge of what goes on in the workplace. The member for Nelson spoke about the board being large at 12. I can tell you, mate, it was hell of a battle to get it down to 12. We had a lot of criticism and a bit of heat to get it down to 12. Queensland has 16; Western Australia, 19 with two university vice-chancellors in that 19; Victoria, 19; Tasmania, 10, but they are very small; South Australia, 14, and New South Wales, 18. Therefore, our 12 is modest in comparison to other jurisdictions. It does not make it right, but it does not make it wrong. I resisted the initial moves to have it up to 18, and we worked at it to get it to 12. The question can be revisited in the future if it is thought that is not enough - views were not able to be expressed through the membership - but, the way the membership has been worked, it is quite broad across the educational structure in the Northern Territory and ought to serve us well.
In relation to criminal history checks, which the members for Blain, Greatorex and Braitling raised, 1455 teachers in government and non-government schools are currently without criminal history checks. The government will pay for these. It has already budgeted about $43 000. DEET’s application for CrimTrac participation is currently with DEET legal services in the Department of Justice and we are given every assurance that it should be operational later this year. The member for Greatorex had a concern that if it was not operational by the beginning of next year, we ought to implement mandatory three, four or five year police checks on teachers. We would be loath to do that. CrimTrac should do it for us, and be operational before the end of the year.
The member for Greatorex also raised some curious points about notification and whether the person who is the subject of complaint receives advice. It is very clear under clause 50 that:
I am unsure if I am not reading that right or if the member for Greatorex has another view. We will go into committee to deal with the member for Braitling’s committee stage amendment and members will have the opportunity for questions if I have that wrong, or if there are other issues that I have not covered, but it appears straight forward to me.
The member for Greatorex asked about the Mutual Recognition Act. The Northern Territory registration system will ensure eligibility for registration in Australia and New Zealand. They will have to pay the fee and the legislation surrounding that - the Mutual Recognition Act (NT) 1993 and the Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition Act 1998 - pick up those points.
Two members also raised the idea of undergoing a professional development every two or five years. This was looked at very closely. We want to encourage professional growth and for the board to do that through advocacy, rather than punitive measures and the extra bureaucracy that constant checking and re-checking would require. The professional development role of the board requires that it must liaise with the department and advise on professional development opportunities. I talked about its liaison role with teacher training institutions as a way of helping people to get across the scheme, and to make sure those courses are available. Some of the functions of the board, as contained in clause 11, are:
…
(b) to make recommendations to the minister in relation to the minimum qualifications and other requirements for registration;
This is important. It is an independent body of advice coming to the department from what, in essence, is a teacher board because it is almost all teachers on the board.;
(f) to develop and improve professional teaching standards;
Which is not to suggest that it does not do that at any stage of a teacher’s career. The catch-all is:
(i) to research and promote best practice in teaching in the Territory…;
Every one of those dot points goes, in part and as a whole, to the larger question of professional development.
I was unclear about the questions surrounding the Quality Services Agency as a recommendation in the Secondary Review, and how that interacted or cut across here, notwithstanding that no decision at all has been made about a Quality Services Agency and whether government would have one.. I am not sure at this stage what the feedback in the consultative process has been around the Quality Services Agency: It is not strong, in the sense that I have not been besieged with people saying: ‘You have to have a Quality Services Agency and this is what it should look like and this is what it should do’. The proposal around this Quality Services Agency was to appraise the performance of the department overall, not the performance of teachers.
The concept of teacher registration applies to all teachers, government and non-government. The Quality Services Agency would have been focussed looking at DEET and its role in the provision of education services. Perhaps the member for Greatorex might want to come back on that, but I do not see a difficulty, notwithstanding that we have not made any decision about a Quality Services Agency. However, I have not been bowled over in the rush to set one up.
On the question of teacher performance versus pay, or the relationship between the two, Dr Nelson was very keen on the concept that you had to reward performance in the profession with higher rates of pay. The member for Blain said this was one thing he agreed on with the federal leader of the Labor Party, Mr Latham. Mr Latham may have said it, but I have not seen or heard it. However, Dr Nelson, the federal Minister for Education, is of this ilk. It was, I think, the member for Greatorex, who said the better the teacher you are, the better the rewards should be.
In part, our system does do that, in the sense that the first year out, on dollars for performance, the teacher is on probation. Then there is a promotion system from ET1 through to ET9. The other route through that is the teacher of exemplary practice, who may be promoted out of the classroom and into administration, assistant principal or principal, and their wonderful skills as a teacher lost to the student body. They could go that route of teacher of exemplary practice and get greater reward because they are regarded as a teacher of exactly that, exemplary practice.
On top of that, the principal is responsible for performance management across their school and body of teachers, and responsible for implementing inability procedures against a teacher who, for whatever reason, is not cutting the mustard. What intrigues me about this performance for pay question is: how do you rate the quality of the teacher at Scotch College versus the Year 2 teacher at Gunbalanya with a group of kids with English as a second, third and fourth language?
The teacher at Scotch College turns out high quality output. They are a private college and they chuck out anyone who is a nuisance to them. They have wealthy and upper middle class kids in their care, high performing kids, and if they are not high performing, they are given the boot anyway. So the teacher, providing they are a teacher of substance, is going to produce some strong results at Scotch College. Whereas for the teacher at Gunbalanya, with the Year 2 group of 20 or 30 kids, it is going to be a tough call for a whole lot of reasons.
What are we going to say? That the teacher at Scotch College, because of the awesome results they continue to produce year after year, is a far better teacher and must come out with a far greater salary than the teacher of Year 2 at Gunbalanya who cannot get the kids to read and write? Look at the results. They cannot get to MAP, they cannot get literacy and numeracy, so we are not going to pay that teacher anywhere near as much. There is no question there, no evaluation. There is no look at the student cohort, or social context of where that school is, where the students come from, any social difficulties, or any language barriers.
It is simply bizarre to say that that Year 4 teacher had better results in that school than the Year 4 teacher in the school down the road, so we are going to give them a 15% pay rise. That is not the way to go, in my view. You cannot measure across classes within schools, or measure school to school without taking into account a whole range of other factors and it will not be the way we go. There is a process and a path for the highly-qualified, highly-skilled teacher through the teacher of exemplary practice. It would always be a tough call on teachers prepared to go out bush to demonstrate, by way of outcomes at least, that they are truly teachers of quality and their results prove it and, therefore, they should get more pay.
I have another note here: CrimTrac has already indicated that they can manage large numbers fairly quickly. The question of no hits and presumably no record of anything is between 24 and 48 hours, which is pretty good.
Dr Lim: You are going to tell me that you are going to be definitely on CrimTrac first day of first term next year?
Mr STIRLING: The information and the advice I am given today is that there is no question that they will be up before the end of this year. I will be staying in touch with the department to ensure that is the case.
The member for Braitling raised an interesting issue in relation to a teacher who may have done something a little naughty – maybe a little more than a little naughty – some time ago, and what that might mean. That is something that will have to be looked at. Let us say it happened when they were a uni student doing teaching back in the 1970s, and - who knows? I am not going any further in drawing a scenario. However, let us say there is something on the record that they would rather not have there, and it comes up. They finished their teacher training and have had an exemplary career as a teacher over 20, 30, 15 years - who cares – a wonderful teacher who has never put a foot wrong. All of those things would have to be taken into account, I would imagine, and a balance drawn.
I know - and it seems that the member for Braitling also knows - of individuals perhaps in that category. I would not have undue anxieties, and nor should those teachers. I would not think, and would be surprised, if any were knocked back over something as far back as that.
In relation to the two- and three-year trained teachers, I do not know the numbers. There may well be two-year trained teachers still out there who would be approaching the end of their working career. When I entered teacher training in 1976 it was a three-year course, so they would have done their training some time prior to that. I do not know when it went from two-year to three-year and then on to four-year. However, suffice to say they are right. They are through and have been teaching in our system. Whether two- or three-year trained, they have been teaching all those years and that is taken into account and they are automatically registered.
The difficulties and the issues we have to work through are those areas the member for Nelson was talking about, where they are authorised year by year. Music teachers, religious education teachers, those categories of people, will be all right. It is the bringing across, perhaps, of the older worker with the trades background - very useful in VET-type situations in the school - who may want to then work through and say: ‘I want to be a teacher; I want to be registered as a teacher’. We have to get those institutions to provide what I see as bridging-type courses, taking into account what they have done and getting them up to the mark.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I apologise if I have missed any points, but members still have the opportunity, when we go into committee, to raise any further questions.
I acknowledge Ms Jean Memery from the department, to whom we owe a huge debt of thanks. This bill has been led very much by her, and others. She has been a central figure in it and I want to put on the record my thanks to her and the department for what has been a busy time in and around the consultation. My thanks to all the others who have contributed to the process along the way, including the different union organisations which have had their views, and COGSO. Right across the board, the entire teaching and education community in the Northern Territory has been consulted to death on this, I think. Thanks again, Jean, for your assistance and for your assistance today. Do not go away because we might get more questions.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Mr CHAIRMAN: The committee has before it the Teacher Registration Northern Territory Bill 2004 (Serial 239) together with Schedule of Amendments No 85 as circulated by the member for Braitling.
Bill, by leave, taken as whole.
Dr LIM: Mr Chairman, the minister spoke earlier about the function of the board and whether it does provide adequate professional development. He raised clauses 11(d) and 11(e). I would like him to explain in greater detail if he can. He suggests that clause 11(d) provides the board with the powers to provide professional development for teachers. I suggest to him that clause 11(d) is about the board negotiating with the Charles Darwin University to develop courses for teachers doing the four-year teaching course. If the minister is talking about something different, I would like to know about that.
Mr STIRLING: My reading of it is:
What jumps to mind is, for example, if you are going into the bush, or have a need for a cross-cultural type background, or if you are going to be teaching in indigenous communities, an awareness of those areas and the importance of English as a second language as a teaching tool in the Northern Territory. In fact, we direct some of our scholarships to students looking to qualify themselves with English as a second language skill because of the great need across our system. On the question of special needs education, working with the disabled, we know that is a huge need and have been working to address it in relation to the extra 100 teachers coming on. However, the need is still there. The teacher can liaise with those institutions about those areas of professional development.
There are also the questions as I alluded to, from the member for Nelson, in relation to a TAFE lecturer, an older worker, a carpenter, plumber, joiner, electrician; those who have been delivering in a TAFE sense and have teacher experience. They have real hands-on experience which can be demonstrated, and perhaps they are working in a high school with vocational students doing VET courses. They say: ‘Well, this ain’t bad. I want to be a fully qualified, registered teacher’. Under this, I would say that the board could work with Charles Darwin University or Batchelor College to say: ‘This is the profile of this particular person. This is what they have done. What does it mean in terms of recognising their prior learning, or their prior experience? They are a tradesman, and they have worked as a TAFE instructor for so many years. How can that be counted against a formal teacher qualification? On top of all that, what else do they need to do?’
Therefore, instead of having to do a four-year degree to become a registered teacher, you would work it down taking into account everything they had done, and being awarded merit and points towards the qualification. This is the outstanding element before the board would register you as a teacher in the Northern Territory. That will be a valuable piece of work and add real value to the system across the board.
Dr LIM: I am satisfied with that response. It gives clarity to the way Charles Darwin University can approach courses and people. I agree that VET teachers in particular, but also tech school teachers and other teachers, can achieve teacher registration with bridging courses.
Mr Chairman, I have other issues to raise with the minister.
Mr CHAIRMAN: You can raise anything you like, member for Greatorex, until we get to clause 85.
Dr LIM: Referring to clause 13, the minister assured us that CrimTrac will be on deck by December this year, or early next year, and I accept that. However, could I have an assurance that, at the first sittings next year, the minister will give us a report on whether DEET is on-line with CrimTrac by the first day of the first term of 2005?
Mr STIRLING: Mr Chairman, I undertake to write to the member for Greatorex as soon as the CrimTrac system is in place. My very strong advice is that it will be before the end of this year, and I give an undertaking that I will advise him when it is operational. If he does not hear from me by the end of the year, he can start jumping up and down.
Dr LIM: Thank you. I am happy to defer to the member for Braitling for clause 28.
Clause 28:
Mrs BRAHAM: Mr Chairman, I move an amendment to clause 28(1), that the words ‘28 days’ be omitted and substituted with the words ‘90 days’. I believe I explained clearly in my address earlier the reasons for the amendment.
Dr LIM: Mr Chairman, I have some comments on this amendment. The member for Braitling approached me about this by e-mail yesterday. I told her I would not go to the wall on this issue, but that I thought 90 days was particularly long, and that 28 days was fair enough.
I draw your attention to clause 38 of the bill which may not relate to this. It deals with an appeal against a decision not to register and that the appeal must be made within 14 days after notice of the board’s decision is given to the affected person. My point is this: there is a person working in Darwin who has a problem and may be de-registered; they decide to take off and work somewhere and not let the board know. You have 90 days to inform the board after the misdemeanour is discovered. The board wants to contact this teacher, but has no way of doing so for 90 days.
Suppose a parent complains to the board about the teacher. Concurrently, the teacher shifts, say to, Alice Springs, and does not advise the board of their change of address. The board is unable to contact that teacher to say: ‘There is a complaint, and we are investigating it’. What do you do? This teacher may be involved in something messy. You are creating a register to provide a safe environment for our students, so why are you making it more than four weeks? Four weeks is a long time. Doctors have to change their address in seven days, as do nurses and lawyers.
Mrs Braham: Do they get penalised if they don’t?
Dr LIM: Oh heck, yes. They get de-registered.
Mrs Braham: No penalty?
Dr LIM: There is a penalty. The penalty is, in fact, 20 units. You are talking about two units here. The penalty is 20 units.
Mrs Braham: But if they are registered? If they leave the Territory, then it does not matter?
Dr LIM: No, it does not. A health practitioner can change address from Alice Springs to Darwin. Under section 46 of the Health Practitioners Act, the practitioner has 30 days to inform the relevant board of his or her change of address. Failure to comply incurs a penalty of 20 units. In clause 28, it is only two units. You are creating a teacher register to provide a safe environment for kids, yet you allow 90 days for someone to advise a change of address. I am not going to go to war on this, but think about it.
Clause 52 relates to another issue that says you have to advise the board of notice of an indictable offence. A registered teacher or person in relation to …
Mr CHAIRMAN: Member for Greatorex, we are …
Dr LIM: This is all relating to …
Mr CHAIRMAN: Yes, I know, but we are only dealing with …
Dr LIM: No, I am saying that clauses 38, 52, 53 …
Mr STIRLING: It might be easier if we can we just deal with that one.
Dr LIM: It is. I am dealing with clause 28, all right? Clause 28.
Mr STIRLING: You are dealing with clause 52.
Dr LIM: No, I am dealing with clause 28. I am speaking to clause 28, about the member for Braitling wanting to amend it to make it 90 days. I am saying that other clauses in your bill, clauses 38(2), 52, and 53 talk about 28 days. It is inconsistent.
Mr STIRLING: The question of consistency does not bother me there. When I have a quick look at clause 52, there is a completely different context in and around that.
Dr LIM: Of course it is.
Mr STIRLING: Let us take Jim Smith, teaching at Borroloola. The department transfers Jim to Ross Park in Alice Springs, as per the example put by the member for Greatorex. Something comes to the board’s attention about Jim Smith, former teacher at Borroloola. They find out from Borroloola he is no longer there. Oh, what do we do? A simple phone call to the department: ‘You have Jim Smith, formerly teaching at Borroloola, in the system?’ ‘Yes. He is teaching at Ross Park’. ‘Call him in. We want to talk to him’. Simple as that. The change of address would not necessarily affect the board’s ability to get hold of him. The department says Jim Smith left Borroloola, never heard of again. Well, he could be anywhere but, certainly, if they were in the system the department would know, at the push of a button, where they were, what class they were teaching and what principal to contact.
I did have a quick look at clause 52 in relation to where 28 days appears in other clauses and other contexts. In fact, I support the member for Braitling’s position on this and will support her amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr LIM: Mr Chairman, I refer this question to the minister. The member for Nelson raised in his debate people from the Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education. What happens to students who are not competent in English in this sense? If you go to BIITE and get your teaching degree and then return to your community teaching vernacular, and your English is really not up to standard, what happens there? You have a teacher’s registration, but according to clause 33(2)(b), you have to be competent to teach, which includes having a good command of the English language. Is there an issue here?
Mr STIRLING: I take that as an insult upon the Batchelor Institute for a start.
Dr LIM: No. That was what was asked by the member for Nelson.
Mr STIRLING: There are teachers of indigenous background teaching in my electorate. Teachers like Raymattja Marika. Some of them are strongly qualified teachers in the system - black or white - with a superb command of English! I know of no indigenous teacher that has come through Batchelor Institute, qualified, out there, without a great command of Her Majesty’s English, thank you very much.
Dr LIM: It is fine for the minister to call me all sorts of names and accuse me of all sorts of things. I am asking a legitimate question.
Mr Stirling: I have answered it.
Dr LIM: In the flyer, put out by the department, minister, there is a section headed, ‘English Language Proficiency’. I will read it to you:
Dr Burns: Or Malaysia.
Dr LIM: Hey, you think that the Singapore teachers are not adequately trained in English, and perfectly good teachers? The department staff will tell you that they are perfectly capable of teaching, but they have to go through an IELTS exam. I am asking a fair question. When other members raise it, it is not a racist question - but when the CLP raises it, it is a racist question! How dare you accuse them? I say to you, and I have said to many members of the teaching profession, that many of our teachers across the Territory are of a very high calibre. I asked the question and it is a legitimate question. If the minister is happy with that, that is fine. I hear the reassurance and, if the reassurance is there, what is the issue?
Bill, as amended, agreed to.
Bill to be reported with an amendment.
Bill reported; report adopted.
Mr STIRLING (Employment, Education and Training): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
CORONERS AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 235)
Continued from 16 June 2004.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, this will be very short; much shorter than the previous bill.
This bill is supported for what can only be described as very obvious reasons. The bill came about as a result of the recommendations the Coroner made arising from the death of an Indonesian fisherman who died whilst being detained on an Indonesian fishing boat in Darwin Harbour. The Coroner recommended that the Coroners Act be amended to broaden the definition of a person held in custody, so that it includes a death that occurs when a person is held in custody under Commonwealth law, and not just Territory law. This amendment, as the Coroner said, will give him, or her, greater powers of investigation should another death occur.
It is a sensible amendment. It is good to see the government acting on the Coroner’s recommendation. I am sure it comes as no surprise whatsoever to the Attorney-General that the bill is supported.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the opposition for their support. As the member for Araluen said, it is a sensible amendment. It ensures that a Coroner can fully investigate a death that has occurred in the situation of a detention, under the Commonwealth laws, as well as the existing provisions that we have in the Coroners Act. It makes sure that everyone gets a fair investigation and that we get to the bottom of any death in the Northern Territory, regardless of a particular circumstances.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General)(by leave): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Mr HENDERSON (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I update Territorians on how the Martin Labor government is implementing our four-year, $75m Building Our Police Force plan, the largest ever injection of resources into the Northern Territory Police. A year ago, I provided the Assembly with a ministerial statement on what the independent O’Sullivan Report said about police resource needs, and provided an overview of the Building Our Police Force plan. I now seek to update the Assembly on the implementation of the plan and provide details of the impact of this unprecedented injection of resources into the Northern Territory Police Force. I also take this opportunity to update the Assembly on other exciting investments in policing that the government is making on behalf of the community, to give police the tools they need to do their jobs.
Members will recall that the O’Sullivan Report detailed a long list of serious problems resulting from more than a decade of under-funding and under-resourcing of the Northern Territory Police. Problems ranged from old and out-of-date equipment to the absence of satellite phones in many remote locations. Most significant was the problem of police numbers, stemming from the recruitment freeze from 1991 to 1994. A year ago, I advised the Assembly that an absolute key ingredient in delivering a new era in Territory policing would be to see a significant increase in the number of police on the beat. A government can have all the best intentions and pass all the laws it likes, but the effectiveness of these laws largely comes down to the capacity to properly resource them in terms of police strength. Passing a law is the easy part. You need police on the beat to enforce the law and keep a strong presence in the community.
Under the $75m plan the Martin government set the ambitious target of funding a record rate of recruitment into the Northern Territory Police, and a significant increase in support staff for police. A four-year recruitment plan has been mapped which involves expenditure of over $62m. I said 12 months ago that if the record rate of recruitment could be achieved and sustained, if the increased level of support were delivered and if the attrition rate of trained officers leaving was within the reasonable band, we would produce a police force that had an extra 200 police available for core policing duty by the end of 2006.
A year into the Building Our Police Force plan, I am delighted that a record rate of police recruitment is being achieved. This year we have seen graduations in March, May and August. Additional squads will graduate in October and December. Since July last year, 140 police officers have graduated from the Tri-Service College, 21 Aboriginal Community Police Officers have completed their training and graduated, and 24 police auxiliaries have graduated. The Police Commissioner advised me that, on 30 July, the combined total of police officers, Aboriginal Community Police Officers and police auxiliaries available for operations totalled 998, and that is excluding recruits and inoperative members - and it goes on. With a new intake of 27 recruits next Monday, 23 August, this calendar year 108 constables will go through the police training college. Indeed, police are well ahead of schedule with our current recruitment strategies.
To put this record rate of recruitment in context, it is worth noting the scale of recruitment we have seen in recent history. In 1998 and 1999, there was one recruit squad each year. In 2000, 2001 and 2002 there were two squads each year. In 2004, we will have four and that means more police going into our police force than ever before. Combined with the current attrition rate, this significant injection of resources is resulting in an increase strength and capacity throughout the force. This means more police on the beat patrolling our streets and suburbs, more assistance for the victims of crime, and above all, less crime and safer communities. And the increase in police numbers is being noticed. Mr Alex Tsopanglou’s Letter to the Editor in yesterday’s paper is a good example of Territorians feeling safer in their community as a result of the increase in police resources.
Twelve months ago, the Martin Labor government committed to putting a greater emphasis on attracting Territorians from all sections of our community to the Northern Territory Police force. Generally speaking, Territorians have a greater understanding of the challenges facing Northern Territory Police and, importantly, they will be more likely to stay in the Territory, and for longer.
The resulting recruitment campaign is the first of its kind in the Territory. It includes all layers of the media, from traditional mediums such as newspaper and radio advertisements, through to corporate video and cinema advertising. The commissioner has advised me that the response has been positive, with more than 100 inquiries made by Territorians thinking about joining their police force.
At the time of the O’Sullivan Report and when launching the plan, I said attrition of police officers was of significant concern to the government. For too many years, the rate of experienced officers leaving the Northern Territory has been too high, and the government asked Mr O’Sullivan to investigate the issues of retention and attrition in his terms of reference.
Members will recall the O'Sullivan Report identified the reasons for the high level of attrition as being:
The O'Sullivan Report identified some key areas where additional funding could help make the Northern Territory Police more attractive to new officers, and help keep experienced officers in the Territory. I am pleased to advise that in the last 12 months there has been substantial achievement in this area. The advice from the commissioner is that the attrition rate has dropped from 6.2% to 4%. Of course, officers leave the force at different times for a whole host of reasons. Sometimes they are linked to the organisation itself, and sometimes departures are linked to external forces like family, health, age and so on.
Overall, it can only be positive that the attrition rate is declining, and part of the reason, we believe, is the improving morale in the organisation. The boost in morale has been assisted by the injection of better resources and improvements in some working conditions. $2m in recurrent funding has been allocated to spending on small capital items, giving police better day-to-day equipment to do the job. We have seen three new state-of-the-art boats hit the water under the four year $1m boat program, with three more to come. The boats are boosting police capacity for coastal search and rescues and to patrol our waters, and that is good news for the Territory’s many professional and recreational anglers. Another initiative benefiting police is the purchase of satellite phones. I found it amazing that they were not already in place as a matter of course.
Beyond the $75m package, we are seeing a number of additional initiatives and purchases to benefit police, and Territorians, in building safer communities. Amongst them is a $2.3m plane to service Central Australia, meeting another recommendation of the O’Sullivan Report. The new plane, a Pilatus PC-12, can carry three times the load as the old Piper Navajo and reduces return travel time by around 30%. That means more police to the scene much faster.
Earlier this year, I was very pleased to formally open the new $1.8m Kintore Police Station. It is providing excellent service to the people of Central Australia as part of the innovative agreement that has been reached with Western Australia. I have been told that the health clinic at Kintore was closed 73 times last year, but has not closed once since the police station opened - a great marker for the success of this police station.
New mounted police patrol facilities at the Peter McAulay Centre are being used to support the rejuvenated efforts to have the mounted police on patrol more regularly. Work has begun on the $2m rural police and fire facility at Humpty Doo, another fulfilment of an election commitment. Work is almost complete on significant upgrades at the Ali Curung station, and I look forward to opening the new station with the member for Barkly in the near future.
Targeting people who supply and sell drugs is a priority of the Territory community and of the Martin government. In the short term, there is very exciting work being done to deliver a drug dog capacity to the Northern Territory Police Force for the first time. In recent months, we have seen the drug enforcement section deliver great results with the use of Australian Custom Services’ sniffer dogs. The Northern Territory Police will have their own drug dog unit ready for operation in early 2005.
Conditions of employment are important to police officers and their families. The government is serious about improving the quality of police housing, and $2.5m is being spent this financial year on upgrading police houses in Tennant Creek, Katherine, Alice Springs and other smaller towns. On average, $40 000 per house will be spent on 63 houses, improving the comfort levels of those officers and their families. Many police officers in locations outside Darwin have also benefited from new arrangements now in place for electricity subsidies. This has been a welcome boost in conditions for officers in more remote areas, and was implemented outside any EBA discussions.
Aboriginal Community Police Officers have benefited from the introduction, for the first time, of entitlement to remote area allowances. It was a move that was overdue and was much welcomed by ACPOs serving our community.
Combined, these changes are improving the efficiency of the workplace and, importantly, encouraging experienced officers to stay in the Northern Territory Police Force. Whilst there is still work to be done, the attrition rate has declined and is now within a reasonable band. The new recruits are swelling the numbers in the force, and we are not losing others excessively at the other end. As a result, we are on track to meet the target of 200 extra police on the beat by the end of 2006.
The influx of uniformed resources is happening at the same time as the support provided by civilian staff and police auxiliaries is increasing. One such initiative has been the establishment of a call centre, delivering on another recommendation in the O’Sullivan Report. The call centre was launched on 1 July this year, and members of the public can now report minor incidents over the phone without having to go to their police station. More than 230 people called the 131 444 number in its first month of operation, a great result. Importantly, the new call centre also keeps uniformed police on the beat longer, relieving them of paperwork duties during shifts, and keeping them out on patrol longer.
The bottom line is that the Martin government said it wanted to see more police on the streets, faster police response times, and improved levels of service for Territorians. Twelve months on, I am delighted to say this is precisely what is happening. The heightened capacity for police to have a physical presence in the community is there for all to see, and victims of crime are receiving reports from police more consistently. Mrs Sue Lowry, Executive Officer of Victims of Crime NT, has noticed substantial improvements in the service police are providing victims, and is pleased to have more police back on the beat and offering a presence that so often deters crime.
Bicycle and trail bike patrols have been reinstated in Darwin and Palmerston, and like the Alice Springs patrols, are getting great results. The foot patrols in shopping areas, such as Casuarina Square and Palmerston, are having a significant impact on addressing opportunistic crime, and businesses in particular are noticing the benefits.
The Northern Territory Police integrating core service delivery structures program is implementing a large number of O’Sullivan Report recommendations. Under this area, we are seeing enhanced training taking place. Training courses for detectives and intelligence officers are being delivered, as are leadership programs. Intelligence-led police training has taken place throughout the Territory.
Police skills and processes are being enhanced and Territorians are reaping the rewards. We are seeing police success in targeting repeat property offenders who are responsible for so much crime in the Territory. Figures sourced from the Northern Territory Police and published quarterly by the Office of Crime Prevention, police publications and the Australian Bureau of Statistics show a decline in crime rate. The commissioner advises that the crime rate has reduced significantly over the last 12 months, with a reduction in reported crime in 2003-04 similar to the 18% reduction in the 2002-03 financial year.
The crime and justice statistics for the March 2004 quarter show that during the preceding 12 months, there were nearly 6500 fewer offences across the Territory, a 30% drop in house break-ins in Darwin; a 40% drop in house break-ins in Tennant Creek; nearly 700 fewer offences in Alice Springs, including a 13% drop in assaults. In Katherine, a 19% drop in business break-ins, and a 23% drop in car thefts, and in Nhulunbuy, a 37% drop in property offences.
Sadly, whilst the number of assaults across the Territory fell by 10% over the last 12 months, the number of sexual assaults rose by 11%. Government will continue to work hard in this area, including $100 000 to domestic violence services in Darwin and Alice Springs, and the establishment of a sexual assault task force.
The positive decreases in crime have not occurred by accident, or by good luck. Crime prevention initiatives, including the work of community members and groups such as crime prevention committees and Neighbourhood Watch, have all played a part. So, too, have the suite of new laws that have been put in place to get tough on crime.
Drug house laws have seen drug houses operating near our schools and residential areas closed down. Drug dealers in particular are being targeted by new laws enabling police to freeze, and then move to confiscate, cash and property sourced through criminal activity. To date, $1.6m in property has been restrained, including real property, cash and vehicles. Property valued at $204 000 has been forfeited, including cash and vehicles.
The police effort is at the heart of the fight against crime. Police have more and better resources at their disposal, and are using their resources in an even smarter fashion. Twelve months ago, the government had a choice: stick with the old ways of under-funding the police, or create the right circumstances for a new era in Territory policing. The Territory has always been blessed with a police force that is honest and committed to serve. What we as a community and a government had to do was to provide them with more and better resources and support.
I hope all in this House will join with me in commending Police Commissioner Paul White, and all serving members of the Northern Territory Police, on the great work they are doing in the fight against crime in the Territory, and their dedication to serving and protecting our community.
The Northern Territory Police have come a long way in 12 months, but there is still a lot of work to be done. I look forward to providing the Assembly with further updates as the $75m plan and other initiatives roll out in months and years ahead.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonnell): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for his statement. I am going to do something which is not often done in this House; and that is actually attempt to give bouquets and brickbats where they are deserved.
The first brickbat, sadly, I am going to give is that this is a 12-minute statement, whereas the minister had half-an-hour to deliver a statement on an agency which is receiving $151m this year. I am disappointed that, although the statement is welcome and there are many good things in it, they were not elaborated on. I would have liked to have heard more about some of the things that are being done. A classic example is on page 19 of the statement:
I would like to have heard a lot more detail about that. I do not think it would have reflected badly on government if they had expanded on that, as it is a piece of legislation that has been supported and has been effective as far as it can be effective.
I do not want to pour buckets of derision over a statement which is describing a police force which, I agree, is in healthy condition and becoming healthier as time goes on. I do, however, wish to visit certain areas of the statement and expand on some issues that I have in relation to how the police force operates, and some of the claims made by the minister.
It is clear that the government is spending more money on police. Being an ex-police officer myself, I am more than happy to see money being spent on police. One of the most fundamental and important roles of government - before it runs Health, Education, or any of the other departments - is the responsibility to provide a safe community for the people who live in the administrative area of any particular government. In this case, the Northern Territory government has carriage of the police force, and that they are funding the Northern Territory Police Force in the way that they are, will draw no criticism from me whatsoever. I believe that is a good thing.
There are also other elements which the minister could have expanded on. One of ongoing concern to me is the PROMIS system. It is also an ongoing concern to the Auditor-General of the Northern Territory. This is a computer system which has had problems, basically, because of its line speeds. It was adopted from the Australian Federal Police operating out of Canberra and they have been kind enough to give it to the Northern Territory to operate without having to pay any of the leasing arrangements and charges. It is, basically, a freebie. However, it has had its problems and its line speeds have caused problems in the past. In fact, in the last financial year, $1.8m was spent trying to bring the system up to scratch. The Auditor-General has outlined that there have been improvements in the system, but he has also made criticisms and, obviously, the system needs continued work.
I point out that the Auditor-General did have to pause briefly to say that there are no network mechanisms in place at the moment to manage the prioritisation of the network traffic. As an example, one police officer said to me prior to the Estimates Committee hearings, where I made this comment, that he can hit the enter button after filling in the screen on the PROMIS system, walk away and make a cup of coffee while he waits for it to scroll down. I am sure the minister will report in his summation that the PROMIS system is being improved and worked on. However, this is a working system that police officers have to use, and which I would like to see operating more effectively. If it is still taking that sort of time whenever you hit the enter button to input a screen, police officers are going to get frustrated and tied up on the very paperwork that the minister says he is trying to wind back.
The Auditor-General does recommend future work, and I will be keeping an eye on it. The minister is fully aware of my attention to the PROMIS system, which I believe must be a tool that enhances a police officer’s job. It is like a set of handcuffs, or a police cell, or a police car in that it is supposed to make their job more effective. However, sometimes I worry that the reverse is true and police officers become an organ of the computer system, rather than the other way around.
I notice that the Northern Territory Police, Fire and Emergency Services commented in response to the Auditor-General that they accept the recommendations contained in his report. The Auditor-General goes on to make four recommendations, which strike me as being eminently sensible. I hope the PROMIS system will end up serving police officers better than it currently is.
I also wish to talk about page 166 of Budget Paper No 3. I have concerns about performance measures used by public service departments, which strike me as being a bit convenient. On page 166 of Budget Paper No 3, there is a qualitative or quality assessment, done and the following is listed under ‘Quality’:
The estimate for 2003-04 was equal to or better than the national average, and that was also the estimate for 2004-05. The problem I have with that is that if you refer to the ABS figures which the minister referred to, what you are doing is comparing how well your propaganda is working as a performance measure. What I mean by this is that people may feel safer at home, but the question is, are they? That is one of the issues …
Mr Henderson: 6500 fewer burglaries.
Mr ELFERINK: The minister interjects and I will pick up on it for the simple reason that, according to the ABS statistics - and these I took off the Internet a few months ago - assaults for the Northern Territory are 1847.2 per 100 000 people annually. That makes it the worst in the country. Sexual assaults are 152.8, the worst in the country again. Unlawful entry with intent, 2119.5, the second worst in the country. Unlawful entry with intent other is 808.2, which is the second worst in the country. We are using a performance measure which really demonstrates how well the publicity machine is working.
If people respond to a survey which is done by the Northern Territory Police that says ‘How safe do you feel?’ people may well say: ‘I feel very safe. I have seen a lot of good letters in the newspaper, and a lot of articles in the newspaper about what the police are doing, and I have listened to the minister telling me how safe I am at home’. I am not saying that this is a performance measure we necessarily need to ignore, but it is a performance measure which, to a degree, ignores the importance of the issue. The issue is not how safe you feel; the issue should be how safe you are and the Northern Territory has a lot of catching up to do.
This situation is not new and I am not saying it is indicative of this particular government’s policing responses. I am saying that let us use performance measures which reflect the reality, rather than perception. It is all too easy to be lulled into allowing perceptions to be your performance measure, but if you start believing perceptions are a reasonable performance measure, then you run into the issue of trying to manipulate perceptions and reality. If you are trying to alter perceptions, then you may not be creating a safer society necessarily.
The minister makes a point of talking about lower crime rates in the Northern Territory, and that is true. In spite of the fact that I have some reservation about the operation of the PROMIS system and how it has provided figures, recently we have seen a consistent drop of crime in the Northern Territory. But that is true for the rest of Australia; it is not exclusive to the Territory. The minister is saying this is a result of new police and tactics, and I think there might be an element of truth in that, but it is also reflective of a national trend. When we discussed this …
Dr Toyne: Twice the national trend.
Mr ELFERINK: It is reflective of the national trend. As the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General knows, when national trends go up, Territory trends - and a whole raft of statistics - usually go up by twice as much, or drop twice as much if the national trend goes down. As the Treasurer pointed out recently, it is because of small sampling groups, or perhaps the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General is suggesting that the Treasurer is wrong on that. I am curious to hear his comments.
I am also concerned with the slowing down of the recruitment drive. I note the minister says he is ahead of schedule, but that is not true.
Mr Henderson: It is true.
Mr ELFERINK: It is not, and I will tell you why: I draw the minister’s attention to page 164 of Budget Paper No 3, and I quote:
Budget Highlights
That is the standard you have set. What you have told parliament today is that there is going to be one fewer recruit squad than that and there are going to be 108 constables. Therefore, you are not ahead of schedule. Your schedule is 120 constables and five squads a year. That is your schedule in the budget paper. What you have delivered is less than that. The minister is being a bit cute by saying that he is ahead of schedule, when in fact he is not.
Mr Henderson: On target for the 200.
Mr ELFERINK: Here is your target, minister. I will read it to you again so you can adhere to it. Here it is:
Slowly and carefully so you understand - would you like a little finger puppet to explain it to you? You said four squads and 108 constables is ahead of schedule. You have just re-set the schedule. You are not ahead of schedule; you are being a bit cute. But, that is life.
I have some reservations with the fact that your ministerial statement, sadly, seems to be more like a bunch of media releases nobbled together, than an assessment of the schedules that you have set. However, it is good to see that you are recruiting.
I am also pleased to see that you are improving police housing. There are places in the Northern Territory where it does need to be brought up to scratch and you are addressing that. Those stations that have poor housing conditions are harder to attract members to. There is good reason for this; police officers, particularly if they are married, want to know that their homes, often in remote areas, will be up to standard and safe and sometimes it is the quality of the home that determines how long they will stay.
When I was a police officer and housing was provided to me, in some instances it was very good. On other occasions, it was very run-of-the-mill. I would have been hard to shift from a great flat I was allocated in Kent Street, but would have happily moved on from some of the other houses I was allocated. I am pleased to see the minister and the commissioner are addressing this issue and that a real commitment is being made.
The minister outlined what has happened at Kintore Police Station. Good! I was lobbying the former government on it. It was on the design list prior to the change of government, and I am pleased it has been built. Like Humpty Doo, it has been on the design list for a long time, and in several budgets, but has finally gotten up. Tally ho! Good on you, minister. Carry on. You are doing a wonderful job.
But where is Docker River? Oh, that is right; you went down there and you did not even stay in the room long enough to explain to the people at Docker River why they are not getting a police station. You left it up to the Western Australian police officer to explain to the people of Docker River they were getting a police station. You were out of there as quickly as you possibly could, mate.
Mr Henderson: Wrong. You are wrong; I was there.
Mr ELFERINK: The dust was not even settling when you had left the room and left a West Australian police officer who had to explain it to them. It is curious, that the minister is saying I am wrong. I got this from the locals at Docker River. They were not particularly happy with him, as they felt that he had done them a great injustice by not having the courtesy of at least telling them.
While he was at Kintore, I spoke to the minister about Docker River, and the fact that there was a person who wanted to take on, for a short term, an ACPO role. I know the review of the Docker River applicants has been completed, and that none of the applicants were found to be suitable. I would ask the minister to visit this again. I am not going to be critical of him, because I can understand why he would not take this person on in some circumstances. However, there was one particular applicant who worked as a very effective ACPO for many years in South Australia, and is recognised by the whole community in Docker River. Although he is 70, what he particularly wants to do is train a couple of locals to a standard where they can be ACPOs in Docker River. There is nervousness about taking on older employees because of duty of care worries and other issues, but I have spoken to the candidate, and he is a very fit and healthy individual. I would never have said he was anywhere close to the age he tells me he is, and I believe he could do the job reasonably effectively. There is a very wise head on those shoulders and he is not the sort of fellow who would expose himself to any sort of danger unnecessarily. I ask the minister to look at that particular applicant again.
Mr Henderson: It is not my job to recruit them.
Mr ELFERINK: Ask the department to have a look.
Mr Henderson: I did.
Mr ELFERINK: I know all the reasons why you would not take this guy on.
Mr Henderson: We did, but I cannot force them to take somebody.
Mr ELFERINK: I understand that, but just ask the department to have a look.
Mr Henderson: I did.
Mr ELFERINK: Because at the moment, guess what police representation exists in Docker River? Zip. Nothing.
Mr Henderson: Yes, it is very sad.
Mr ELFERINK: Not good enough.
Mr Henderson: It has been zip there for many years.
Mr ELFERINK: I am asking you to explore as many options as you can possibly manage. It is not criticism; it is not me sticking it to you or whatever. It is me saying there are options out there. Exercise a little latitude. If it cannot be done, then it cannot be done, but just have a look. This guy has something to offer the community, and he would help remarkably.
On page 15 of the pre-prepared statement where the minister talks about more police on the streets, faster response times, and improved levels of service to Territorians, he could have used more than 12 minutes in his half-hour to expand on that. I would like to know how the response times are improving. I am sure with more police on the streets, as he says there are, how many extra patrols are there in the Darwin area, in A sector, in B sector, if they still use those zones? Physically, how many more patrols and police officers are we getting on the streets? How many are tied up in other operations? Areas such as intelligence-led police - and I like the logic of that – which is a formalisation of something that used to be done to a lesser degree, and does prove results.
Sometimes we may run the risk of setting up our police force to fail by asking them to be the fix-up job where other departments could have intervened earlier on in the piece. There is a new philosophy of policing that could be visited in terms of trying to co-opt other government departments, especially those with an intervention role, into being more aggressive. You would have to be very careful in how you approach those sorts of issues, but they are worth exploring. The targeting of individual known villains is a good idea. Sadly, however, the indications are that the minister is not making, nor accepting, the legislative changes that would be necessary to pursue that harder.
I have heard nothing from the minister, or the Police Association, about the proposed legislation giving individual police officers immunity from liability, except when they were acting in bad faith. The police minister was on his feet for only 12-and-a-half minutes, but he could have said something extra about that. Even if he does not accept our motion, hopefully he will bring something similar into the House. Those steps were taken in New South Wales under a Labor government, and I do not care if it is a Labor or a CLP government that gets the idea up. However, for all the reasons I gave in my second reading speech, I want those particular amendments supported, so police officers are able to do their jobs more effectively as a result. Without going into the whole second reading speech again, some indication from the government would be nice. I have had support from the president of the Police Association, Vince Kelly, on the telephone, and hope there will be some public statement by them. Perhaps they have to discuss it at some future meeting, but I have not heard much back in the meantime.
In the statistics given by the minister, there is something I find curious. He said:
This is at odds with the Australian Bureau of Statistics numbers that I have in front of me. In fact, it is almost the reverse. For the percentage changes; assault is up 7% and sexual assault is down 8.3% in the Northern Territory. These ABS figures date back a couple of months, but I ask the minister to check the figures he has quoted to make sure he is right. If he is not, it raises a question mark dealing with statistics that the minister sometimes brings into this House.
During the Estimates Committee sittings in June this year, I asked the minister:
He has provided a list of offences against the act, which, for edification of members, deals with those smaller street type offences, such as urinating, swearing, fighting, objectionable language, defecating and acts of indecency in public. Basically, the legislation controls how the streets operate. There were a total of 726 offences throughout the Northern Territory in the last year. I have a problem with that, because it is very light on. Sorry, it is for a nine month period, but 726 is an average of about two a day. That is two arrests per day for swearing, spitting, defecating, and many other offences which are offensive to people as they go about their daily business.
Walking through town last night, I heard people swearing in the mall, and I heard screaming and yelling. I understand that cities are noisy places, but it is the same in Alice Springs. In fact, if you walked down any back alley in this town, the place stinks of urine. Often faecal material is deposited in those areas and I find it quite disgusting. The pressure that has been placed on the commissioner to pursue house break-ins and similar offences has been at the expense of other areas of policing. The minister says we have more coppers on the street. True, but they have to pursue street level offences. What the minister has effectively done is said, we will protect you in your home and make your home much safer than it was, and it follows the national trend, but as I said, intelligence-led policing has had a role to play in this.
The minister has, essentially, abandoned the streets. This is very important as two arrests per day throughout the Northern Territory for these offences means one of a number of things is happening. One, people are no longer swearing in the streets, people are no longer defecating in the streets, nobody is urinating in the streets and everything is very orderly; two, the arrests are not being made; or three, section 128 of the Police Administration Act has become the cover all, lock them up thing, if you like, and the way to deal with street offences.
I have reservations about this and feel that approach is incorrect. Section 128 is there to get people who are so drunk they cannot stand up and take them into protective custody. It is not the penalty. It is up to the courts to impose penalties and that is what the system is there for. If you are only arresting two a day for these types of offences then you have lost a large amount of control as a government on the streets.
Mr Henderson: Oh, rubbish!
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, the minister laughs. He says: ‘Oh, rubbish’. I was walking down the street yesterday and I saw people begging, which is an offence under the Summary Offences Act. I have made reports of this in the past and police investigate when they can. It is seen so often, and if I was going to telephone every time I saw one of these offences committed, then I would be constantly on the phone. If the minister wants to laugh about this, it is fine. The point is, people tell me that they are very unhappy with some of the things they hear and see being done on the streets and section 128 is not the `fixer’.
The fixer is arresting these people and bringing them before a court. Continue with intelligence-led policing, absolutely, because in the same way that intelligence-led policing identifies the villains that break into our homes - which is only a handful of people when you look at the whole of the population - it is the same on the streets. There is a group of people on the streets which represents 10% of the people, but 90% of the problem, and nothing is being done effectively to prevent them from doing it. We are told about people being transported to their communities and those sort of measures, but they are coming straight back. It is up to this government to make sure that those levels of control are put in place.
What would the CLP do? They would review the operation of the Summary Offences Act, probably repeal it and replace it with something called the Public Order Act and then we would enforce it. We would enforce the act so that public order was properly maintained. In Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and Darwin, I hear complaints all the time that public order is not being properly maintained by this government. It is not; I have seen it every day as well.
The CLP will continue taking the good policies that have been put in place by the police department and continue them operating - as this government has continued many of the CLP policies that operated when we were in power. However, one thing we will definitely do is make the streets places where you can walk without being molested, putting up with the smell of urine or faeces, and putting up with loud, obnoxious people, often drunk, acting in a disorderly manner and fighting. That is not a huge question to ask and it would help bring some of these problems under control
I remind members of the broken windows theory which has been applied so effectively in places like New York City. The Treasurer agrees and knows about it and understands. The former Chief Minister, the member for Brennan, understood it well enough and the Treasurer was quite supportive of some of these ideas. He understood the process of the broken windows theory. It is still legitimate, and as long as people continue to be people, it will continue to be legitimate. I want to see the police force not only lock up the villains that break into our homes, but also those people who make walking down our streets more difficult or intolerable.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Auditor-General): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I am sure the member for Macdonnell would be whistling quite a different tune if he was out in his own electorate. I support the new era in Territory policing statement brought to this parliament by my colleague, the Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services.
Let me go no further without echoing the honourable member’s sentiments regarding our police force. To Commissioner White and all the members of the Northern Territory Police Force, I offer my congratulations and ongoing appreciation for the great work they do.
As Minister for Central Australia, I know the record injection of funds under this government, $75m over four years, will mean better police services in the Centre. The $2.3m Pilatus PC-12 servicing Central Australia has a far greater capacity than the old plane, and means more police on the ground more quickly.
Last week, I had the pleasure of visiting the new $1.8m police station in Kintore. It is quite an impressive facility, and has already brought about a reduction in antisocial behaviour and social disruption. These benefits can be seen, as my colleague pointed out, not only in the reduction in crime, but in the benefit to the delivery of health services.
The Kintore station is only one part of an important and innovative agreement between the Territory, South Australia and Western Australia, which will see better delivery of justice services to the people who live in the area where these three jurisdictions meet.
A station upgrade in Ali Curung and an upgrade to the police cells at Ti Tree will further support police in building safer Central Australian communities. Aboriginal Community Police Officers, who play such a vital role in Central Australia and across the Territory, are for the first time receiving remote area entitlements. I am confident that this has been very welcomed by the ACPOs and the communities they serve.
Each quarter the Department of Justice releases independently compiled and audited criminal justice statistics, and each quarter I am reminded of the success of our police and of the O’Sullivan recommendations in achieving what every Territorian wants: fewer crimes and safer communities. At the end of March this year, the year-on-year drops in property crime are down 26%, and in assault, down by 10%. The level of sexual assaults continues to be high. Unfortunately, reductions in this area have not been achieved to date. No member on this side wants to see such a situation continue.
The Northern Territory Police, along with Justice, the Department of the Chief Minister and the Department of Health and Community Services, are actively participating in the Sexual Assault Task Force established by this government late last year. The main focus of the task force is reducing the level of sexual offences across the Territory through the development of a targeted, whole-of-government Sexual Assault Prevention Plan. Along with an investigation support and service models, particularly in remote areas, the task force is also looking at investigation and prosecution of sexual assault and how this might be improved. The input of the Northern Territory Police in this process is vital. Crucial to preventing crime and in providing such important front line services to survivors when an assault does occur, the police are best placed to provide expert advice on the investigation of these offences.
Not only are we building our police force through our record funding injection, we are giving our police the tools they need to do their job. This government introduced new offences of home and business invasion shortly after we were first elected. The capacity of police to investigate these crimes has been increased, with all officers cracking down on property crime by identifying and targeting the activities of repeat offenders, who are responsible for the majority of unlawful entries.
Our government is also absolutely committed to breaking the drug crime cycle and preventing drug criminals profiting from their crimes. To this end, the government put in place the Criminal Property Forfeiture Act, which commenced on the 1 June 2003. Since that time, a substantial number of restraining orders, 65 at last count, have been issued. Some of the orders and warrants issued relate to remote communities and illustrate the success of the new legislation and policing strategies in stopping the harm that drugs cause in so many areas.
Earlier this year, I reported to the House that the amount of property restrained under this legislation had surpassed $1.5m. This figure has now reached almost $1.7m. Property valued at over $200 000 has already been forfeited under the scheme, ranging from cash to mobile phones and a vehicle.
As the minister pointed out so clearly, the effectiveness of these laws is largely dependent on the capacity of the police to do their job, in terms of resources, equipment and numbers. Evidence of this government’s better resourcing of the police force can be seen in many areas, such as bike, foot and mounted patrols. I have recently been informed by a very active local crime prevention group, the Wagaman Residents Group, of the success of bike patrols in their area. Looking out my office window about a week ago in Alice Springs, I was able to see the bike patrol in action. Some unruly behaviour had broken out in the street opposite, and it was reassuring to see those officers turn up to sort it out.
The upgraded scientific facilities, such as forensic labs, provide high tech support for front-line policing and intelligence-led policing, with police targeting recidivist criminals, particularly those responsible for unlawful entry and robberies. Similar initiatives, such as Operation Spitfire, Operation Sharp Edge and Operation City Safe, have seen police work actively to prevent juveniles being involved in crime, to apprehend those carrying weapons and to increase safety in Darwin city.
The $75m allocated by this government is the largest ever injection of resources into the Northern Territory Police Force. It sits alongside the $26.5m allocated to our Correctional Services, and turning our prison officers into a second crime prevention force. It stands to reason that if we can reduce the rate of re-offending, we are going to have an impact on crime rates within our community and, importantly, reduce victims.
A third area of our crime prevention effort is our crime prevention community groups. I have reported regularly to this House on the development of these groups throughout the Northern Territory. We are now following a multi-layered approach to crime prevention in our community. We are involving the community and our Correctional Services in support of our front-line force, which is our police force.
The Martin Labor government was elected with a firm commitment to tackle crime, and the causes of crime, in our community, and to create safer communities. The efforts of the police are at the heart of this fight against crime. Madam Speaker, I commend my colleague’s statement to members.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I want to contribute to this debate for obvious reasons, and it is logical that I follow the Attorney-General. I am a great supporter of police officers in the Northern Territory. I say that for a number of reasons, one being that some of them are my friends and, indeed, interstate I have family who are police officers. The job they do around the country is difficult and, certainly in the Territory, it has its own challenges and it is great to see some young people contemplating a career in the police force.
Some aspects of the minister’s statement are good and others are not. Of course, any organisation welcomes an injection of funds, and government has made much of the injection of $75m. And why on earth wouldn’t it? With the huge amount of additional GST revenue this Labor government has received, it is not surprising that it has not only money to spend, but it is putting it in areas that are worthy of attention.
Having said that, however, I want to extract some points from the minister’s statement, and hope that that he considers some of my points with a view to putting them into his think tank. I do not know whether that is his brain or the brain of others, but some of the matters I raise I do so in a sincere way and hope he looks at them. I will try to resist the temptation of colourfully getting stuck into the statement, although I make no promises in that regard.
In no particular order, I make note of the fact that the minister mentioned victims of crime. What is interesting, however - and this will not come as a surprise to the minister - is that, in last year’s budget, the amount of the assistance to victims of crime was reduced. In the 2002-03 budget, it was estimated that assistance to victims of crime would be $6.37m. In 2003-04, that would reduce to $4m. I have made speeches in this parliament before and, in relatively recent months, I tabled a letter from a law firm in Alice Springs wherein the authors have said they do not act in crimes compensation matters any more because it is not economical for them to do so. I note that the police minister is also the business minister, and remind him that law firms are also businesses. I would have thought, since he referred to victims of crime, that he would take an interest in the fact that victims of crime are finding it more and more difficult to access lawyers. That is directly as a response to this government’s decision to change the Crimes (Victims Assistance) Act to make it, in essence, uneconomical for lawyers to act for them. That is a crying shame; and I feel that very strongly. I knew that would happen from the outset, and when the government first introduced the bill, I made much of it. I will continue to do so, as lawyers continue to tell me that this is a real problem.
The minister says that crime has gone down. We can, in the way that politicians do, argue about figures until we are blue in the face. However, I would like to make mention of an interview on Top FM on 4 August, where a bloke by the name of Justin Clough was interviewed. He owns JC Electronic Security. He was asked in by the reporter:
What does this man do? He installs security systems into people’s homes. I reckon a bloke like that would know what he is talking about, and he says there is more crime. I can cite hundreds of examples such as this. Government can do its spin - that is fair enough - but I do not think the punters believe you. When I go doorknocking in Alice Springs, some people say that crime is worse than it has ever been. Whether this is true - and I believe it is, because I also have eyes and ears - that is the perception, and any government worth its salt needs to do something about it. This government though, is soft on crime and I will seek to demonstrate that in some of the points I will make later.
The minister made mention of foot patrols. Foot patrols are great. We all know that the citizens of the Northern Territory - and anywhere else for that matter - really like foot patrols. People like seeing police on the beat; it is as simple as that. It is an old standard formula. The average Northern Territory copper out on the beat would see more antisocial behaviour than any other crimes being committed. Without adequate laws to do something to stop this, life will continue to be made difficult for police officers and, in turn, the citizens of the Northern Territory.
Shortly after coming to office, Labor repealed the Public Order and Anti-Social Conduct Act, commonly known as the move-on laws. I feel strongly that the government should revisit that, or at least come up with something similar. In Alice Springs, people walking from their workplace to the bank, or to get a sandwich at lunchtime, do not like dodging the drunks who make their life difficult. Almost without exception, when I am doorknocking that is the issue. I believe the 25 members of this parliament would know it is the issue, and what is very interesting, is that I have not seen a demonstration that Labor is prepared to do something about it.
This issue does not appear to be measured in any way, certainly not in the crime statistics that are published, and perhaps it should be. Politicians can argue all day about the figures, but what I do not accept is the mantra that under Labor there have been significant improvements. There have been some improvements in some areas. There are some encouraging signs, but I do not believe it is not as good as the government says it is.
Not long after crime statistics were introduced, I remember the Attorney-General saying in the House - I cannot recall the date but it is on the Hansard - that the government will stand or fall on the crime figures. Is it any wonder that some of us are sceptical of the crime figures? Is it any wonder that Territorians regard crime figures with some cynicism and scepticism every time they come out, when a government says we will stand or fall by these figures?
Crimes as we know are under-reported. The member for Macdonnell wrote to the Attorney-General around May 2003 asking about this, and also what the standard error rate was in the reporting of crime. My copy of the Attorney-General’s letter is, I think, in my office in Alice Springs, but from memory he replied that there was a standard error rate of 25% or more. Should we be sceptical about the quarterly crime and justice statistics? Yes, we should, and it is the opposition’s job to question them. The Labor members should not think for a minute that we are going to swallow this book whole, without asking any questions. We know there is under-reporting. We know there is a standard error rate, and we know this government has said it will stand or fall by these figures. Some might say that the government is doing all that it can to make these figures look good. It makes much of what it calls the independent Office of Crime Prevention. It is not an independent office of anything; it is part of the Department of Justice. Need I say more?
What is disturbing from the trends in the crime figures is the increase in sexual assaults and crimes against the person. This was talked about earlier, but let us revisit it. I took notes when the Attorney-General spoke during ministerial reports, and he said in 2001, he did not say if that was the calendar year, there were 263 cases of sexual assaults. Of these 11 went to court; seven were pleas, two were acquittals and two were non-convictions. I should not be surprised that the Attorney-General chose to refer to lower figures. The figures I have, which I referred to this morning and will do so again now, are from the March quarter of the crime statistics published by this government. June 2002 to June 2003 shows there were 419 sexual assaults, which includes rape, incest, aggravated and non-aggravated assault. There are more sexual assaults under Labor than there was under the CLP, but I digress. For the same period, according to the ABS publication Criminal Courts, from 1 July 2002 to 30 June 2003 in the Territory, only 33 of those 419 cases went to court. Of those, eight were acquittals, 23 were pleas of guilty and there were only two convictions in contested matters.
The Attorney-General, to his credit, said in his speech that sexual assaults have gone up. They have, and surely it is incumbent upon us to see what we can do about it. I think it was the June quarter for last year that showed, for instance, in Alice Springs sexual assaults had gone up by 78% compared to the same quarter the previous year. The figures do jump all over the place, but for anything to go up by 78% is rather extraordinary.
This morning, I asked the Attorney-General to consider commencing an inquiry like the one initiated in South Australia. For the benefit of the police minister, who might think some of this is outside his portfolio, there are some tangible lessons to be learnt by the police, such as consideration of whether adequate training exists for police and their role in investigations. As minister, I would have thought he would be concerned about the under-reporting of sexual assaults.
The ABS, in about 2002, reported that, on their analysis, only 25% of sexual assaults in Australia are reported. In other words, 75% are not. Why not? Is the police minister interested to find out? Clearly, it is a problem. An inquiry like this could come up with some answers and also assist police. In the South Australian inquiry, they refer to the difficulties for police and question whether training provided in relation to sexual assault investigations and prosecutions is appropriate. I encourage the minister for police to give this matter consideration.
In his statement, the minister referred to the area of domestic violence, and said that $100 000 has been given to services in Alice Springs and Darwin. I am sure that was announced in the last two months, so it is relatively new money. By all means, I say to any government, give money to domestic violence services, but please do not think that it solves the problem. Domestic violence services deal with victims and, for obvious reasons, they are not charged with trying to determine the causes of domestic violence, and they do not deal with perpetrators. I was disappointed to see in the statement a paragraph or two saying that $100 000 was given to domestic violence services. That is good, but does it go to the heart of these crimes? No. As any police officer will tell you, they go to a lot of domestic violence cases. Again, I return to the point I made about an inquiry: there may well be merit in it. It is important that we look at why the reporting rates of sexual assaults and domestic violence are so low and, surely, as legislators, we want to improve conviction rates.
In his statement the minister said $1.6m is being seized as a result of criminal and drug-related activity. Some members may not know that in relation to the seizure of assets and monies from those involved in criminal activity, under the legislation, which was introduced in May 2002, no conviction is required. It is all very well and good to seize money from criminals, but Territorians want these people locked up. What the minister did not give in his statement were figures for drug offences. He simply said: ‘We have seized $1.6m worth of stuff’. ‘Suspiciously short,’ I thought, and looked up the last crime statistics which were for the March quarter 2004, Issue 7. On page 86 it says:
For drug offences, only 14% of those convicted were sent to gaol. This is not very good. Hopefully, the police minister is listening to this. No government can say on the one hand, ‘Aren’t we doing well by seizing these goods’, but on the other, not make any reference to the fact that hardly any of them are being locked up. Surely the average punter wants those involved in serious criminal activity and/or drug-related activity to be locked up? I am not for a moment saying everyone needs to be, but 14% of drug-related offences that were finalised to court? Seriously, that is not a good figure.
There are many things to say in the short time available, but I must refer to the Auditor-General’s August 2004 Report tabled yesterday. There are real problems identified by the Auditor-General and I will give one example. At page 52, the Auditor-General says that
This is a theme on several pages of the Auditor-General’s report. He has referred to what was obviously planned to be done by the NTPFES, but consistently says ‘but’, ‘however’, at the end of various paragraphs and says there is no explanation as to a variety of things. The Auditor-General’s report, I would have thought, should be a concern to the minister for police.
As I have said from the outset, I have tried to be measured. I hope he has listened, although I do not have much confidence he has, but all is not rosy. I commend the members of the Northern Territory Police Force. They have a very difficult job to do, and much more to be done, but do not for think that the CLP, or indeed Territorians, are going to swallow the spin of this government hook, line and sinker.
Mr McADAM (Barkly): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I support of the police minister’s statement. There can be no doubt that significant progress has been made, and much has been achieved, through the minister’s commitment, and the professional management and diligence of the Commissioner, Mr White, and all other people associated with the NT Police Force.
Members are aware that I live in a small community, and represent even smaller communities that are, in a lot of cases, isolated and very remote. Unfortunately, most of the service providers in those communities are under the microscope and subjected to scrutiny on almost a 24-hour basis. I am referring here to nurses, teachers and other service providers, but none to the same extent as it is with the NT Police Force.
Most of the police live in residences that are next door to the police stations on the respective communities. They are handling difficult situations on a daily basis, many arising out of excessive grog abuse. They are apprehending people, dealing with domestic violence, attending road accidents, plus doing mundane tasks such as registering motor vehicles. Sometimes we underestimate their role in small communities. Police officers have to liaise and consult with community councils and organisations and be involved with Night Patrols in a many cases. Quite apart from the operational components they are required to carry out, they often have a community role. They are consulting, and performing roles probably beyond the expectations of similar type professions in those communities. I mention this, as we should never underestimate their contribution. To police officers who reside in remote isolated communities: thank you very much, and thanks also to your partners.
In places like Tennant Creek, particularly over the last few months, sometimes there are some of us who are, perhaps, all too ready to criticise the performance of the police, without fully appreciating the intricacies and complex nature of their jobs. Unfortunately, this has occurred. I am not being critical of those people who are making these comments, but I am saying to them: be constructive, be prepared to listen, and accept that on occasion things might not always work out, but always be prepared to work matters through. In many cases, there will be successful outcomes, as there has been in our community over the last few months. I am not being critical at all; I am trying to be real and say to those people, do not use the police for your own agendas. Hopefully, that message will get across.
I want to speak about matters in my electorate regarding policing operations. Of course, most people will be aware that many communities are fairly isolated. At Ali Curung we have Sergeant Stewart Baum, along with Constable Steven Nalder and ACPO Gwen Brown. This is a community where the police get involved in a wide range of issues. They interact very well with the community, with people like Marjorie Limbiari and others, and perhaps this is why there has been a significant decrease in crime and antisocial behaviour over the years. The police are part of the community. They have gained the confidence of the community and vice versa. That is how it should operate in all bush communities.
The same applies to Borroloola, where we have Sergeant Donald Garner, Constable Louis Mahony, Constable Warwick Hulm and ACPO Noel Dixon. People may not be aware - although I have spoken about it previously in this House – that Don Garner played a key role in the community in attempting to alleviate some of the problems associated with excessive alcohol abuse, and negotiated a reasonably successful outcome in regards to a trial period. Again, that is just an example of the role they play.
At Elliott, we have a Constable Lukas Nickson, Constable Amanda Hardy and ACPO Mr Harold Daly Water. Members may have read in the NT News some months ago that there had been very few crime-related matters in Elliott. That is in no small part due to the role ACPO Mr Harold Daly Water plays and, of course, the local police.
I want to pay tribute to a number of people in Tennant Creek who have worked extremely hard over a very long period of time in attempting to address issues in our community, in particular, Senior Sergeant Chris Smith. Chris is the Officer-in-Charge and attends all the Barkly Regional Safer Community strategy meetings. He meets with the local businesses in town to discuss police-related issues that impact on Tennant Creek, and is involved in community activities such as umpiring football. He has noticed a significant difference in the behaviour of people at the footy and that their respect for officials and umpires has improved markedly. There is no doubt that this is due to the role that the community and the police play in community activities, and football is an integral part of that.
Sergeant Richard Martin has acted as Officer-in-Charge when Senior Sergeant Chris Smith is on leave. Richard has his own commitment to community policing and also interacts with the community. He is freely available to attend meetings and both men are examples of how police officers operate in these smaller places.
I also pay tribute to the seven ACPOs in Tennant Creek: Senior ACPO Denise Goddard, Senior ACPO Lex Holt, ACPO Jarrod Williams, ACPO Sarah Butcher, Senior ACPO Baden Alley, ACPO Anthony Ah Kit and ACPO Danielle Carter, who I understand graduated as dux of her class. These ACPOs play a key role, and it has been very noticeable that, since their number increased, there is a more proactive community policing strategy. ACPOs are now walking the main street, Paterson Street, and policing some of the hot spots around town. There is a high level of respect, particularly from the indigenous community, for the ACPOs, many of whom come from Tennant Creek or from surrounding communities. There is no doubt that it does provide a degree of self-esteem and respect which perhaps was lacking in the past.
I also acknowledge Senior Constable Mick Adams who is resigning from the police force after 22 years. On behalf of the community in Tennant Creek and people across the Barkly, thank you very much for your contribution. We wish you, your wife Sue, and family, all the very best in the future.
Over the last few months I have had the opportunity to meet with the police regarding a whole range of matters and also to discuss them with the minister for police. I pay tribute to the minister for his quick response, and also to officers of the NT Police Force. I refer to Assistant Commissioner Mark Payne, Superintendent Bruce Porter and Commander Gary Manison from Alice Springs. Some of the issues have been a bone of contention in Tennant Creek, but it is again indicative that if you sit down as a community with all the different players and you develop strategies, more often than not you can come up with solutions which assist the total community.
One issue has been the transfer of prisoners, or people who are held in cells overnight in Tennant Creek, to Alice Springs. The main point is that the halfway mark is Barrow Creek. Two police officers accompany the prisoner from Tennant Creek to Barrow Creek, and are met by two officers from Alice Springs who accompany the prisoner to there. This means something like 16 to 18 hours out of the police officers’ time. We had discussions of how it can be best addressed. In part, the minister has done so with the Pilatus plane, which I understand is to be purchased quite quickly, and can be used for the transfer of prisoners - not on all occasions, but there will be capacity for that to occur.
Another issue discussed is that when the court sits in Tennant Creek - and sometimes this is for two to three days - police officers and ACPOs are tied up for that period. It could be argued that they could be more effectively utilised in the community. Assistant Commissioner Payne is going to look at this. Perhaps one of the options, subject to further discussions, is for that work to be outsourced to a private security firm or some other provider. As I understand it, it is part of the compliance that there must be at least two police officers present when people are in the cells. This issue is subject to further discussion, but there is potential for people other than police officers undertaking that role. One of the options we discussed was developing an accredited training program incorporating elements such as first aid, radio communications and a whole host of others, so that trained people could be called in as required to provide that service.
These have been some of the issues discussed at a local level within our community, but they are indicative of how the community and the police work together to overcome some of the problems.
It is pleasing that there is now provision for a pursuit vehicle to travel from Alice Springs to Tennant Creek. I understand it will be on a weekly basis for a period of three to four days. They will be stopping in at places such as Ti Tree, Ali Curung and other communities to speak to members. It will also provide a focus on the roads and Stuart Highway, with the increasing number of tourists. They will also watch for traffic infringements, such as people who may be driving under the influence. However, just the presence of the police car will act as a deterrent. In Tennant Creek, on an as-required basis, those people will be involved with breath-testing, as well as the local police officers.
These are the changes in Tennant Creek that have been brought about by the community and the police working together. This is enhanced by the commitment of the Martin Labor government, as demonstrated by the additional $75m for the provision of better resources and services. This is reflected in police officers in my region getting improved accommodation. My understanding is that there will be up to nine dwellings in Tennant Creek and Elliott that will be upgraded, and that will certainly provide a quality of life that perhaps was not there in the past. Other speakers have spoken about the need to have appropriate accommodation for police officers, particularly those with partners and small children.
The final issue - again, it is something that we talk about at a local level with the police and the community - is the Barkly Region Safer Community strategy, and the new Tennant Creek Economic Development Committee, which incorporates all the businesses. It is the group people will relate to, replacing the old Tennant Creek Concerned Businesses Committee. One thing Assistant Commissioner Payne has spoken about is a model, which I understand operates in Ontario, described as community policing. There is no doubt that community policing occurs right across the Territory, and particularly in Tennant Creek, as I have mentioned with BRSC, and also the Tennant Creek Economic Development Committee.
I wait with interest the initiative discussed by Assistant Commissioner Payne. My understanding is that it is an enhanced model of what we do already. It is described as ‘customised policing’ where, effectively, in the Barkly we would have a look at the special circumstances that relate to the community socially and demographically. What you are trying to do is customise the police force to meet the demands of a particular region. This is very much in the early stages, but it is worth looking at.
As local member, you always aspire to achieve things in your electorate. On my part, I honestly believe one of the biggest challenges is how to decrease the high level of domestic violence, assaults, etcetera. We have already seen a decrease in property-type offences and break-ins, but the challenge is how do you achieve an outcome which is going to improve the quality of life for all people across the community? I believe it is something that can be achieved by working together and for that reason I am pretty passionate about this customised policing model.
In conclusion, I congratulate the minister for police for his commitment and dedication. I pay tribute to the Martin Labor government for their concerted and concentrated response to many of the issues that we face. Last, but by no means least, to Commissioner White and to all the police officers throughout the Northern Territory, thank you very much for your commitment and dedication.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I reiterate many of the comments made by the member for Barkly, as they also apply to Katherine. Being a regional community, much of what he said in relation to the role of the police, domestic violence and housing, relate to Katherine as well.
I congratulate the police in Katherine. They have a great amount of diversity in their job. I do not know any other vocation that has such a huge diversity to deal with, and I commend them for the great work they do. The issues that they have to deal with in Katherine are very similar to those in Tennant Creek, involving a lot of distance and a lot of time, and the police do a great job. Unfortunately, I have had to call them on many occasions in the last 10 years, particularly when I was involved with Red Gum Tourist Park. Most of the matters involved vandalism or break and entry. The police were always very diligent. They attended very promptly and, even though I did not want them getting me out of bed at midnight or 2 am, they did their job extremely well.
I am not sure what the situation is like in Alice Springs and Darwin, but in Katherine it is an issue that police housing is not of the highest standard. Whilst doorknocking, I met several police wives who, while not complaining about the housing in general, did have some complaints. One example was a woman living in a high-level house in Katherine East, who had four children under six in a three-bedroom house. She was not complaining about the number of bedrooms, as the children were young, but she did find having only one airconditioner, which was in the main living area, quite challenging. She was told that they had to provide their own airconditioners for the bedroom. As you know, Katherine is no different to Darwin and it gets very hot and humid at night and you need to have a good night’s sleep to face the next day. She was not making a big issue of this, but it obviously was a problem. When she made inquiries about having airconditioning installed, she was told no, sorry it was not part of the parcel. This obviously applies to other police housing as well. We need to make sure that we have happy families at home, so we have happy policemen in the communities as well.
Another matter that is really important in Katherine is the community policing, or the foot patrols. I believe they can be manned by community police in Katherine and, while they are doing something in that area, it can go much further. This may not apply to other electorates, but it certainly does to mine. One of main issues in Katherine is the main street, and this is not the first time I have talked about this in the House. The visual impact of Katherine is extremely important to the tourists and also to the locals. The CBD is one street mainly, and you need to have pleasant surroundings to go about your business, and also to run your business, but there have been times when it has been less than desirable for us to want to be anywhere near the main street. Despite the fact that we have community patrols and the Harmony Programs working in Katherine, we still have the issue of unacceptable behaviour in the main street, and the surrounding streets, Railway Terrace and First Street.
While this is not purely the role of police as they have far more important issues to be taking care of, I do believe there should be auxiliary police or community patrols manning these areas, especially until the liquor outlets are closed. It is a huge issue. I know I keep harping on it when I come in here, but it is an absolutely huge issue for Katherine and Tennant Creek, as the member for Barkly has just said. To a lesser degree, it is also an issue for Alice Springs and Darwin, and probably other areas throughout the Territory. We need to address this as it has a huge economic impact on Katherine, for a start. People just do not want to be in our main street. I have practically beaten my head against the wall for about seven years about this area now, saying that we have to do something about it. Some of the things I have addressed in the last few days, and which I have been talking about for several months, I intend to pursue in the line of zero tolerance for public drunkenness, etcetera. I reiterate that I do not expect the Northern Territory Police to deal with this issue, but I would like to see it addressed as a policing role for community police.
Domestic violence and sexual assaults are a huge worry, and they certainly have not decreased in Katherine as they have not in other areas. I am like the member for Barkly: what the hell do we do about it? I have had to make two phone calls to police in the last three months to come to domestic violence incidents in my own street. It is not pleasant for me to hear, let alone other families living in homes nearby that have children, and it is quite distressing that people have to live in such an environment. I know that all of us in this House would be happy to work with each other to ensure that the domestic violence figures are reduced and strategies put in place to deal with them. I do not think any of us have the finite answer. If we did, we would not be sitting here discussing the level of violence that we are still experiencing.
The member for Barkly also mentioned the positive effects that police presence has in ensuring football games in Tennant Creek are incident free and a lot friendlier. I am pleased to report that this year, the Katherine AFL association, which I am proud to be patron of but had nothing to do with this decision, decided all AFL games would be alcohol-free. I applauded that decision and gave them a great pat on the back for having the initiative to do that. It has made the games a family event and they are a pleasure to attend. When I am in Katherine I take absolute enjoyment in watching the AFL, but I am not in tune with all of those other games that the Northern Territory people seem to follow. I am still southern-oriented with AFL which I understand and enjoy. It has also meant that the police have a lot less work to do on Friday and Saturday nights around the football games, and I am very pleased to say that the initiative is working very successfully.
I will always applaud and support more funding and more initiatives in the police area. I would like to see more done in the area of domestic violence and am very happy to work with government to try to get some strategies in place to deal with such serious issues as sexual assault and domestic violence. I support the police minister’s statement, and look forward to seeing especially domestic violence figures reduced in the next report.
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I welcome this update on Building Our Police Force, and congratulate our police minister for continuing to keep parliament and the public well informed of progress. The issue of law and order consumed much of my early months as the member for Karama, with consistent complaints from residents about crime incidences at their homes or in the community around the shopping centres, and the inability of police to respond appropriately.
Today it is very different. We happily live, work and play under a new era of law and order, where there are sufficient police to not only respond to any crime incidences, but the police resources applied by the Martin Labor government ensure police can be strategic with their policing to prevent and, therefore, dramatically reduce crime.
How does this translate to Karama and Malak? Our suburbs sit within the Casuarina police area, in very close proximity to the Peter McAulay Centre at Berrimah. With 109 extra police available for operations throughout the Territory, we benefit enormously from an extra 21 police being operational at Casuarina Police Station.
The extremely popular bicycle patrols are now regularly patrolling our streets and shopping centres; a terrific, proactive policing tool that the community has embraced and, I believe, is showing dividends through reduced crime rates.
We are seeing more foot patrols through the shopping centres. What a great initiative of the Martin Labor government to have daily patrols at Casuarina Shopping Centre. So many of us shop there as the major retail hub in the northern suburbs. It is a much safer shopping centre than it was a few years ago. Gone is the constant harassment and concerns about safety in the car park, which was a regular feature under the CLP era of neglect.
I was delighted to visit the new mounted patrol facility at the Peter McAulay Centre, something I argued for as a candidate and continue to support as a member. This new, purpose-built $600 000 facility allows the mounted patrol to be far more effective, with greater regularity of patrols. Previously, they had suffered through years of neglect with a run-down demountable and disgusting stables near Berrimah Prison. I visited this run-down facility under the CLP regime and was shocked by the conditions the then police minister, now retired, was prepared to have staff work in, to say nothing of the physical danger the stables presented to the horses.
I congratulate the Martin Labor government for funding the new mounted patrol facility and locating it in the Peter McAulay Centre. We recognised the need to adequately resource mounted police and responded. As a result, we are all getting used to seeing the mounted patrols as a feature of our markets, in the CBD and the suburbs, where they are very welcome. They are a terrific deterrent and part of our government’s emphasis on proactive policing patrols that are an effective crime prevention mechanism.
Clearly, there has been a resurgence in community confidence in our police brought about by the increased visibility of police and, importantly, their increased capacity to respond to incidents of crime. Recognition of the community’s desire to work with police in my electorate has been the resurgence of Neighbourhood Watch. We now have two active branches in Karama and Malak. Karama has held two Community Fun Days and created the Territory’s first Neighbourhood Watch Fun Day last year. This has been adopted by other Neighbourhood Watch branches because of its success. Malak is busy working on assessing plans for the beautification of Malak Shopping Centre, an area that in the past has been recognised as a hot spot for hoons and vandals. Again, this is proactive work with the able support and encouragement of police.
I want to single out for praise some members of the police force who have worked closely with me, as the local member, and our Neighbourhood Watch branches to improve community safety. Successive officers in charge of Casuarina station have been fantastic in their willingness to receive information about incidents, and follow-up in an operational sense. Officers Mark Coffey, Des Smith, Murray Taylor and currently Mick Read have all been highly professional and thorough, aware of the community’s needs, operational imperatives, and the resources of their staff. Working with these officers has ensured an identification of hot spots and a focus on recidivist behaviour.
In addition, we have enjoyed enormous support from Neighbourhood Watch police. I know Rod Strong has retired, and I wish him all the best after a long and distinguished career in the force. He set Karama on a healthy path and has been very willing to pass on his crime prevention through environmental design expertise, which we have appreciated. We have been working extremely closely with Senior Constable Geoff Pickering, who has been a pillar of strength and support for both Karama and Malak Neighbourhood Watch.
Neighbourhood Watch meetings are a great forum for the passage of information to police about criminal activity patterns in an area, for example, hoons at the Malak shops car park late at night. This information is used by police to inform patrols. In exchange, police provide a crime report which details all reported crime in the past month. These have shown an impressive downward trend in crime to an average of four break and enter offences and about one motor vehicle theft per month in these suburbs – hardly the crime centres that ill-informed commentators would have us believe.
It was amazing to hear one police officer say recently that a decade ago they would turn up on shift and deal with an average of 100 break and enters a week, and now they are averaging less than a handful. The officer indicated there had been something like a 257% decrease in property crime in the past decade - what a phenomenal reduction. Much of this, the officer believes, is a result of increased police resources, and intelligence-led policing introduced by Commissioner White. Much praise needs to go to Commissioner White who came to the Territory and implemented fundamental reforms in the nature of policing which, coupled with the resources provided by this government, have brought real dividends in crime reduction.
My hearty congratulations goes to our Cabinet, which had the strength to commission the O’Sullivan independent review of police, and to sign up to its recommendations by committing some $75m to police resourcing. I thank Commissioner White for his expertise and strength of professionalism to pursue important policing reforms. I also thank our hard-working police officers who have stuck it out through the lean times of under-resourcing, and are putting their all into a much rejuvenated force, teaching our new recruits the nature of policing in the Territory. I thank the men and women of the Territory who have rallied to our call to join the force and serve our community - no easy task to undertake and constant daily challenges. As a former shift worker, I know the personal toll it can take, coupled with the sometimes aggressive force they meet, and the distressing incidents they attend. Police work is a very tough job, requiring tremendous passion and dedication. Thank you to our officers who give it their all to provide our safe community.
I also thank the residents of Karama and Malak, who have stepped up to the mark and are working with me and the police to strengthen our safer community and restore our ability to move through our streets and shopping centres with a feeling of greater safety. We no longer live bunkered down in high security wondering when our home will be broken into. Our shopping centres have returned to the more peaceful and family friendly environments they were years ago. Our parks are again sites for children playing, and residents walking through, instead of antisocial behaviour that we all went out of our way to avoid.
We cannot become complacent; we need to continue to provide information to police. Reporting suspicious behaviour and nuisance crimes do work to establish hot spot policing. Staying vigilant and supportive of crime preventative measures is important. Improving the numbers of police, and improving the working conditions for police, is critical to a continued strengthening of the force. I commit myself to supporting our police and their minister in their tremendous endeavours to build a safer Territory. I commend this statement to the House.
Ms CARTER (Port Darwin): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I welcome the minister’s statement. It is always good to hear how the police are progressing in their efforts to address crime in the Northern Territory. I congratulate our police force. They have certainly developed over the years, and we all know that they are held in very high esteem in our community. It is great to see that situation is continuing.
I want to inform the House of some of the experiences I have had with regards to our great police force since I became a member of parliament. Very early on, I was called to a lady’s house in Larrakeyah, which overlooks the golf course. She was quite distressed because of the smell in the house and, as I walked through, I could smell the smell of death. It was quite concerning to both of us. The smell was coming from the escarpment underneath the house, between it and the golf course. Once I realised this, I decided not to investigate further because of what I might find, and instead phoned the police. They said they would be there to investigate in due course, and would get back to me.
About half-an-hour after I left the house, the police phoned to say that they had found the cause of the very strong smell around the house. It was, in fact, a large goanna that had died. The police did the right thing and buried it, which solved the problem. That is an example of the great service that we get from our police.
More recently, the alarm went off in my office. I had no idea this had happened until, all of a sudden, a rather excited young policeman on his motorbike screamed up to my front door. He had timed himself, and it was quite a spectacular time that he had achieved to get from Fannie Bay to my office in Larrakeyah. It is another example of a great response from the police in the work they do.
On the news tonight there was a story about the hit and run that tragically occurred on the Stuart Highway at Parap a few nights ago. The story said that the police are looking for every one of the several thousand Toyota Hilux utilities in the Territory to find, from the description given to them about the person who drove away from the hit and run, the vehicle involved. They are searching for it, and have already tracked down, and inspected, about 600 vehicles. This is the perseverance we can expect, and we congratulate our police force for their perseverance. I have no doubt that, in due course, the police will locate the person responsible for that despicable act, and we will all be able to congratulate our police for the perseverance they have shown.
Some months ago, I had the pleasure of touring the new police facilities in the Mitchell Street Centre, where I was accorded a very warm welcome and had a great tour. It was really interesting to see the way it is set out. I hope the cells are rarely filled because they are very large and, if ever required, many people could be kept there. It is, obviously, a great facility to have in the middle of the CBD. Not having to travel all the way to Berrimah, as they did only a short time ago, to process someone who has been arrested, will help our police be more efficient. It is great to see those premises right in the heart of the CBD.
It is wonderful to see in the CBD from time to time - usually on a Friday or Saturday night - the horse patrols; it is great to see those officers on their beautiful horses. More than anything, it gives people a sense of joy to see horses under great control, presented beautifully, in the midst of a city setting. It is rare to find someone who does not admire horses, and it is wonderful to see the police officers on their patrols. We know they are well trained but I would expect, and hope, that it would be very rare for police officers to have to use their horses in the Northern Territory in the riot and public control way for which they have been trained. However, should they be called upon, they will be ready and able to respond accordingly, and it gives us a sense of security to know they are there. I am sure it is part of the ongoing training that the horses and officers need to be comfortable amongst traffic in a city setting. As the night progresses into the wee small hours, the horses and their riders are probably subjected to the challenging interjections of inebriated people in the CBD. That too, I guess, is part of desensitising the animals and their riders to some of the reasonably harmless behaviour that some inebriated people may display from time to time.
In my electorate of Port Darwin, there really is only one major problem that I want to comment on. We do have some problems with break and enters, traffic and hooning and, from time to time, unfortunate problems with violence. This probably comes from the fact that we are the playground of Darwin with regards to our licensed premises. However, the biggest problem that we face in the CBD of an ongoing nature is what we term antisocial behaviour. Obviously, I am referring to the behaviour of people who are under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and the way their behaviour impacts upon the good citizens of the Northern Territory, and our visitors, as we go about our business.
The police are often the last line of defence for us in regards to antisocial behaviour. I am sure they get very frustrated and despondent having to intervene, day after day, week after week, month after month, in antisocial behavioural matters. They probably have to deal with the same people day after day, week after week, month after month. When I worked as a nurse in the casualty department at the Royal Darwin Hospital, I noticed that after a period of time, I became very intolerant of the behaviour of drunks. I got sick to death of it and it was one of the reasons why I moved into the wards. I do feel for the police when they are the ones who are expected to deal with what is really the end result of people who are despairing in life, people who feel there is nothing much for them, and as a consequence become habitual drunks.
The issue of drinking within 2 km of a licensed premise needs to be dealt with in the short term, as we will be driven crazy if we have to wait for a long-term solution. I suspect that this problem will go on for decades. The police get stuck with it, and they have to tip out the alcohol. I am sure this is a very tedious, difficult, depressing job, but I encourage the police to do it. Anyone who walks down Darwin mall right now will probably find people drinking alcohol in public, and ask themselves: ‘Where are the police? Why aren’t they coming through regularly and tipping out this alcohol? It is a yellow liquid sitting in the bottom of a Coke bottle, and it is very obvious what it is. For goodness sake, can’t somebody tip it out?’ There may be other ways. Perhaps it does not have to be the police who have to do this tipping out all the time. Another group, or agency, could be given the power to enforce the 2 km. This would release our poor police from having to do this rather tedious and unpleasant job. However, it really does work.
A year or two ago, I visited Cairns and met with their Mayor, Kevin Byrne, and the Cairns City Council. Kevin, who is still mayor, made a decision to have a zero tolerance policy in regards to drinking in public, which is something the member for Katherine mentioned earlier. The effect has been spectacular. When I met with the mayor I said to him: ‘Kevin, I do not know what you are doing in this town, but I have not been harassed by drunks once’. I looked like a tourist. I am of an age that people who are drunk like to approach. I have grey hair and the drunks do like to pick on middle-aged women in particular as they think we are a soft touch for $5. In Cairns, I did not get harassed once by anybody. This was due to the effort made, particularly by the Cairns City Council workers, to encourage people drinking in public to clear out of the public areas where tourists visit.
I encourage police to continue tipping out alcohol. If public drunkenness is allowed to continue in urban settings, the end result will be that tourists stay for shorter periods, and tourism is the lifeblood of the Northern Territory. If we are not looking after our visitors, if they do not enjoy themselves and stay as long as possible, we are diminishing the benefits that tourism brings to our community.
Many people living in my electorate despair of public drunkenness. As these constituents age, they start to think about what they are going to do and whether they will stay in Darwin. They feel the situation is getting worse, although, as the member for Araluen said, there are no statistics on this and it is very hard for us to measure antisocial behaviour at this stage. The feeling in my electorate is that it is getting worse and people are deciding at a distressing rate to retire interstate. It is my hope that the government, and the police, continue to enhance efforts to tackle antisocial behaviour.
Two years ago, a community group held a public meeting at the Mirambeena Tourist Resort to discuss antisocial behaviour in the CBD. Around 40 people attended and the result was that, after lobbying by me and the community group, the Martin Labor government introduced street patrols in CBD. They definitely had an effect and we welcomed that. However, their frequency has diminished significantly since then, and it is uncommon to see police officers on patrol, particularly at night. I urge the minister and the government to reconsider the rate at which we have foot patrols within the Darwin CBD because, once again, that has an effect on antisocial behaviour.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I congratulate the minister on his statement and I congratulate the police force. I wish them all the very best. However, my message is that antisocial behaviour needs to be tackled so tourists and locals can live in peace in the Northern Territory.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I congratulate the minister on his statement. It is a good statement. It covers a wide range of issues and highlights some of the problems as well as some of the improvements we have in our police force. The statement gives us an opportunity to praise our police. They have a difficult job, and come under a fair amount of scrutiny. Law and order is always a hot political potato, particularly around election time, and they are drawn into that whether they like it or not.
Our police do a wonderful job. There are times when I might not always agree with their policies on certain matters - and I will raise a couple of those issues - but they do a great job. It is good to see police numbers have increased. This will help the rural area to have a station at Humpty Doo which is staffed during the day, and a fire station to go with it. I believe there should also be a permanent ambulance service with a training area for St John cadets and hope this is not far away.
I congratulate the government on fulfilling its election promise to have a police and fire station at Humpty Doo. There has been some criticism in the newspaper that it is a waste of time, but I do not agree. Businesses over the last few years have been concerned about the level of crime, and I am the first to say that it is relatively low in the rural area. However, that is no an excuse for not having a police force. We want to keep it that way and there has been serious crime in the rural area. People who have read the headlines recently will know what I mean. The police are not there just for crime. They also have to attend car accidents, which are one of the difficult sides of life. Where they are placed now on the Arnhem Highway, allows them to patrol as far as the Bark Hut area and also the Noonamah, Berry Springs, Acacia areas.
People forget that police are part of the community. It is very important that they are recognised for who they are and people get to know them. Having a police station helps build a community; it is not a negative. The only people who are scared of the police are those who do not do the right thing. I believe the community as a whole will welcome the new police and fire facility to our rural area.
I appreciated the minister’s invitation to attend the turning of the first sod, but it has to be reported that the sod was already dug. There are all sorts of tricks with cameras these days, and what really happened was that the minister turned over a pre-sodded piece of ground pretending he was turning the sod. However, it was a very good day and I was particularly pleased the fire volunteers came along. There have been some issues concerning them recently and I am unsure if they have been resolved, but it was good for them to see the minister and people who are in the hierarchy of the police force and the fire service.
Because we may not see them often, we tend to forget school constables. There is a very good one at Taminmin High, which receives bad publicity at times, but is a great school. It has improved out of hand and the negative publicity does annoy me ...
Mr Bonson: I have played wheelchair basketball out there.
Mr WOOD: Have you? I know about playing basketball there. I was nearly in a wheelchair; it almost killed me. However, that is another issue.
The police constable at Taminmin, Karen O’Dwyer, does a marvellous job. She also works at some of the primary schools in the area and is a credit to the police force. Karen has helped me with other issues not necessarily related to the school. People have to realise that they are still police officers and will help with other matters in the community. This reflects that school constables are working in the community for the benefit of everyone, and should be recognised for the great work they do. It is not easy work. I imagine a school constable deals with anything from counselling to criminal matters and all types of other issues, some of which might not be called ‘strictly police matters’. She is out there dealing with those issues and that is great.
An area which needs attention is dog control. A common complain is that when you ring the police and say that the dog next door has killed half a dozen chooks, or has just chased your daughter off her bike, you are told: ‘Do not ring us, ring the Litchfield Shire Council’. The problem is that the Litchfield Shire Council does not have dog by-laws. In fact it has no by-laws – period. Therefore, it is no good for the police to tell people to ring the council. Maybe they are doing it to put some pressure on council to introduce by-laws.
The police do have the power to control dogs and I ask them to perform that duty when they can. That is not saying that if there is a murder, a car accident, or some other more serious incident they attend to a barking dog first, but they should do so when there is the opportunity. Sometimes dog control can be a serious matter. For example, if someone gets bitten, the police have power under the Summary Offences Act to take the dog, or even shoot it. They have more power than the council, because council would need to obtain a warrant before it attempted to do anything like that to a dog in the rural area. There are times when the police cannot use the council as an excuse for not carrying out that task. It is not a pleasant, I understand that; but who else do you go to? If you have tried to negotiate with the person who owns the vicious dog – and neighbours should try to resolve the issue first – without success, then sometimes the police are the only option. It is an area that needs to be looked at.
Parliament has passed legislation which allows for the confiscation of the vehicles involved in hooning offences. According to the newspaper there have been a number of these offences, and I am interested to know if any have progressed to the stage where the new penalties have been used, as that is the reason that we brought it in.
Another area I want to raise is the number of Aboriginal people in the police force. I am not talking about ACPOs. I would like to see them as, you might say, full police, and this is what we should be aiming for. Someone said to me recently that sometimes there is disparity in the way a non-indigenous domestic violence case might be handled, as against indigenous domestic violence, or there might be a reluctance to worry about someone in the gutter outside Raintree Park, rather than someone who is belting up somebody in the northern suburbs. I understand there may be some issues there, but one of the ways to solve these is to have more fully-qualified Aboriginal police officers. We need to move from having them as mainly ACPOs, which are a great idea, but we have to ensure there is a fair percentage of Aboriginal police officers.
It is nice to see an Aboriginal person in uniform; it gives you a sense of pride. It is good to see somebody walking around the footy field, smart, well dressed, and looking as if they have pride in their job. That is great and the more Aboriginal people we can have, the better. People talk about the percentage of Aboriginal people in our community, but I am not saying that, necessarily, we need that percentage in our police force. You may ask what the relationship is. It is that, if you have that many Aboriginal people in our community, it would be great to see a similar percentage in our police force. That is an area I know members of the police force would be working on, so let us encourage and promote Aboriginal people in our police force as it is a great form of employment. Being a police officer is a vocation in life to some extent. You have to love it to stay in it.
I want to thank some of the police in the higher echelons. Sometimes, I have difficult issues to deal with and I am not sure which way to go and need some legal advice, or knowledge of the law. On occasions I have phoned Deputy Commissioner Bruce Wernham for advice, or spoken to someone else if he has been unavailable. It is good to know that you can get some straight-out advice which can be passed on to the constituent and their problems solved. Perhaps not totally solved, but you can help people quickly. Some issues may need more involvement from the police; but some can be fixed with a simple phone call. I want to thank the police who give me good advice which I can pass on to my constituents. That relationship is important.
I hope one would not be blamed for saying it, or would not be accused of using it for political purposes. I do not at any time believe it is proper practice for anyone to use police for their political advantage. However, if a constituent phones with a genuine problem, I find that is what you should do. If the advice can be passed on and a result achieved, it is a benefit for the community and I want to thank the police for that.
Minister, thank you for your statement. The police do sometimes come in for a bit of a barrage, especially when law and order debates come into place. There will always be some issues that we have to look at, but overall they do a fine job. I like our men in khaki, by the way, and hope you do not change that colour.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I contribute to the Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services’ statement A New Era in Territory Policing and his update on the implementation on the $75m Building our Police Force plan and other police initiatives.
The core of this statement and any of the issues we look at in the future to deal with law and order matters should be based around extra police on the beat. I am very proud to be part of a government that guarantees it will put an extra 200 police on the beat. The minister in his statement said:
Residents of the Millner electorate, which includes the suburbs of Millner, Ludmilla, Coconut Grove and the RAAF Base, will be happy to hear that this government recognises a strong police force requires strong numbers.
Why have we put $25m into the plan to build a better NT police force? As the minister said in his statement, members will recall that the O’Sullivan Report identified the reasons for high levels of attrition as being the impact over a decade of under-funding and stretched resources, the standards of police housing in some centres, targeted recruitment of the Northern Territory talent and highly skilled police by other states, and officers returning to their interstate home towns.
The Police, Fire and Emergency Services Minister, in conjunction with the police force, has put out three fantastic brochures which give an update. The first one gives a plan and an outline of what we intend to do. The brochure says:
doubling the number of constables entering the NT Police Force;
more Territorians recruited to the NT Police Force;
more police back to core police duties;
more police patrols;
more than 80 extra civilian support staff to get police back on the beat;
improved living and working conditions to keep our experienced police in the Territory.
These measures are aimed at creating:
safer Territory communities;
more police on the street;
faster police response times;
improved service for Territorians.
This is a fantastic initiative. The brochure goes into the key findings of the O’Sullivan Report supporting the reasons why we have made this huge investment. One of the factors was the shortage of staff due to underfunding and in particular, the recruitment freeze between 1991 and 1994 which left the NT Police with a shortage of experienced sergeants. We cannot underestimate the fact that this minister, with Cabinet, caucus, and the Martin Labor government, has decided we are going to commit monies over many years to improve our Police Force to ensure we have a safer community to live in, and that law and order issues are handled with utmost priority.
The second report, February 2004, Update No 1, addresses hitting hot spots. This is one of the big factors of why we were able to win government. It was well known that there were a number of drug houses throughout the Northern Territory which had high profiles. One, unfortunately, was in my electorate in the Coconut Grove area, another was known as Foils at Moil, and there was one at Fannie Bay. Many residents knew that these places existed and with our drug laws, we have been able to close these places down.
The reality, unfortunately, is that you will never be able to wipe out drugs. In fact, for as long as this parliament or any other parliament in the history of the human race has made laws, laws have been broken. What we can do, however, is minimise the effect of drugs in the community, and the opportunities for young people and others to access drugs and other contraband. Hopefully, this will result in lower crime rates and also lower the destruction it causes to people either using or dealing with profits of crime from drugs. It is a great result.
Bike patrols are a huge success for anyone, and both sides of parliament recognise that and look forward to their increased numbers and higher profile within the community.
The report also gives the Police Commissioner staffing figures as at 31 July 2003 for officers ranked constables and above. Since the Building Our Police Force plan began last August, there are 10 more officers at Darwin police station, 11 more at Casuarina, 12 more at Palmerston, four more at Alice Springs, six more at Katherine, two extra officers at Tennant Creek, and two extra officers available for duty in the bush. As well, there are 12 additional Aboriginal Community Police Officers on duty, including five in remote stations.
Since August 2003, 60 constables have finished training, including 14 new Aboriginal Community Police Officers, and five new police auxiliaries have started duty. In 2004, 120 constables in five recruit squads will join the NT Police. Taking into account the retirements and resignations, this record rate of recruitment is gradually increasing the number of NT Police.
Producing these pamphlets outlining what the plan is, and reporting on numbers, is a fantastic initiative by this government. It keeps us honest and also future governments, as they have to live up to this type of community reporting.
Update 2 of August 2004, focusses on the recruitment of Territorians. Police and other professions should be recruiting locals because they have an investment in our community, either being long-term Territorians or families in the Northern Territory. I definitely have been promoting to many people the fact that there is a career in police, and it gives great pay, personal challenges and offers professional rewards. The pay and conditions are excellent and we hope to improve those over the coming years.
The brochure also has a report on 109 more police officers. The strength of the NT Police is continuing to build, with 109 extra police available for operations as of June 2004 compared to 30 June 2003. It goes on to say,
The brochure has a great headline, ‘Putting the Bite on Dealers’ and gives details of the new drug dog detection unit. This will be ready soon - my understanding is after Christmas this year - and I know people in remote areas look forward to having the ability to detect drugs entering or leaving their community. This service will also operate at our airports.
I thank the minister for his hard work, and the government for its commitment to address law and order issues. It is a difficult area. You are not always going to be victorious, but people are happy to see police on the beat. Both sides recognise that when you talk about the Police Force, people want to see police on patrol. They want to see them at the football, at Casuarina, down the track, at the local functions and riding their bikes through the suburbs. This has two effects: it makes honest people feel more secure; and criminals less secure. It is a fine balancing act. The police have to enforce the law, but they also have to encourage people to obey the law.
I believe that this quote from the minister’s speech summarises the feelings of everyone in this House:
Mr HENDERSON (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank everyone who has contributed to this statement. There is no doubt that our police force is held in very high regard across the Northern Territory, and it is great to see that high regard reciprocated by elected members of parliament.
I thank the opposition speakers for, in the most part, being constructive and supportive of the statement. The member for Macdonnell, who is also the shadow minister for police and an ex-police officer, does have insight into the police, and some history of police and police resourcing, going back many years. I agree with his comments that, essentially, the first obligation of government is to do whatever it can to ensure a safe community. That was brought home to me very strongly when I had the pleasure of opening the new police station at Kintore, which is in his electorate. In talking to a wide cross-section of the community in Kintore that day, I will never forget the joy within the community in regards to the police station and the staffing that had been allocated to it. The police station had been open for a couple of months when the official opening was held, and the community was a much better place than it was previously. The hugs I received from members of the community, and the thanks that this government received for building the police station, will stay with me as a great joy during my time in this job.
In the specific example I gave in my statement, the health clinic had been closed 73 times the previous year as a result of violent behaviour and drunken people attempting to break-in, trying to get at victims of crime who were being treated. In the two months the police station had been open, the clinic had not been closed once, nor has it been since.
I also talked to the teachers and the principal about how hard it was to recruit and keep teachers at the Kintore School. Predominantly, the reason was that although the teachers had good housing, it was a great school and they enjoyed the job, every few months they would go to Alice Springs for a weekend in the big city, and when they returned their house had been turned over. They could put up with it the first time. The second time was really tough but, the third time, they would say: ‘That is it. I have had enough; I am out of here’. The cost was not only to the kids with an extraordinary turnover of teachers, but also to taxpayer in continual recruitment of teachers to that community - and probably to many other communities across the Northern Territory - was enormous. Since the police station and officers had been there, homes were not being broken into, and kids were going to school because the police on the ground were patrolling the petrol sniffers, driving them out of town, and getting at the sly grog runners. Kids were sleeping at night and going to school the next day. Without the police there, the entire community was dysfunctional to a large degree. Kids were not getting the opportunities they should for a decent education, and women were not safe.
The problem is the capacity of the taxpayer of the Northern Territory to replicate a fully-fledged police station in over 100 communities across the Territory is just not there. Therefore, we have to find other strategic ways to provide on-the-ground law enforcement across the Northern Territory.
The member for Macdonnell said the police force is in a healthy condition and getting healthier. I could not agree more. He spoke about the PROMIS system, which he has been briefing on, and the issue of response times. My understanding as minister for DCIS and Communications, as well as police minister, is that it is not an issue of the PROMIS system and the databases, but it is the whole-of-government network. That comms network is going to tender soon, and I am confident that, as a result, we will have significantly increased bandwidth across the Northern Territory. That is going to improve response times, not only for police, but all other government services. We did put in an additional $1m per year recurrent into upgrading the PROMIS system. The previous government installed the system, but allocated very little money to run it and that issue has been addressed. I talk to police officers across the Northern Territory. Wherever I go, I always visit the police and ask them how PROMIS is going. They say, compared to how it was a couple of years ago, they are very pleased.
We will always have debates in the parliament in regards to crime figures, but there is no doubt in my mind as I travel in the Northern Territory, and as local member, that crime across the Territory has reduced. The Police Commissioner can point to the statistics, ABS can point to the statistics, and you cannot take 6500 burglaries out of any community, let alone a community the size of 200 000 people across the Northern Territory. The fact is that there were 6500 less break-ins during the last 12 months, than the previous 12 months. That is a hell of a lot of grief that is no longer in the community at all.
As local member in Wanguri, I feel that as I go around the electorate. In fact, at the last Neighbourhood Watch meeting in my office, the sergeants at Casuarina police reported that the crime figures for the Wanguri/Leanyer area were the lowest they had been in 10 years, and I am confident they will continue to reduce with the extra resources that we are putting into the police.
The member for Macdonnell made a cute play in regards to the budget commitment for five recruit squads, 120 police officers, this year. Yes, that is what we budgeted for but that was based on calculations, estimations and historical analysis of the recruitment and retention in the Northern Territory Police Force. The commitment was an additional 200 police on the street by the end of 2006. The reality is, as a result of improved morale in the police force, police are not leaving at the rate budgeted for and, if we had not pulled back on that squad, we would have been in the position of having around 80 unfunded police officers at the end of the year. We are still on target to have those 200 extra police out on the street. That is exactly what we are going to do, and we are going to achieve that. The great result of the declining attrition rate has meant that we do not have to recruit at the level that we thought we would. It is good news as opposed to the bad news portrayed by the member for Macdonnell.
I absolutely refute the issue of Docker River. I do not know if the member for Macdonnell is making mischief or he has been badly advised, but at the meeting attended by the local community council, Michelle Roberts, the police minister from Western Australia, and our respective commissioners and I did not leave prior to saying that we would not be building a police station at Docker River. That is a total fabrication and I was at the entire meeting. The fact is, that as a result of the tri-state agreement we have with the police, Western Australia will be building a police station at Warakurna, 100 km west of Docker River, in 2005. There will be a Northern Territory police officer based at Docker River and as a result of that presence, Kintore, increased policing at Yulara, and the $2.5m commitment to a new plane in Central Australia, Docker River will be much better served by our police force than it ever was under the previous government. The member for Macdonnell is just making mischief.
Comments were made regarding the statistics on assaults and sexual assaults. Our statistics come as current figures from the PROMIS system, which are always ahead of the ABS statistics that are printed 12 months behind. Their figures are the historical analysis; our figures are the current analysis out of PROMIS. We are producing those statistics on a regular basis, and the government is not happy that assaults and sexual assaults are not down to the same levels as the property crime statistics. The reality is, we have analysed those figures and unfortunately, as we all know, with the majority of assaults and sexual assaults, alcohol is a contributing factor, and tends to be family or related violence. Until we as a Territory get across some of the grog issues in the Northern Territory, we are unlikely to see those figures decline substantially, although the police are putting additional efforts into those areas. That is why the debate we will have later this year in regards to the Alcohol Framework Review is going to be so important. If we want to see assaults and sexual assaults come down, we have to deal with the grog issues and that is a challenge for the parliament later this year.
The member for Macdonnell talked about police abandoning the streets. What a lot of rubbish! They are more visible in the streets today than they have been for many years. The police are not abandoning the streets. We are going to work on the issues of summary offences and how many people are charged with summary offences. We will go through the previous four years of the last government and see how those statistics stack up. There is no doubt that extra police are doing foot patrols and bicycle patrols. They are very visible and move people on. Possibly, as a result, there are fewer requirements for those charges. Police cannot be everywhere. They cannot be on every street corner. We will deal with those antisocial issues not only through policing activities but also programs such as Community Harmony, the itinerant strategy, and a whole range of other strategies. One thousand people were relocated from Darwin to their communities in the last year, and we have certainly put the effort into that.
The CLP has a history of rhetoric. Who can forget the former Chief Minister, Shane Stone, wanting to monster and stomp on people? We had rhetoric on mandatory sentencing for property crime. You can have all the legislation you like, but unless the police force is there to enforce the law, if the crooks know they ain’t going to get caught, it is on for young and old. The fact that property crime has reduced 30% across the Northern Territory certainly shows this Labor government is very committed to tackling crime in the Northern Territory and are getting results. The CLP has a history of rhetoric and increasing crime rates.
I pay particular tribute and thanks to my colleague the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice. We work very closely as a team in Cabinet on crime prevention issues. The crime prevention and community justice programs across the Northern Territory my colleague is establishing are getting the community involved and taking a level of responsibility which people need to take to put local programs in place, and to work cooperatively with police on the ground to reduce crime in the community.
Recently, my colleague launched the latest crime prevention community group in Alyangula on Groote Eylandt. Again, we worked closely as a team and I commend the Department of Justice and Corrections on the work they are doing. He is correct that this government has an absolute, and resolute, commitment to tackling drug-related crime in the Northern Territory, as well as property crime. That stands in stark contrast to the previous government and Chief Minister who said drug-related crime was ‘minuscule’ in the Northern Territory. It just does not hold water.
The member for Araluen mentioned the Crimes (Victims Assistance) Act decline in dollars available for lawyers. That is another debate, but I can say I recently received correspondence from Sue Lowry, the CEO of VOCAL, the Victims of Crime Assistance League, which gave a huge rap to the work police are doing, the noticeable difference it is making, and improvements in the assistance police give victims of crime and the reduction of crime in the Northern Territory. I thank Sue for that correspondence.
The member for Araluen also gave anecdotal evidence about someone who has a business selling security alarms, trying to correlate the fact that because his business was doing well, crime was going up. That is a very long bow to draw. People pay more attention to security on their own premises. I could make the same analogy that I was talking to Wayne Zerbe - everyone in this House would know Wayne - a couple of weeks ago and he told me about a glazier in Palmerston who said he was losing work hand over fist as a result of the great work the police were doing in the reduction of crime in Palmerston. So, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. We can all come up with anecdotes, but the fact is crime is on the way down.
I pay tribute to the member for Barkly who works very hard and constructively in what is about to become the largest electorate in the Northern Territory with many small communities. He is in regular contact with my office on policing issues. He has a great relationship with police across his electorate and works constructively with them. As he said, he has done some constructive thinking about how we can release police from some of there more administrative and custodial duties so they have more time in the community. We are working through some of those ideas and initiatives that he has proposed recently. I look forward to being in Ali Curung in the next couple of weeks with the member for Barkly to open their new, improved station.
It was good to hear the member for Katherine support the police in Katherine. They are doing a great job. It is a very difficult town to police, but I have spoken to businesses and the hotels and the additional police resources, such as foot patrols in the main street, are making a difference. Of the $2.5m we are allocating to improve police housing, a fair chunk of it is going to Katherine.
When we came to government and with the resourcing that the police had, Karama was certainly a hot spot. I know the member for Karama has been working very hard with the police and with the local Neighbourhood Watch committees in Karama and Malak. She has put her shoulder to the wheel, working with the community and the shopping centre. We can certainly see a big difference as a result of the work of the community, the local member and the police. The initiative the member for Karama kicked off with the Family Fun Day is one that is being replicated across the Northern Territory. It is a great idea. I had one in Leanyer just a couple of weeks ago which was attended by about 400 to 500 people. It was a fantastic day and a great initiative.
The member for Port Darwin spoke about the CBD and, yes, it is Darwin’s program. The horse patrols are very visible. I assure the member for Port Darwin that the police do not ignore the 2 km law. If people are drinking publicly in the CBD, police tip out that grog, and I have seen this happen. As well, City Safe is still operating and patrols in the CBD are increasing. It is incorrect for the local member to say that police are not patrolling the CBD. That is certainly not the case and in fact, patrols are increasing. Recent correspondence I have received from the Australian Hotels Association has been full of praise for the productive, proactive work the police are doing with local licensees, particularly in Mitchell Street. The increased presence that the licensees are seeing, and the police working with security, certainly says to me that they have not abandoned the CBD and there are increasing numbers of patrols.
Member for Nelson, yes, you will get an invitation to the opening of the shining new police station at Humpty Doo. It was an election commitment. We are going to do it, and it will be a great facility for people in the rural area. I thank the member for Millner for his contribution. He has been very proactive in working with the Bagot Community in his electorate to get a better relationship between Aboriginal Community Police Officers and the Bagot Community.
I will finish on a quote from the member for Millner that essentially says it all:
That is absolutely the intent of government policy.
I say again, my thanks to the Police Commissioner, Paul White, and all the men and women who serve the best police force in Australia and who are doing a great job.
Motion agreed to, statement noted.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Sadly, I inform the House that former Royal Darwin Hospital specialist surgeon, Professor Ian O’Rourke, passed away at his home in Sydney on Monday 16 August 2004. Professor O’Rourke who only turned 60 in December last year, was diagnosed a little more than a year ago with a very aggressive form of lung cancer and was expected to live only a few months. Until that time, he had been remarkably fit and healthy, impressing all with his energy and enthusiasm for mountain bike cycling.
I am advised that Professor O’Rourke continued to work in Sydney until a few weeks ago. It would not be improper for me to inform the House that the only reason he did not continue to work even further, was that his wife Trish finally, ‘… put her foot down’ and forbade him to ‘… go to the office with a drip stand and a catheter’. When told only a few weeks ago that the cancer had spread from his lungs to his brain, while jointly examining the scans, he informed his treating doctor, in a characteristically humorous manner that there was, ‘… little to worry about because the lesions were only small’.
Professor Ian O’Rourke, as many in this House will recall, earned a reputation during his five years in Darwin and the Top End as a compassionate and tireless clinician. A man who treated all as equal and believed firmly in a fair go for everyone. Professor O’Rourke’s energy, his passion and, indeed, his sense of humour are legendary, endearing him to all who worked or came in contact with him.
By way of background, Ian O’Rourke completed his medical studies and Master of Surgery at the University of Sydney, and was a fellow of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons and the Royal College of Surgeons of England.
Before coming to Darwin, he was a senior staff specialist surgeon and Clinical Director of Medical Services at Westmead Hospital, and had already demonstrated a passion for safety and quality, at a time when these concepts were not as accepted as they are today. His ethos was a combination of first doing no harm and always considering the patient’s needs, often before his own. Following his surgical training, he became one of Australia’s pre-eminent upper gastrointestinal surgeons, pioneering aspects of a procedure called ‘total oesophagectomy, or removing of the gullet, in cancer patients.
This pre-eminence as a specialist surgeon did not stop Professor O’Rourke from taking up an appointment in Darwin in 1997 as a general surgeon; stepping aside in a sense from a super speciality so that he might help others. Consequently, Professor O’Rourke worked with his colleagues at Royal Darwin Hospital as part of the general surgical roster, responding around the clock to emergencies, trauma and elective surgical procedures. This very experience led him, after he left Darwin, to espouse the benefits of a wide-ranging generalist training, and the valuable clinical opportunities available in Darwin and, indeed, in the Northern Territory. Soon after arriving in Darwin, Professor O’Rourke successfully performed the Territory’s first ever total oesophagectomy, and went on to become the divisional head of the Royal Darwin Hospital’s Department of Surgery.
During his five years in Darwin, he worked not only in the hospital but became a familiar sight at the regional hospitals and communities. He became a key figure in championing the existing surgical outreach service based at RDH, and established the Territory’s first diabetic foot clinic; a clinical endeavour that saved and preserved the function of many Territorians’ feet and legs. The result of this work is well documented and demonstrated a significant decline in diabetic-related amputations.
Professor O’Rourke is well remembered, not only as a leader and champion, but as a teacher, mentor and loyal friend to many. He was one of the few who understood the demands upon the public system, and always assisted administrative colleagues in their often difficult activities. His regard amongst nurses and allied health professionals, as well as doctors, was and remains of the highest order, as was the respect that he commanded within the NT Clinical School. Having said this, he remained a humble and simple man of Irish extraction, and a fair share of musical flair and the blarney.
A man of passion, Professor O’Rourke worked tirelessly to address the issues of both Aboriginal and remote health, and there are many far from this place today who will sadly mourn his loss.
In 2002, reluctantly he left Darwin and the Territory to become the Chief Executive Officer of the New South Wales Institute of Clinical Excellence. Such was his passion for the Territory that he maintained close links and continued to visit Darwin regularly until a few months ago. During one such visit late last year, the small operating theatre library at RDH was named in his honour, a privilege reserved for a respected few.
In November 2003, Professor O’Rourke was awarded the Australian Council on Healthcare Standards highest honour, the gold medal; a tribute to his enduring commitment to improved quality and safety in Australian health services. At the time of the presentation, the council president said:
He was, indeed, all of the above, as well a true ambassador for all that makes the Territory the wonderful place it is.
Professor O’Rourke’s passing is, indeed, a tragic loss to his wife, Trish, and daughters, Kate and Annie, and a significant loss, not only to the clinical world, but to all of us. To each of them, I pass my own and the House’s sincerest condolences. While Professor O’Rourke will be missed, he will also be remembered as a courageous human being who made a difference; a man with a can-do attitude that would not let anything stand in the way of justice.
I know that it is his wish to be remembered as the humble man that he was and, to this end, he invited all his friends and colleagues to a wake at Bondi Pavilion following his funeral at Waverley in Sydney this Friday. A remembrance service will be held in the auditorium of the Royal Darwin Hospital at midday on the same day, to recall a fine Australian and a true Territorian.
I thank you Mr Acting Deputy Speaker for this opportunity to remember Professor Ian O’Rourke.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I had the privilege to meet Ian O’Rourke when I was working at Danila Dilba and he came to help Aboriginal people at Danila Dilba’s diabetic foot clinic. He was a gifted clinician. He was a human being who had a passion for Aboriginal remote health. He had a great sense of humour and a great passion when it came to patient care. He was a clinician first, a gifted surgeon and he was well recognised in the Territory and other places in Australia.
He remained a fierce advocate for patients’ rights, so much so that on one occasion he left a meeting to admonish a senior clerk whom he felt was obstructing the delivery of ultimate care to a patient. Although a truly Balmain boy, he considered Darwin to be his real home and left only because of his daughters in Sydney. He loved the Territory and the challenges and opportunities it provided. He fought for equality and regarded everyone as equal.
He was an adequate musician, according to himself, and a passionate performer. When given the opportunity, he loved to perform and continued this tradition almost to the end. He is remembered as a loyal friend and dedicated clinician, who recognised the importance of patient safety and quality clinical services early in his distinguished career.
He continued in his position at the Institute of Clinical Excellence in Sydney until weeks before his death. When diagnosed with a secondary lung cancer a little less than 18 months ago, he was given limited time to live. Not to be beaten, he embraced the opportunity with good spirits and humour, and lived and worked for more than a year than had been expected. He was loved by everybody in his workplace and he will be missed by everybody. As we say in my mother country: ‘He will never be forgotten’. He was a great man; a great doctor; a great surgeon. He was a great human being.
From his comments during the adjournment yesterday, the member for Macdonnell seemed to take great offence when I said during Question Time that ‘Nationalism is the last refuge of scoundrels’. The member for Macdonnell is very passionate about this, but in his usual pompous style he is trying again to put a different spin on what I was saying and trying to prove me wrong. I am told that he said in his adjournment that I was absolutely wrong, that I did not know what I was talking about because the real quote was, ‘Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels’, and that was said by Samuel Johnson in late 18th century.
I am fully aware, and want to remind the member for Macdonnell, that my quote, ‘Nationalism is the last refuge of scoundrels’, is attributed to politicians in the mid-war years in France when right wing parties tried to claim the flag and everything else about patriotism in order to rise to power. In this, I am be supported by someone very well known - George Orwell.
George Orwell started as an artist and then became a fierce anti-communist. In his essay notes on nationalism, which were published in October 1954, he said he defined patriotism as ‘... a devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life which one believed to be the best in the world’, but he had no wish to force upon other people’. He went on to say that nationalism was inseparable from the desire for power, which was precisely my point. I did not refer to patriotism, because patriotism is different to nationalism.
What we saw yesterday was a display of arrogance, of ‘Let us claim back our flag’. What is surprising is that it is three years too late to claim back their flag. Why? Because the president of the federal Liberal Party said at the CLP Central Council conference, ‘Let us claim back our flag’. Which flag? The flag that does not belong to the CLP, the ALP, or to any other party? No, the flag that belongs to every Territorian. The member for Macdonnell tried to confuse the issue about patriotism and about ethnic groups flying their flags. The ethnic groups fly their flags because they want to have a connection with their country of origin. They do not want to impose their lifestyle, their habits, or their customs on anyone, but they will share them. At the same time, the CLP is trying to embrace the flag. They wrap themselves in it trying to prove to Terrorisations that they are the only true Territorians.
That is not the case. Territorians know who they are. If we define Territorians as ‘born and bred in the Territory’, the members for Drysdale, Goyder, and possibly the member for Daly qualify, and also the members for Barkly, Arnhem, Arafura and Millner. That is all. Most of us come from elsewhere.
It is offensive for any party –not only the CLP - or group of people to try to claim a particular symbol or a flag as their own, and that they are the only ones who can use it. That is very offensive. What I consider as my national symbol, as an Australian, is the flag with the Union Jack and the stars. That is the real Australian flag and, as an Australian by choice, what I consider to be my very own flag. However, I do not claim it for me or for the Labor Party to which I belong. This is a flag for all Australians, and the Territory flag, is a flag for every Territorian.
I looked on the Internet - as did the member for Macdonnell who claimed various quotes – and quote Ralph Waldo Emerson:
When a whole nation …
I take the liberty of changing ‘nation’ to ‘party’:
I question why, three years after the election, suddenly the CLP discovers the flag is theirs. They want to embrace it; wrap it around themselves and run with it. Are they so desperate? Territorians are not going to vote for them because they wrap the flag around themselves; Territorians will vote for them if they come up with decent policies that will promote the Territory, jobs and unity in our community.
In the last few months, we have heard claims by the Leader of the Opposition that nothing has happened in the Territory and everything is in ruins. That is what he said: Everything is in ruins. Really! I do not see any ruins. I receive information from all over the Territory and there is everything but ruins out there. This year Casuarina Shopping Centre is experiencing the highest turnover since it opened and occupancy rate since 1986. I have the seen tourists and locals out there. If you want to do some work on your house, I wish you luck. You are not going to get any workers as they are all occupied.
We have reached the stage where additional money has to be allocated for public works because people are working and everything is about 30% to 40% more expensive than a year ago. We have faith in this place. We are not perfect; we make mistakes, and I am the first to admit that. But we have faith in the Territory and work very hard to promote it, both inside and outside the Territory. I find it offensive when members of the opposition tell us that everything is in ruins.
Not everyone on the other side is like that. Some are brave enough to stand up and say: ‘No, things are really good’. I was talking to the member for Katherine the other day, and she told me that Katherine is very busy with tourism. It has started to decline, as you would expect. Every year, that is the pattern. During the Dry Season, a lot of people visit the Territory, but come 1 September, everyone waves goodbye because the weather is better elsewhere.
It is offensive when people in this House resort to patriotism or nationalism and wrap the flag around themselves - be it the Territory flag, the Australian flag or any other flag - just to prove they are the true patriots, the only ones who believe in this place, and that people should vote for them because they have a flag draped around their shoulders.
As the member for Macdonnell likes quotes, I want to conclude with one from the late 18th century, when Samuel Johnson said:
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, on the news this morning, my colleague from Nelson talked about the appointment of Kerry Heisner as Electoral Commissioner. This follows on from yesterday’s ‘mini statement’ to the House by the Chief Minister, who told us that Kerry Heisner had been appointed and ran through some of his claims to the job. Indeed, she told us that he was a very superior applicant, as assessed by three senior public servants.
Mr Kerry Heisner is a personal friend. I have socialised with he and his family, and he used to live in my electorate. That is not the point. The point is that I believe Mr Kerry Heisner brings a significant bigotry towards the CLP. If the Chief Minister wants to set up independent organs such as the Electoral Office, the Ombudsman, the Discrimination Commissioner, the Clerk of this parliament, and the DPP, they must be seen to be squeakily independent. The sad fact is, Kerry Heisner does not carry those credentials.
For the Chief Minister to say things were wrong in the past and we have to set up an independent office, it is incumbent to make sure that in that independent office is an independent person. It is simple to provide immense protection to someone carrying a bigotry if they are untouchable in an independent office. You can go around the world and see independent offices which have been abused, and officers of high stature, including people who have run countries. If they are untouchable, and if they carry a bigotry, it is not an improvement. It is a destruction of the system. I believe the Chief Minister has made a mistake with this. It is not a matter of saying the office is independent, but the person in it is bigoted. It is my firm belief there are number of issues relating to the CLP and Kerry Heisner which are still not put to bed. There is significant animus between the CLP and Kerry Heisner, some of which has yet to be resolved.
This is not a personal attack on the man. This is a strong attack on the process where you can pick someone, stick them in an independent office, and use it as a sanctuary so they cannot be criticised. Well, I can criticise, and I can criticise in this parliament. When the Chief Minister was delivering her statement, the Deputy Leader said, `Well, you mucked it up in the past’. I thought this was a strange statement, given that a president of the ALP, Mr Charlie Phillips, also occupied this position and was appointed by the CLP government. Everybody in this House would recommend and commend the tenure of Barry Hamilton, and would readily see him as a person of great independence and impartiality. The same cannot be said for Mr Heisner.
The Chief Minister would know - and one assumes she has done some research into this - that there was a Commonwealth parliamentary report into the conduct of the 1998 federal election and matters related thereto. As members can see from the tags on the report, I could quote extensively from it, but I will only read a comment made by the Chair on 29 June 1999, after he had heard significant evidence from some members of the CLP:
Given some of the evidence, that is an understatement.
If that is on the federal parliamentary record, and if in some quarters of the CLP - and I would say fairly significantly - there is still a feeling this man carries a bigotry and bias and that was evident in certain of his actions during that election, he is a poor appointment. As I said, I know Kerry personally, and suspect that after this speech our relationship will not be the same again, but I have a greater duty. It is highly offensive to appoint somebody to an independent office who is not independent …
Mr Henderson: Highly offensive. Coward’s castle. Go outside and say it.
Mr DUNHAM: I can say this on the radio tomorrow, champ. I believe the way the Chief Minister has approached this appointment is a bad signal for the system. I am saying this because if there are problems at the next election, or any by-election intervening, these matters will be scrutinised by the CLP, and they will be taken to the appropriate authorities, with this speech as its precursor. It is not good enough to say, whatever the outcome of the election is, oh well that is just sour grapes.
It is evident there is some disquiet about this man’s appointment, and there are still, I believe, unreconciled issues between the CLP and Mr Heisner. The Chief Minister has that as a matter for her solution, but if independent people are going to be appointed, it is not good enough to say to the Leader of the Opposition: ‘Here is the name, what do you think?’, and then appoint them anyway. That is not independent.
If you want to look at how the CLP did it, consider the appointment of Charlie Phillips, whose politics are pretty well known to all of us. He has been working in Parliament House on the 5th floor; he stood for the ALP, as did his wife, and he has been president of it. He is a former holder of this office. Therefore, before you start pointing fingers and saying: ‘Well, the system was corrupt and bad before’, I do not think it was too bad. You have created an independent office, but it has not solved the problem.
These matters are now on the record, and they will be ongoing. If people think I am not prepared to say this outside, I am. I believe there are matters relating to the appointment of Kerry Heisner that are not in the best interest of the CLP, because I believe he carries a bigotry towards it. I also believe some of the matters which were raised in public submissions to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters of the House of Representatives, are on the record. They are readily available to members who want to read them and can be easily researched.
I cannot understand why the current government has such a cringe about matters relating to the flag. The member for Casuarina has told us that we have been missing in action and now, three years later, we want to reclaim the flag. That is not what has happened. For years after self-government, the flag was evident everywhere. It flew proudly at the mastheads of schools, it was on government cars, government letterhead, logos, advertisements, and its colours were proudly displayed by our athletes in the form of their livery. Unique colours that made Territorians stand out in a pack of athletes.
It is not that we have, all of a sudden, worked out that we need the flag. What has happened is a gradual erosion of the use of the flag. Over the last three years, the flag has disappeared. It is quite evident. For instance, media releases from members, particularly ministers, which not that long ago had the flag on them - and incidentally the flag that was used was wrong - are now carrying this bird. I am no ornithologist, but as I pointed out once before, I think this bird is actually a bustard. It certainly looks like a bush turkey, and I do not think Territorians are that keen on having a bush turkey as an indicator of this government’s faunal logo for the Territory. Bustard is appropriate, because going back to the last speaker, there are a number of matters in the economy that are busted. However, I would think, if they are really keen to abandon the flag and take on the bustard, we are quite happy to go to an election on that basis.
When the member for Casuarina says: ‘You cannot grab the flag and have it as yours’, that is not what we are saying. We are inviting everybody to use the flag. The only people who have vacated the field are the government. What we are trying to do is resurrect their interest in this icon for Territorians. It is a proud icon that has carried us to self-government, and it will carry us to statehood. Do not abandon the field and leave the flag behind in a muddy heap, then come up with some brand new livery and flora and fauna on the emblems and some different colours, and accuse us of being infatuated with the flag. The fact is Territorians are infatuated with it. How do we know this? We gave away thousands - thousands and thousands. We went to the shows and cracker nights and, as somebody who gave away hundreds of flags, I can tell you the kids were really pleased to get them. They were pleased with their flags.
In the matter of the big booze-up for the Greek community in front of this parliament, it was interesting that the member who protesteth too much, the member for Casuarina who thinks that wrapping oneself in one’s flag is a terrible and despicable act, should probably look at the photos on the invitation from the Chief Minister. Pretty much, it is lots of people wrapped in the Greek flag.
I have a problem with putting on a function of that type. I have spoken on the radio about it and I am quite happy to talk about it again. To summarise, I am not sure we should be using the offices of government to celebrate a win for a competition that we cannot be involved in. If people say ‘You celebrated the Melbourne Cup’, yes, we did because Territorians could get involved in it. We could get involved in the Olympics. However, we could not get involved in the competition of the European Soccer match because, for some bigoted reason, we are not considered to be Europeans. I am not sure that was the best way to run the celebration. There are plenty of other much more comfortable facilities available for the worthy Greek citizens of this place.
Please do not assume that we are running the case that the flag is ours and you cannot touch it. We are inviting you to touch it; to reuse it. We are inviting you to get rid of the bustard, and reintroduce the flag on your letterhead, and on our number plates. We are inviting you to fly it proudly in front of Parliament House. We are inviting you to say when the train turns up, please give it to the school kids, and to take it to the showground.
It is not a matter of any exclusivity, or a matter of us saying this is ours and it is not yours. In fact, it is the contrary. We are saying it is ours, please participate because we think it is a matter of great heritage, and a great joy to the people who have a love and passion for this flag. We think you can get some kudos by abandoning the bustard and coming onboard with us, back to where the flag was a precious icon for governments.
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonnell): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I remember a time quite recently when the government put out a press release saying that the opposition had abandoned the Chamber. Guess what? There is not a member of government here. I am sure that any member of government who objects to being identified as not being in the Chamber, will immediately leap to their feet and object. But I do not hear a thing at all. Why? Because there is not a single member of government in this Chamber. Not one. Not the Chief Minister. Not the Leader of Government Business. Not the Treasurer.
A member interjecting.
Mr ELFERINK: Oh hello. Look at this? Welcome aboard. I am making the point because I can tell you, if the government is going to be so cute as to pull these stunts, if they live by the sword, they shall die by the sword. And isn’t it funny to get them in here I have to actually point out the fact …
Mrs AAGAARD: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker! The member for Macdonnell knows perfectly well that he is not allowed to refer to the absence or presence of members in this Chamber.
Mr ELFERINK: Well, if any one member of government was in here up until the moment I started talking about it, you would not have had to run into this Chamber and make the point of order.
Mrs AAGAARD: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I just said that the member should withdraw those comments. He is not allowed to comment on the absence or presence of members in this Chamber.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Macdonnell, you will be aware that you are not to make reference to the absence in this Chamber of any member.
Mr ELFERINK: I got them in here, didn’t I?
Dr LIM: May I speak to the point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker?
Mr ELFERINK: I have made my point. It is done.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I want to comment on the AFL Women’s Football team of the Northern Territory. Over a number of years I have been assisting them by making my office available, donations, etcetera, and I was proud to assist the most recent AFL Women’s National Championship once again. The carnival was held in Adelaide from 20 to 26 June. Each player had to raise $1400, and whilst I only gave a small donation, all small donations add up. We have a saying in my family: small fish are sweet. I donated $50 each to the following people who live in my electorate: Isobel Cummins, Sharon Fielder, Steven Lolias, Krystel Smith and Rebecca Taylor, for a total amount of $250.
I want to thank Beckie Taylor, Vice President of the AFL Women’s Football of the Northern Territory. She has been a fantastic worker for all the ladies in football. We need to assist the growth of women’s football as the reality is that 50% of the community are women. For football to grow, we need to get into the untapped market of mothers, supporters and helpers of the great game that we all love.
Beckie Taylor is a third year player. She apparently has a deadly kick into the forward line, rovers off the full forward and snaps an unbelievable goal. She also has a great chase in her defensive game. Of course, I say that half tongue-in-check.
Sharon Fielder is a first-year player with Territory Women’s Football and plays in the back pocket and wears No 1. Isobel Cummins wears No 8 and is a second-year player. She shows a lot of promise; works well in the back line and lays a strong tackle and great off-field team worker.
Krystel Smith wears No 3. She is a first-year player and has great, safe hands from her netball background. She is always looking to better herself, provides a great lead in the forward line, helps the club off the field with all sorts of fund raising and, in the words of many of her peers, is a potential champion.
Steve Lolias is the coach. I have had a lot to do with Steve over the years, and even coached him myself. He is great guy and very passionate about football. He believes in the girls and pulls them together as a team. He trains hard and once told a story about his coach bringing an animal heart to the change rooms and saying: ‘You have to have a bit of heart to play this game of football’. He picked up a lot from this coach and believes he is one of the best tactical coaches he has ever had. The coach made him feel like Andrew McCloud, I believe.
Recently, I attended the garden Olympics with the member for Karama and a great helper of the Australian Labor Party, Bronwyn Butler. We were up against Sue Carter and a team of candidates from the CLP. I must admit they won last year, but we performed very well and knocked them off this year. It is one all and next year will be the decider.
It was great to be involved with people such as Isabell Shipherd and the President of the Tropical Garden Spectacular, Simon Smith, who was one of our helpers and coaches, and he did a incredible job in supporting us. The patron is Ms Nerys Evans who was born in Wales and immigrated to Australia in 1964. She obtained Australian citizenship in 1975 and has a great love for Darwin. She moved here in 2003 when her husband was appointed as the Administrator of the Northern Territory; none other than Ted Egan of course.
I also want to thank Pete and Lisa from Mix 104.9 FM; the NT government, the Darwin City Council, Top End Sounds, Seven Darwin, and ABC 105.7 FM. It was great to see so many Territorians there, and I look forward to attending the Tropical Garden Spectacular next year. They made us feel very welcome, provided all the supplies and the hard workers down there. They did a fantastic job.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
STATEMENT BY SPEAKER
Flags in the Chamber
Flags in the Chamber
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I remind you of a decision by the House Committee. We raised the question of whether flags would be displayed in the Chamber, and the committee agreed that it is not appropriate. I spoke to the Leader of the Opposition this morning and asked him to remove the flags from opposition desks. I ask him again.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I ask if you could consider extending the provision of flags to members of the opposition bench.
Madam SPEAKER: That will have to go back to the House Committee for a decision. The House Committee has made a decision on flags. That is what I have said clearly to you twice now. If you wish to have flags, the matter has to go back to the House Committee.
Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker, out of respect for your position, I will remove the flag.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you very much, Leader of the Opposition, and I request all members …
Mr MALEY (Goyder): Madam Speaker, may I speak to your direction?
Madam SPEAKER: You may.
Mr MALEY: Madam Speaker, I will, of course, comply with what you have said. However, may I place on the record that I am proud of the flag and our colours. It is not just because I was born and bred here, but because the flag and its colours symbolise our independence. To direct me to hide the flag, remove it from my desk, in our parliament is, to say the least, grating and very disappointing.
Madam SPEAKER: I just want to say …
Members interjecting.
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: Excuse me, no comments from anyone. I have the floor, thank you. I remind members that this is a Chamber. We need to maintain the dignity and the status of the Chamber. At times people approach me and ask: ‘May I wear this?’ or ‘May I do that?’. I am always willing for people to do whatever they want. It is usually for a specific reason or occasion, and then it is done. Opposition members made their point yesterday. You are all members of this parliament and you clearly understand your role and the need to preserve the dignity of this House. That is why I have asked you to remove the flags. I have ruled on the matter.
Mr HENDERSON: Madam Speaker, I ask that the member for Goyder withdraw that statement, which was tantamount to challenging not only your authority to make the ruling, but self-indulgent to say that he will comply but disagrees. That is tantamount to challenging a ruling from the chairman. I ask the member to withdraw his statement.
Madam SPEAKER: I chose to ignore it because I noticed that the member for Goyder did, in fact, remove the flag, and that is what I asked him to do. I thank opposition members for their cooperation. If, in future, you wish to bring anything into this Chamber to display, you know the rules. Now we will get on with our proper job.
PETITIONS
Northern Territory Open Education Centre - Proposed Closure
Northern Territory Open Education Centre - Proposed Closure
Ms MARTIN (Fannie Bay): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 710 petitioners, praying that the Northern Territory Open Education Centre not be closed, and the Rapid Creek centre be maintained. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
Madam Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Madam SPEAKER: Before we continue, this is an extensive petition. A copy is being circulated to honourable members, and the Deputy Clerk will read a summary of the text of the petition, and the prayer, and a full copy of the text of the petition will be included in Hansard. However, because it is very lengthy, you will understand that it will not be read in toto.
We the undersigned respectfully showeth that this petition, initiated by the Student Representative Council (SRC) of the Northern Territory Open Education Centre (NTOEC) and signed by concerned citizens, draws to the attention of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly the reasons why the proposed closure of NTOEC should be rejected.
For over 24 years the NTOEC has served the Northern Territory in providing quality curriculum, resourcing and teaching in a supported distance mode to many thousands of Territorians. NTOEC’s student learning outcomes, achievements and results, particularly at Year 12, stand as evidence of the success of the service provided by NTOEC.
NTOEC’s overall student enrolments have continued to climb annually and are indicative of NTOEC’s good standing and the increasing need for its services from a widening variety of remote and urban client groups. Increasing enrolment requests from CEC/remote community teachers to access NTOEC teaching and learning support for indigenous secondary aged students, particularly at the senior level, also accounts for NTOEC’s continued growth and focus on new and emerging ways to better deliver education at a distance (ICT/IDL/mixed mode) for a changing clientele.
Recommendation 15 of the Secondary Review Report proposes that NTOEC be closed, its resources used in regions or precincts and that the feasibility of a joint venture with the SA Department of Education be explored to develop a new model of open and distance education delivery in the NT. The possible outsourcing of Territory distance education to South Australia neglects an understanding of, and fails to provide for, the intensive student contact, counselling and support processes currently in place. Neglected too are Territory relevance, needs and pride. It also illustrates a lack of understanding that NTOEC already works well in partnership with the Open Access College of South Australia (OAC).
NTOEC has drafted an enhanced model of open and distance learning which negates the need for the proposed ‘outsourcing’ of Territory distance education to South Australia, maintains in one place the corporate and specialist knowledge, experience and skills of staff and builds on the strengths of NTOEC and the relationships already established here, interstate and throughout Australasia.
NTOEC supports efforts to improve educational opportunities for indigenous secondary students through the provision of more face-to-face education to remote Indigenous students in larger centres with sustainable student numbers whilst maintaining that NTOEC has a role to play in materials delivery and teacher support for both smaller schools and these emerging independent centres and should not, therefore, be closed.
NTOEC’s physical facility (the building) has undergone much internal redevelopment over a long history to finally evolve into an exceptionally appropriate, accessible and user-friendly facility for its operation and for students, their families and the many visitors. The grounds are also ideal to house the planned capital works extension for increased student access.
NTOEC is an identifiable, readily accessible, user-friendly alternative provider of quality secondary education that offers equity of access to secondary education, intensive student contact, flexible enrolment, counselling and support processes, and access to a broad range of senior secondary courses through a variety of delivery modes. It stands proudly in the wider Australian context and for its many satisfied past and present students and should not be closed.
Your petitioners, therefore, humbly pray that the honourable the Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
Northern Territory Open Education Centre - Proposed Closure
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 654 petitioners praying that the Northern Territory Open Education Centre not be closed and the Rapid Creek centre be maintained. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
The petition is identical to the petition presented by the Chief Minister, and I do not propose to move that it be read.
Lee Point Development – Size of House Lots
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 199 petitioners collected over two days praying that the house lot size for Defence houses in the Lee Point development are 800 m. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
Madam Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
- To the honourable Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory. We the undersigned respectfully showeth that the Defence Housing Authority (DHA) wants to develop a suburb of over 700 lots near Lee Point based on house lots less than 800 m in size and without any facilities for the new community.
Darwin Waterfront Project – Historic Heritage Significance
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 131 petitioners praying that development of the waterfront project is not at the expense of areas of history and heritage value to the Darwin community. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders.
Madam Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
- To the honourable Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory:
We the undersigned respectfully showeth that the government’s waterfront project adjoins and encompasses areas of historic heritage significance to the Darwin community.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
MINISTERIAL REPORTS
Community Cabinet and Women’s Forum - Jabiru
Community Cabinet and Women’s Forum - Jabiru
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Assisting Chief Minister on Young Territorians, Women’s Policy and Senior Territorians): Madam Speaker, I am delighted to report to this House that the Martin Labor government’s 26th Community Cabinet was held in July in the Jabiru region of my electorate. In particular, I want to focus on the women’s forum that the Chief Minister and I attended, along with over 60 women from the region.
As members are aware, Community Cabinet is an initiative of this government that enables Territorians, regardless of where they live, to interact with ministers and senior departmental staff. It allows them to inform government first-hand of issues that are of concern. The Jabiru Region Community Cabinet presented many such opportunities and members met with large numbers of local people.
The Community Cabinet began at Gunbalanya where ministers met with elected representatives and the staff of the Gunbalanya Council, as well as health and education workers. Following the welcome by the traditional owners and dancing by the famous Yam dancers, ministers engaged with the council, members of which were very passionate and constructive in their feedback.
They raised ongoing concerns regarding their children and young people and the community’s desire to re-engage them, educate them and keep them healthy and free of substance abuse. There are some wonderful initiatives in Gunbalanya and the school has been nationally acclaimed for the claymation film The Echidna and the Turtle. I especially want to acknowledge Esther Djayhgurrnga, the Principal at Gunbalanya School. She is one of the few indigenous principals in the Northern Territory and co-Chair of the Learning Lessons Implementation Steering Committee. Esther is an inspiring role model for her people and, in particular, young indigenous woman.
After the meeting, ministers met with various groups in the community: the minister for Education visited the Gunbalanya Community Education Centre; the minister for Police caught up with the officers stationed at Oenpelli Police Station; the minister for Arts visited the world-famous Injalak Art Centre; the minister for Primary Industry inspected the meat works; and the Minister for Parks and Wildlife met with rangers from the excellent Demed Rangers program, which has a men’s and, more importantly, a women’s ranger program.
Jabiru was the next stop and a very busy program kept ministers active for the visit. As mentioned, the Chief Minister and I attended the Women’s Forum, an essential aspect of the Community Cabinet process, where women from very diverse backgrounds in the region were able to raise issues of importance to them. his was the fifth Women’s Forum and, like previous forums, the women were passionate and committed about the issues that concern them and their communities. It was an excellent forum which may lead to the formation of a regional women’s group that can talk to government and other stakeholders on a regular basis.
Women from Gunbalanya also attended and feedback has been very positive, with the women enjoying the exchange of ideas and support for the Jabiru community. What is apparent - and I am heartened by this - is that with each Community Cabinet, particularly the Women’s Forums, there is increased response and participation by indigenous women who no longer feel isolated or excluded. I will be attending the women’s meeting at Gunbalanya in September to help them progress their issues into actions.
All ministers met with the newly elected Jabiru Town Council. The Chairperson, Tanya Simner, and the council are certainly enthusiastic and eager to work with government to cement the future directions of Jabiru township. The Minister for Local Government had a useful meeting with Yvonne Margarula who is leading the way in that region. Yvonne is with the Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation, which is playing a leading role in the development of new and sustainable economic development opportunities for the people of the Jabiru region.
Ministers listened to the concerns of the Jabiru region and have a real commitment to look at and address what is important to the people. The day concluded with dinner at the Crocodile Hotel, where large numbers of locals were able to informally mix with ministers and their staff. It was a successful evening, enjoyed by all who attended.
All in all, this Community Cabinet was well received by the people of the Jabiru region. I commend the Martin government’s commitment to take government to the people of our far flung regions.
Finally, the Gunbalanya Open Day is being held this weekend. It is always a fantastic day and I urge all members to attend.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for her statement. It is refreshing to see someone other than the Chief Minister make an attempt to illustrate to the women of the Northern Territory that this government cares about them.
However, it is appropriate to remind members that this government abolished the Business Women’s Consultative Council, without consultation. It also abolished the Women’s Advisory Council with some consultation but, curiously, adopted the least preferred option of the submissions that were made. I think four out of 16 respondents were in favour of this Community Cabinet option, which is, in essence, a ‘come one come all women of the Northern Territory’ whenever Cabinet meets somewhere other than Darwin. It is not good enough. It does not replace the direct links that organisations like VWCC and Women’s Advisory Council had with the government ...
Mr Henderson: Very well received.
Ms CARNEY: Well, if you are proud of it, and you are an idiot, but if you are proud of it then you should hang your head in shame ...
Members interjecting.
Ms CARNEY: What you know about women’s policy, mate, could be written on the back of a matchbox.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Araluen, please withdraw that comment.
Ms CARNEY: I withdraw that, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, in response.
Ms CARNEY: I have not finished Madam Speaker. I still have some time left.
Madam SPEAKER: I thought you had. You turned your back to the Chair.
Ms CARNEY: It was interesting that the minister did not refer to any domestic violence matters. I note that the Domestic Violence Strategy, released in December 2002, stated that:
- The Northern Territory government was committed to stimulating new and innovative responses so that Northern Territorians can live in safety, free from violent and abusive behaviour.
Given that under the government’s very own crime statistics, there is an increase in physical and sexual assaults, predominantly on women, I would like to know what is happening with the Domestic Violence Strategy, and whether the government is capable of coming up with any new and innovative responses. To date all we have seen is incompetence.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Family and Community Services): Madam Speaker, as I mentioned - and perhaps the member for Araluen did not hear me - this was the fifth Women’s Forum held. Hundreds of women have attended. You can criticise and be negative but the women who have participated have responded that this is the first time that they have re-engaged with government.
I advise the House - and the Chief Minister will confirm this - that not a single woman has said that they believe there are too many women in parliament. I mention this because it is an issue of great debate on the other side of the House. We do need more women in parliament. I urge women not to be disheartened by the much publicised position of the CLP and that they put their hands up to represent their communities at all levels of government.
Visit to Indonesia and Malaysia
Mr HENDERSON (Asian Relations and Trade): Madam Speaker, today I inform members about my recent visit to Indonesia and Malaysia. This was an important visit for strengthening ties with our neighbours in West Timor, Bali and Sarawak.
I was accompanied by Mr Bruce Fadelli, President of the Northern Territory Chamber of Commerce who, as always, provided excellent advice and assistance throughout the delegation. In Kupang, I was pleased to meet with His Excellency, Mr Piet Tallo, Governor of West Timor and Mr Sam Lerik, Mayor of Kupang. The reinstatement of the Darwin to Kupang flight by Airnorth and Merpati Nusantara Airlines is an important link in the relationship between our two jurisdictions. However, it requires two-way traffic to really succeed.
I joined with Governor Tallo in lobbying the federal government to ease the issuing of visas to Australia by establishing an Honorary Australian Consul in Kupang. I am disappointed to report that the federal government has ruled it out, and one only hopes that common sense will prevail in the future. This is very important. To apply for an Australian visa West Timorese have to travel to Jakarta at great expense to personally appear at the Australian Embassy. It then takes approximately three days for a decision to be made. I will be contacting Airnorth to see if they are happy with the federal government’s decision, and urge all members of the parliament to use whatever influence they can to get an honorary consul in Kupang.
Members may recall the Timor eight ball competition played between Territory residents and the citizens of Kupang. With the reinstatement of direct flights, the players are again lining up competitions. As a sign of friendship between our regions, I was pleased to present Mayor Lerik with a pool cue on behalf of the Darwin Eight Ball Association. They compete for a great trophy which I have in my office. The member for Millner brought in a delegation from the Darwin Eight Ball community, and I was pleased to advise them that the Territory government will co-sponsor, with Airnorth, a Kupang Eight Ball team to travel to Darwin for a competition.
From Kupang, I travelled to Bali, where I again met with His Excellency, Dewa Made Beratha, the Governor of Bali. The Governor reported that tourism numbers have improved significantly in 2004, and he is looking forward to an even greater increase in 2005. It is great to see the Darwin/Bali yacht race back on the sailing calendar, with nearly 30 yachts competing in July. However, the Governor is still concerned about our federal government’s rather harsh travel advice warning Australians about travelling to Bali.
I was privileged to be given a tour of the new Australian Memorial Centre at the Sanglah Hospital by the Director, Dr Gusti Rudiartha, and was pleased to learn that a number of Territorians are working on the project. Following discussions between myself, Mr Fadelli and Mr Ketut Alit, President of the Bali Chamber of Commerce, the Territory Chamber of Commerce and I will be pursuing new trade and exchange opportunities between the Territory and Bali in education, training, health services and tourism.
I also met with the staff of Indonesia’s Director General of Customs and Excise to advise them that the Territory government will continue the Indonesian customs facility trial until mid-2006. The government, in conjunction with the Indonesian authorities, is working on the opportunity to expand the current service beyond the eastern Indonesian ports to all Indonesian ports. The Australian exporters who currently ship to Indonesia from other ports have a value-added service available to them in Darwin which complements the railway and further enhances the Territory as Australia’s Asian gateway.
In Kuching, Sarawak, I was honoured to be welcomed into the private residence of the Chief Minister, His Excellency Pehin Haji Abdul Taib. The Chief Minister expressed keen interest in developments in the Northern Territory’s LNG arena and Gove’s new alumina plant. He was impressed to learn that in early September I will lead a Territory business delegation to Bintulu Sarawak where one of the regions largest LNG plants is under construction.
With Territory business the AustralAsian group of companies recently signing a memorandum of understanding with the trading hub Bintulu Port in Sarawak to operate a shipping line from Darwin, there are real opportunities for exporters to use the AustralAsian trade route into Malaysia and onwards. We are close to seeing a new shipping link from Darwin to Bintulu, and then hub from Bintulu to the rest of Asia, up to Hong Kong and China.
I was also hosted by Sarawak’s joint Chambers of Commerce at a business forum with approximately 50 business people in attendance. This provided an excellent forum in which Mr Fadelli and I promoted the Territory’s major infrastructure developments and investment opportunities. This delegation provided the opportunity to further develop the Territory’s business and trade relations, and an opportunity to foster new relations with the governments and business communities of West Timor and Sarawak.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, it is a bit embarrassing for the minister to stand up and outline a catch-up exercise, particularly in relation to the eastern provinces of Indonesia.
I note the absence of any report on a visit to a port in Kupang because, on my visit there in January, they had no knowledge of the conclusion of the construction of the Darwin to Adelaide rail. You also made no mention of the massive reconstruction and redevelopment of the port in West Timor. I also note that no mention was made of a visit to the Chamber of Commerce in West Timor, which expressed a clear desire to sign a memorandum of understanding with the Northern Territory Chamber of Commerce.
There was no mention of the initiative of the Palmerston community in terms of its Palmerston/Kupang sister city relationship in developing a dialogue to establish a child health clinic in Kupang. I also notice no mention - and I am sure you were lobbied on this – about the re-establishment of a real relationship between the Northern Territory and the eastern provinces, principally Nusa Tengarra. There was no mention of the soccer competition, and I am sure Piet Tallo and Sam Lerik would have mentioned this to you, minister.
With regard to the Honorary Consul, what lobbying or discussions were held with regards to visiting the port of Bali rather than having to travel to Jakarta? I would be interested to hear those responses from the federal government.
I take this opportunity to remind honourable members that it was this government that showed no vision whatsoever when the rail arrived in the Northern Territory. You had no representation from the eastern provinces to demonstrate you have a vision to use the infrastructure of the rail to connect with the regions …
Madam SPEAKER: Your time has expired, Leader of the Opposition.
Mr MILLS: You did not even have the consul visit at that celebration.
Upgrade of Territory Infrastructure
Dr BURNS (Transport and Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, I report to the House on progress towards major upgrading of Territory fishing infrastructure that this government has committed to undertake. As members would know, a total of $1.5m was committed by the Martin Labor government to improve recreational fishing infrastructure; an initiative that has been very well received by the recreational fishing community. Amateur anglers will be pleased to know that this year, the third year of the program, the government has allocated even more funds towards such infrastructure in recognition of the major part that fishing plays in the Territory’s unique outdoor lifestyle.
Madam Speaker, $500 000 of these funds were allocated for Buffalo Creek boat ramp. Works are now complete and include the installation of an 11 kV powerline extension from Lee Point Road, an additional 37 car parks, security fencing, security lighting at the car park, a walkway to the boat ramp and a barbecue area. Importantly, it is planned to have a caretaker operating at the Buffalo Creek ramp from the end of September.
As members will no doubt be aware from the signs along Tiger Brennan Drive, the Dinah Beach boat ramp is currently being upgraded at a cost of $700 000, which will greatly improve the amenity of this facility. This work will involve doubling the width of the current ramp and the number of car and trailer parks. Some in the media have described it as a ‘super ramp’. Work is planned to be completed in September 2004 and the ramp will not be accessible between 16 August and 12 September 2004.
An allocation is planned for improvements to the Palmerston boat ramp to provide electrical reticulation to enhance security at the car park. Subject to resolution of the scope of the works with Palmerston City Council, work is expected to commence shortly.
My colleague, the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries, has received public submissions for further recreational fishing infrastructure. The outcome of these submissions has been the development of plans for new ramps at Borroloola and Mule Creek, providing improved access to the McArthur River, which we closed. At the end of this term of government there will be two rivers closed not just one - McArthur River and Adelaide River - a great achievement.
Funding for these important projects was flagged in the 2004-05 budget, as was $500 000 for a new boat ramp to be built in the Victoria River district. It was my pleasure a fortnight ago to visit that area and inspect the new site for that boat ramp which will be greatly welcomed by tourists and locals alike. Many people drive by this particular area, but with a $500 000 boat ramp and tourists who want to enjoy the gorge as well as fish, it will become a great attraction for the Victoria River region. I am proud that this government has done this.
Other work such as the Mandorah boat ramp is already complete and more infrastructure is planned for other regions. Consequently, Territorians and visitors alike now have more opportunities to safely launch and land their boats. The government is currently undertaking discussions with traditional owners in the coastal area opposite the Peron Islands so it can be accessed by recreational anglers under a range of controls acceptable to all. It is a very complex matter but I am quietly confident that we can work through those issues and bring results and benefits to all concerned.
The government maintains 24 boat ramps located across the Territory as well as platforms, wharves, jetties and artificial reefs that support recreational angling for the benefit of Territorians and visitors. This government understands just how important fishing is for many in the Top End and throughout the Territory. We are always proud to support this activity. We recognise it is a lifestyle that people want to preserve and enjoy. We are encouraging that and proudly helping the Territory move forward.
Mr BALDWIN (Daly): Madam Speaker, I am glad to see that the Labor government is following a fine tradition set by the CLP in developing infrastructure for recreational use in the Northern Territory, particularly by amateur anglers. It is very important that a program such as one the minister has outlined is continued. It is great to some of the projects actually coming on board. Your promise for Dinah Beach was that it would take you two years. It was in last year’s budget; it is in this year’s budget. Now we can see the work finally starting only because of good lobbying by the members of the opposition.
Members interjecting.
Mr BALDWIN: The members for Karama and Sanderson were parading around saying: ‘We have got you a new ramp’. What a pathetic show that was. What a con job! As I said, it follows in the great tradition of the CLP to provide this sort of infrastructure.
I raise an issue about Point Stuart. When are you going to fix the Point Stuart ramp situation? When will that operator be able to open his tourist show out there? When are you going to solve the issues surrounding the boat ramp at Point Stuart? You can answer that in your reply.
When are you going to do the Palmerston platform that has been lobbied and has been an idea of the local members and the Leader of the Opposition …
Mr Burke: Promised. At the local elections, they said the money was in the budget, that Vatskalis had promised it.
Mr BALDWIN: Absolutely! Do not come waltzing in here proclaiming that you have all these good toys for recreational anglers. Let us fix the things that need doing right now. Use the ideas we give you by all means, but get on and do them. As for you closing the McArthur River, what a laugh! We closed it, you reopened it and then you closed it again. What an absolute joke!
Dr BURNS (Transport and Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, in relation to Point Stuart, it is a complex matter. We are trying to work through these issues along with La Belle and access to the Peron Islands. We made election commitments and I am working hard to ensure that we fulfil those commitments.
The member can rave on all he likes about the McArthur River. Mike Reed declared the closure of these rivers in an autocratic fashion, with no consultation with your own mate, Peter Manning. So do not talk about disorder or lack of communication! You mob have a lot to answer for.
In the time remaining, when I was out at Victoria River, I did manage to wet a line. I caught two barramundi. They were a bit small; I threw them back. It is a very beautiful part of the world and this government is proud to announce that boat ramp being designed and constructed out there. It will be a boon to the whole district.
Child Care Funding Initiatives
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Family and Community Services): Madam Speaker, today I will talk about child care in the Northern Territory. Good, affordable and available child care is very important and nowhere is it more important than in the Northern Territory. The NT has the highest proportion of families with dependent children and a higher proportion of working two parent and sole parent families compared with the rest of Australia. Territorian families are more mobile and have less extended family support.
In the lead-up to the last election, the Martin Labor government acknowledged the pressures faced by families in the Northern Territory, promising Territorians an increase to the child-care subsidy by $7.50 per child per week. This promise was fulfilled on 1 July 2002 when the weekly Child Care Subsidy was introduced.
The Northern Territory is the only state or territory government to supplement the Commonwealth’s Child Care Benefit for all licensed child-care centres. We recognise that the Howard government is not meeting their clear responsibility, but we will not sit back and let the Territory family suffer. In the Northern Territory, licensed child-care centres now receive an additional $20.20 per child over the age of two years of age, and an additional $27.37 for every child under two. Since the Martin Labor government made this increase, there has been a 19% increase in child-care places in the Northern Territory. This compares to stagnant growth nationally - clear proof that the increased subsidy works. A 19% increase means more than 500 children are now in child care compared with two years ago, an outstanding success.
However, we recognise that our subsidy alone is not sufficient to meet unmet demand in all areas of the Territory. In light of this, I recently announced a $910 000 initiative for new child-care initiatives. The initiatives were far reaching and included support for remote and urban communities. This included:
a package of $140 000 to Karama Primary School to increase support services and facilities for families with a focus on parenting assistance;
a package of $140 000 to Maningrida Primary School to support parenting and children’s early learning, particularly young mothers;
I have since visited several of these communities and they are very grateful. In Kintore, it was stressed to me just how helpful this money will be and what will be done. In Katherine, the extra $300 000 has been very warmly welcomed, and I know the child-care waiting lists there are too long. I have been informed that, on 29 July, the steering committee for the Katherine Child and Family Precinct met to progress this project. I am aware that the member for Katherine also attended this meeting, and I welcome her enthusiasm and support.
Last week, I invited 20 child-care centre directors from across Darwin to Parliament House to hear their views. One of the things we discussed was the Early Years Framework, which is a joint strategy with the Minister for Health, the minister for Education and I to provide integrated and holistic services for children and families. At the meeting, it was agreed to set up an ongoing forum between child-care directors and those relevant departments.
Madam Speaker, although the Northern Territory government does not have the ultimate responsibility for child care, we have taken on board the issues raised and we will see what we can do.
Ms CARTER (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for her report. Child-care issues are something that I know all of us as local members are concerned about. I have been delighted over the last few years to see private enterprise coming into the fore with regard to the provision of child care. Just off my border in Woolner, two private child-care agencies are being established which will certainly go someway toward meeting the need for child care in the city.
As the minister quite correctly said, in the Northern Territory a subsidy is paid to child-care providers, and this is used to encourage private enterprise to establish child-care centres. It was a wonderful CLP initiative, and it is great to see that it is continued to this day. It will certainly be something that the CLP will be supporting when we one day return to government.
I bring to the minister’s attention the issue of child care in Alice Springs which is short of child care. I will be interested to hear what is being done to provide more places. I know some effort is being made in Katherine, but I am advised about 60 child-care places are still required, which is quite a substantial amount. It puts quite a lot of stress particularly on families. For example, at Tindal and places like that, where both parents want to work, it becomes a real problem when child care is not available and parents do not have the extended family that some people in Darwin enjoy. This puts a real blockage to both parents being able to go back to work. It would be good to hear what is being done, particularly in Alice Springs, and what is being done in Katherine to address a continuing need.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Family and Community Services): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Port Darwin. I acknowledge that she does have a real interest in child care. I am also aware that she recently received a briefing from my department regarding some of our activities. I acknowledge there are some issues which have been raised with me in respect to Alice Springs. I have given a commitment to organising a meeting there similar to the one held in Darwin last week. That meeting was attended by all child-care centre directors, both from small private operators to the bigger franchises and relevant agencies, to go through some of the issues together. It also needs to be kept in mind that we need to involve the Commonwealth. We can do so much but the Commonwealth needs to be part of the process.
Child care is not just an issue in the urban centres. We recently went to Nhulunbuy which has experienced many problems, as has Jabiru. There are huge issues in other townships as well.
Madam SPEAKER: Your time has expired, minister.
Reports noted pursuant to Sessional Order.
EVIDENCE REFORM (CHILDREN AND SEXUAL OFFENCES) BILL
(Serial 240)
(Serial 240)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The purpose of this bill is to reduce the trauma experienced by child witnesses and other vulnerable witnesses such as adults with intellectual disability in criminal proceedings for sexual offences, and improve the quality of evidence from those witnesses in criminal proceedings.
In December 2003, I announced a new Sexual Assault Task Force in response to government concerns about some spiked increases in the number of sexual crimes. The primary focus of the task force is reducing the level of sexual offences across the Territory through the development of a targeted whole-of-government sexual assault prevention plan. The task force is currently investigating Northern Territory data; researching police and legal responses across Australia; exploring service models, particularly in relation to indigenous survivors; and gathering information on issues facing the reporting, investigation and prevention of sexual assault in remote areas.
The task force has also been looking at recommendations of the 1999 Law Reform Committee Report on the investigation and prosecution of sexual assault, including the proposals for specialist training for prosecutors, legal and judicial officers working on sexual assault cases, and the provision of facilities for vulnerable witnesses in Territory courts.
While I am looking forward to the task force presenting the prevention plan early next year, this government is not waiting until that time to put in place some measures necessary to protect those vulnerable members of our community. The Northern Territory has both a high rate of reported sexual assault and a high attrition rate of sexual assault cases in the criminal justice system. Very few reported cases actually result in a formal disposition by the courts. In 2001, the police reported a total of 263 cases of sexual assault with a clear up rate of about 69%. In the same year, only 11 sexual assault cases reached a formal conclusion in the Supreme Court. Out of those cases, seven were pleas of guilty, two resulted in acquittals, and two resulted in a guilty conviction.
There are concerns that the existing processes for prosecution of sexual offences have a significant negative impact on complainants of sexual assault, and whether cases are successfully prosecuted. This is supported by Australian research which indicates that the legal system systematically disadvantages children who report sexual assault.
The bill provides for children and other vulnerable witnesses to give evidence by pre-recorded statement, introduces time limits for the prosecution of sexual offences, abolishes oral examination of children at the committal proceedings for sexual offences, and introduces new provisions into the Evidence Act regarding the questioning of witnesses, and child witnesses in particular.
In regards to disallowance of question and principles to protect child witnesses, a comparison of the existing Northern Territory laws with those in other states indicates that current Northern Territory laws to protect witnesses, including child witnesses, from inappropriate questioning is limited.
The bill proposes a new provision for the Evidence Act which will permit a court to disallow a question that the court considers to be misleading, confusing, annoying, harassing, intimidating, offensive, repetitive or phrased in inappropriate language. In determining whether to allow a question the court must have regard to the age, maturity, cultural background and any mental, intellectual or physical characteristics of the witness. The provision will apply to all witnesses, including children, and replaces a provision in the Evidence Act that was more limited in its application. The new provision is more practical in approach, in that it recognises that different witnesses have different needs, attributes and levels of understanding.
The bill also proposes to introduce principles that the courts must take into account when dealing with child witnesses. These principles would provide guidance for the courts in the exercise of their discretion in relation to child witnesses. The advantage of placing principles such as this into legislation is that prosecutors, judges and magistrates are alerted to the issues that must be considered when a court is exercising its discretion in relation to the questions put to a child witness. They provide material for submissions and decision by the judicial officer in relation to questions to a child witness that minimise the grounds for an appeal from a decision to exclude a particular question. These principles are also consistent with, and relevant to, the proposals to record the evidence of children and fast-track the prosecution of sexual assault cases and other existing provisions in the Evidence Act regarding vulnerable witnesses.
In regards to evidence of vulnerable witnesses, a 1999 report by the Northern Territory Law Reform Committee on laws related to the investigation and prosecution of sexual assault in the Northern Territory, recommended the introduction of alternative means for children to give evidence in sexual assault prosecutions so that the statements of children recorded by videotape could be used instead of requiring the children to give oral evidence at the trial. The bill implements that recommendation.
An analysis of sexual assault cases heard by the Northern Territory Supreme Court over the last three years shows that one third of the cases involved victims who were children under the age of 18 years. Recent Australian research that examined the experiences of children who gave evidence in criminal proceedings for sexual offences, found that a significant number of children who had been through the process of giving evidence would not report sexual abuse again. The comments from children who participated in this research indicated a widespread belief that the process was not worth the trauma suffered.
The Australian Law Reform Commission inquiry into children and the legal process recommended the introduction of legislation to permit the entire evidence of a child to be taken prior to the trial and videotaped. Recent research conducted for the Criminology Research Council on the experiences of child complainants of sexual abuse in the criminal justice system indicated that the Western Australian model, where the evidence of children is recorded at a special pre-trial hearing, has been successful in contributing to a reduction in trauma experienced by children during a prosecution.
The proposed amendment provides options for the prosecution to present the evidence of children under the age of 18 years, and other vulnerable witnesses such as adults with an intellectual disability, in cases involving sexual or violent offences. They permit the prosecutor to adduce pre-recorded evidence of the witness instead of the vulnerable witness giving oral evidence at the trial. The prosecutor has the option of presenting the witness’ evidence-in-chief in the pre-recorded statement, or recording the whole of the witness’ evidence, including cross-examination, at a special pre-trial hearing of the court. This will allow the witness’ evidence to be captured at a relatively early stage in the proceedings, and helps to prevent trauma to the witness as a result of last minute rescheduling of trials or re-trials.
It is anticipated that the court will develop guidelines in relation to this provision to assist parties to use this provision effectively. The Supreme Court already has facilities necessary for the recording of a witnesses’ evidence at a special hearing.
The bill also proposes to use out of court, or hearsay evidence, in sexual offence prosecutions that involve a child. In these cases, the court will have the discretion to admit evidence of a child’s statement to another person if the court considers the evidence is of sufficient probative value. For example, this will permit the court to admit evidence of a child’s initial disclosure of sexual abuse and for that to be part of the evidence of the offence. Under the current laws of evidence such statements cannot be admitted as evidence of the offence.
The rights of an accused person are protected by the provision that an accused person cannot be convicted solely on the basis of hearsay evidence admitted under the provision. The bill also proposes that a court must be closed when a vulnerable witness gives evidence in relation to a sexual offence.
The bill proposes amendments to the Justices Act which will abolish the oral examination of children at preliminary examinations held in the Magistrates Court, also referred to as committal proceedings. In prosecutions for sexual assault offences children are often required to give oral evidence which includes cross-examination at both a committal hearing and a trial. While the Northern Territory Justices Act provides for a procedure for written statements to be used as evidence in committal proceedings, the defendant can require the attendance of a witness to attend and to give oral evidence. This is invariably the case in committal proceedings for sexual offences.
Traditionally, the procedure of calling oral evidence at committal and permitting cross-examination of witnesses is justified on the basis that the accused is entitled to be appraised of the full extent of the Crown’s case and the evidence. Committals have also been identified as having an important role in giving protection from unwarranted prosecution. However, changes such as the establishment of independent Directors of Public Prosecutions, the introduction of formal and public guidelines in relation to prosecutorial discretion, and the full disclosure of the prosecution case, also provide protection from unwarranted prosecution.
The trend of law reform across Australia in this area indicates that the traditional procedures, such as a full oral committal hearing are being re-evaluated and there is recognition of the need to balance the legitimate rights of accused persons with the protection of victims of crime, particularly child victims. Most Australian states have now either modified or abolished oral examination of children in committal proceedings for sexual offences.
A recent Australian study of the experiences of children in sexual assault prosecutions, found that cross-examination of children at committal is often more harsh than at an actual trial, and that intimidatory cross-examination at committal increases a child’s fear of the trial.
There are indications that inappropriate, oppressive or lengthy cross-examination of children occurs in committal proceedings in the Northern Territory. At a recent committal hearing in Alice Springs, a child was cross-examined for two days for a charge under section 131A of the Criminal Code, Unlawful Sexual Relationship with a Child. The child was cross-examined, even though she had given birth to a child as a result of the alleged offences at the age of 14 years and the accused had confessed to police of having sexual intercourse with the child on five occasions.
In its 1997 report on Children in the Legal Process, the Australian Law Reform Commission recommended that child witnesses should not give evidence in person at committal proceedings and that, instead, the child’s written or electronically recorded statement should be produced as evidence.
This bill proposes to abolish oral examination of children under the age of 18 years at committal proceedings, formerly known as preliminary examinations in the Justices Act. Evidence of the child will only be given by written or recorded statement and the child cannot be cross-examined. This means that the child will only be required to give evidence on one occasion rather than at both the committal hearing and trial.
Abolishing oral examination of children in committal hearings for sexual offences will have other benefits as cases will be heard more quickly and will use fewer resources in the Magistrates Court.
Amendments to the Oaths Act are necessary to ensure consistency between this act and other provisions proposed by this bill for the use of evidence recorded by audiotape, video or other audio-visual recording means. The proposed amendments will not authorise the use of these statements in court proceedings, but will permit their use when they are otherwise admissible in proceedings.
The introduction of time limits for the prosecution of sexual offences was recommended by previous Northern Territory reports into sexual assault laws published in 1992 and 1999 to deal with the problem of lengthy delays, which may cause further trauma for victims of sexual assault. I am pleased that this long-standing recommendation is now being implemented by this bill.
The fast-tracking of sexual assault prosecutions was also recommended by the Coroner, Mr Cavanagh SM, in the findings concerning a case of a youth suicide in Alice Springs. In this matter, the Coroner concluded that the deceased’s lengthy interaction with the criminal justice system as a victim awaiting the finalisation of proceedings was a stressor that contributed to her decision to take her own life.
An analysis of sexual assault cases finalised in the Northern Territory Supreme Court over the last three years shows that there are significant time delays in many criminal prosecutions involving sexual assault or child sex abuse. One-third of finalised cases involved child victims, and many of these cases took more than 12 months from the initial proceedings in the Magistrates Court to final deposition in the Supreme Court. In cases involving adult victims, the time delays were even more significant, with many cases taking more than two years to be completed.
Data produced by the Australian Bureau of Statistics indicates that the median duration for sexual assault and related offences in the Northern Territory Supreme Court is 44 weeks. This is significantly longer than the median duration for property offences at around 18 to 20 weeks, or homicide and related offences at 35 weeks.
Delays in the prosecution of these sexual assault offences means that the quality of evidence from victims is compromised and victims experience further trauma as a result of the drawn out legal proceedings. National and international experience in this area highlights the need to ensure that cases of sexual assault are dealt with as quickly as possible.
The proposal will introduce time limits for the prosecution of all sexual offences. Proceedings in the Magistrates Court and in the Supreme Court must be completed within three months. The provision includes a discretion for the court to extend the time period where this is necessary.
Fast-tracking of sexual assault cases will not cause any significant problems in the administration of courts, due to the relatively low number of cases coming before the Supreme Court. In 2000-01, only 11 out of the total of 331 finalised cases in the Northern Territory Supreme court involved charges of sexual assault as the principal offence, and most of these - in fact, seven - proceeded by way of plea of guilty.
The amendments to the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act proposal will provide a definition of sexual offences to be used in this act, The Evidence Act and the Justices Act. The definition includes all sexual offences contained in the Criminal Code.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, I take this unusual but, I am told, legitimate step of making a few comments before I adjourn this bill. I am advised by a couple of my colleagues that I am able to do so.
Madam SPEAKER: Do you want to make this your second reading speech?
Ms CARNEY: Yes, with a view to continuing …
Madam SPEAKER: If you like, you can make your comments and then seek leave to …
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I assure the Attorney-General that he does not have anything to worry about.
In his speech, the Attorney-General quoted some figures from 2001. He said there were 263 sexual assault cases in the Northern Territory. Eleven of those cases made it to court - seven were pleas, two were acquitted, and two offenders were convicted. I add to those, the following figures: in 2002-03, the Territory’s crime figures record 419 sexual offences. For the same period, the ABS Criminal Reports publication, says that only 33 of those cases went to court. Of those 33, eight were acquitted, 23 were pleas, and there were, again, only two convictions in contested matters.
I raise this because it is a very serious issue, and important for all of us to get this right. I know the Attorney-General feels strongly about it, and he knows that I do as well, which is why, no doubt, he extended me the very kind offer of a briefing on this bill, which I had a week or so ago.
As I understand it, a large amount of the content of the bill is based on a body of research that is done in some other jurisdictions in Australia and internationally. Therefore, there is a global push to improve the court processes for victims.
However, the main point I wish to make is that this bill is essentially based, or has regard to, the evidence of children and other vulnerable witnesses particularly – on the basis of information I received at the briefing – witnesses, or victims with intellectual disability. Given the figures the Attorney-General quoted, and the figures that I have added, it appears to me that the area of sexual assaults in the Northern Territory is very serious. We know it goes beyond children and affects adults, particularly women.
I urge the Attorney-General to consider – perhaps announcing when the bill next comes before parliament – commencing an inquiry, similar to that initiated in March this year by the South Australian parliament, into sexual assault conviction rates. I have asked him about this before, but I do so again with some passion and great sincerity.
I am yet to look at the bill in detail and it may well be that some of the difficulties with prosecutions will be addressed in it. If so, that will be great, and I will be the first to applaud.
As legislators, there are lessons we can learn from the South Australian parliament’s inquiry. If the Attorney-General does not have that inquiry document I am happy to show it to him. Some of the issues raised in the document are these: under the heading of ‘Possible Inquiries’, there is a list of questions which include:
what are the barriers to reporting sexual assaults?;
is the prosecution process properly explained to the complainants?; and
These are some of the matters that the South Australian committee will inquire into.
Attorney-General, I simply ask you to consider commencing an inquiry. All of us in the Northern Territory can benefit. If our collective objective is to come up with good laws for the Northern Territory and to assist women and children giving evidence then, surely, an inquiry like this would complement the aims and objectives that I understand that you and your government are committed to achieving.
Madam Speaker, with those comments, I seek leave to continue my remarks at a later hour.
Leave granted.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS
Pass Bill Through All Stages
Pass Bill Through All Stages
Mr VATSKALIS (Mines and Energy): Madam Speaker, I move that so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Tanami Exploration Agreement Ratification Bill 2004 (Serial 242) passing through all stages at these sittings.
Motion agreed to.
TANAMI EXPLORATION AGREEMENT RATIFICATION BILL
(Serial 242)
(Serial 242)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr VATSKALIS (Mines and Energy): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
I have much pleasure in introducing the Tanami Exploration Agreement Ratification Bill to the Legislative Assembly. The need for this bill has arisen due to the impending expiration, on 12 September 2004, of the current agreement between the Northern Territory government and Newmont called the Granites Exploration Agreement.
Newmont approached the government in 2003 to extend the Granites Exploration Agreement. On advice from the Northern Territory Department of Justice, it was determined that there was no provision to allow an extension without passing specific legislation. There is a desire by government to facilitate Newmont’s aggressive exploration and development program of the Tanami region of Central Australia.
Members will be aware that exploration for minerals is a necessary precursor to development or continued existence of a mine. Mineral exploration is a long drawn-out, technically difficult, expensive and time-consuming process. Risk of failure is high, but the chance of success is enhanced by:
the prospectivity of the exploration area,
Balancing the period for which a company is licensed to explore an area against their performance - as judged by expenditure, the quality of the exploration work as seen on the ground and in their regular reports - and the success of that exploration, is one of the difficult tasks carried out by the government. Exploration in the remote, arid areas of Australia is particularly difficult due to the deep weathering of the ancient geological terrain, the remoteness from infrastructure and supplies, difficult communications and, sometimes, inclement weather conditions.
The Tanami Exploration Agreement Ratification Bill sets in place an agreement which establishes Newmont’s right of access to existing and future exploration licences in the Tanami region for a period of 10 years. It should be indicated at this point that the Tanami Exploration Agreement Ratification Act ratifies a new agreement which successfully updates and replaces the pre-existing Granites Exploration Agreement.
My comments today are guided largely by the rationale presented by the government of the day when introducing the 1994 Granites Exploration Agreement Ratification Act.
The Tanami exploration agreement between Newmont Australia Ltd and the Northern Territory government is not unique. It represents recognition by the government that this company succeeded in becoming one of Australia’s largest gold producers. Newmont has successfully developed major gold mines in the Northern Territory and operates the only two major gold processing plants in the region. It has also discovered high grade gold deposits at Dead Bullock Soak and Groundrush, which are now being mined. Several additional significant gold prospects have also been identified in the Tanami region for potential development.
The previous agreement, the Granite Exploration Agreement between the Territory government and the then North Flinders Mines Ltd, was commenced in 1994 and afforded North Flinders Mines with the opportunity to explore and develop a region in the vicinity of the Granites Gold Mine in a logical and progressive way. North Flinders Mines has now been acquired by Newmont Australia Ltd. The vision, technical expertise and persistence of these companies continues and has resulted in recognition of the Tanami region as the Northern Territory’s major producing gold region and one of the key prospective gold fields in Australia.
To date, about $200m has been spent on exploration in the Tanami by North Flinders and Newmont. Current plans include an annual expenditure in the Northern Territory of about $8m on greenfield exploration, in addition to about $2m of brownfield exploration, and expenditure and some $200m per year in operational costs of the mining and milling operations.
Newmont has a capital investment of over $150m in the Tanami operations with processing facilities including the Granites Mill and the Tanami Joint Venture Mill. It has an annual gold production in excess of 600 000 ounces from these mills and this figure is expected to be surpassed this year. It employs over 700 people, many of whom are based in the Territory, and engage with some 250 Territory businesses with further flow-on effects to the Territory economy.
Since inception, the Tanami operations have generated revenue for the Territory, by way of royalties, of approximately $62m with $11.5m paid in 2002-03.
Newmont is also committed to indigenous employment. Indigenous employment reached 20% in 2002 and currently runs at about 15%. It is also actively engaged in contracts with local indigenous businesses, sponsors cultural activities and invests in a lot of community infrastructure injecting some $5m a year in to the local communities.
The Northern Territory government, through its agencies, will liaise with Newmont to facilitate maximising training and employment opportunities in this region. The benefit to Newmont afforded by this agreement is constrained by conditions related to expenditure and tenure rental that exceed those applicable to other Territory explorers. The benefit to the Territory is the continued high level of socio-economic benefits instilled in to the region.
The basis of the Tanami Exploration Agreement is that Newmont will, within an agreement area of 20 000 graticular blocks, approximately 64 400 km2, be able to hold granted exploration licences or exploration licence applications up to 10 000 blocks throughout the 10-year term of the agreement. In return, Newmont will guarantee to expend a significant amount on exploration. This guaranteed expenditure level is defined in the agreement as $600 per granted exploration licence block multiplied by the number of granted blocks. This amount will be adjusted annually taking into account the Consumer Price Index. Regionally, there has been an average annual exploration expenditure of approximately $475 per block by all explorers. This means that Newmont could spend an extra $1.2m per year above the average expenditure in this region.
The agreement also requires higher tenure rental than is required under the current Northern Territory Mining Act. For example, under the Mining Act the first year rental is set at $10 per block increasing to $40 per block in year four, whereas in the agreement the rental is set at $50 for the first year, increasing to $98 in year four. Because this land is Aboriginal freehold, in accordance with the Aboriginal Land Rights Act the Territory foregoes these rents which are on-paid to traditional owners through the Central Land Council.
The relatively high expenditure level and the rental requirements will encourage Newmont to carefully manage the tenure within the agreement area. This may lead on to early relinquishment of land which could then be picked up by other explorers.
The Tanami Exploration Agreement is subject to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. All the exploration licences covered by the agreement are on land held as Aboriginal freehold by the Tanami Land Trust, some of which were originally granted following agreement between North Flinders Mines and the Central Land Council.
The Central Land Council has been fully appraised of the negotiations of the Tanami Exploration Agreement and supports the agreement. Newmont and the Central Land Council will adjust existing agreements to account for the terms of the Tanami Exploration Agreement.
Let me briefly review some of the Tanami gold fields history, which was described at the time of passage of the original Granites Exploration Agreement Ratification Act. For new members of this Assembly, including myself, this will be of interest and a salutary reminder that an area is never fully explored. Repeated exploration efforts seeking different models of mineral occurrence and using newer and more sophisticated exploration technology continually surprises us with new discoveries, further enhancing prospectivity and longevity of the original development.
The Tanami region, and the Granites in particular, is one of the more remote mining localities in Australia. Gold was first discovered at the Granites in 1900 by Mr Alan Davidson who, while prospecting by camel, discovered gold in outcrops at what was later called Chapmans Hill.
The deposit was worked for a short time by Mr Stewart who extracted approximately 200 ounces of gold from alluvial deposits and quartz veins. The hardships endured in those years must have been daunting for the rewards they won and the early rush to the area was severely curtailed by the extreme shortage of water.
Further discoveries of gold were made by Mr Jim Escreet at Bullakitchie in 1932. The mine was purchased by C H Chapman who successfully worked there and later made a new discovery at the site called Shoe. Production of over 10 000 ounces of gold occurred over the next 20 years. Exploration in the area by major companies was not lacking in those years, with a number of companies being floated to take part in the gold rush. Most fizzled out without success.
Subsequent exploration by a number of major of companies during the 1950s through the 1970s did not find a sufficient grade of gold to develop a vision of a major gold field in the region. In 1975, North Flinders Mines applied for its first exploration licence covering the area of the Granites. It had to wait until 1983 to commence work in the area, delayed by the need to sign agreements with traditional owners.
Drilling at the East Bullakitchie and Shoe prospects delineated high grade ore shoots, which led to the construction of the modern Granites Gold Mine. The mine produced its first bar of gold on 1 July 1986. North Flinders Mines pursued an aggressive exploration program on this original exploration licence and, following the signing of further agreements with traditional landowners, additional exploration licences were granted in 1998.
Gold was discovered at what is descriptively named Dead Bullock Soak later that year. Over the next few years, additional ore bodies were found and given such colourful names as Triumph Hill, The Villa, Furmarole, Avon, Callie, Colliwobble Ridge and Sleepy Hollow.
It is this exploration success and the desire to capitalise upon the full potential of the Tanami region that the government has agreed to enter into this new agreement allowing Newmont to explore for an extended period on a stable tenure basis.
There is a lead time of between three to five years from a mineral discovery to mine development, and continuous access to ore is required to ensure operations continue. It is essential that we must do everything reasonable to ensure that ore is available for continued operation of existing infrastructure to sustain the flow on effects of employment and local industry in the region.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to the Assembly.
Debate adjourned.
NUCLEAR WASTE TRANSPORT, STORAGE AND DISPOSAL (PROHIBITION) BILL
(Serial 243)
(Serial 243)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Environment and Heritage): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The purpose of this bill is to protect the Northern Territory from becoming the dumping ground for the nation’s nuclear waste. It is about protecting the environment of the Northern Territory, the health of Northern Territorians and the industry of the Northern Territory. It is about protecting the wonderful reputation the Northern Territory has as one of the most pristine places on earth. The intention of this bill is to prevent waste from outside the Northern Territory being transported into the Northern Territory and stored in the Northern Territory.
In the event that a national nuclear waste disposal facility is proposed for the Northern Territory, the bill provides the minister with the capacity to seek an injunction to prevent such action. If works on a facility have already been taken, the minister may authorise action to remove the facility and make good any environmental harm. This bill does not relate to the transport, storage and disposal of radioactive waste produced within the Northern Territory.
There already exists a range of acts that cover this. The Mining Management Act places environmental and safety controls on uranium mining and waste disposal. The Radioactive Ores and Concentrates (Packaging and Transport) Act controls radioactive products from uranium mines after they have left the mine. The Radiation (Safety Control) Act places safety controls on radioactive substances such as those used in laboratories and hospitals. Parliament has already determined that this act is to be replaced by the improved provisions contained within the Radiation Protection Act.
The Radiation Protection Act applies to less than 1% of the nation’s nuclear waste. None of these wastes are high level waste. Some 90% of Australia’s nuclear waste derives from Commonwealth activities and, in particular, the operations of the nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights run by the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, or ANSTO. It is this waste, which includes the highest grade nuclear waste in Australia, that this government does not want to see dumped in the Northern Territory.
The issue of radioactive waste disposal has been a national issue for almost 30 years. Up until recently, the Howard government has consistently maintained that a single national repository for radioactive waste was the best and safest option. They embarked on a protracted search around Australia for the best site. They determined that it was in South Australia, and then sought to impose it on the people of South Australia who very vocally opposed it. The Parliament of South Australia also opposed it. They have passed legislation similar to this bill, and so has Western Australia. However, then the Prime Minister got cold feet, and there is a federal election and marginal electorates have to be saved.
On 14 July, the Prime Minister announced that the Commonwealth would abandon its plan and instead establish a single disposal facility on Commonwealth land that would house the Commonwealth’s radioactive waste and the nation’s intermediate level waste. States and territories could manage their own low level radioactive waste themselves and, according to the Prime Minister, this was all South Australia’s fault for opposing the facility in the courts and winning.
Notwithstanding that the signs clearly illustrated that South Australia was the best spot for any such facility, the Prime Minister announced that the new Commonwealth facility would not be located in South Australia after all. We all know South Australia is off the Commonwealth’s hit list because there are some marginal electorates. We know that the federal government is looking for a site on Commonwealth land - although not necessarily on land that they own at the moment - and while the Commonwealth will not announce their intentions until after the election, there can be no doubt that the Territory will be under consideration.
In South Australia, there was almost unanimous opposition to the proposed dump, especially from politicians. Unfortunately, that is not the case in the Northern Territory. In the Northern Territory, we do not have a bipartisan, unconditional opposition to being the home of this national nuclear dump. Clearly, this situation makes this bill even more important if we are to prevent this occurring.
The CLP member for Solomon has suggested that it is the obligation of the Northern Territory to be the home of this dump if his own federal government determines that the Northern Territory is the best place. The CLP member for Solomon gave the green light for Canberra to dump their waste in the Territory. He has not been rebuked by his party. He has not been rebuked by the Leader of the Opposition. He clearly has the support of his party and the support of the CLP opposition and its leader …
Dr Lim: Have you asked Bob Collins what he did in his report under the Keating government?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: This government’s position is absolutely clear. The Territory produces less than 1% of Australia’s radioactive waste …
Dr Lim: Ask Bob Collins what he did in his report.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Greatorex, allow the minister to finish her speech.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: We are happy to manage our own radioactive substances, which are at the lower end of the scale, but we are not willing to be the dumping ground for the rest of Australia. The Chief Minister has written to the Prime Minister indicating this position, but this bill goes further. It will send a clear signal to Canberra that Territorians do not want the nation’s nuclear waste, and that they are in for a fight if they choose to proceed. The legislation proposed in this bill will be one of our strongest weapons in this fight.
It might seem obvious and self-explanatory, but it is important to outline why the government opposes a nuclear waste dump in the Northern Territory. First and foremost, it is the responsibility of any government to act on behalf of the people, and it is clear that the people of the Northern Territory do not want this dump. The Northern Territory is known throughout Australia and the world as one of the last great wildernesses. Our clean and green great outdoors has a pristine reputation. A nuclear waste dump does not just compromise that reputation - it destroys it. Not only do Territorians not want this nuclear dump because they care for the environment and their health, they love the lifestyle that our environment provides.
Industry also is threatened, especially tourism which is such a vital component of industry and employment in the Northern Territory. Leading figures in the tourism industry have already spoken out in outrage at the message being sent to potential tourists by the member for Solomon. It is not only tourism. The Minerals Council has come out and also voiced their opposition to the facility, particularly in relation to its impact on exploration.
Representatives of our two biggest industries oppose this dump, yet the CLP and the member for Solomon have ignored this. They have argued that there might be some money in it for us if we agree to take this dump. It would have to be an enormous amount of money to compensate for our tourism industry. Tourism is our biggest employer - a nuclear waste dump will never be able to compensate for that. The economic cost of a nuclear waste dump on the Territory will clearly outweigh any small benefits, and we should not put our industry and jobs at risk in such a short-sighted way.
We should also not take at face value the proposition that the best option is to put this waste in a single facility thousands of kilometres away from its source of production or use. The handling and transport of these wastes presents a significant additional risk factor. I am not arguing that there would never be sound reasons for consolidating this waste at a regional scale, but transporting it across the continent seems unnecessarily risky, and the arguments in favour of doing it are certainly not compelling.
This is particularly apparent when we look at comments from the major source of these wastes, ANSTO. In public comments and submission to a recent New South Wales parliamentary inquiry, ANSTO is reported to have indicated that it safely stores its current nuclear waste, and can continue to do so in the future. If this is the case, then why move it?
ANSTO seems to be having a bet both ways. One is left wondering whether their desire to move their waste to a single national repository away from Sydney has more to do with enhancing public acceptance of a new nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights than it does about proper waste disposal. In fact, as 90% of Australia’s nuclear wastes are currently stored at Lucas Heights I could, perhaps a little provocatively, suggest that it might make more sense for the remaining 10% of wastes to be transported to Sydney.
I am sure there is a presumption in people’s minds that a national repository will do away with the need for local storage, so that the increase in risk from transporting the waste across Australia might, to some extent, be offset. Unfortunately, however, this is not the case. Under the Commonwealth government’s previous proposal – and, one might presume, this latest proposal - the waste would be shifted every two to five years. Therefore, instead of doing away with storage areas, we end up with more. The bottom line for Territorians is that, even if we host the national facility, we would still need storage close to the point of production or use because the truck simply would not be visiting the national dump weekly.
In stating the Territory government’s position, I am very aware that radioactive materials provide important benefits to Territorians and the wider Australian community - in nuclear medicine, mining technology and research. Some have sought to couple the acceptance of these benefits with acquiescence to a national waste disposal facility wherever the Commonwealth government may choose to put it. This argument clearly does not hold at several levels. If we accept the benefits of nuclear medicine, then absolutely we have a responsibility to manage the wastes that are generated in the Territory. However, it certainly does not automatically follow that we should blindly accept a national waste disposal facility where the arguments in favour of such a facility simply do not stack up.
Furthermore, the proposition that the waste generated from Lucas Heights is the necessary by - product from our access to radioactive substances for medicines and research, is not universally held. Other technologies are available for producing at least some of the radioactive substance used in medicine without the use of nuclear fission. Certainly other developed countries access these products without a domestic nuclear reactor.
Clearly, there is a strong case for at least having a thorough look at minimising the generation of these nuclear wastes before we blindly accept that we need to look for a hole in the ground somewhere. Nuclear medicine will not become any less available to the community if we do not have a national nuclear waste dump. Our clear responsibility lies in safely storing and disposing of the wastes generated in the Territory. In many cases, this means near the site at which it is produced or generated.
To this end, my colleague, the Minister for Health, recently introduced a major overhaul of the regulatory regime for radioactive substances by introducing the Radiation Protection Act. If, as a result of this debate, some inadequacies come to light with respect to the existing management of radioactive substances, then this government will not shy away from fixing any problems. This is, after all, why the new legislation was introduced. The Leader of the Opposition, in a media release dated 28 July, called this legislation ‘a meaningless political stunt’ and seemed to be almost pleading with the Commonwealth to exploit the fact that we are not a state, and overrule this legislation. Worryingly, the member for Solomon, a member of John Howard’s government, has also pointed to the capacity of his government to overrule the Territory government.
Let me make it very clear that the Northern Territory government has an absolute mandate to introduce this legislation. The Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act makes it clear that the disposal and storage of hazardous, dangerous waste is the domain of the Northern Territory government. The Prime Minister, when speaking on this issue on 19 July, ruled out taking advantage of the fact that we are not a state when he said the rights of the Territory will no less be respected than the rights of other parts of the country. The rights of the Territory would clearly not be respected were the Commonwealth to overrule this legislation.
This bill legislates to prohibit a nuclear waste dump to the full extent of the Territory parliament’s capacities. It would be wrong for me to propose that this bill, when enacted, would offer some sort of cast-iron guarantee that there will not be a nuclear waste dump in the Territory - it does not. The capacity of the Territory to regulate Commonwealth instrumentalities has limitations and the Commonwealth can, if they wish, remove our right to legislate on this matter. Both South Australia and Western Australia have similar legislation, with similar limitations. Although the CLP member for Solomon is trying to make sure the Territory is an easy target, this legislation ensures we will not become a soft touch.
This bill sends a strong message to Canberra that if they want to override the Territory on this issue, they will do so against the express wishes of Territorians.
I commend the bill to honourable members
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I seek to make a few remarks before the shadow minister adjourns debate.
There are times when this House descends into high farce. I would suggest to you that what we have heard this morning is an example of that. It is indicative of the fact that a junior minister is now taking the lead on an issue that has been the subject of pronouncements of the Chief Minister in the past. It reminds me of the old adage that the monkey is loose while the organ grinder is absent. That is, essentially, what we have here. However, what is important is that the seriousness the government places on this legislation is indicated by the status of the minister who is presenting it. That is the first thing I would say.
My second point is that I would emphasise my agreement with the Leader of the Opposition that this is a cheap political stunt! In fact, when I chose to make comment when this issue was first raised, the media representatives I talked to said they were not interested because they thought it was simply that – a cheap political stunt.
The government will try to make mileage of it. I suggest to the minister that she may have been handed a bit of a problem here because, if you want to bring in this sort of legislation and you want a mature debate on it, let us have it. Firstly, let me say that I have only had time for a cursory glance at this legislation - which the minister pronounces to protect Territorians – and it says in clause 5 – and note this:
- A provision of this act relating to the transport, storage or disposal of nuclear waste does not have any effect …
… to the extent that it is inconsistent with a law of the Commonwealth.
The minister stands in this House and purports to present legislation, carries on with gobbledegook and, somehow, thinks the average Territorian is so dumb that a junior minister is now going to be the protector of their welfare, whilst the Chief Minister is noticeably absent because she does not get herself involved in cheap political stunts.
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker! The member for Brennan well knows he cannot draw attention to a member’s presence or otherwise in the Chamber. I ask that he withdraw the comment.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, please withdraw the comment about the …
Mr BURKE: The Chief Minister is absent from presenting the legislation! I have made no reference to the Chief Minister being – in fact, I will say that the monkey is here and the organ grinder is absent. So in that regard, I am at fault for suggesting that the Chief Minister, the organ grinder in this case, is absent.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Brennan …
Members interjecting.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Brennan, could you withdraw the statement that the Chief Minister is absent, please?
Mr BURKE: I withdraw.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you.
Mr BURKE: It is very important when the minister gives her media statements about the fact that she has now introduced this wonderful legislation, she addresses clause 5 straight up, which says: ‘disregard all of the second reading speech because in clause 5 of the act it says this law matters zip insofar as it is inconsistent with any law of the Commonwealth’.
Do not suggest for a moment to anyone that this law protects Territorians against onerous or dominant Commonwealth action which, I might add, the Commonwealth has not suggested. Rather than suggesting that the Commonwealth is going to establish a nuclear dumping facility in the Northern Territory, what they should be addressing, and what this debate will address when it comes on, is what the Commonwealth government has said - that the states and territories are responsible for the disposal of their own wastes.
If you want to bring in this legislation, firstly we want an informed debate on how this Labor government currently disposes of its own radioactive wastes in the Northern Territory. If this debate is to be informed, it is the responsible action of the government to produce papers in this Chamber to inform us of the current status.
I request the minister provides all the information. I want the names and locations of current storage sites in the Northern Territory. I know where there is one. Rather than worrying about what the Commonwealth is going to do, there is one right next to Casuarina shopping centre - isn’t there, minister? You are the minister for the environment. How about the Minister for Health? There is one right in Royal Darwin Hospital. It is about 30 feet from patients’ beds. I would like to know, minister, what is the capacity and standard of storage of that facility? I would like to know, minister, what audits you have done on your own facilities?
If you want to bring debate in to this Chamber, I will be demanding that the minister demands of this government …
Members interjecting.
Mr BURKE: It would nice to be heard in a bit of silence. I listened to the second reading speech in silence.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Could we all just settle down? There is too much shouting and yelling going on.
Mr Kiely: It is another shot at the leadership.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Sanderson, did you just hear me?
Mr Kiely: Yes, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: All right. It applies to you to.
Mr BURKE: Madam Speaker, I will be demanding - and I believe it is the only responsible action of this government - that they produce in this Chamber the location of every radioactive storage facility currently in use in the Northern Territory, under whatever act or legislation they are currently supervised.
To be assured of the standard and quality assurance of those sites, I would like to know what audits the government has conducted since it has been in government. I would also like produced in this Chamber any report that has been done for the Northern Territory government in the past 10 years relating to the storage of radioactive waste in the Northern Territory. I know there is at least one.
Minister, if you want to stand up here and be the protector of Territorians let us just lay down, for everyone’s benefit what the current situation in the Northern Territory is; what reports have been produced for the Northern Territory government over the last 10 years; and what audits are in place on the current facilities that we have in place in the Northern Territory, so that we can all approach this debate from an informed position.
Sadly, minister, your second reading speech does not provide any scientific evidence on which to conduct the debate. I also ask you this: the Vice-Chancellor of Charles Darwin University, Dr Helen Garnett, who is a nuclear scientist ...
Dr Burns: No, no. She is a microbiologist. Get your facts straight.
Mr BURKE: Has a background in nuclear science …
Dr Burns: She is not a nuclear scientist. Get your facts straight.
Members interjecting.
Mr BURKE: If you want to denigrate the Vice-Chancellor of Charles Darwin University …
Dr Burns: I am not denigrating her. Look at her CV.
Mr BURKE: I ask this: why are you getting so upset?
Members interjecting.
Mr BURKE: This is supposed to be a very serious issue that you want ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Brennan, would you speak to me.
Mr BURKE: I am actually bemused that the government is so sensitive. On the one hand, they ask for Territorians to be protected against onerous action by the Commonwealth, and yet they seem to be very sensitive about just answering some simple questions for this parliament. I will repeat them again. Detail to Territorians every location of every radioactive facility in use in the Northern Territory. Detail to Territorians any report that has been produced for the Northern Territory government over the last 10 years relating to the appropriateness or otherwise of how we store radioactive waste in the Northern Territory. You might also add an addendum to that: what have you done since you have been in government to improve that situation which will give us an informed basis to deal with our own responsibilities? I would like to see the Northern Territory government produce a paper - I suggest Dr Helen Garnett as she would be eminently capable of producing such a paper - to inform this parliament of exactly what we are discussing, concerned and worried about: what are the implications of what could happen to the Northern Territory and what are the wastes that can be stored? Dr Garnett might want to do an audit herself of the way we currently store our own wastes in the Northern Territory.
Finally, I would ask the minister to reply to clause 5, which says the legislation provides no protection against any act or law that is passed by the Commonwealth …
Mr Bonson: It is called the Australian Constitution.
Mr BURKE: ... and more than that, it says …
A member: You are weaselling.
Mr BURKE: Have you read this? It has been on your desk for about the last 15 minutes.
Dr Toyne: Yes, we have read it in detail.
Members interjecting.
Mr Bonson: And we still have not heard what the CLP’s policy is.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Millner!
Mr BURKE: I am used to the childish chatter that comes along. We are highly paid politicians. Staff are employed to produce this legislation.
A member: What’s your position? Give us your position?
Mr BURKE: You not sit there like a monkey and listen to the second reading speech and say: ‘Oh, that sounds good’.
A member: Give us your position.
Mr BURKE: Here is the legislation. It has been on your desk for the last 15 minutes. If you want to make a comment, make an informed comment.
Members interjecting.
Mr Ah Kit: Stop being provocative.
Mr BURKE: And you cannot say anything, minister. You are still trying to figure out the difference between a starving hippo and a fat hippo.
Members interjecting.
Mr BURKE: Madam Speaker, I apologise. They provoked me.
Madam SPEAKER: You should withdraw some of those remarks that you have made that are unparliamentary, and address your remarks through me. You do not call people the sort of things you have been calling them. Withdraw them. Get on with your debate and address your remarks to me.
Dr Toyne: Well, withdraw them.
Madam SPEAKER: Did you withdraw?
Mr BURKE: Which remark? I am sorry, Madam Speaker, I am happy to withdraw.
Madam SPEAKER: You know you were making remarks across the floor ..
Mr BURKE: I said that the minister is still trying to figure out the difference between a starving hippo and a fat hippo. What is so bad about that?
Madam SPEAKER: Yes, but you got into a debate where you called them certain names.
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member for Brennan referred to either the member for Millner or the member for Sanderson as a monkey. That is unparliamentary and he should withdraw.
Madam SPEAKER: He did.
Mr BURKE: I said that you do not sit there like monkeys, but if it is offensive to you, I apologise and withdraw.
It is very important, Madam Speaker …
Members interjecting.
Mr BURKE: I do withdraw.
Madam SPEAKER: Speak to me, member for Brennan.
Mr BURKE: Thank you Madam Speaker. I want to emphasise clause 5(2) of the legislation - and it is very important - which has a qualification to say this act has no capacity to effect any law of the Commonwealth, and it goes on to say:
(2) This act does not apply in relation to –
- (b) nuclear waste –
- (i) derived from radioactive material used in accordance with a legislative authority ...
I ask the question: is the Commonwealth a legislative authority, and is Lucas Heights a facility owned or operated by a legislative authority?
Mr Baldwin: One would think so.
Mr BURKE: One would think so. The point I want to make is that this is nothing more than a cheap political stunt railed out by a minister who has been given the notes and the front task, who will prove to be suitably embarrassed, and tries to promote legislation that by a quick reading of clause 5 has no capacity to protect Territorians whatsoever.
A responsible government should be talking to the Commonwealth and understanding exactly what the Commonwealth’s position is, and we know what it is. Territorians should know also, that the choosing of potential sites around Australia, including the Northern Territory, came from the Keating Labor government. The position of the Prime Minister is clearly this: states and territories are responsible for their own wastes. You satisfy this House that you are attending to our own wastes; you produce the documentation that …
Ms Scrymgour: I said that. Didn’t you listen to any of that? Didn’t you hear me say any of that? You chose to only - you have selective hearing.
Mr BURKE: Very sensitive. You have a glass jaw.
Ms Scrymgour: You are being sensitive.
Mr BURKE: Finger pointing as well.
Ms Scrymgour: Why don’t you support it? Do you support it or not?
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: I think she has the floor, Madam Speaker.
Mr Baldwin: Don’t get too toey.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Brennan …
Ms Scrymgour: I am not getting toey. You are the ones who are getting toey. That is why you …
Madam SPEAKER: There is too much cross-Chamber chatter. Let the member for Brennan finish his remarks.
Mr BURKE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. The opposition intends to approach this debate in as mature a fashion as we are able.
Following a quick reading of the legislation, I have given a couple of examples of where, prima facie, it fails miserably. I have asked the government if they are genuine in their endeavours. Has the government convinced Territorians that they have been attending to - through audit and by appropriate safeguards with world practice standards - our own wastes in an appropriate manner, and that they will continue to do so? Put all that information on the table, together with a paper from Dr Helen Garnett, or someone similar, and inform honourable members of the situation so that we can have a suitable debate.
Madam Speaker, I seek leave to continue my remarks at a later hour.
Leave granted.
TEACHER REGISTRATION (NORTHERN TERRITORY) BILL
(Serial 239)
(Serial 239)
Continued from 17 June 2004.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, to put the minister’s mind at ease, I will, at the outset, advise the House that the CLP will support the bill. Having said that, there are many comments I want to make about the bill, which I feel does lack some substance.
The Labor Party came into government trumpeting loudly that they would establish, and I quote:
- … by July 2003, a nationally recognised Teacher Registration Board that will enable the profession to determine registration standards, enhance the quality of teaching practice and improve educational outcome for students.
This was quoted from Paper 407 tabled on 18 June 2002.
Well, this government is 12 months late, just like it has been with many of its promises. At least this one is here and, hopefully, there are no backflips - or maybe there will be. We are the second last jurisdiction to introduce teacher registration, just pipped at the post by New South Wales. The only jurisdiction yet to introduce teacher registration is the ACT.
As almost the last jurisdiction to introduce teacher registration, I would have thought that this government had every opportunity to introduce the best model of teacher registration available. South Australia has had it since the 1970s, and I would have thought you would have studied how it went about bringing teacher registration on board. Disappointingly, this is a common garden variety proposal. When it had the opportunity to introduce best practice teacher registration legislation, this government has introduced one with the barest of minimum requirements.
What is the purpose of introducing a teacher register? I suggest to you that a teacher register is to bring about professional status for Northern Territory teachers. It is to weed out undesirable persons from the teaching profession. It is to ensure that our teachers are professionals who continue to aspire to the highest standards of teaching our children. I am certain that this is what all parents aspire to - to have professional teachers of high quality, teaching their children in a safe environment.
Speaking of safe environments, I move to the section in the bill regarding criminal history checks for teachers. The bill requires that all teachers in the Territory have at least one police check in the time that they remain as teachers in the Territory. Many teachers recruited over recent years have had to provide a criminal history check on application to teach in the Territory. I am advised that the government will now pay the cost for the criminal history check for any teacher currently employed in the Territory who has not had one done previously. That is fine. I also understand that any new teacher now applying to teach will have to go through the Teacher Registration Board and provide a criminal history check themselves.
I ask the minister whether the government’s promise to cover the cost of the criminal history check applies to teachers in non-government schools, because in the in the bill, it is not clear.
Mr Stirling: Yes.
Dr LIM: Thank you very much, minister, for that interjection to say that the government will cover the cost of police checks on all teachers in the Territory in government and non-government schools. I am sure the teachers in non-government schools will be very pleased to hear this, and I thank you very much.
The criminal history check is only as good as the day it is issued. A person, after a criminal history check is issued, could commit the most heinous crime the next day and no one would be any the wiser until the person is prosecuted. I was advised at my briefing that DEET will be a participant in CrimTrac, a national crime tracking system which will flag a warning to anyone using the system if a person on the database has a criminal history. Well and good.
I was also advised that, once they have had their police checks done, all the teachers will have their names logged with CrimTrac so that any indictable offence, anywhere in the country, will be flagged within the system to DEET, which will then report such flagging to the Teacher Registration Board. That is commendable and an efficient system, but there is no indication when it will happen. It is just a hope that DEET will be with CrimTrac at the start of the first term of next year. I suggest to the minister that he makes sure that will definitely be the case. If not, then he leaves the system open to a potential flaw.
I look forward to the minister coming back to this House at the start of the first term of school next year to tell us that DEET has linked up with CrimTrac. If there is no likelihood of such a move, then I suggest that provision should be made to have regular criminal history checks for all teachers - say at a five yearly interval. You could have one or the other. If you have CrimTrac, I am happy to go along with that because that will be a good system. However, if you cannot guarantee that, then you have to have some other system available so we can have continual checks on our teachers over certain intervals. You could introduce that amendment to the legislation if you know by early next year that DEET is unable to link up with CrimTrac in that reasonable time.
Another issue which the minister should address is complaints made against teachers. Under the current system, a complaint against a teacher is made to the school principal. The principal then assesses the matter accordingly and by due process. Under this legislation, a person can complain against a teacher directly to the Teacher Registration Board. Natural justice would require that the board seeks a response from the teacher; however, there is no mechanism in the bill to say that the board needs to inform anyone else.
It is important to ensure that the board advises the employer or the school principal of the teacher who is the subject of the ongoing investigation. The parent or person making the complaint would be aware of the investigation but not the employer or principal. That will fail the system badly.
I now come to matter of mutual recognition that this legislation allows. The minister, in his second reading speech, said:
- Mutual recognition of this teacher registration by other registration authorities in Australia or New Zealand is prescribed by mutual recognition legislation already in place.
I understand mutual recognition to mean that a teacher registered in the Northern Territory would have registration rights across the country and New Zealand and, similarly, teachers from other jurisdictions have registration rights in the Territory subject to a criminal history check.
The privilege of mutual recognition comes with a responsibility in the Territory to ensure that our teachers are of high quality. Remember that once a teacher is registered here, the teacher can have every expectation that the registration is perfectly portable across the country and across the Tasman Sea. A teacher registered in a Darwin school can teach at any of the schools in Darwin and, say, at Yuendumu and the reverse will also apply. That teacher can expect that his or her qualification is recognisable in Sydney, Adelaide or Auckland. Therefore, we have to ensure that our registered teachers are of a standard that is acceptable interstate and overseas. Any other position will be untenable. We cannot afford to have any jurisdiction, including New Zealand, refusing to accept our registered teachers because they assess that our teachers are not of their standard.
This brings me to the quality of our teachers. Again, I refer to the minister’s speech about quality. He wants the Teacher Registration Board to promote the profession, to establish professional standards for teachers based on broad consultation, and regulate the profession through qualifications, etcetera. I have no doubt that teachers in the Territory are of a high calibre, but in terms of quality, in his second reading speech, the minister espoused that the Teacher Registration Bill will:
- … ensure that we have quality teachers recognised as professionals.
Sadly, I see that this bill fails the very aspirations that the minister spoke about. As a former teacher, I would have thought the minister would have considered his words and the bill very carefully. Clause 3(2), Objective of the Act, declares that its objective is to establish a Teacher Registration Board to register persons as teachers and to facilitate the continuing competence of teachers in the Territory. However, nowhere in the bill does it describe what it will do to facilitate the continuing competence of teachers, nor was it described in the minister’s second reading speech.
This bill is simply to bring about a register of teachers and ensure they have had a police check at least once during their career as teachers in the Territory. As for quality of our teachers, I do not see the bill doing any more than ensuring that teachers are four-year trained. In regards to two and three-year trained teachers - and some members in the Chamber are in that category - the teacher registration flyer states that they will be entitled to full registration, provided the application is endorsed by the principal or manager. Consequently, a teacher with two or three-years’ registration who fills in the registration application form has to ask the school principal to sign off on it. If the principal agrees to do so, that person will then be registered by the Teacher Registration Board.
Obviously, if a teacher with two or three years’ training has been teaching since the time of their qualification, and the principal has no issue with that, there should not be a problem. But, if the principal refuses to sign the application, what happens to the teacher? It is a double-edged sword for the principal. The fact that a principal refuses to endorse an application means that the principal has some issue with the teacher. Therefore, you have to ask why the principal has allowed the teacher to continue at that school for such a long time. Importantly, the flyer states that the endorsement should be automatic, unless a teacher is subject to inability or disciplinary measures.
There are issues with two- and three-year teaching qualifications but, through the normal course of events, hopefully, things will float through quite simply.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Greatorex, could I interrupt you for a moment? As you probably know, we have a number of visitors here for the lunchtime launch that I am hosting. Would you continue your remarks after Question Time?
Dr LIM: Yes, Madam Speaker, to comply with what we need to do.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Greatorex.
Dr LIM: I will reserve my right to continue later.
Debate suspended.
DISTINGUISHED VISITORS
United Kingdom Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Members
United Kingdom Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Members
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I wish to draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of a delegation from the members of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, United Kingdom Branch. The members of the delegation include the Rt Hon Helen Liddell, leader of the delegation; Sir John Butterfill MP; Sir Sydney Chapman MP; Mr Alan Meale MP; Mrs Diana Organ MP and Mr Richard Organ; Sir Nicholas Winterton and Lady Anne Winterton, who are both MPs; and Mr Andrew Tuggey, who is the Delegation Secretary from the CPA. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
STATEMENT BY SPEAKER
Parliament House Anniversary Exhibition
Parliament House Anniversary Exhibition
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I congratulate the Department of Legislative Assembly for the excellent exhibition that has been put together today. Special thanks to Anna-Maria Socci, who has been in charge of compiling the exhibition. The photos were outstanding, and a great commemoration of this building. I thank also those members who attended our ceremony today.
MOTION
Proposed Censure of Government
Proposed Censure of Government
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonnell): Madam Speaker, for the sake of completeness I will start again.
I move that this House censure the government for their outrageous conduct in their fanatical pursuit of Owston Nominees, and particularly Warren Anderson; and for the reckless indifference they have shown to the proper processes of justice in the Northern Territory; and for lying to this House and Territorians about their role in pursuit of this matter.
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I seek a point of clarification. This matter is currently listed before the Supreme Court in Western Australia. You made a ruling earlier on during Question Time for members to be very careful in their comments given that this issue is before the courts. The terms of reference for this censure motion directly go to one of the proponents in the litigation. One Warren Anderson has been named specifically in this motion before the House. I ask you to consider whether this is in breach of your previous ruling that this debate should not occur in the House.
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, speaking to the point of order.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes, but I will seek some advice from the Clerk on this. What is your point of order?
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, if you look at the terms of reference of the censure motion, I have actually adjusted it to accuse the government, not specifically an individual member of the government. I believe that this censure motion should proceed for the purposes of maintaining proper justice and the operation of proper justice without ministerial interference in the Northern Territory.
Madam SPEAKER: It is very hard to make a judgment when I do not quite know what the debate will be about. My previous comments stand: you should be very careful of what you say. I will ask the attendant to distribute these notes that I have on sub judice convention so members can read them.
Perhaps some of the wording of that motion may have been implicating by naming Warren Anderson. This sort of implication might be a problem. If we go ahead with the censure motion, would you please be guarded in what you say because, remember, it is still before the courts. I would like a copy of the motion to read.
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, at the outset, it is clear that the government is going to try to interfere at every opportunity with this particular censure motion because they do not want to hear what is contained in it. Therefore, I seek leave to table something I was going to table much later in the censure debate. It is an e-mail from David Coles to several staff members in his own department.
Leave granted.
Mr ELFERINK: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I will table that shortly.
We have reached a fascinating situation where the minister is refusing to answer even simple questions in relation to his conduct, and the way he has behaved in relation to a prosecution conducted in the Northern Territory. I direct members’ attention to the media release issued by minister Ah Kit on 9 November 2003. I quote from the release:
- The Minister for Local Government today said that legal action was pending under the Animal Welfare Act against the owner of Tipperary Sanctuary, Mr Warren Anderson, over his failure to properly care for the animals.
I have been advised by the Animal Welfare Authority that it was called to the wildlife sanctuary on 9 October by its manager …
- The sanctuary was visited by two animal welfare officers and the wildlife officer that afternoon. Since that time, my officers from the Department of Business, Industry and Resource Development and my department have been supplying food to ensure that the animals would not starve.
It is interesting to note the date on that, because they were the first comments made publicly by the minister for animal welfare.
It is very curious that the minister was clearly aware of this much earlier in the piece. He had already been in discussions, obviously, with Mr David Coles, the CEO of the department, because on 16 October 2003 Mr Coles had written this e-mail to several members of his staff. It is worth reading the whole e-mail into the Hansard record as several parts of it have to be revisited. The subject is ‘Tipperary Letter’:
- I have knocked up the attached. Is there any reason that it should not be sent? If not, what is the address of the appropriate company? Should we send a copy to Freeman? We will need to ensure that Kel Small knows what we intend and is happy with the approach. Is Kel Small prepared, as an authorised person, to issue a notice? If so, could we have an appropriate notice prepared, supported by the appropriate statements?
We need to write to the Department of Justice to advise on matters that we should have to hand before the notice is issued. This would clearly include some evidence that the animals had not been fed within a 24-hour period. The practicalities are that this period would not commence until after the current feed delivery is finished. With luck, we will not have to issue the notice because Anderson will take action. If necessary, we will need to consider what powers we have to deal otherwise with the animal …. For instance, are there any powers under the Pounds Act to impound and then sell the animals if necessary? We need CIB as quickly as possible. The minister may wish to make this matter public.
It is curious because, if you look at the original media release, this e-mail was issued seven days after he says he received advice from Mr Freeman. Although he does not mention Mr Freeman’s name on 9 October, the fact is we know it is Mr Freeman as he is named in this e-mail. We know the source of information is Mr Freeman because he was the star witness in the prosecution, which subsequently failed. We will revisit Mr Freeman shortly.
There are several aspects to this particular e-mail which are of great concern. One is that the minister stood in this House yesterday and lied about the fact that he had received no advice from the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The DPP comes under the control of the Department of Justice. I remind honourable members of the words uttered in this House yesterday by the minister, and the minister repeated them in the House today. What did he say?
- The DPP did not supply an opinion as the Animal Welfare Authority has its own contracted legal advisers, so they were not sought out for advice and opinion. As a consequence of the investigation, and the information given …
And he goes on.
That is clearly at odds with what his own CEO was saying he was going to do. Do we know that the minister was talking to the CEO? Absolutely. Why? Mr Coles’ e-mail says: ‘The minister may wish to make this matter public’. Here was an opportunity for the minister to grandstand because he was going to knock over a high profile person. Of course he was aware. Do you think that the CEO of the department would launch a high profile public prosecution without advising the minister? Not a chance. Do you think that a CEO of a department would launch into a prosecution without advising the Director of Public Prosecution’s office, or the Department of Justice? Not a chance. Of course, the Department of Justice was advised, and consequently the DPP. How do we know that? Because there was an e-mail from the CEO of the department saying that the matter was going to be referred to the Department of Justice.
Curiously, the minister comes in to this House and says: ‘No, we did not go to the Department of Justice. We contracted out. We sought independent advice’. Who did they go to? Da Silva Hebron, a firm of solicitors, and they secured the services of Elizabeth Fullerton SC. For those people who are unaware of who she is, she has to be one of the most gun QCs in Sydney, in fact, in Australia. She comes with a price tag guesstimated in the order of $7000 a day. The minister advised this House today when the member for Nelson asked how much this little prosecution cost that it was somewhere in the order of $120 000, and there are a few bills still to come. I will be very fascinated to find out what the rest of those bills are. Do they include hotel bills, hire car bills, aeroplane bills? I think not. I would suggest to you that the price that is being paid is going to be much higher than anything this minister will ever admit to.
However, they get a gun QC from Sydney to prosecute this case. It would be curious to know if the minister is prepared to table the travel itinerary for that particular QC. He tells us that she briefed the witnesses prior to the case, therefore, I would be curious to know on what date she arrived. I would like to see her travel itinerary as I would be surprised if she would have had time to brief the witnesses before the case. And if she did brief the witnesses before the case, I have a sneaking suspicion that she would have discovered some of the aspects that came up during the cross examination. It does not take a rigorous and thorough cross-examination to run into the two issues that Mr Freeman fell over on.
Indeed, I draw members’ attention to the an article which appeared in newspapers on 5 August 2004, and I quote from that article:
- Animal neglect Anderson cleared:
The charges were withdrawn midway through a trial in the Darwin Magistrates Court, after the credibility of the key prosecution witness was shaken amid revelations he had wanted to buy the animal collection and had found out he would be sacked two days before he called the authorities to report there was no feed.
On 7 October 2003, Mr Freeman, the star witness for the prosecution, finds out he is going to be sacked. He wants to buy the animal collection in question and he is in charge of looking after them. He sits down and thinks about it for two days and all of sudden decides that there is not enough feed to feed those animals, and telephones the Northern Territory government. There should be a little alarm bell ringing for the minister and investigating officers by this point. Why should there be a little alarm bell ringing? Because it should be time to start doing some digging. The minister tells us it was not him, it was his public servants who investigated at Tipperary where they found there was no food. I would be curious to know exactly what the extent of that investigation was. I would put money on it …
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Earlier in this contribution, the member for Macdonnell said that he was tabling, and was given approval to table, an alleged e-mail. It has not been tabled yet, and I would ask him to table it.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes, he has it now.
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, I have just handed it to the attendant. I need the document and he is photocopying it as quickly as he can.
I am very curious about what happened next. The two staffers - or however many staffers - from the department or the welfare authority go to Tipperary and who did they speak to? Were I investigating it, I would speak to the person who made the complaint, which I am sure they did. Doubtless they were shown around and they were, I guess, shown some empty sheds and told there was no feed, which is what they recorded.
The minister thinks: ‘Oh, here is an opportunity. I will step in and start providing feed’. No problem with that at this stage. He starts supplying feed, but then the investigation seems to run a little flat. Why does it run a little flat? Because the minister has decided to make the investigation public within seven days of it commencing. Why do I know that? Because it is in the e-mail from Mr Coles.
In seven days, Mr Coles says the minister may wish to make the matter public. Absolutely, of course, he wants to make the matter public. Within seven days, we presume that the minister has decided that he is going to commence a prosecution. Indeed, I would suggest from the flavour of the comments made by Mr Coles in that e-mail, that is exactly what they were planning to do: launch a prosecution. However, they had to line up their ducks.
The problem is that the minister, in his enthusiasm to protect starving animals, an enthusiasm that he certainly had not shown on a prior occasion when his own property in Katherine had a starving horse on it and he had no interest in pursuing ...
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member is making unsubstantiated claims against the minister. The minister explained earlier in Question Time that he took immediate action to address that issue, and I ask that he withdraw that.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Continue, member for Macdonnell.
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, he simply did not engage in a prosecution and, as the minister responsible, he could have ordered one in the same way that he ordered one in this instance. That is the problem.
Mr Dunham: Big difference.
Mr ELFERINK: Big difference. The minister says that he finds animals starving to death a matter of personal distress. That is in his media release of 9 November. Why does he not prosecute a person with a starving animal on his own property in Katherine, when within a week of an investigation starting into a high profile person he is already looking for ways to make political mileage out of it? That is a very interesting question indeed, and it is not one that he has answered.
Within a week the minister has decided that it is time for a prosecution. He has not called in anyone from the CIB at this stage, although he is already thinking about making it public on 16 October. ‘We need the CIB as quickly as possible’, says Mr Coles. What was the result of that investigation? Will the minister table the CIB investigation into the matter in question? It would be very interesting to see exactly what steps were taken.
What happens next? Charges are laid and the whole thing turns into a circus because they make a complaint about some 1800 animals against three sections in the act and they suddenly realise that it is very difficult to pursue the case. So the whole thing, 1800 animals starving to death, is reduced to one case - one case only. What is that case? One rhinoceros starving to death is the allegation. We have gone from 1800 down to one.
By this stage, of course, the minister has made all sorts of public comments. For example, on the AM program of 14 November 2003 - we are talking about national media - Mr Ah Kit says this:
- Look, I feel for the animals. You know, we have had a manager that works for him that rang and ...
So the government said:
- … I am in dire straits. I have no feed, I have no credit. I cannot feed these animals.
The minister is on radio and in the newspapers telling anybody who will listen, parroting the one source of information he has, and that is Mr Freeman, the manager, whom he refers to on the AM broadcast on that particular day. Based on that, the minister launches into a prosecution. That prosecution is overseen by the Department of Justice. How do I know this? I telephoned Mr Anderson, who asked me to speak to his lawyer, Mr Jeremy Giles. I spoke to Mr Giles and I asked him to tell me about the prosecution. He said: ‘Oh yes, there was a Department of Justice officer …’. I did not get a name from him but it was a Department of Justice officer overseeing this particular prosecution.
The minister stands up in this parliament and says: ‘Oh, no. We never sought advice from the Department of Justice’, when Mr Anderson’s lawyer is telling me there was a Department of Justice officer overseeing the case, or keeping an eye on the case. That is very interesting. I wonder who has the best motive to tell lies? I believe this matter did go to the Department of Justice and section 13(d) of the Director of Public Prosecutions Act states:
- It is a function of the Director…
…
(d) take over and conduct any proceedings in respect of a summary offence.
Section 11(1)(b) of the DPP act states:
(1) The functions of the Director:
…
One would think the coherent approach in government would be that the very able QCs in the Department of Justice might be able to run a summary prosecution. That is the other important issue you have to remember: we are talking about a summary offence. This matter was heard on a complaint, not on information. In terms of court proceedings that means it is heard in a lower court. It is a small matter. It is not something that needs to go to trial in the Supreme Court. Television footage confirmed it was indeed heard in the lower court. The matter is heard on complaint, yet one of the best gun silks in Australia was flown in from Sydney to prosecute a summary offence.
This is not starting to look like somebody who wants a prosecution. This is starting to look like somebody who is getting awfully nervous about some of the things that he has had to say. We have to speculate a little as the minister, when asked some pretty straightforward questions in this House today, lied. He deceived this House and went out of his way to avoid answering questions that he did not want to answer.
The minister now has to go down the road of pursuing this case. He is obviously talking to his CEO who is ultimately a lawyer serving the government and will do whatever the minister directs. It is on the record that when a CEO does something of which this government does not approve they put out a media release condemning that CEO. These CEOs and public servants are now starting to live in an environment of what I would describe as fear; therefore, of course they are going to be very concerned.
The question is: why? Why would the Minister for Community Development go down this path so vehemently, so destructively and so recklessly? I will tell you why: because it suits him. It is in the nature of this particular minister to engage in vindictive conduct; and that is what he has done. His approach to this has been so rash that, within a week of being advised, he had already decided to make the matter public. By 9 November they were making it public. Why? For no other reason than to be vindictive.
Here is a lesson for the people of the Northern Territory. We have a government which is prepared to actively involve itself in the prosecution of cases before the House. We have a Chief Minister who is prepared to pronounce guilt, in spite of the fact that the courts, through the normal hearing process, have discovered a person to be innocent. We have a government which has threatened - and I remind members of the quote:
- … that certainly does not stop us making Warren Anderson accountable for the substantial animals he has.
That is a threat:
- We are going to go out there as a government and we are going to make Warren Anderson accountable and, if we cannot manage it through the normal system of prosecution; we are going to find another way to do it. How have we found it? We do not know yet.
The message is clear to the people of the Northern Territory: if this government wants you, they are going to get you. That is really the message that you can draw from this. When a Chief Minister says:
- Look, there was a case against Warren Anderson, but we haven’t been able to prove that in court. Well, that doesn’t matter, we’re going to do it anyhow. We are still going to come after you.
This is the real message coming from here: this government does not care about the judicial process of the Northern Territory. It does not care about truth in this House.
The Chief Minister was lying here today when she said there was an action, when there clearly was not. She stood up in this House and told lies to us as well. This is the most outrageous action you could possibly engage in, and this government is still sitting here and laughing. I ask those backbenchers who are sitting here today: do they really want to continue to support what is clearly a government that tells lies and is clearly a government prepared to use threats to get its own way?
This minister, damned by the e-mail of his own CEO stands condemned. Why is he damned? Because it clearly demonstrates that he has interfered at every level in that particular e-mail. Yet, we find this government sitting here laughing and joking, and thinking that this is just a great joke. It is not a great joke.
I also point out that this government, in defence of this minister, has decided to protect that minister from civil litigation by paying for his costs. That is curious, isn’t it? There was a Cabinet decision for a former Chief Minister which said, in the process of doing your job, you will get covered in case of litigation. Guess what? This Cabinet turned around and said: ‘Nope, we are not going to protect that former Chief Minister. Stuff him! He can go and pay his own costs’.
They were going to be wonderfully perfect and they were never going to get sued for anything. They were warned at the time that one day one of them was going to get sued. Well, guess what? That time has come and what do we find? The government rallies around its minister and says: ‘Oh, there is litigation coming’. I believe it is an act of unspeakable bastardry …
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! That is offensive language, and I ask that it be withdrawn.
Madam SPEAKER: That is very unparliamentary, member for Macdonnell. Please withdraw it.
Mr ELFERINK: I withdraw it, Madam Speaker. It is simply unspeakable that they have the audacity to sit there and say: ‘We deserve protection that no other people deserve’. They claim to be the friend of Territorians but what they are proving themselves to be, is highly arrogant.
They had a wonderful opportunity today to apologise for their conduct. They relied on a court case which was predicated entirely on the statement of one person who was thoroughly discredited; easily discredited in the courtroom under a summary investigation as being a witness who was totally unreliable. As one person put it to me, the guy would probably have testified to the existence of Santa Claus if he thought it was going to help sink Warren Anderson.
This government’s excitement, its desire to go out and passionately attack Mr Anderson, has landed flat on its bum.
Madam SPEAKER: Watch your language!
Mr ELFERINK: Mr Warren Anderson has demonstrated the courage to say, ‘No, I am not going to cop this’, which has cost him upward of $200 000. How many other people living in the Territory when this government decides to go after somebody and fly up a silk to prosecute a summary offence is going to have $200 000 lying around to protect themselves? This government has acted in a reprehensible way. They have lied to this House, they have been deceitful and they have cheated.
The Chief Minister and her minister have besmirched the good name of an innocent man and they have failed to correct their own statements and shortcomings. They should be condemned for it. I urge all members, right thinking and honest members of this House, to support this censure motion because it goes to the very heart of good governance and the legal system in the Northern Territory.
Mr AH KIT (Community Development): Madam Speaker, I refer members of this Assembly to my comments during Question Time and I will repeat those comments for the benefit of members.
Charges in the Court of Summary Jurisdiction were withdrawn on 5 August 2004 against Owston Nominees No 2 Pty Ltd controlled by Warren Anderson. As a result of information received from the manager of Tipperary Wildlife Sanctuary last October, a government employed veterinarian and an animal welfare officer investigated the supply of food to the animals at the sanctuary. The officer reported that there was insufficient quantity of food available at the time of his inspection to feed the animals. The matter was brought to the attention of the Animal Welfare Authority. Feed was supplied to the sanctuary by the government during the period 10 October 2003 to 11 November 2003. There was 112.68 tonnes of hay provided at a total cost of $29 211.60. A further order for pellets was made on 22 October 2003 at a cost of $1320.
Letters were sent to the owners of the animals on two occasions, 16 October 2003 and 21 October 2003, seeking immediate action to address the situation. The owners did not provide feed for the animals. As a consequence of the investigation into the information given by the manager referred to earlier, and because there was an insufficient quantity of food on hand when the animal welfare officer inspected the sanctuary, legal advice was obtained as to whether prosecution action was appropriate.
The solicitors advising the government sought the advice of independent counsel; charges were laid consistent with that advice. Due to the complexity of the case, one of the country’s leading prosecutors with experience in similar matters, a Senior Counsel of the Sydney Bar was engaged to lead the prosecution on behalf of the Animal Welfare Authority. After speaking to the authority’s witnesses, the Senior Counsel advised that the case was based on reasonable grounds and that in her view there was a clear case to answer.
During the hearing of the charges, the key witness of the prosecution underwent a lengthy and probing cross-examination by counsel representing the defendant. The cross-examination and re - examination of the witness was completed on 4 August 2004 when the case resumed after an adjournment. At the conclusion of the evidence of the key witness, the advice of senior counsel and other lawyers representing the authority was that a finding of guilt was unlikely. Acting on that advice, the authority properly withdrew the charges. The company made no application to the court for its costs. I repeat: the company made no application to the court for its costs.
The matter was launched in the public interest and when it became clear that the prosecution was not likely to lead to a conviction, it was dropped, again in the public interest. It is not yet possible to provide a final figure for the cost of pursuing this case. Invoices totally $120 000 have been paid. There are some yet to be received. The owner of the animals, Owston Nominees No 2, was invoiced and all accounts for feed have been settled as at 10 March 2004.
Enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act requires that the owners and carers of animals take their responsibilities seriously. Where owners appear not to take that responsibility seriously, it is incumbent on those responsible for the administration of the act to take action.
Madam Speaker, I believe that the opposition is acting irresponsibly in this matter. The authority received independent legal advice to prosecute and the authority prosecuted. That was the responsible and appropriate thing to do.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Madam Speaker, I thought it was appropriate today that we stood with such pride in the Main Hall of this wonderful Parliament House and talked about Tipperary Investments and its involvement in its construction. It happens to be that the gentleman we are discussing today was involved in the construction of this building, which seems to be a little bit strange, doesn’t it?
I want to talk about what happened in my relationship with the Warren Anderson affair since I have been elected to parliament. This prosecution occurred shortly after I became the member for Katherine. Prior to that, I was interested in purchasing or acquiring the animals for a sanctuary in Katherine. That sanctuary would have provided a much-needed economic boost to the community through tourism and employment. This prosecution was launched toward the end of extensive negotiations I was having with interested parties about developing the sanctuary very close to Katherine. Despite the fact that the idea was considered laughable by some members of government, it was positively considered by the Katherine community and would be of benefit.
Negotiations were under way with a local vet who was a member of the syndicate who had been to Tipperary several months prior to this prosecution and inspected the animals. At the time I started discussing with him the formation of the syndicate, he said that the animals were in an extremely fit and healthy condition, there was plenty of food. At that stage, of course, we had not even reached prosecution. He said that, as a matter of fact, he considered the animals fat.
Early in December, I visited Tipperary Station with David Gifford from Whirl Tree Station to inspect the animals with a view to continuing negotiations to purchase and relocate them to Katherine. Whilst I am not a qualified vet, I can recognise the difference between a fat hippo and a skinny one and a fat rhino from a skinny one. That is exactly what I saw. I was left in no doubt that the animals were perfectly healthy and in no danger of dying of starvation. On a scale of one to five in fatness and health, they were four, which is considered fat. We viewed all the animals, including the herd animals. Some were near the end of their life and possibly needing to be culled, but the general wellbeing of them was extremely good, which was evidenced by the great number of young animals we saw.
Shortly after this visit, the gentleman who was the key witness in the prosecution case came to see me in Parliament House. He wanted to talk to me about acquiring the animals for his own use. He did not have the financial means to acquire them. However, he had a collection of what he said were letters of support from different organisations. They were so fanciful. I think there was even one from Elton John saying that he would financially support him. These letters were not signed or dated, or on letterhead. This was the sort of person who was actually talking to members of …
A member: Jack’s pack.
Mrs MILLER: Yes, Jack’s Pack I guess we could call them - the minister’s pack, putting together a prosecution case against Warren Anderson. Quite frankly, I could not wait for this gentleman to leave my office because I found him quite creepy …
Ms Lawrie: Lucky you are under privilege.
Mrs MILLER: I am under privilege and I have no hesitation in saying it …
Ms Lawrie: Yes, and you are abusing it.
Mrs MILLER: I figure that the person who made these claims that the animals were without feed, and had no money to purchase them, had nothing but an ulterior motive in saying what he did.
It is hard to believe that the Minister for Community Development’s advisors and informers had any conversations with this gentleman prior to the prosecution. If they had, I believe they certainly would not have gone ahead with it as he was not a credible witness. There was absolutely nothing he said to me that could or should have resulted in a prosecution. I can only wonder what the motives were for the Minister for Community Development to continue on regardless.
At the time negotiations commenced, the parties interested in establishing the sanctuary at Katherine believed they had several months to relocate the animals. Unfortunately, due to the decision by the Minister for Community Development to proceed with the animal cruelty charge against Warren Anderson through Owston Nominees, the whole process was derailed. Quite understandably, Warren Anderson negotiated a sale agreement with another Territory station which was able to act more quickly than the syndicate - which was still being formed - to reach a sale agreement. It goes without saying that the people of Katherine were extremely disappointed that the opportunity for a new venture was taken away from their community.
What intrigues me is that the Minister for Community Development acted quickly to lay charges against Warren Anderson through Owston Nominees, without proper investigation, yet I know of several cases of alleged animal cruelty which have been reported more than once and not one prosecution has been made in relation to some of these very serious charges. Why was there such a rush to prosecute Warren Anderson at whatever cost? Minister, did your decision have anything to do with the fact that Warren Anderson has such a high profile? Do we have one law in the Territory for alleged cruelty of animals by the wealthy and another for the not-so-wealthy? That is the message this has sent out. What particularly concerns me, is the fact that the evidence shows the Minister for Community Development contrived with others to manipulate the dates of stockfeed delivery so as to concoct this prosecution against Warren Anderson.
Madam Speaker, I rest my case. This has been a failed prosecution. I also find it extremely embarrassing, and would like to see how you are going to get out of this one, minister.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I do not normally speak on censure motions. However, I believe this one requires some comment. Members of parliament may or may not know that, when I first signed up for parliament, I signed a form which said I would oppose any no-confidence motions in the government, unless there was a proven case of corruption or gross public maladministration.
At this stage, I am not sure whether there is a gross public maladministration case to answer, but I am very concerned about what I have heard today. Madam Speaker, I also take note of the advice you have given me on sub judice convention, and what the member for Macdonnell has given us as a motion today.
As you will have gathered from the questions I asked today and yesterday, I am seriously concerned about what has happened. I will not vote on this motion. I will rest my case as I believe there is more information to come out which we need to hear. I am concerned about who made the decision to prosecute and on what advice; who made the decision to drop the charges; who did the checking; and who did the background on these charges before they were first introduced. I am also concerned about public comments made, which I have here from various media files.
Madam Speaker, I am taking on board your advice as I am certainly not experienced enough to challenge what I see here under sub judice. However, I believe it is the right thing for me to say that there is something wrong here and it needs a lot more investigation. I have not seen enough evidence today.
I am always concerned when I see motions that include ‘lying to this House’. To me, that is an extremely serious statement and I would not vote for that section of this motion unless I was 100% sure that was the case. However, I am certainly concerned that what happened has cost taxpayers a lot of money. I have always believed that government should be very careful in the administration of our taxpayers’ taxes and we have already heard that $120 000 was spent on this case. Therefore, even though I will not vote on this particular motion, people will get the gist of where my support is.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, the progress of this debate has certainly reminded me of why we have courts and sub judice conventions which put some constraints over the way in which affairs are conducted in this House. For members’ benefit, I will read out the pertinent section of the sub judice convention which was distributed by Madam Speaker. It is this:
- … matters before a civil court should not be referred to for the time they are set down for trial or otherwise brought before the court and, similarly, the restriction should again be applied from the time an appeal is lodged until the appeal is decided.
There are very good reasons for these conventions - what we pay our judiciary and our magistracy to do is to get beyond idle or ill-informed conjecture about what motivated someone to take a particular action; whether the laws of our jurisdiction have been contravened; whether the evidence to that effect or to the effect of what motivated people was believable, or could be weighted in a certain way. In other words, the court offers an objective process of testing the evidence that would substantiate an allegation of an offence. They also offer an objective process by which what people say around the community about each other can be testimony in the context of some sense of fairness and justice, both to the benefit of victims of defamation and to the perpetrators of defamation.
My colleague, the Minister for Community Development, has read out a factual account of what happened in the first of the court cases that have occurred as a result of this matter. That factual account tells members, in detail, what led to the court action taken by animal welfare; and the basis on which the authority proceeded to take that action which was not based on ministerial urgings. It was based on the opinion of an outsourced legal firm - not by the DPP as wrongly asserted over there. We had further opinion from a senior counsel brought in from New South Wales who has a background in this type of enforcement action. There was a clear process as to why this action was taken, which has been outlined today.
You can conjecture all you like about what my colleague might have felt, or thought, or said to himself, or to anyone else, around this action being taken. However, the facts are, and have been tested for all to see through a court process, that there was a legal opinion sought and given; there was a decision made, not by the government, but by the agency to proceed to a court action; the court duly heard the quality of the evidence that was available; and on the basis of the evidence not being seen to be capable of leading to a prosecution, the action was dropped. That is not uncommon in our court system. It happens on many occasions where evidence that was thought to be there, on testing was not going to provide the basis of the prosecution. The comments around this debate today have been drawing a fairly long bow on much of this.
If you need any other evidence of the difference between a legitimate court action and a kangaroo court which we have seen here, you only need to go to the actual wording of the censure motion that was brought forward today. Can you imagine initiating an action in a court action and having this sort of language thrown at the accused? ‘The outrageous conduct and fanatical pursuit of Owston Nominees’; ‘Reckless indifference that they have shown to the proper process of justice’; and ‘The lying to the House and to Territorians’. Can you imagine that sort of language leading any court into an objective process? What we are talking about here, is like the old cowboy films where the poor bugger is locked up in a cell …
Madam SPEAKER: Watch your language, minister.
Dr TOYNE: … awaiting a trial - in fact, To Kill a Mockingbird is a good example - and along comes the lynch mob. ‘Let us forget about the evidence or whether the person has their day in court; just string them up straight away’. That is what this exercise sounds like today. I know for a fact that it is not progressing the cause of justice one iota to be proceeding on this sort of line.
There is another court case potentially pending. Writs have been served before a Western Australian court. That makes this matter sub judice under a civil action. We are constrained on what we can say about this matter, as indicated by my colleague and certainly by the Chief Minister during Question Time. We cannot enter into conjecture about matters that could potentially come before the court if a defamation action proceeds.
We are playing by the rules. We are conforming to the conventions regarding sub judice and we will continue to because I, for one, as Attorney-General, am not going to see this House turned into a kangaroo court where we are going to cut across the due process of the justice system and where we deny, or attempt to deny, proper justice to any person regardless of which side of the House they belong, or the matter at hand. People should have their day in court according to the proper principles of justice and we are going to do everything we can to make sure that is not contravened by what happens here.
Madam Speaker, I move that the motion be put.
Motion agreed to.
Madam SPEAKER: The question is that the censure motion be agreed to.
The Assembly divided:
Ayes 10 Noes 13
Mr Baldwin Mrs Aagaard
Mr Burke Mr Ah Kit
Ms Carney Mr Bonson
Ms Carter Dr Burns
Mr Dunham Mr Henderson
Mr Elferink Mr Kiely
Dr Lim Ms Lawrie
Mr Maley Ms Martin
Mrs Miller Mr McAdam
Mr Mills Ms Scrymgour
Mr Stirling
Dr Toyne
Mr Vatskalis
Motion negatived.
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The censure debate having just concluded, this document has only just been seen by me, and I would like to have more information on its derivation. However, I would point out to the House, that there have been many occasions where we have talked about matters that are on foot in the courts. I believe it is a matter for the judgment of the Speaker, and I agree that if there are areas where we stray they should be tested.
This is a major departure from where we have been in this House over many years, where matters on foot in the courts have been discussed. I can recall, for instance, where I talked about a case before the Power and Water Authority. I gave much the same answer that it was a matter before the courts, and the now Chief Minister’s retort to that was, ‘Gutless, gutless’, for those who want to look it up on the Parliamentary Record.
My point is this: it provides a very convenient hidey hole if the government can say: ‘There is a threat of litigation, or there is litigation, I am not going to talk about it’. I believe with the separation of powers, this House has very different parameters to the court system.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Drysdale, I advise you that those notes were prepared for me as Speaker on a previous occasion when we had a court action which had been referred to in the House. They were given to me for advice in my discretion. I felt they were worthwhile to give to members today, particularly as we were discussing a case which I have since learned is listed for 1 September in the Western Australian Supreme Court. That is where it came from and that is what it has been used for in the past. I have used my judgment whenever anything has been referred to, but we are talking about cases that are before courts, not cases that are over.
Mr DUNHAM: Therefore, the document is merely useful rather than a prescription?
Madam SPEAKER: It is not a standing order. They are notes for the Speaker to use in her discretion when making judgments. It is like other notes that I have when there is a question of order of some sort that I seek additional information on - as I have seen you do when you go to your second or third edition of the House of Representatives Practice.
TEACHER REGISTRATION (NORTHERN TERRITORY) BILL
(Serial 239)
(Serial 239)
Continued from earlier this day.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, prior to the luncheon adjournment, I was talking about equality of our teachers, and had referred members to the Teacher’s Registration flyer, which indicates endorsement should be automatic unless a teacher is subject to inability or disciplinary measures, and for teachers who are two and three-year trained. Once a teacher is registered, according to clause 39(1) of the bill, the extension of registration each year is automatic on application by the registered teacher. That is it. Every year, you put your application in and it goes through. But, in the minister’s own words uttered in August 2002, he said:
- The Teacher Registration Board itself would have a fairly key role in determining professional development for teachers. I certainly hope that is the case. I am sure teachers themselves would welcome the opportunity to have a more hands-on role in determining what should be run and where, because they are at the coalface; they know the needs of both themselves and their colleagues.
In his second reading speech, the minister further reinforces that by speaking about the board establishing professional standards for teachers based on board consultation, etcetera. Having said that, the minister then introduced this bill and one of the functions of the registration board listed in clause 11(e), only gives the board the authority to liaise with the Department of Employment, Education and Training for professional development of teachers. That is hardly giving much power to the board to enhance teacher quality. All they can do is talk to DEET.
I am not a teacher, but I would assume there is a differentiation between primary and secondary school teachers. I might be treading on dangerous ground - or difficult ground more than dangerous ground; I repeat, I am not a teacher – but I would assume that it is rather difficult for a subject specialist in secondary school to teach a primary class. I would also assume it would be somewhat easier for a primary school teacher to teach in a secondary school area. However, either teacher could seek professional development, which would allow either to move from one area into another more smoothly.
What about the teachers who are not four-year trained who have come from areas of industry - music teachers, tech teachers - but have an innate ability to teach? I am sure many school principals have known lots of people who have not gone through the formal process of being trained as a teacher, with a great innate ability to teach. They make the best instructors that I have come across. There must be some sort of flexibility in the legislation to allow these people to teach and, perhaps, achieve teacher status or teacher registration, and not having to remain as an authorised person to teach.
The CLP supports teacher registration; do not get that wrong. We do support teacher registration, but we will produce a system that will enhance the professional standing of Territory teachers. We will introduce a system of professional development for teachers. We will explore a system that will have the capacity to weight the type of professional development undertaken by a teacher, formally recognising the professional development undertaken. Then you remunerate the teacher accordingly. That way, you say: ‘Here is a professional development structure. You go do it, we will recognise what you have done, and then we will reward you for having done it’. With this system, the better teacher you are, the greater the rewards.
To give a practical example; as a doctor my professional body conducts professional development courses. They measure the value of each course, giving relative weight to its training and counting that as points. Then they say you will be given a three-year period to accumulate, say, 10 points, which will satisfy the learned bodies that you have done adequate professional training during that period of three years. An example, I received today by e-mail this reminder from the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners of which I am a member. It says:
- Just a reminder that the new activity Managing Hydration in Children has been added to the GP learning web site for the month of August 2004. This activity has been developed through an educational grant from a donor.
- This activity deals with assessing and managing hydration in children. Within this activity, there is a case study which looks at assessing and managing hydration for an eight-month-old boy. You may complete this activity in one session or over a number of sessions. If you leave the activity before completing it, your progress will be recorded. The next time you attempt this activity, you will automatically resume at the screen you last completed. For doing that activity you are awarded two quality assurance and continuing professional development points.
So, there are systems already in existence that provide proper professional development. I understand that in consultation this was a fairly major issue. I would like to see it being brought back. I know that nurses, for instance, have continued to work in their professional area to obtain their registration, and with professional development can become higher qualified nurses with higher financial rewards.
Finally, I want to address a concern that has been expressed to me by many people about the impact of the Secondary Education Review on teacher registration. The implementation of the recommendation to a quality services agency will subsume this legislation. I am asking the minister to explain where he sees the Teacher Registration Board bill fit into the recommendations of the Secondary Education Review, or as it is now called, Priority Education. The Secondary Education Review was written on the premise that some 3500 remote, indigenous students have missed out on secondary education, but that is another debate to be had at another time.
When you come to the report, this tome, some 400 pages, or 350 pages of - I will call it something else later on - I refer you to Chapter 12. It talks about quality and accountability and the recommendations contained therein, that chapter which is relevant to our debate today. Recommendation 44 says that:
- … NT government establish a separate statutory Quality Services Agency to be responsible to the minister for advising the government on all aspects of quality in education, having jurisdiction over both government and non-government schools.
This agency will …
There are several dot points and I will read those that are relevant to the Teacher Registration Board:
incorporate the role and responsibilities of the proposed Teacher Registration Board to advise on those appropriate to be registered as teachers and the quality of their work.
This recommendation impacts directly on the Teacher Registration Board bill and I wonder where we go from here. In his second reading speech the minister makes no reference to this at all. People in the community have been wondering what has happened and the minister has continued to be silent about it. He says: ‘I have to consult with the people’. He said nothing about it, absolutely nothing.
Mr Mills: No leadership.
Dr LIM: No leadership. He has mismanaged the whole process of this particular document. I will leave that for debate for another day.
There are many weaknesses in this bill. It is a common garden variety bill that does little for teachers. If this government is serious about lifting the professionalism of teachers, they will ensure that the concerns I have raised will be addressed adequately and satisfactorily so that teachers see themselves as the proud professionals they are.
Teachers are probably the most important professionals in our community. They are responsible for the wellbeing, academically and technically, of our children and providing a safe environment in our schools. Therefore, we have to pay due attention to their needs and professional development so that we can continue to improve the educational outcomes for children in the Territory.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I am pleased to support the minister on this bill today, which is a matter dear to my heart. It goes back to the time when we were in opposition and I had shadow Education responsibilities, and to negotiations that I had with the AEU - particularly with Robert Laird, who was the secretary at that stage - regarding a Teacher Registration Board and its establishment within the Northern Territory.
On settling the policy that we took into the last election, I announced the broad outline of what is in this bill at the AEU Annual Conference. This received huge applause from the 200 to 300 people attending, so I am pretty sure that teachers out there are going to welcome this legislation. It does move the status of the profession on in the Northern Territory by providing an independent body to represent it on matters of professional accreditation and the quality and nature of professional practice. These are very important matters for teachers as a profession to have a focal point. Teacher registration does that which is why the AEU was very keen to see a board introduced in the Northern Territory.
A major objective of this legislation is to deal with monitoring and overseeing the quality of our professional teachers and their professional practice. One very important aspect is to have an organisation that can act as a watchdog over serious malpractice on the part of teachers in a role that parallels the role of police and our courts regarding any criminal elements to actions taken by teachers as members of their profession. It is important to have that dimension of professional scrutiny on the behaviour of teachers, given that they have a major duty of care and a position of trust in respect of the students for whom they are responsible.
In the provisions within the legislation, sections 55, 56 and 57 provide mechanisms for the board to follow up on allegations regarding serious misbehaviour by teachers, whether that is allegations of sexual assault and paedophilia, common assault, or some other form of malpractice. It is very important to understand the impact of a teacher’s behaviour on a school and its community.
I am a person of some authority on that topic. During the period I was a principal in Territory schools, unfortunately, I had no less than three people who were subsequently found to have been paedophiles. I can certainly report that, when you are a principal and parents or community members come to the school and report that one of your teachers is interfering with their kids, it is probably the most difficult professional situation any principal and the school community can be in. In my experience, the teachers become polarised around either their support or objection to the accused staff member. This can be extraordinarily ugly when it occurs in the daily life of the school. The community is looking for immediate support for the parents who, quite rightly, have high levels of concern and anxiety about what might have happened or might still be happening to their kids.
That is a very volatile situation. It is one that cannot be left to sort itself out. Going back to the 1990s, it was not unknown for the Education Department to move an accused teacher from one community to the next, rather than dealing with the allegations and any associated problem that might prove to be borne out by the evidence. We cannot afford to have that sort of fate visited on our communities or our schools. We have to have a very forthright approach and mechanism to respond to allegations, not weeks after, not even days after - hours after the allegation is made in the community there has to be a response.
I have spoken to my colleague, the minister for Education and, in line with the policy document that we brought forward at the last election, I believe we can get a good process in place where appropriate people can be at the site of an allegation quickly enough to cut out any further damage or loss of trust in the community, save the staff from the volatile and often destructive reactions people have when one of their colleagues is in that situation, protect the teacher if the allegations are false, and certainly protect the kids from any further potential harm. It is important to know how this is going to work in the field. I welcome the minister’s undertaking that we can work on the actual mechanisms by which this legislative framework can be put into action to protect kids, teachers and communities. This is an incredibly important aspect of this legislation.
I believe the education community, generally, will welcome this. I take note of the member for Greatorex’s comments regarding professional development. It is important to have an independent professional body involved, and that is certainly provided for in the way that this board will operate. We can look forward to having a new mechanism which will stabilise the recruitment and retention of teachers. It gives far greater certainty and status to the practice of teachers in the Northern Territory.
For all those reasons, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I welcome this bill today and its debate in the House. It is a very important step forward.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I advise the minister that I agree with the concept of a teacher registration board and act. It is long overdue for a profession such as this and the ACT is now the only state or territory not to have one.
As an ex-teacher, and because of feedback I am getting from teachers, there are issues I wish to raise with the minister, if he could provide me with some answers. Some teachers are feeling nervous because they may suddenly find themselves not eligible for registration for all sorts of reasons. When I started teaching, I had a certificate, but continued my professional qualifications throughout my career and now have a diploma, a degree and a graduate diploma. However, there are many long-term teachers who have not done that and are still less qualified, but are no less a good teacher because of it. With the nervousness that is there, my main concern is that we might be discouraging these teachers from staying in the Territory. I hope this is not the case.
Sometimes, I question the products that the universities send out to our schools. As an example, when I was 16 and had finished my matriculation I was too young to go to Teachers College, and was given a student traineeship in a school. In that 12 months, I learnt to teach. It was not when I went to college where they told me about the theories, religion and multiculturalism that made me a good teacher. The good teacher was when I was actually in the classroom on the ground with the students. I have always been grateful that I was given that opportunity to do those 12 months before I ever went to Teachers College. It certainly stood me in good stead.
This particular act – and I just hope we are not going into over-regulation. I always …
Mr Stirling: Richard does not think there is enough.
Mrs BRAHAM: I believe that we should not have too much red tape which bogs down professionals who are doing a good job. I believe we have to be careful that we do not get bound up.
You are creating a bit of a monster. You are going to have an EO1, AO6, AO3 to run this particular board; 12 board members with a chairman. You are going have travelling allowance; accommodation, air fares - you name it. You are creating a monster, are you not? For what reason?
I would like to see some things in the act that are not there, although may be in the regulations. For instance, you talk about minimum qualifications and an accredited course. However, in the definitions in the act there is no definition of what the minimum qualifications are and what an accredited course is.
I hope that where we are going will allow room for innovation for introducing different types of teacher accredited courses, other than just university courses. We could look at mature-aged people in our schools who do not have qualifications and their on-the-job training could count towards some sort of diploma or degree, because often they are very good teachers. I believe we should be thinking about offering teacher traineeships, almost like an apprenticeship that we have now where apprentices do some work in schools, some on the job, but they still get all their theory done as well. I was hoping there would be opportunities to be innovative and not stick to the same tried and true accredited university course. Even though I realise that is a little aside from this act, I hope, minister, you will keep that in mind because it is certainly something worth having.
I know of a principal who has a person working for them who is not a trained teacher. The principal spent many hours a week with this teacher - who is an excellent teacher now - training them on-the-job. It has been a very successful relationship. It is in a private system, and I know that the principal would hate to lose this particular teacher because of his affinity with students, his dedication to his job, and the way he is able to pass on information to the students. We do not need to be so locked in to an accredited course. We need to think a bit more laterally about that.
I also question the functions of the board. They seem very broad when you look at the objectives of the act. You talk about the board developing and improving professional teaching standards, and developing competencies of teachers during early stages. I would have thought that was the job of the Department of Education. I would have thought teacher development would be their role, not the board. I am not quite sure how the board fits in to that particular section.
You say that registration has to be implemented by February 2005, and this also involves criminal checks for every teacher who has been employed prior to 1996. You are talking about 1800 teachers out of 3000 who, as yet, have not had criminal checks. I am well aware that we have to be very careful of anyone who works with young children and we now have criminal checks for people working in child care. I am not saying we should not have criminal checks, but there is nervousness out there amongst some very experienced teachers who have been around for a long time who may have past misdemeanours -unrelated to child offences - which may cast a cloud upon them within our system, although they have passed on from those events which happened perhaps 20 or 30 years ago. Criminal checks need to be treated with sensitivity. I would hope that all information is confidential and does not in any way mar the good reputation of any teacher presently within our school system.
Could the minister reassure me that the demands made upon the police to carry out these 1800 checks will not disrupt their normal operations? That is a lot of checks for the police to do in a short period of time. Will it affect their normal day-to-day operations, or can they just press a button and get an answer? I hope also, minister, that if they are not completed by February - and you are asking for a lot to be done within six months - no teacher will be stood down or disadvantaged due to this overload. I would hate to think any teacher is disadvantaged because of the bureaucracy that you are creating.
I note that a change of address notification must be given with 28 days or a penalty applied; something I have discussed with your office, minister. I know the amount of effort required for a teacher to move from, say, Papunya to Maningrida. The last thing on their minds is probably notifying the board that they have moved. It is not a priority for them. The priority is to make sure they transfer family and belongings successfully, and settle into their new school and class. I suggest to the minister that if they overlook notifying the board, they are not doing it on purpose, therefore, to penalise them is unrealistic. You have to put a penalty there and that is why I put forward an amendment to change the notification period to 90 days; a figure I feel more acceptable. Remember, also, that the department would have this information on their files if they transferred a teacher. It is not as though they are disappearing.
There are other organisations which require notification of change of address, for example the Electoral Commission, but no penalty is attached for not doing so. It was the penalty which prompted me to bring forward the amendment. I ask all members to support it as it recognises the distances and difficulty of moving around the Territory. Particularly, it recognises the need for teachers to be able to settle into a new school and class without the hassle of having to register with the board.
I also ask if annual re-registration will be made easier with a renewal notice being sent out, similar to getting an automatic notice to renew your driver’s licence or car registration …
Mr Stirling: The answer is yes.
Mrs BRAHAM: I have had representations regarding severance of people who have not had teacher qualifications and I am pleased the act enables them to continue teaching. However, I am concerned that the teachers who have to seek authorisation through their principal every year may feel that they are being devalued or unrecognised for their efforts. I want to be able to give an assurance that the fact they can only be authorised every 12 months is not an impediment to their career or profession. There are many teachers who do not have teacher qualifications, including some of the TAFE teachers who come into our secondary schools, as well as some of the teachers in private schools. They need to have that reassurance.
It was unfortunate there was no provision for an exemption within this bill for registration rather than just authority, to be based on the strong recommendation of the principals. I know it goes against what you are trying to do to set a standard for teachers, but the Territory is unique. In the 1960s when I arrived, we had one-year trained teachers. We had two-year trained teachers. I guarantee there are people out there who are still at that level. You may think it is not a good thing, but I say they are probably still doing a good job.
I also ask whether people working in office positions, such as student services, curriculum, and head office, have to register? Does it mean they do not have to register until they go back to a school, or do they automatically become registered under the system?
Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the move for registration of teachers. I believe we have some of the finest teachers you can get in our schools and that our schools are a credit to the staff who are dedicated to their profession. I would be dismayed if this process becomes so arduous that it discourages many of our lesser qualified teachers and they leave the Territory. We need to encourage them. We should ensure that, whatever the process, it is not confronting to our professionals, it does not question the professionalism of our teachers and it is sympathetic to the situation of teachers teaching in the Territory. I support the bill.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Mr Deputy Speaker, the opposition supports the legislation, but I reflect on the passage of this over my time in the Chamber. As shadow minister for education, I raised the issue a number of times of the status of our teaching profession and the need to enhance the quality of the profession. The minister would listen sympathetically and say: ‘Wait until we get the Teacher Registration Board. I understand what you are saying. It is a debate held at every level of consideration of education issues, not only in the Territory, but nationally and internationally. Do not worry; wait until we have the Teacher Registration Board’. We were promised a massive four-wheel drive, and we received a Mini Moke. It is not able to deliver the expectations raised in any of the discussions about how, in a radical way, we move the status of the teaching profession forward. How do we do that? During those discussions over the last three years, I was led to believe this mechanism would allow that to occur.
What we have is an adequate mechanism for registering teachers which I thought was the base level requirement: a means of registering teachers to strengthen the quality control over qualifications, and so on, within the teaching profession. We went further than that in our discussions and considerations of how we elevate the status of the profession in the eyes of the wider community. That is directly linked to professional development. I find that component, that opportunity has been lost. The minister might say: ‘No, it is referred to,’ but it is referred to in such a manner that it has no bite to it. That, to me, is the traction which is going to take the teaching profession from where it currently is - how the teaching profession feels about itself, and how it is viewed in the wider community - as we start to provide adequate and well-crafted professional development that is clearly recognised and rewarded and the profession moves forward.
That is where we need to put our attention. Some may not want that within the profession. I understand that the education union - I do not know this on direct authority - started to moderate that component of the Teacher Registration Board so what we end up with is simply a registration board. It provides the appropriate safety mechanism in terms of is this teacher who is teaching my child qualified? Yes, we can work that out. Does that teacher have a criminal record that I need to know about? That screen is there, but there are far more serious issues to attend to and we have lost that opportunity. I am saying, and echo the member for Greatorex, that we will go further with this mechanism to provide that component.
I focus on this area because of a paper written by Dr Kenneth Rowe of the ACER, entitled, The Importance of Teacher Quality as a Key Determinant of Students’ Experiences and Outcomes of Schooling. I read this last year and it impressed me immensely. With all the discussion about recommendations and innovative ideas in the education review, the comments made in this paper, are an important reminder of where we should be focusing our attention. I thought that the Teacher Registration Board would provide the mechanism to deal with that central issue. I read an extract from Dr Rowe’s paper:
Where a student’s literacy skills, general academic achievements, attitudes, behaviours and experiences of schooling are influenced by their background and intake characteristics, the magnitude of these affects pale into insignificance compared with class teacher effects. That is, the quality of teaching and learning provisions are by far the most salient influences on students’ cognitive, affective and behavioural outcomes of schooling, regardless of their gender or their backgrounds.
- Indeed, findings from the related local and international evidence-based research indicate that ‘what matters most’ is quality teachers and teaching, supported by strategic teacher professional development.
That is where we must strike, with clear focus and determination, to deal with that issue. I agreed with your federal leader, Mark Latham, on this aspect that:
- ... in order to recognise the importance of the teaching profession, we must develop means for performance-based pay ...
Through the Teacher Registration Board and the clear recognition of professional development, and reward for professional development, we have the means of affirming the effort that the profession takes to strengthen the quality of the profession, to learn more as a teacher, and that it be recognised and rewarded, so the profession informs and strengthens itself. To find that component has become much quieter, is a serious concern - an opportunity lost.
The members for Braitling and Greatorex have raised important points in this debate, but it is the broader issue of how we use this legislation to raise the status and increase the quality of the teaching profession that we need to focus on. Those issues have not been properly addressed, and what we have is simply a Teacher Registration Board. We have lost an opportunity. It will be taken up with appropriate policy from the CLP to ensure that the teaching profession is enhanced and the quality improved, so that the outcomes of education which are most clearly linked between a quality teaching profession and the interface that the profession has with a student, will bear the greatest result. That is the focus of policy formation for the CLP.
One issue, which may have been raised earlier, is the cost of a police check. Will that be compensated for, for non-government teachers?
Dr Lim: I asked that, and the minister said yes.
Mr MILLS: You asked that? Okay. I note that the professional development component of this legislation, as outlined in the second reading speech, says it has the capacity to liaise on behalf of teachers. I believe it is inadequate.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I am coming from a different point of view than previous speakers. I am not a teacher, although I was under the hand of teachers for many years. Whilst I welcome the new legislation, I also believe there are areas which could have been better looked at. We are missing an opportunity to do things that would not only improve the teaching profession, but hopefully rub off on the children they are teaching. I thank the minister for the opportunity of a briefing on the legislation, during which I raised some of the points I am about to make.
Why is registration not automatic following completion of a teacher training course? I would have thought registration would be included in the teacher qualification. Someone has spent four years training and has a piece of paper saying they are a qualified teacher. They know they can teach well, but are unable to do so because they are not registered. Surely the police checks and whatever else, should have been done so that registration is automatic upon someone qualifying as a teacher? It seems to me that if someone has gone to all that trouble training, they should automatically get registration.
I welcome the section on the authorisation to enrol unregistered people. That is a good area that can be expanded on. I have said before that there are opportunities for older people in our communities to teach in schools. I have said that with special regard to males. Everyone is aware that there is a shortage of males in the teaching profession. Older people who have retired, or who have been made redundant, often have a lot of life experiences and qualifications behind them. If they go through the correct channels - that is, have a police check and tests to see if they have the right attitudes to be able to teach because that is important - I believe they should be able to be registered. This is an important section in the legislation and should be expanded on at a later date.
The member for Braitling asked why unqualified people could not eventually be registered. There is a clause in the bill which leaves that fairly open. I refer to the pamphlet which says something like teachers can be registered subject to certain courses. It was fairly vague on what those courses would be. The idea of authorising an unregistered person to work in schools could be combined to advance those people to fully qualified teachers, through undertaking courses while they are teaching. It would encourage authorised people to enter the teaching profession if they knew they could eventually be registered. If you have to be registered year after year, this could work against this idea.
Another concern I have is where students leave school, go straight to teachers college and then straight to teaching in schools. I have mentioned this situation before and I do not think it is ideal. Within our registration of teachers there needs to be some way that a teacher cannot teach in a school unless they have been employed for a period of time in another occupation. Recently, I spoke informally to the CEO of the teachers’ union about this. He said one option might be for the government to provide funding for a trainee teacher to work, say, six months in another industry. This a good concept as it would broaden the vision of young people coming through the teaching profession. It would be good for them to know what kids are in for when they leave school and try to find a job. I believe this is an opportunity that is being missed. There are scholarships available through the Commonwealth for improving one’s education by entering the workforce, but that is usually for teachers who are dealing with a specific part of the workforce, or a specific skill that is required. My suggestion would allow all teachers who have not been employed in another occupation to gain experience in other areas and that is healthy for our teachers.
I am also concerned at the size of the board. I realise it is supposed to represent a lot of people, but when you consider what the board is for, you have to ask why it has to represent all those people? Basically, it is there to register teachers. The police checks, surely, are done by the police and, if something comes up negative you do not need 12 people to tell you a person should not be employed - it is there; according to the rules, you cannot be employed.
You also do not need 12 people to tell you if a person has the proper qualifications, or whether they have paid their fee. I know there are other functions and I take note of what the member for Braitling said, as to whether some of those should be done by the department or the university – that is up to debate. However, it does appear to be a large board and I wonder if the reason for the registration fee is to cut down its costs which are expected to be $440 198 in 2008-09 whilst only receiving $180 000 back in registration fees. I always fear the size of the bureaucracy in the Education Department when we struggle to get teachers in schools, especially music teachers. I would rather work on a slim registration board – this is a cricket team with a 12th man included. It is a pretty big board, and I am not sure we need that many.
It seems to me that you are automatically registered as a teacher for the rest of your life as long as you pay $60, so why bother with re-registration? What is the purpose of that registration except to raise revenue? It seems a pointless proposition. However, if that registration has something that says: ‘Yes, we as a board have checked your ability to teach. We have taken note that you have improved some of your qualifications,’ or ‘We believe your standards have dropped and want you to do some extra courses, but will register you again for another year’, that is acceptable. It is acceptable if there are some components of improving one’s skills, of checking whether those skills are still relevant and are still being delivered in a proper manner. I can then see the point of having a $60 re-registration fee. But except for raising money, I cannot see the point of having an automatic registration. It does not make sense.
When I get my car registered, every year I do not just hand over $450. It has to be taken to the MVR to see if it still goes. If it is rusty, I have to have the rust taken out. If the tyres are bald, I have to get the tyres replaced. I am not saying that teachers are like rusty old cars, but if we are looking at improving our standards or at least keeping our standards to the level they are today, then we have to have a carrot with that re-registration.
There is an opportunity we have missed. I take on board what the member for Greatorex said, that there is professional development, but it is not only professional development. Once we had school inspectors. I have never known why they were abolished because the idea of a school inspector was a good one. Basically, you are making sure, on the ground, that the teachers are delivering what they are supposed to be delivering. Inspectors were neutral; they were not the principal. You might say that the principal does that job, but the principal is part of a school and it would be a fairly hard job for someone who works with those teachers day in day out. A school inspector went around as a neutral person and checked that the teachers were doing their job as required, the curriculum was being taught and the skills were there. If we are not using that system, then use the registration system to maintain, improve and encourage teachers to do a better job. That is not saying that they are not doing a good job, but we need to make sure that standards are not dropping below a certain level.
Finally, I would like to mention Batchelor College. I notice in the flyer which was sent out, there is an apology. In The Northern Territory Teacher Registration Board, Bulletin No 2, it said that the Bulletin had failed to acknowledge the Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education as one of the two major providers of teacher education in the Territory. That gives rise to the question of how indigenous teacher qualifications fit into the registration. I imagine a registered teacher is a fully qualified teacher. I may not be right, but my understanding of indigenous education teachers is that they can only teach at certain schools because their qualifications are not as high as someone who has gone through university. Therefore, can they be registered under this scheme, or are they registered under the authorisation? This is worth an explanation.
I support the idea of registration. I also support what the members for Greatorex, Braitling and Blain have said: that there is an opportunity to use this registration as a way of improving professional excellence, you might say, in the sphere of teaching which is very important. We must maintain and improve our standards if we are to teach and bring children up in Australia which, as a famous prime minister once said, is going to be the clever country.
Mr STIRLING (Employment, Education and Training): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the members for Greatorex, Stuart, Braitling, Blain and Nelson for their comments in what has been quite wide-ranging input, above and beyond the teacher board. Many of the comments were pertinent and I am always attentive when the member for Nelson speaks about matters of education, as he does come from a solid, commonsense basis in terms of what should work and what would be good. I will finish my opening remarks in relation to the support from members which I appreciate. I also appreciate the support from the opposition in relation to the bill overall.
I pay credit to the member for Stuart who developed this policy paper long before the last election was held. It was put forward as Labor party policy, in the event a Labor government was formed, that we would have a Teacher Registration Board. Therefore, the origins of this derive from the member for Stuart in his time as shadow spokesperson for education. In that sense, three years on after the election, it remains very much his bill and he has been involved with the development of it.
I will go to some of the issues raised during this debate, starting with the comments by the member for Nelson which are last and freshest in my mind. He spoke about having a mandatory type of intervention between the time the student leaves secondary school, goes into tertiary education to obtain teacher qualifications, and then back in the classroom without a break. This not an uncommon practice and, in fact, our scholarship system encourages Year 12 students to get a teaching scholarship to become teachers and then go back into the classroom.
I am always reminded of an incident in 1982 when I was relief teaching in the south-east Queensland area, at little coast resort called Bargara which was nestled in the heart of the Queensland sugar cane industry. I turned up at this delightful little primary school, about 15 km out of Bundaberg on the coast, nestled in 12-foot high sugar cane. The principal met me on arrival and said that the teacher had left a teaching program, so just go in. ‘It is a Year 4, nice little group, good kids, you will be right; just follow the teacher’s program’. Come mid-morning at this little school, where the sugar cane trolleys ran straight past the building - many of the mums and dads of the kids would have worked in the sugar industry - and, lo and behold, when I get to the social studies part of the day, the lesson plan is ‘the story of cane’. I nearly wept because, if there was one thing these kids knew and understood, it was the story of cane. Their families’ lives revolved around it. Their dads worked shift work. You could smell the cane and the molasses in the air from the crushing mill down the road. They lived it, they breathed it, and here was a teacher going to give them the story of cane. Well, I did not. Instead, I gave them a lesson on the three levels of government as they operated in Australia.
This left me feeling something was wrong in the system and, on inquiry - I was not snooping but I was interested in the background to it – I discovered it was a Bundaberg-born, fairly young teacher, who had only left to attend teacher training in Townsville. As the Queensland system required, she had gone west, out to the bush, to teach for a couple of years, hell-bent on getting back to Bundaberg, where she had been born and educated, and wanted to teach. I thought this was a very narrowing educational process. I felt for those kids, in the sense that there was not going to be a lot of mind-expanding stuff going on in the classroom with a teacher of that ilk.
Therefore, I have always been attracted to, in some way, mandating world, life and work experience outside the classroom. You have preschool, transition, primary, secondary school, off to uni or college, teaching qualification, and back in the classroom - a young person who has never worked or seen industry or business, and how it operates on a day-to-day basis. Maybe we resolve this by simply working with the department to see how we can adjust it, and what it means in terms of discrimination. If you mandate it before they get the scholarship, they may disappear, or find something else they want to do, rather than come back to teaching. This is fine for the individual, but we could lose a quality teacher in the process, so there has to be a balance. I am taken with the idea, and if the member for Nelson keeps saying it, we will have to act on it some time, because he is right in part.
The member for Nelson also raised older workers, people with trade backgrounds or from other professions, coming into teaching, and how you might get them across the board in terms of a teaching qualification. If you refer to the bill - I will also pick up issues raised by the member for Greatorex - under clause 11(d), the board is required to:
- … liaise with institutions providing teacher education courses in relation to standards and relevance of those programs to the teaching profession in the Territory;
That gives the board responsibility for liaison with Charles Darwin University and Batchelor College to structure appropriate training courses for teachers.
That sort of area could apply to late entries, and the people you are talking about coming across. RPL - recognition of prior learning process – could be picked up under that. For a person who has been doing TAFE instructing for a long time, that sort of prior learning and experience has to be taken into account, weighed up on merit, and worked toward, and contribute to, the qualification the person is looking for in order to get across the line with teacher registration. It is a process that works very well in the United Kingdom as a recruitment initiative. Our institutions have to offer these sorts of courses, without the person having to do a four-year degree, so that you can get them up to the mark. They could be authorised to teach, anyway, without the qualification.
It has to be done in a lot of areas. An example I came across recently was a music teacher in a school who was teaching violin. From memory, she had been a violinist in the London Symphony Orchestra. What a wonderful gift for that school - a violinist from one of the great orchestras of the world teaching a small group of students violin. Not a teacher, but I do not think you are going to jump up and down and say: ‘We are not going to let you near our kids’. She is a wonderfully gifted musician who will be able to take a small group of students through, and master what is one of the trickiest instruments in the world of music - wonderfully skilled. That person will have authority to continue to teach.
At another school I was in on Monday morning, in Year 1/2 a couple of people came into the room to take the next lesson which was RE, religious education. They were not trained teachers, but have been going to schools, and this school in particular, for many years. They are going to be authorised to teach by the principal. We do not want to lose the skills and attributes of people like that who come into the classroom and offer whatever expertise or value that they are adding to the curriculum. This was referred to as a ‘monster’ by the member for Braitling, and referred to as a ‘Mini Moke’ by the member for Blain, so I am not sure what we have. Perhaps it is more a medium-size Holden, but it is not going to roll over these kinds of practices that are well established and add value to our system.
I will be all over the place while I try to pick up the different points made by members. The member for Nelson talked about teachers in industry. There was such a program in the Northern Territory, which ended five years ago. It was modest funding: $42 000 for the final year which paid the relief cover for two week placements, or contract employment to cover ten week placements. There is currently a Commonwealth program that funds careers advisors to work in industry and the focus is work experience for students. I am prepared to look at that again, particularly for those people who have responsibility for career advice. They need to be right up to the mark in terms of emerging careers, new job opportunities and the type of qualifications and pre-requisites that are required to get into those newish industries. CPI would have added something over five years; $40 000 or $50 000 a year is not a lot for the value you might get from such a program. I thank the member for Nelson for raising that issue.
It is not a demand we put on other professions, but people do feel quite strongly that because they are working with and developing children, teachers ought to have a broad view and knowledge of what goes on in the workplace. The member for Nelson spoke about the board being large at 12. I can tell you, mate, it was hell of a battle to get it down to 12. We had a lot of criticism and a bit of heat to get it down to 12. Queensland has 16; Western Australia, 19 with two university vice-chancellors in that 19; Victoria, 19; Tasmania, 10, but they are very small; South Australia, 14, and New South Wales, 18. Therefore, our 12 is modest in comparison to other jurisdictions. It does not make it right, but it does not make it wrong. I resisted the initial moves to have it up to 18, and we worked at it to get it to 12. The question can be revisited in the future if it is thought that is not enough - views were not able to be expressed through the membership - but, the way the membership has been worked, it is quite broad across the educational structure in the Northern Territory and ought to serve us well.
In relation to criminal history checks, which the members for Blain, Greatorex and Braitling raised, 1455 teachers in government and non-government schools are currently without criminal history checks. The government will pay for these. It has already budgeted about $43 000. DEET’s application for CrimTrac participation is currently with DEET legal services in the Department of Justice and we are given every assurance that it should be operational later this year. The member for Greatorex had a concern that if it was not operational by the beginning of next year, we ought to implement mandatory three, four or five year police checks on teachers. We would be loath to do that. CrimTrac should do it for us, and be operational before the end of the year.
The member for Greatorex also raised some curious points about notification and whether the person who is the subject of complaint receives advice. It is very clear under clause 50 that:
- (1) A person may complain, in writing to the board, about the professional conduct of a person who is or was a registered teacher or person in relation to whom an authorisation is or was in effect.
(2) The board may dismiss a complaint if it considers it to be frivolous or vexatious.
(3) The board must notify the contents of a complaint to –
(a the person who is the subject of the complaint; and
(b) … the employer …
I am unsure if I am not reading that right or if the member for Greatorex has another view. We will go into committee to deal with the member for Braitling’s committee stage amendment and members will have the opportunity for questions if I have that wrong, or if there are other issues that I have not covered, but it appears straight forward to me.
The member for Greatorex asked about the Mutual Recognition Act. The Northern Territory registration system will ensure eligibility for registration in Australia and New Zealand. They will have to pay the fee and the legislation surrounding that - the Mutual Recognition Act (NT) 1993 and the Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition Act 1998 - pick up those points.
Two members also raised the idea of undergoing a professional development every two or five years. This was looked at very closely. We want to encourage professional growth and for the board to do that through advocacy, rather than punitive measures and the extra bureaucracy that constant checking and re-checking would require. The professional development role of the board requires that it must liaise with the department and advise on professional development opportunities. I talked about its liaison role with teacher training institutions as a way of helping people to get across the scheme, and to make sure those courses are available. Some of the functions of the board, as contained in clause 11, are:
…
(b) to make recommendations to the minister in relation to the minimum qualifications and other requirements for registration;
…
(d) to liaise with institutions providing teacher education courses …;
- … in relation to strategic priorities for professional development of teachers in the Territory;
This is important. It is an independent body of advice coming to the department from what, in essence, is a teacher board because it is almost all teachers on the board.;
(f) to develop and improve professional teaching standards;
Which is not to suggest that it does not do that at any stage of a teacher’s career. The catch-all is:
(i) to research and promote best practice in teaching in the Territory…;
Every one of those dot points goes, in part and as a whole, to the larger question of professional development.
I was unclear about the questions surrounding the Quality Services Agency as a recommendation in the Secondary Review, and how that interacted or cut across here, notwithstanding that no decision at all has been made about a Quality Services Agency and whether government would have one.. I am not sure at this stage what the feedback in the consultative process has been around the Quality Services Agency: It is not strong, in the sense that I have not been besieged with people saying: ‘You have to have a Quality Services Agency and this is what it should look like and this is what it should do’. The proposal around this Quality Services Agency was to appraise the performance of the department overall, not the performance of teachers.
The concept of teacher registration applies to all teachers, government and non-government. The Quality Services Agency would have been focussed looking at DEET and its role in the provision of education services. Perhaps the member for Greatorex might want to come back on that, but I do not see a difficulty, notwithstanding that we have not made any decision about a Quality Services Agency. However, I have not been bowled over in the rush to set one up.
On the question of teacher performance versus pay, or the relationship between the two, Dr Nelson was very keen on the concept that you had to reward performance in the profession with higher rates of pay. The member for Blain said this was one thing he agreed on with the federal leader of the Labor Party, Mr Latham. Mr Latham may have said it, but I have not seen or heard it. However, Dr Nelson, the federal Minister for Education, is of this ilk. It was, I think, the member for Greatorex, who said the better the teacher you are, the better the rewards should be.
In part, our system does do that, in the sense that the first year out, on dollars for performance, the teacher is on probation. Then there is a promotion system from ET1 through to ET9. The other route through that is the teacher of exemplary practice, who may be promoted out of the classroom and into administration, assistant principal or principal, and their wonderful skills as a teacher lost to the student body. They could go that route of teacher of exemplary practice and get greater reward because they are regarded as a teacher of exactly that, exemplary practice.
On top of that, the principal is responsible for performance management across their school and body of teachers, and responsible for implementing inability procedures against a teacher who, for whatever reason, is not cutting the mustard. What intrigues me about this performance for pay question is: how do you rate the quality of the teacher at Scotch College versus the Year 2 teacher at Gunbalanya with a group of kids with English as a second, third and fourth language?
The teacher at Scotch College turns out high quality output. They are a private college and they chuck out anyone who is a nuisance to them. They have wealthy and upper middle class kids in their care, high performing kids, and if they are not high performing, they are given the boot anyway. So the teacher, providing they are a teacher of substance, is going to produce some strong results at Scotch College. Whereas for the teacher at Gunbalanya, with the Year 2 group of 20 or 30 kids, it is going to be a tough call for a whole lot of reasons.
What are we going to say? That the teacher at Scotch College, because of the awesome results they continue to produce year after year, is a far better teacher and must come out with a far greater salary than the teacher of Year 2 at Gunbalanya who cannot get the kids to read and write? Look at the results. They cannot get to MAP, they cannot get literacy and numeracy, so we are not going to pay that teacher anywhere near as much. There is no question there, no evaluation. There is no look at the student cohort, or social context of where that school is, where the students come from, any social difficulties, or any language barriers.
It is simply bizarre to say that that Year 4 teacher had better results in that school than the Year 4 teacher in the school down the road, so we are going to give them a 15% pay rise. That is not the way to go, in my view. You cannot measure across classes within schools, or measure school to school without taking into account a whole range of other factors and it will not be the way we go. There is a process and a path for the highly-qualified, highly-skilled teacher through the teacher of exemplary practice. It would always be a tough call on teachers prepared to go out bush to demonstrate, by way of outcomes at least, that they are truly teachers of quality and their results prove it and, therefore, they should get more pay.
I have another note here: CrimTrac has already indicated that they can manage large numbers fairly quickly. The question of no hits and presumably no record of anything is between 24 and 48 hours, which is pretty good.
Dr Lim: You are going to tell me that you are going to be definitely on CrimTrac first day of first term next year?
Mr STIRLING: The information and the advice I am given today is that there is no question that they will be up before the end of this year. I will be staying in touch with the department to ensure that is the case.
The member for Braitling raised an interesting issue in relation to a teacher who may have done something a little naughty – maybe a little more than a little naughty – some time ago, and what that might mean. That is something that will have to be looked at. Let us say it happened when they were a uni student doing teaching back in the 1970s, and - who knows? I am not going any further in drawing a scenario. However, let us say there is something on the record that they would rather not have there, and it comes up. They finished their teacher training and have had an exemplary career as a teacher over 20, 30, 15 years - who cares – a wonderful teacher who has never put a foot wrong. All of those things would have to be taken into account, I would imagine, and a balance drawn.
I know - and it seems that the member for Braitling also knows - of individuals perhaps in that category. I would not have undue anxieties, and nor should those teachers. I would not think, and would be surprised, if any were knocked back over something as far back as that.
In relation to the two- and three-year trained teachers, I do not know the numbers. There may well be two-year trained teachers still out there who would be approaching the end of their working career. When I entered teacher training in 1976 it was a three-year course, so they would have done their training some time prior to that. I do not know when it went from two-year to three-year and then on to four-year. However, suffice to say they are right. They are through and have been teaching in our system. Whether two- or three-year trained, they have been teaching all those years and that is taken into account and they are automatically registered.
The difficulties and the issues we have to work through are those areas the member for Nelson was talking about, where they are authorised year by year. Music teachers, religious education teachers, those categories of people, will be all right. It is the bringing across, perhaps, of the older worker with the trades background - very useful in VET-type situations in the school - who may want to then work through and say: ‘I want to be a teacher; I want to be registered as a teacher’. We have to get those institutions to provide what I see as bridging-type courses, taking into account what they have done and getting them up to the mark.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I apologise if I have missed any points, but members still have the opportunity, when we go into committee, to raise any further questions.
I acknowledge Ms Jean Memery from the department, to whom we owe a huge debt of thanks. This bill has been led very much by her, and others. She has been a central figure in it and I want to put on the record my thanks to her and the department for what has been a busy time in and around the consultation. My thanks to all the others who have contributed to the process along the way, including the different union organisations which have had their views, and COGSO. Right across the board, the entire teaching and education community in the Northern Territory has been consulted to death on this, I think. Thanks again, Jean, for your assistance and for your assistance today. Do not go away because we might get more questions.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Mr CHAIRMAN: The committee has before it the Teacher Registration Northern Territory Bill 2004 (Serial 239) together with Schedule of Amendments No 85 as circulated by the member for Braitling.
Bill, by leave, taken as whole.
Dr LIM: Mr Chairman, the minister spoke earlier about the function of the board and whether it does provide adequate professional development. He raised clauses 11(d) and 11(e). I would like him to explain in greater detail if he can. He suggests that clause 11(d) provides the board with the powers to provide professional development for teachers. I suggest to him that clause 11(d) is about the board negotiating with the Charles Darwin University to develop courses for teachers doing the four-year teaching course. If the minister is talking about something different, I would like to know about that.
Mr STIRLING: My reading of it is:
- … to liaise with the institutions providing teacher education courses in relation to standards and relevance of those programs to the teaching profession in the Territory …
What jumps to mind is, for example, if you are going into the bush, or have a need for a cross-cultural type background, or if you are going to be teaching in indigenous communities, an awareness of those areas and the importance of English as a second language as a teaching tool in the Northern Territory. In fact, we direct some of our scholarships to students looking to qualify themselves with English as a second language skill because of the great need across our system. On the question of special needs education, working with the disabled, we know that is a huge need and have been working to address it in relation to the extra 100 teachers coming on. However, the need is still there. The teacher can liaise with those institutions about those areas of professional development.
There are also the questions as I alluded to, from the member for Nelson, in relation to a TAFE lecturer, an older worker, a carpenter, plumber, joiner, electrician; those who have been delivering in a TAFE sense and have teacher experience. They have real hands-on experience which can be demonstrated, and perhaps they are working in a high school with vocational students doing VET courses. They say: ‘Well, this ain’t bad. I want to be a fully qualified, registered teacher’. Under this, I would say that the board could work with Charles Darwin University or Batchelor College to say: ‘This is the profile of this particular person. This is what they have done. What does it mean in terms of recognising their prior learning, or their prior experience? They are a tradesman, and they have worked as a TAFE instructor for so many years. How can that be counted against a formal teacher qualification? On top of all that, what else do they need to do?’
Therefore, instead of having to do a four-year degree to become a registered teacher, you would work it down taking into account everything they had done, and being awarded merit and points towards the qualification. This is the outstanding element before the board would register you as a teacher in the Northern Territory. That will be a valuable piece of work and add real value to the system across the board.
Dr LIM: I am satisfied with that response. It gives clarity to the way Charles Darwin University can approach courses and people. I agree that VET teachers in particular, but also tech school teachers and other teachers, can achieve teacher registration with bridging courses.
Mr Chairman, I have other issues to raise with the minister.
Mr CHAIRMAN: You can raise anything you like, member for Greatorex, until we get to clause 85.
Dr LIM: Referring to clause 13, the minister assured us that CrimTrac will be on deck by December this year, or early next year, and I accept that. However, could I have an assurance that, at the first sittings next year, the minister will give us a report on whether DEET is on-line with CrimTrac by the first day of the first term of 2005?
Mr STIRLING: Mr Chairman, I undertake to write to the member for Greatorex as soon as the CrimTrac system is in place. My very strong advice is that it will be before the end of this year, and I give an undertaking that I will advise him when it is operational. If he does not hear from me by the end of the year, he can start jumping up and down.
Dr LIM: Thank you. I am happy to defer to the member for Braitling for clause 28.
Clause 28:
Mrs BRAHAM: Mr Chairman, I move an amendment to clause 28(1), that the words ‘28 days’ be omitted and substituted with the words ‘90 days’. I believe I explained clearly in my address earlier the reasons for the amendment.
Dr LIM: Mr Chairman, I have some comments on this amendment. The member for Braitling approached me about this by e-mail yesterday. I told her I would not go to the wall on this issue, but that I thought 90 days was particularly long, and that 28 days was fair enough.
I draw your attention to clause 38 of the bill which may not relate to this. It deals with an appeal against a decision not to register and that the appeal must be made within 14 days after notice of the board’s decision is given to the affected person. My point is this: there is a person working in Darwin who has a problem and may be de-registered; they decide to take off and work somewhere and not let the board know. You have 90 days to inform the board after the misdemeanour is discovered. The board wants to contact this teacher, but has no way of doing so for 90 days.
Suppose a parent complains to the board about the teacher. Concurrently, the teacher shifts, say to, Alice Springs, and does not advise the board of their change of address. The board is unable to contact that teacher to say: ‘There is a complaint, and we are investigating it’. What do you do? This teacher may be involved in something messy. You are creating a register to provide a safe environment for our students, so why are you making it more than four weeks? Four weeks is a long time. Doctors have to change their address in seven days, as do nurses and lawyers.
Mrs Braham: Do they get penalised if they don’t?
Dr LIM: Oh heck, yes. They get de-registered.
Mrs Braham: No penalty?
Dr LIM: There is a penalty. The penalty is, in fact, 20 units. You are talking about two units here. The penalty is 20 units.
Mrs Braham: But if they are registered? If they leave the Territory, then it does not matter?
Dr LIM: No, it does not. A health practitioner can change address from Alice Springs to Darwin. Under section 46 of the Health Practitioners Act, the practitioner has 30 days to inform the relevant board of his or her change of address. Failure to comply incurs a penalty of 20 units. In clause 28, it is only two units. You are creating a teacher register to provide a safe environment for kids, yet you allow 90 days for someone to advise a change of address. I am not going to go to war on this, but think about it.
Clause 52 relates to another issue that says you have to advise the board of notice of an indictable offence. A registered teacher or person in relation to …
Mr CHAIRMAN: Member for Greatorex, we are …
Dr LIM: This is all relating to …
Mr CHAIRMAN: Yes, I know, but we are only dealing with …
Dr LIM: No, I am saying that clauses 38, 52, 53 …
Mr STIRLING: It might be easier if we can we just deal with that one.
Dr LIM: It is. I am dealing with clause 28, all right? Clause 28.
Mr STIRLING: You are dealing with clause 52.
Dr LIM: No, I am dealing with clause 28. I am speaking to clause 28, about the member for Braitling wanting to amend it to make it 90 days. I am saying that other clauses in your bill, clauses 38(2), 52, and 53 talk about 28 days. It is inconsistent.
Mr STIRLING: The question of consistency does not bother me there. When I have a quick look at clause 52, there is a completely different context in and around that.
Dr LIM: Of course it is.
Mr STIRLING: Let us take Jim Smith, teaching at Borroloola. The department transfers Jim to Ross Park in Alice Springs, as per the example put by the member for Greatorex. Something comes to the board’s attention about Jim Smith, former teacher at Borroloola. They find out from Borroloola he is no longer there. Oh, what do we do? A simple phone call to the department: ‘You have Jim Smith, formerly teaching at Borroloola, in the system?’ ‘Yes. He is teaching at Ross Park’. ‘Call him in. We want to talk to him’. Simple as that. The change of address would not necessarily affect the board’s ability to get hold of him. The department says Jim Smith left Borroloola, never heard of again. Well, he could be anywhere but, certainly, if they were in the system the department would know, at the push of a button, where they were, what class they were teaching and what principal to contact.
I did have a quick look at clause 52 in relation to where 28 days appears in other clauses and other contexts. In fact, I support the member for Braitling’s position on this and will support her amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr LIM: Mr Chairman, I refer this question to the minister. The member for Nelson raised in his debate people from the Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education. What happens to students who are not competent in English in this sense? If you go to BIITE and get your teaching degree and then return to your community teaching vernacular, and your English is really not up to standard, what happens there? You have a teacher’s registration, but according to clause 33(2)(b), you have to be competent to teach, which includes having a good command of the English language. Is there an issue here?
Mr STIRLING: I take that as an insult upon the Batchelor Institute for a start.
Dr LIM: No. That was what was asked by the member for Nelson.
Mr STIRLING: There are teachers of indigenous background teaching in my electorate. Teachers like Raymattja Marika. Some of them are strongly qualified teachers in the system - black or white - with a superb command of English! I know of no indigenous teacher that has come through Batchelor Institute, qualified, out there, without a great command of Her Majesty’s English, thank you very much.
Dr LIM: It is fine for the minister to call me all sorts of names and accuse me of all sorts of things. I am asking a legitimate question.
Mr Stirling: I have answered it.
Dr LIM: In the flyer, put out by the department, minister, there is a section headed, ‘English Language Proficiency’. I will read it to you:
- Applicants who completed their pre-service teacher education training overseas will need to satisfy the board that they can communicate at a professional level in the English language. Teachers employed in the NT at the commencement of the act, and those who gained their qualification in Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, United Kingdom or United States of America will not be required to undergo an English language test. Applicants who do not qualify under these exemptions will be required to sit the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) or an equivalent. The cost to be borne by the applicant. The office of the board can be contacted for information on available testing.
Dr Burns: Or Malaysia.
Dr LIM: Hey, you think that the Singapore teachers are not adequately trained in English, and perfectly good teachers? The department staff will tell you that they are perfectly capable of teaching, but they have to go through an IELTS exam. I am asking a fair question. When other members raise it, it is not a racist question - but when the CLP raises it, it is a racist question! How dare you accuse them? I say to you, and I have said to many members of the teaching profession, that many of our teachers across the Territory are of a very high calibre. I asked the question and it is a legitimate question. If the minister is happy with that, that is fine. I hear the reassurance and, if the reassurance is there, what is the issue?
Bill, as amended, agreed to.
Bill to be reported with an amendment.
Bill reported; report adopted.
Mr STIRLING (Employment, Education and Training): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
CORONERS AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 235)
Continued from 16 June 2004.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, this will be very short; much shorter than the previous bill.
This bill is supported for what can only be described as very obvious reasons. The bill came about as a result of the recommendations the Coroner made arising from the death of an Indonesian fisherman who died whilst being detained on an Indonesian fishing boat in Darwin Harbour. The Coroner recommended that the Coroners Act be amended to broaden the definition of a person held in custody, so that it includes a death that occurs when a person is held in custody under Commonwealth law, and not just Territory law. This amendment, as the Coroner said, will give him, or her, greater powers of investigation should another death occur.
It is a sensible amendment. It is good to see the government acting on the Coroner’s recommendation. I am sure it comes as no surprise whatsoever to the Attorney-General that the bill is supported.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the opposition for their support. As the member for Araluen said, it is a sensible amendment. It ensures that a Coroner can fully investigate a death that has occurred in the situation of a detention, under the Commonwealth laws, as well as the existing provisions that we have in the Coroners Act. It makes sure that everyone gets a fair investigation and that we get to the bottom of any death in the Northern Territory, regardless of a particular circumstances.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General)(by leave): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Building Our Police Force - Update
Building Our Police Force - Update
Mr HENDERSON (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I update Territorians on how the Martin Labor government is implementing our four-year, $75m Building Our Police Force plan, the largest ever injection of resources into the Northern Territory Police. A year ago, I provided the Assembly with a ministerial statement on what the independent O’Sullivan Report said about police resource needs, and provided an overview of the Building Our Police Force plan. I now seek to update the Assembly on the implementation of the plan and provide details of the impact of this unprecedented injection of resources into the Northern Territory Police Force. I also take this opportunity to update the Assembly on other exciting investments in policing that the government is making on behalf of the community, to give police the tools they need to do their jobs.
Members will recall that the O’Sullivan Report detailed a long list of serious problems resulting from more than a decade of under-funding and under-resourcing of the Northern Territory Police. Problems ranged from old and out-of-date equipment to the absence of satellite phones in many remote locations. Most significant was the problem of police numbers, stemming from the recruitment freeze from 1991 to 1994. A year ago, I advised the Assembly that an absolute key ingredient in delivering a new era in Territory policing would be to see a significant increase in the number of police on the beat. A government can have all the best intentions and pass all the laws it likes, but the effectiveness of these laws largely comes down to the capacity to properly resource them in terms of police strength. Passing a law is the easy part. You need police on the beat to enforce the law and keep a strong presence in the community.
Under the $75m plan the Martin government set the ambitious target of funding a record rate of recruitment into the Northern Territory Police, and a significant increase in support staff for police. A four-year recruitment plan has been mapped which involves expenditure of over $62m. I said 12 months ago that if the record rate of recruitment could be achieved and sustained, if the increased level of support were delivered and if the attrition rate of trained officers leaving was within the reasonable band, we would produce a police force that had an extra 200 police available for core policing duty by the end of 2006.
A year into the Building Our Police Force plan, I am delighted that a record rate of police recruitment is being achieved. This year we have seen graduations in March, May and August. Additional squads will graduate in October and December. Since July last year, 140 police officers have graduated from the Tri-Service College, 21 Aboriginal Community Police Officers have completed their training and graduated, and 24 police auxiliaries have graduated. The Police Commissioner advised me that, on 30 July, the combined total of police officers, Aboriginal Community Police Officers and police auxiliaries available for operations totalled 998, and that is excluding recruits and inoperative members - and it goes on. With a new intake of 27 recruits next Monday, 23 August, this calendar year 108 constables will go through the police training college. Indeed, police are well ahead of schedule with our current recruitment strategies.
To put this record rate of recruitment in context, it is worth noting the scale of recruitment we have seen in recent history. In 1998 and 1999, there was one recruit squad each year. In 2000, 2001 and 2002 there were two squads each year. In 2004, we will have four and that means more police going into our police force than ever before. Combined with the current attrition rate, this significant injection of resources is resulting in an increase strength and capacity throughout the force. This means more police on the beat patrolling our streets and suburbs, more assistance for the victims of crime, and above all, less crime and safer communities. And the increase in police numbers is being noticed. Mr Alex Tsopanglou’s Letter to the Editor in yesterday’s paper is a good example of Territorians feeling safer in their community as a result of the increase in police resources.
Twelve months ago, the Martin Labor government committed to putting a greater emphasis on attracting Territorians from all sections of our community to the Northern Territory Police force. Generally speaking, Territorians have a greater understanding of the challenges facing Northern Territory Police and, importantly, they will be more likely to stay in the Territory, and for longer.
The resulting recruitment campaign is the first of its kind in the Territory. It includes all layers of the media, from traditional mediums such as newspaper and radio advertisements, through to corporate video and cinema advertising. The commissioner has advised me that the response has been positive, with more than 100 inquiries made by Territorians thinking about joining their police force.
At the time of the O’Sullivan Report and when launching the plan, I said attrition of police officers was of significant concern to the government. For too many years, the rate of experienced officers leaving the Northern Territory has been too high, and the government asked Mr O’Sullivan to investigate the issues of retention and attrition in his terms of reference.
Members will recall the O'Sullivan Report identified the reasons for the high level of attrition as being:
- (1) the impact of over a decade of under-funding and stretched resources;
(2) the standards of police housing in some centres;
(3) targeted recruitments of the Northern Territory’s talented and highly skilled police by other states; and
(4) officers returning to their interstate home towns.
The O'Sullivan Report identified some key areas where additional funding could help make the Northern Territory Police more attractive to new officers, and help keep experienced officers in the Territory. I am pleased to advise that in the last 12 months there has been substantial achievement in this area. The advice from the commissioner is that the attrition rate has dropped from 6.2% to 4%. Of course, officers leave the force at different times for a whole host of reasons. Sometimes they are linked to the organisation itself, and sometimes departures are linked to external forces like family, health, age and so on.
Overall, it can only be positive that the attrition rate is declining, and part of the reason, we believe, is the improving morale in the organisation. The boost in morale has been assisted by the injection of better resources and improvements in some working conditions. $2m in recurrent funding has been allocated to spending on small capital items, giving police better day-to-day equipment to do the job. We have seen three new state-of-the-art boats hit the water under the four year $1m boat program, with three more to come. The boats are boosting police capacity for coastal search and rescues and to patrol our waters, and that is good news for the Territory’s many professional and recreational anglers. Another initiative benefiting police is the purchase of satellite phones. I found it amazing that they were not already in place as a matter of course.
Beyond the $75m package, we are seeing a number of additional initiatives and purchases to benefit police, and Territorians, in building safer communities. Amongst them is a $2.3m plane to service Central Australia, meeting another recommendation of the O’Sullivan Report. The new plane, a Pilatus PC-12, can carry three times the load as the old Piper Navajo and reduces return travel time by around 30%. That means more police to the scene much faster.
Earlier this year, I was very pleased to formally open the new $1.8m Kintore Police Station. It is providing excellent service to the people of Central Australia as part of the innovative agreement that has been reached with Western Australia. I have been told that the health clinic at Kintore was closed 73 times last year, but has not closed once since the police station opened - a great marker for the success of this police station.
New mounted police patrol facilities at the Peter McAulay Centre are being used to support the rejuvenated efforts to have the mounted police on patrol more regularly. Work has begun on the $2m rural police and fire facility at Humpty Doo, another fulfilment of an election commitment. Work is almost complete on significant upgrades at the Ali Curung station, and I look forward to opening the new station with the member for Barkly in the near future.
Targeting people who supply and sell drugs is a priority of the Territory community and of the Martin government. In the short term, there is very exciting work being done to deliver a drug dog capacity to the Northern Territory Police Force for the first time. In recent months, we have seen the drug enforcement section deliver great results with the use of Australian Custom Services’ sniffer dogs. The Northern Territory Police will have their own drug dog unit ready for operation in early 2005.
Conditions of employment are important to police officers and their families. The government is serious about improving the quality of police housing, and $2.5m is being spent this financial year on upgrading police houses in Tennant Creek, Katherine, Alice Springs and other smaller towns. On average, $40 000 per house will be spent on 63 houses, improving the comfort levels of those officers and their families. Many police officers in locations outside Darwin have also benefited from new arrangements now in place for electricity subsidies. This has been a welcome boost in conditions for officers in more remote areas, and was implemented outside any EBA discussions.
Aboriginal Community Police Officers have benefited from the introduction, for the first time, of entitlement to remote area allowances. It was a move that was overdue and was much welcomed by ACPOs serving our community.
Combined, these changes are improving the efficiency of the workplace and, importantly, encouraging experienced officers to stay in the Northern Territory Police Force. Whilst there is still work to be done, the attrition rate has declined and is now within a reasonable band. The new recruits are swelling the numbers in the force, and we are not losing others excessively at the other end. As a result, we are on track to meet the target of 200 extra police on the beat by the end of 2006.
The influx of uniformed resources is happening at the same time as the support provided by civilian staff and police auxiliaries is increasing. One such initiative has been the establishment of a call centre, delivering on another recommendation in the O’Sullivan Report. The call centre was launched on 1 July this year, and members of the public can now report minor incidents over the phone without having to go to their police station. More than 230 people called the 131 444 number in its first month of operation, a great result. Importantly, the new call centre also keeps uniformed police on the beat longer, relieving them of paperwork duties during shifts, and keeping them out on patrol longer.
The bottom line is that the Martin government said it wanted to see more police on the streets, faster police response times, and improved levels of service for Territorians. Twelve months on, I am delighted to say this is precisely what is happening. The heightened capacity for police to have a physical presence in the community is there for all to see, and victims of crime are receiving reports from police more consistently. Mrs Sue Lowry, Executive Officer of Victims of Crime NT, has noticed substantial improvements in the service police are providing victims, and is pleased to have more police back on the beat and offering a presence that so often deters crime.
Bicycle and trail bike patrols have been reinstated in Darwin and Palmerston, and like the Alice Springs patrols, are getting great results. The foot patrols in shopping areas, such as Casuarina Square and Palmerston, are having a significant impact on addressing opportunistic crime, and businesses in particular are noticing the benefits.
The Northern Territory Police integrating core service delivery structures program is implementing a large number of O’Sullivan Report recommendations. Under this area, we are seeing enhanced training taking place. Training courses for detectives and intelligence officers are being delivered, as are leadership programs. Intelligence-led police training has taken place throughout the Territory.
Police skills and processes are being enhanced and Territorians are reaping the rewards. We are seeing police success in targeting repeat property offenders who are responsible for so much crime in the Territory. Figures sourced from the Northern Territory Police and published quarterly by the Office of Crime Prevention, police publications and the Australian Bureau of Statistics show a decline in crime rate. The commissioner advises that the crime rate has reduced significantly over the last 12 months, with a reduction in reported crime in 2003-04 similar to the 18% reduction in the 2002-03 financial year.
The crime and justice statistics for the March 2004 quarter show that during the preceding 12 months, there were nearly 6500 fewer offences across the Territory, a 30% drop in house break-ins in Darwin; a 40% drop in house break-ins in Tennant Creek; nearly 700 fewer offences in Alice Springs, including a 13% drop in assaults. In Katherine, a 19% drop in business break-ins, and a 23% drop in car thefts, and in Nhulunbuy, a 37% drop in property offences.
Sadly, whilst the number of assaults across the Territory fell by 10% over the last 12 months, the number of sexual assaults rose by 11%. Government will continue to work hard in this area, including $100 000 to domestic violence services in Darwin and Alice Springs, and the establishment of a sexual assault task force.
The positive decreases in crime have not occurred by accident, or by good luck. Crime prevention initiatives, including the work of community members and groups such as crime prevention committees and Neighbourhood Watch, have all played a part. So, too, have the suite of new laws that have been put in place to get tough on crime.
Drug house laws have seen drug houses operating near our schools and residential areas closed down. Drug dealers in particular are being targeted by new laws enabling police to freeze, and then move to confiscate, cash and property sourced through criminal activity. To date, $1.6m in property has been restrained, including real property, cash and vehicles. Property valued at $204 000 has been forfeited, including cash and vehicles.
The police effort is at the heart of the fight against crime. Police have more and better resources at their disposal, and are using their resources in an even smarter fashion. Twelve months ago, the government had a choice: stick with the old ways of under-funding the police, or create the right circumstances for a new era in Territory policing. The Territory has always been blessed with a police force that is honest and committed to serve. What we as a community and a government had to do was to provide them with more and better resources and support.
I hope all in this House will join with me in commending Police Commissioner Paul White, and all serving members of the Northern Territory Police, on the great work they are doing in the fight against crime in the Territory, and their dedication to serving and protecting our community.
The Northern Territory Police have come a long way in 12 months, but there is still a lot of work to be done. I look forward to providing the Assembly with further updates as the $75m plan and other initiatives roll out in months and years ahead.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonnell): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the minister for his statement. I am going to do something which is not often done in this House; and that is actually attempt to give bouquets and brickbats where they are deserved.
The first brickbat, sadly, I am going to give is that this is a 12-minute statement, whereas the minister had half-an-hour to deliver a statement on an agency which is receiving $151m this year. I am disappointed that, although the statement is welcome and there are many good things in it, they were not elaborated on. I would have liked to have heard more about some of the things that are being done. A classic example is on page 19 of the statement:
- … drug dealers in particular are being targeted by new laws, enabling the police to freeze, and then move to confiscate, cash and property sourced through criminal activity.
I would like to have heard a lot more detail about that. I do not think it would have reflected badly on government if they had expanded on that, as it is a piece of legislation that has been supported and has been effective as far as it can be effective.
I do not want to pour buckets of derision over a statement which is describing a police force which, I agree, is in healthy condition and becoming healthier as time goes on. I do, however, wish to visit certain areas of the statement and expand on some issues that I have in relation to how the police force operates, and some of the claims made by the minister.
It is clear that the government is spending more money on police. Being an ex-police officer myself, I am more than happy to see money being spent on police. One of the most fundamental and important roles of government - before it runs Health, Education, or any of the other departments - is the responsibility to provide a safe community for the people who live in the administrative area of any particular government. In this case, the Northern Territory government has carriage of the police force, and that they are funding the Northern Territory Police Force in the way that they are, will draw no criticism from me whatsoever. I believe that is a good thing.
There are also other elements which the minister could have expanded on. One of ongoing concern to me is the PROMIS system. It is also an ongoing concern to the Auditor-General of the Northern Territory. This is a computer system which has had problems, basically, because of its line speeds. It was adopted from the Australian Federal Police operating out of Canberra and they have been kind enough to give it to the Northern Territory to operate without having to pay any of the leasing arrangements and charges. It is, basically, a freebie. However, it has had its problems and its line speeds have caused problems in the past. In fact, in the last financial year, $1.8m was spent trying to bring the system up to scratch. The Auditor-General has outlined that there have been improvements in the system, but he has also made criticisms and, obviously, the system needs continued work.
I point out that the Auditor-General did have to pause briefly to say that there are no network mechanisms in place at the moment to manage the prioritisation of the network traffic. As an example, one police officer said to me prior to the Estimates Committee hearings, where I made this comment, that he can hit the enter button after filling in the screen on the PROMIS system, walk away and make a cup of coffee while he waits for it to scroll down. I am sure the minister will report in his summation that the PROMIS system is being improved and worked on. However, this is a working system that police officers have to use, and which I would like to see operating more effectively. If it is still taking that sort of time whenever you hit the enter button to input a screen, police officers are going to get frustrated and tied up on the very paperwork that the minister says he is trying to wind back.
The Auditor-General does recommend future work, and I will be keeping an eye on it. The minister is fully aware of my attention to the PROMIS system, which I believe must be a tool that enhances a police officer’s job. It is like a set of handcuffs, or a police cell, or a police car in that it is supposed to make their job more effective. However, sometimes I worry that the reverse is true and police officers become an organ of the computer system, rather than the other way around.
I notice that the Northern Territory Police, Fire and Emergency Services commented in response to the Auditor-General that they accept the recommendations contained in his report. The Auditor-General goes on to make four recommendations, which strike me as being eminently sensible. I hope the PROMIS system will end up serving police officers better than it currently is.
I also wish to talk about page 166 of Budget Paper No 3. I have concerns about performance measures used by public service departments, which strike me as being a bit convenient. On page 166 of Budget Paper No 3, there is a qualitative or quality assessment, done and the following is listed under ‘Quality’:
- Respondents aged 15 years or over who felt ‘safe’ or ‘very safe’ at home alone during the day.
The estimate for 2003-04 was equal to or better than the national average, and that was also the estimate for 2004-05. The problem I have with that is that if you refer to the ABS figures which the minister referred to, what you are doing is comparing how well your propaganda is working as a performance measure. What I mean by this is that people may feel safer at home, but the question is, are they? That is one of the issues …
Mr Henderson: 6500 fewer burglaries.
Mr ELFERINK: The minister interjects and I will pick up on it for the simple reason that, according to the ABS statistics - and these I took off the Internet a few months ago - assaults for the Northern Territory are 1847.2 per 100 000 people annually. That makes it the worst in the country. Sexual assaults are 152.8, the worst in the country again. Unlawful entry with intent, 2119.5, the second worst in the country. Unlawful entry with intent other is 808.2, which is the second worst in the country. We are using a performance measure which really demonstrates how well the publicity machine is working.
If people respond to a survey which is done by the Northern Territory Police that says ‘How safe do you feel?’ people may well say: ‘I feel very safe. I have seen a lot of good letters in the newspaper, and a lot of articles in the newspaper about what the police are doing, and I have listened to the minister telling me how safe I am at home’. I am not saying that this is a performance measure we necessarily need to ignore, but it is a performance measure which, to a degree, ignores the importance of the issue. The issue is not how safe you feel; the issue should be how safe you are and the Northern Territory has a lot of catching up to do.
This situation is not new and I am not saying it is indicative of this particular government’s policing responses. I am saying that let us use performance measures which reflect the reality, rather than perception. It is all too easy to be lulled into allowing perceptions to be your performance measure, but if you start believing perceptions are a reasonable performance measure, then you run into the issue of trying to manipulate perceptions and reality. If you are trying to alter perceptions, then you may not be creating a safer society necessarily.
The minister makes a point of talking about lower crime rates in the Northern Territory, and that is true. In spite of the fact that I have some reservation about the operation of the PROMIS system and how it has provided figures, recently we have seen a consistent drop of crime in the Northern Territory. But that is true for the rest of Australia; it is not exclusive to the Territory. The minister is saying this is a result of new police and tactics, and I think there might be an element of truth in that, but it is also reflective of a national trend. When we discussed this …
Dr Toyne: Twice the national trend.
Mr ELFERINK: It is reflective of the national trend. As the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General knows, when national trends go up, Territory trends - and a whole raft of statistics - usually go up by twice as much, or drop twice as much if the national trend goes down. As the Treasurer pointed out recently, it is because of small sampling groups, or perhaps the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General is suggesting that the Treasurer is wrong on that. I am curious to hear his comments.
I am also concerned with the slowing down of the recruitment drive. I note the minister says he is ahead of schedule, but that is not true.
Mr Henderson: It is true.
Mr ELFERINK: It is not, and I will tell you why: I draw the minister’s attention to page 164 of Budget Paper No 3, and I quote:
Budget Highlights
- Further increase in funding to $16m for Building our Police Force in 2004-05, for the continued implementation of the O’Sullivan Review recommendations. This will enable record rates of police recruitment, including 120 constables in five squads a year …
That is the standard you have set. What you have told parliament today is that there is going to be one fewer recruit squad than that and there are going to be 108 constables. Therefore, you are not ahead of schedule. Your schedule is 120 constables and five squads a year. That is your schedule in the budget paper. What you have delivered is less than that. The minister is being a bit cute by saying that he is ahead of schedule, when in fact he is not.
Mr Henderson: On target for the 200.
Mr ELFERINK: Here is your target, minister. I will read it to you again so you can adhere to it. Here it is:
- This will enable record rates of police recruitment, including 120 constables in five squads a year ...
Slowly and carefully so you understand - would you like a little finger puppet to explain it to you? You said four squads and 108 constables is ahead of schedule. You have just re-set the schedule. You are not ahead of schedule; you are being a bit cute. But, that is life.
I have some reservations with the fact that your ministerial statement, sadly, seems to be more like a bunch of media releases nobbled together, than an assessment of the schedules that you have set. However, it is good to see that you are recruiting.
I am also pleased to see that you are improving police housing. There are places in the Northern Territory where it does need to be brought up to scratch and you are addressing that. Those stations that have poor housing conditions are harder to attract members to. There is good reason for this; police officers, particularly if they are married, want to know that their homes, often in remote areas, will be up to standard and safe and sometimes it is the quality of the home that determines how long they will stay.
When I was a police officer and housing was provided to me, in some instances it was very good. On other occasions, it was very run-of-the-mill. I would have been hard to shift from a great flat I was allocated in Kent Street, but would have happily moved on from some of the other houses I was allocated. I am pleased to see the minister and the commissioner are addressing this issue and that a real commitment is being made.
The minister outlined what has happened at Kintore Police Station. Good! I was lobbying the former government on it. It was on the design list prior to the change of government, and I am pleased it has been built. Like Humpty Doo, it has been on the design list for a long time, and in several budgets, but has finally gotten up. Tally ho! Good on you, minister. Carry on. You are doing a wonderful job.
But where is Docker River? Oh, that is right; you went down there and you did not even stay in the room long enough to explain to the people at Docker River why they are not getting a police station. You left it up to the Western Australian police officer to explain to the people of Docker River they were getting a police station. You were out of there as quickly as you possibly could, mate.
Mr Henderson: Wrong. You are wrong; I was there.
Mr ELFERINK: The dust was not even settling when you had left the room and left a West Australian police officer who had to explain it to them. It is curious, that the minister is saying I am wrong. I got this from the locals at Docker River. They were not particularly happy with him, as they felt that he had done them a great injustice by not having the courtesy of at least telling them.
While he was at Kintore, I spoke to the minister about Docker River, and the fact that there was a person who wanted to take on, for a short term, an ACPO role. I know the review of the Docker River applicants has been completed, and that none of the applicants were found to be suitable. I would ask the minister to visit this again. I am not going to be critical of him, because I can understand why he would not take this person on in some circumstances. However, there was one particular applicant who worked as a very effective ACPO for many years in South Australia, and is recognised by the whole community in Docker River. Although he is 70, what he particularly wants to do is train a couple of locals to a standard where they can be ACPOs in Docker River. There is nervousness about taking on older employees because of duty of care worries and other issues, but I have spoken to the candidate, and he is a very fit and healthy individual. I would never have said he was anywhere close to the age he tells me he is, and I believe he could do the job reasonably effectively. There is a very wise head on those shoulders and he is not the sort of fellow who would expose himself to any sort of danger unnecessarily. I ask the minister to look at that particular applicant again.
Mr Henderson: It is not my job to recruit them.
Mr ELFERINK: Ask the department to have a look.
Mr Henderson: I did.
Mr ELFERINK: I know all the reasons why you would not take this guy on.
Mr Henderson: We did, but I cannot force them to take somebody.
Mr ELFERINK: I understand that, but just ask the department to have a look.
Mr Henderson: I did.
Mr ELFERINK: Because at the moment, guess what police representation exists in Docker River? Zip. Nothing.
Mr Henderson: Yes, it is very sad.
Mr ELFERINK: Not good enough.
Mr Henderson: It has been zip there for many years.
Mr ELFERINK: I am asking you to explore as many options as you can possibly manage. It is not criticism; it is not me sticking it to you or whatever. It is me saying there are options out there. Exercise a little latitude. If it cannot be done, then it cannot be done, but just have a look. This guy has something to offer the community, and he would help remarkably.
On page 15 of the pre-prepared statement where the minister talks about more police on the streets, faster response times, and improved levels of service to Territorians, he could have used more than 12 minutes in his half-hour to expand on that. I would like to know how the response times are improving. I am sure with more police on the streets, as he says there are, how many extra patrols are there in the Darwin area, in A sector, in B sector, if they still use those zones? Physically, how many more patrols and police officers are we getting on the streets? How many are tied up in other operations? Areas such as intelligence-led police - and I like the logic of that – which is a formalisation of something that used to be done to a lesser degree, and does prove results.
Sometimes we may run the risk of setting up our police force to fail by asking them to be the fix-up job where other departments could have intervened earlier on in the piece. There is a new philosophy of policing that could be visited in terms of trying to co-opt other government departments, especially those with an intervention role, into being more aggressive. You would have to be very careful in how you approach those sorts of issues, but they are worth exploring. The targeting of individual known villains is a good idea. Sadly, however, the indications are that the minister is not making, nor accepting, the legislative changes that would be necessary to pursue that harder.
I have heard nothing from the minister, or the Police Association, about the proposed legislation giving individual police officers immunity from liability, except when they were acting in bad faith. The police minister was on his feet for only 12-and-a-half minutes, but he could have said something extra about that. Even if he does not accept our motion, hopefully he will bring something similar into the House. Those steps were taken in New South Wales under a Labor government, and I do not care if it is a Labor or a CLP government that gets the idea up. However, for all the reasons I gave in my second reading speech, I want those particular amendments supported, so police officers are able to do their jobs more effectively as a result. Without going into the whole second reading speech again, some indication from the government would be nice. I have had support from the president of the Police Association, Vince Kelly, on the telephone, and hope there will be some public statement by them. Perhaps they have to discuss it at some future meeting, but I have not heard much back in the meantime.
In the statistics given by the minister, there is something I find curious. He said:
- Sadly, whilst the number of assaults across the Territory fell by 10% over the last 12 months, the number of sexual assaults rose by 11%.
This is at odds with the Australian Bureau of Statistics numbers that I have in front of me. In fact, it is almost the reverse. For the percentage changes; assault is up 7% and sexual assault is down 8.3% in the Northern Territory. These ABS figures date back a couple of months, but I ask the minister to check the figures he has quoted to make sure he is right. If he is not, it raises a question mark dealing with statistics that the minister sometimes brings into this House.
During the Estimates Committee sittings in June this year, I asked the minister:
- How many prosecutions have been launched – we are separating out on-the-spot fines, arrest and summons – under the Summary Offences Act across the Northern Territory and by major centre.
He has provided a list of offences against the act, which, for edification of members, deals with those smaller street type offences, such as urinating, swearing, fighting, objectionable language, defecating and acts of indecency in public. Basically, the legislation controls how the streets operate. There were a total of 726 offences throughout the Northern Territory in the last year. I have a problem with that, because it is very light on. Sorry, it is for a nine month period, but 726 is an average of about two a day. That is two arrests per day for swearing, spitting, defecating, and many other offences which are offensive to people as they go about their daily business.
Walking through town last night, I heard people swearing in the mall, and I heard screaming and yelling. I understand that cities are noisy places, but it is the same in Alice Springs. In fact, if you walked down any back alley in this town, the place stinks of urine. Often faecal material is deposited in those areas and I find it quite disgusting. The pressure that has been placed on the commissioner to pursue house break-ins and similar offences has been at the expense of other areas of policing. The minister says we have more coppers on the street. True, but they have to pursue street level offences. What the minister has effectively done is said, we will protect you in your home and make your home much safer than it was, and it follows the national trend, but as I said, intelligence-led policing has had a role to play in this.
The minister has, essentially, abandoned the streets. This is very important as two arrests per day throughout the Northern Territory for these offences means one of a number of things is happening. One, people are no longer swearing in the streets, people are no longer defecating in the streets, nobody is urinating in the streets and everything is very orderly; two, the arrests are not being made; or three, section 128 of the Police Administration Act has become the cover all, lock them up thing, if you like, and the way to deal with street offences.
I have reservations about this and feel that approach is incorrect. Section 128 is there to get people who are so drunk they cannot stand up and take them into protective custody. It is not the penalty. It is up to the courts to impose penalties and that is what the system is there for. If you are only arresting two a day for these types of offences then you have lost a large amount of control as a government on the streets.
Mr Henderson: Oh, rubbish!
Mr ELFERINK: Madam Speaker, the minister laughs. He says: ‘Oh, rubbish’. I was walking down the street yesterday and I saw people begging, which is an offence under the Summary Offences Act. I have made reports of this in the past and police investigate when they can. It is seen so often, and if I was going to telephone every time I saw one of these offences committed, then I would be constantly on the phone. If the minister wants to laugh about this, it is fine. The point is, people tell me that they are very unhappy with some of the things they hear and see being done on the streets and section 128 is not the `fixer’.
The fixer is arresting these people and bringing them before a court. Continue with intelligence-led policing, absolutely, because in the same way that intelligence-led policing identifies the villains that break into our homes - which is only a handful of people when you look at the whole of the population - it is the same on the streets. There is a group of people on the streets which represents 10% of the people, but 90% of the problem, and nothing is being done effectively to prevent them from doing it. We are told about people being transported to their communities and those sort of measures, but they are coming straight back. It is up to this government to make sure that those levels of control are put in place.
What would the CLP do? They would review the operation of the Summary Offences Act, probably repeal it and replace it with something called the Public Order Act and then we would enforce it. We would enforce the act so that public order was properly maintained. In Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs and Darwin, I hear complaints all the time that public order is not being properly maintained by this government. It is not; I have seen it every day as well.
The CLP will continue taking the good policies that have been put in place by the police department and continue them operating - as this government has continued many of the CLP policies that operated when we were in power. However, one thing we will definitely do is make the streets places where you can walk without being molested, putting up with the smell of urine or faeces, and putting up with loud, obnoxious people, often drunk, acting in a disorderly manner and fighting. That is not a huge question to ask and it would help bring some of these problems under control
I remind members of the broken windows theory which has been applied so effectively in places like New York City. The Treasurer agrees and knows about it and understands. The former Chief Minister, the member for Brennan, understood it well enough and the Treasurer was quite supportive of some of these ideas. He understood the process of the broken windows theory. It is still legitimate, and as long as people continue to be people, it will continue to be legitimate. I want to see the police force not only lock up the villains that break into our homes, but also those people who make walking down our streets more difficult or intolerable.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Auditor-General): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I am sure the member for Macdonnell would be whistling quite a different tune if he was out in his own electorate. I support the new era in Territory policing statement brought to this parliament by my colleague, the Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services.
Let me go no further without echoing the honourable member’s sentiments regarding our police force. To Commissioner White and all the members of the Northern Territory Police Force, I offer my congratulations and ongoing appreciation for the great work they do.
As Minister for Central Australia, I know the record injection of funds under this government, $75m over four years, will mean better police services in the Centre. The $2.3m Pilatus PC-12 servicing Central Australia has a far greater capacity than the old plane, and means more police on the ground more quickly.
Last week, I had the pleasure of visiting the new $1.8m police station in Kintore. It is quite an impressive facility, and has already brought about a reduction in antisocial behaviour and social disruption. These benefits can be seen, as my colleague pointed out, not only in the reduction in crime, but in the benefit to the delivery of health services.
The Kintore station is only one part of an important and innovative agreement between the Territory, South Australia and Western Australia, which will see better delivery of justice services to the people who live in the area where these three jurisdictions meet.
A station upgrade in Ali Curung and an upgrade to the police cells at Ti Tree will further support police in building safer Central Australian communities. Aboriginal Community Police Officers, who play such a vital role in Central Australia and across the Territory, are for the first time receiving remote area entitlements. I am confident that this has been very welcomed by the ACPOs and the communities they serve.
Each quarter the Department of Justice releases independently compiled and audited criminal justice statistics, and each quarter I am reminded of the success of our police and of the O’Sullivan recommendations in achieving what every Territorian wants: fewer crimes and safer communities. At the end of March this year, the year-on-year drops in property crime are down 26%, and in assault, down by 10%. The level of sexual assaults continues to be high. Unfortunately, reductions in this area have not been achieved to date. No member on this side wants to see such a situation continue.
The Northern Territory Police, along with Justice, the Department of the Chief Minister and the Department of Health and Community Services, are actively participating in the Sexual Assault Task Force established by this government late last year. The main focus of the task force is reducing the level of sexual offences across the Territory through the development of a targeted, whole-of-government Sexual Assault Prevention Plan. Along with an investigation support and service models, particularly in remote areas, the task force is also looking at investigation and prosecution of sexual assault and how this might be improved. The input of the Northern Territory Police in this process is vital. Crucial to preventing crime and in providing such important front line services to survivors when an assault does occur, the police are best placed to provide expert advice on the investigation of these offences.
Not only are we building our police force through our record funding injection, we are giving our police the tools they need to do their job. This government introduced new offences of home and business invasion shortly after we were first elected. The capacity of police to investigate these crimes has been increased, with all officers cracking down on property crime by identifying and targeting the activities of repeat offenders, who are responsible for the majority of unlawful entries.
Our government is also absolutely committed to breaking the drug crime cycle and preventing drug criminals profiting from their crimes. To this end, the government put in place the Criminal Property Forfeiture Act, which commenced on the 1 June 2003. Since that time, a substantial number of restraining orders, 65 at last count, have been issued. Some of the orders and warrants issued relate to remote communities and illustrate the success of the new legislation and policing strategies in stopping the harm that drugs cause in so many areas.
Earlier this year, I reported to the House that the amount of property restrained under this legislation had surpassed $1.5m. This figure has now reached almost $1.7m. Property valued at over $200 000 has already been forfeited under the scheme, ranging from cash to mobile phones and a vehicle.
As the minister pointed out so clearly, the effectiveness of these laws is largely dependent on the capacity of the police to do their job, in terms of resources, equipment and numbers. Evidence of this government’s better resourcing of the police force can be seen in many areas, such as bike, foot and mounted patrols. I have recently been informed by a very active local crime prevention group, the Wagaman Residents Group, of the success of bike patrols in their area. Looking out my office window about a week ago in Alice Springs, I was able to see the bike patrol in action. Some unruly behaviour had broken out in the street opposite, and it was reassuring to see those officers turn up to sort it out.
The upgraded scientific facilities, such as forensic labs, provide high tech support for front-line policing and intelligence-led policing, with police targeting recidivist criminals, particularly those responsible for unlawful entry and robberies. Similar initiatives, such as Operation Spitfire, Operation Sharp Edge and Operation City Safe, have seen police work actively to prevent juveniles being involved in crime, to apprehend those carrying weapons and to increase safety in Darwin city.
The $75m allocated by this government is the largest ever injection of resources into the Northern Territory Police Force. It sits alongside the $26.5m allocated to our Correctional Services, and turning our prison officers into a second crime prevention force. It stands to reason that if we can reduce the rate of re-offending, we are going to have an impact on crime rates within our community and, importantly, reduce victims.
A third area of our crime prevention effort is our crime prevention community groups. I have reported regularly to this House on the development of these groups throughout the Northern Territory. We are now following a multi-layered approach to crime prevention in our community. We are involving the community and our Correctional Services in support of our front-line force, which is our police force.
The Martin Labor government was elected with a firm commitment to tackle crime, and the causes of crime, in our community, and to create safer communities. The efforts of the police are at the heart of this fight against crime. Madam Speaker, I commend my colleague’s statement to members.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I want to contribute to this debate for obvious reasons, and it is logical that I follow the Attorney-General. I am a great supporter of police officers in the Northern Territory. I say that for a number of reasons, one being that some of them are my friends and, indeed, interstate I have family who are police officers. The job they do around the country is difficult and, certainly in the Territory, it has its own challenges and it is great to see some young people contemplating a career in the police force.
Some aspects of the minister’s statement are good and others are not. Of course, any organisation welcomes an injection of funds, and government has made much of the injection of $75m. And why on earth wouldn’t it? With the huge amount of additional GST revenue this Labor government has received, it is not surprising that it has not only money to spend, but it is putting it in areas that are worthy of attention.
Having said that, however, I want to extract some points from the minister’s statement, and hope that that he considers some of my points with a view to putting them into his think tank. I do not know whether that is his brain or the brain of others, but some of the matters I raise I do so in a sincere way and hope he looks at them. I will try to resist the temptation of colourfully getting stuck into the statement, although I make no promises in that regard.
In no particular order, I make note of the fact that the minister mentioned victims of crime. What is interesting, however - and this will not come as a surprise to the minister - is that, in last year’s budget, the amount of the assistance to victims of crime was reduced. In the 2002-03 budget, it was estimated that assistance to victims of crime would be $6.37m. In 2003-04, that would reduce to $4m. I have made speeches in this parliament before and, in relatively recent months, I tabled a letter from a law firm in Alice Springs wherein the authors have said they do not act in crimes compensation matters any more because it is not economical for them to do so. I note that the police minister is also the business minister, and remind him that law firms are also businesses. I would have thought, since he referred to victims of crime, that he would take an interest in the fact that victims of crime are finding it more and more difficult to access lawyers. That is directly as a response to this government’s decision to change the Crimes (Victims Assistance) Act to make it, in essence, uneconomical for lawyers to act for them. That is a crying shame; and I feel that very strongly. I knew that would happen from the outset, and when the government first introduced the bill, I made much of it. I will continue to do so, as lawyers continue to tell me that this is a real problem.
The minister says that crime has gone down. We can, in the way that politicians do, argue about figures until we are blue in the face. However, I would like to make mention of an interview on Top FM on 4 August, where a bloke by the name of Justin Clough was interviewed. He owns JC Electronic Security. He was asked in by the reporter:
- What about the level of, you know, break-in and that sort of thing - crimes in the Territory? I guess Darwin, especially, it is sort of static. Is it lower? Has it gone up? Have you, sort of, you know, noticed any changes in the last 12 months?’
- Clough: Yes there is more. There is definitely getting more work out there for me.
What does this man do? He installs security systems into people’s homes. I reckon a bloke like that would know what he is talking about, and he says there is more crime. I can cite hundreds of examples such as this. Government can do its spin - that is fair enough - but I do not think the punters believe you. When I go doorknocking in Alice Springs, some people say that crime is worse than it has ever been. Whether this is true - and I believe it is, because I also have eyes and ears - that is the perception, and any government worth its salt needs to do something about it. This government though, is soft on crime and I will seek to demonstrate that in some of the points I will make later.
The minister made mention of foot patrols. Foot patrols are great. We all know that the citizens of the Northern Territory - and anywhere else for that matter - really like foot patrols. People like seeing police on the beat; it is as simple as that. It is an old standard formula. The average Northern Territory copper out on the beat would see more antisocial behaviour than any other crimes being committed. Without adequate laws to do something to stop this, life will continue to be made difficult for police officers and, in turn, the citizens of the Northern Territory.
Shortly after coming to office, Labor repealed the Public Order and Anti-Social Conduct Act, commonly known as the move-on laws. I feel strongly that the government should revisit that, or at least come up with something similar. In Alice Springs, people walking from their workplace to the bank, or to get a sandwich at lunchtime, do not like dodging the drunks who make their life difficult. Almost without exception, when I am doorknocking that is the issue. I believe the 25 members of this parliament would know it is the issue, and what is very interesting, is that I have not seen a demonstration that Labor is prepared to do something about it.
This issue does not appear to be measured in any way, certainly not in the crime statistics that are published, and perhaps it should be. Politicians can argue all day about the figures, but what I do not accept is the mantra that under Labor there have been significant improvements. There have been some improvements in some areas. There are some encouraging signs, but I do not believe it is not as good as the government says it is.
Not long after crime statistics were introduced, I remember the Attorney-General saying in the House - I cannot recall the date but it is on the Hansard - that the government will stand or fall on the crime figures. Is it any wonder that some of us are sceptical of the crime figures? Is it any wonder that Territorians regard crime figures with some cynicism and scepticism every time they come out, when a government says we will stand or fall by these figures?
Crimes as we know are under-reported. The member for Macdonnell wrote to the Attorney-General around May 2003 asking about this, and also what the standard error rate was in the reporting of crime. My copy of the Attorney-General’s letter is, I think, in my office in Alice Springs, but from memory he replied that there was a standard error rate of 25% or more. Should we be sceptical about the quarterly crime and justice statistics? Yes, we should, and it is the opposition’s job to question them. The Labor members should not think for a minute that we are going to swallow this book whole, without asking any questions. We know there is under-reporting. We know there is a standard error rate, and we know this government has said it will stand or fall by these figures. Some might say that the government is doing all that it can to make these figures look good. It makes much of what it calls the independent Office of Crime Prevention. It is not an independent office of anything; it is part of the Department of Justice. Need I say more?
What is disturbing from the trends in the crime figures is the increase in sexual assaults and crimes against the person. This was talked about earlier, but let us revisit it. I took notes when the Attorney-General spoke during ministerial reports, and he said in 2001, he did not say if that was the calendar year, there were 263 cases of sexual assaults. Of these 11 went to court; seven were pleas, two were acquittals and two were non-convictions. I should not be surprised that the Attorney-General chose to refer to lower figures. The figures I have, which I referred to this morning and will do so again now, are from the March quarter of the crime statistics published by this government. June 2002 to June 2003 shows there were 419 sexual assaults, which includes rape, incest, aggravated and non-aggravated assault. There are more sexual assaults under Labor than there was under the CLP, but I digress. For the same period, according to the ABS publication Criminal Courts, from 1 July 2002 to 30 June 2003 in the Territory, only 33 of those 419 cases went to court. Of those, eight were acquittals, 23 were pleas of guilty and there were only two convictions in contested matters.
The Attorney-General, to his credit, said in his speech that sexual assaults have gone up. They have, and surely it is incumbent upon us to see what we can do about it. I think it was the June quarter for last year that showed, for instance, in Alice Springs sexual assaults had gone up by 78% compared to the same quarter the previous year. The figures do jump all over the place, but for anything to go up by 78% is rather extraordinary.
This morning, I asked the Attorney-General to consider commencing an inquiry like the one initiated in South Australia. For the benefit of the police minister, who might think some of this is outside his portfolio, there are some tangible lessons to be learnt by the police, such as consideration of whether adequate training exists for police and their role in investigations. As minister, I would have thought he would be concerned about the under-reporting of sexual assaults.
The ABS, in about 2002, reported that, on their analysis, only 25% of sexual assaults in Australia are reported. In other words, 75% are not. Why not? Is the police minister interested to find out? Clearly, it is a problem. An inquiry like this could come up with some answers and also assist police. In the South Australian inquiry, they refer to the difficulties for police and question whether training provided in relation to sexual assault investigations and prosecutions is appropriate. I encourage the minister for police to give this matter consideration.
In his statement, the minister referred to the area of domestic violence, and said that $100 000 has been given to services in Alice Springs and Darwin. I am sure that was announced in the last two months, so it is relatively new money. By all means, I say to any government, give money to domestic violence services, but please do not think that it solves the problem. Domestic violence services deal with victims and, for obvious reasons, they are not charged with trying to determine the causes of domestic violence, and they do not deal with perpetrators. I was disappointed to see in the statement a paragraph or two saying that $100 000 was given to domestic violence services. That is good, but does it go to the heart of these crimes? No. As any police officer will tell you, they go to a lot of domestic violence cases. Again, I return to the point I made about an inquiry: there may well be merit in it. It is important that we look at why the reporting rates of sexual assaults and domestic violence are so low and, surely, as legislators, we want to improve conviction rates.
In his statement the minister said $1.6m is being seized as a result of criminal and drug-related activity. Some members may not know that in relation to the seizure of assets and monies from those involved in criminal activity, under the legislation, which was introduced in May 2002, no conviction is required. It is all very well and good to seize money from criminals, but Territorians want these people locked up. What the minister did not give in his statement were figures for drug offences. He simply said: ‘We have seized $1.6m worth of stuff’. ‘Suspiciously short,’ I thought, and looked up the last crime statistics which were for the March quarter 2004, Issue 7. On page 86 it says:
- A total of 470 drug offences were finalised by the courts between 1 July 2003 and 31 March 2004. The principal penalty for 14% of these offences was an actual term of imprisonment …
For drug offences, only 14% of those convicted were sent to gaol. This is not very good. Hopefully, the police minister is listening to this. No government can say on the one hand, ‘Aren’t we doing well by seizing these goods’, but on the other, not make any reference to the fact that hardly any of them are being locked up. Surely the average punter wants those involved in serious criminal activity and/or drug-related activity to be locked up? I am not for a moment saying everyone needs to be, but 14% of drug-related offences that were finalised to court? Seriously, that is not a good figure.
There are many things to say in the short time available, but I must refer to the Auditor-General’s August 2004 Report tabled yesterday. There are real problems identified by the Auditor-General and I will give one example. At page 52, the Auditor-General says that
- NTPFES clearly shows the linkage to the Northern Territory government’s social policy of Building a Safe and Secure Community to the performance outcomes, output groups and outputs on page 29 of the annual report. However there is no articulation of the expectation for each of the three performance outcomes and whether those expectations have been met.
This is a theme on several pages of the Auditor-General’s report. He has referred to what was obviously planned to be done by the NTPFES, but consistently says ‘but’, ‘however’, at the end of various paragraphs and says there is no explanation as to a variety of things. The Auditor-General’s report, I would have thought, should be a concern to the minister for police.
As I have said from the outset, I have tried to be measured. I hope he has listened, although I do not have much confidence he has, but all is not rosy. I commend the members of the Northern Territory Police Force. They have a very difficult job to do, and much more to be done, but do not for think that the CLP, or indeed Territorians, are going to swallow the spin of this government hook, line and sinker.
Mr McADAM (Barkly): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I support of the police minister’s statement. There can be no doubt that significant progress has been made, and much has been achieved, through the minister’s commitment, and the professional management and diligence of the Commissioner, Mr White, and all other people associated with the NT Police Force.
Members are aware that I live in a small community, and represent even smaller communities that are, in a lot of cases, isolated and very remote. Unfortunately, most of the service providers in those communities are under the microscope and subjected to scrutiny on almost a 24-hour basis. I am referring here to nurses, teachers and other service providers, but none to the same extent as it is with the NT Police Force.
Most of the police live in residences that are next door to the police stations on the respective communities. They are handling difficult situations on a daily basis, many arising out of excessive grog abuse. They are apprehending people, dealing with domestic violence, attending road accidents, plus doing mundane tasks such as registering motor vehicles. Sometimes we underestimate their role in small communities. Police officers have to liaise and consult with community councils and organisations and be involved with Night Patrols in a many cases. Quite apart from the operational components they are required to carry out, they often have a community role. They are consulting, and performing roles probably beyond the expectations of similar type professions in those communities. I mention this, as we should never underestimate their contribution. To police officers who reside in remote isolated communities: thank you very much, and thanks also to your partners.
In places like Tennant Creek, particularly over the last few months, sometimes there are some of us who are, perhaps, all too ready to criticise the performance of the police, without fully appreciating the intricacies and complex nature of their jobs. Unfortunately, this has occurred. I am not being critical of those people who are making these comments, but I am saying to them: be constructive, be prepared to listen, and accept that on occasion things might not always work out, but always be prepared to work matters through. In many cases, there will be successful outcomes, as there has been in our community over the last few months. I am not being critical at all; I am trying to be real and say to those people, do not use the police for your own agendas. Hopefully, that message will get across.
I want to speak about matters in my electorate regarding policing operations. Of course, most people will be aware that many communities are fairly isolated. At Ali Curung we have Sergeant Stewart Baum, along with Constable Steven Nalder and ACPO Gwen Brown. This is a community where the police get involved in a wide range of issues. They interact very well with the community, with people like Marjorie Limbiari and others, and perhaps this is why there has been a significant decrease in crime and antisocial behaviour over the years. The police are part of the community. They have gained the confidence of the community and vice versa. That is how it should operate in all bush communities.
The same applies to Borroloola, where we have Sergeant Donald Garner, Constable Louis Mahony, Constable Warwick Hulm and ACPO Noel Dixon. People may not be aware - although I have spoken about it previously in this House – that Don Garner played a key role in the community in attempting to alleviate some of the problems associated with excessive alcohol abuse, and negotiated a reasonably successful outcome in regards to a trial period. Again, that is just an example of the role they play.
At Elliott, we have a Constable Lukas Nickson, Constable Amanda Hardy and ACPO Mr Harold Daly Water. Members may have read in the NT News some months ago that there had been very few crime-related matters in Elliott. That is in no small part due to the role ACPO Mr Harold Daly Water plays and, of course, the local police.
I want to pay tribute to a number of people in Tennant Creek who have worked extremely hard over a very long period of time in attempting to address issues in our community, in particular, Senior Sergeant Chris Smith. Chris is the Officer-in-Charge and attends all the Barkly Regional Safer Community strategy meetings. He meets with the local businesses in town to discuss police-related issues that impact on Tennant Creek, and is involved in community activities such as umpiring football. He has noticed a significant difference in the behaviour of people at the footy and that their respect for officials and umpires has improved markedly. There is no doubt that this is due to the role that the community and the police play in community activities, and football is an integral part of that.
Sergeant Richard Martin has acted as Officer-in-Charge when Senior Sergeant Chris Smith is on leave. Richard has his own commitment to community policing and also interacts with the community. He is freely available to attend meetings and both men are examples of how police officers operate in these smaller places.
I also pay tribute to the seven ACPOs in Tennant Creek: Senior ACPO Denise Goddard, Senior ACPO Lex Holt, ACPO Jarrod Williams, ACPO Sarah Butcher, Senior ACPO Baden Alley, ACPO Anthony Ah Kit and ACPO Danielle Carter, who I understand graduated as dux of her class. These ACPOs play a key role, and it has been very noticeable that, since their number increased, there is a more proactive community policing strategy. ACPOs are now walking the main street, Paterson Street, and policing some of the hot spots around town. There is a high level of respect, particularly from the indigenous community, for the ACPOs, many of whom come from Tennant Creek or from surrounding communities. There is no doubt that it does provide a degree of self-esteem and respect which perhaps was lacking in the past.
I also acknowledge Senior Constable Mick Adams who is resigning from the police force after 22 years. On behalf of the community in Tennant Creek and people across the Barkly, thank you very much for your contribution. We wish you, your wife Sue, and family, all the very best in the future.
Over the last few months I have had the opportunity to meet with the police regarding a whole range of matters and also to discuss them with the minister for police. I pay tribute to the minister for his quick response, and also to officers of the NT Police Force. I refer to Assistant Commissioner Mark Payne, Superintendent Bruce Porter and Commander Gary Manison from Alice Springs. Some of the issues have been a bone of contention in Tennant Creek, but it is again indicative that if you sit down as a community with all the different players and you develop strategies, more often than not you can come up with solutions which assist the total community.
One issue has been the transfer of prisoners, or people who are held in cells overnight in Tennant Creek, to Alice Springs. The main point is that the halfway mark is Barrow Creek. Two police officers accompany the prisoner from Tennant Creek to Barrow Creek, and are met by two officers from Alice Springs who accompany the prisoner to there. This means something like 16 to 18 hours out of the police officers’ time. We had discussions of how it can be best addressed. In part, the minister has done so with the Pilatus plane, which I understand is to be purchased quite quickly, and can be used for the transfer of prisoners - not on all occasions, but there will be capacity for that to occur.
Another issue discussed is that when the court sits in Tennant Creek - and sometimes this is for two to three days - police officers and ACPOs are tied up for that period. It could be argued that they could be more effectively utilised in the community. Assistant Commissioner Payne is going to look at this. Perhaps one of the options, subject to further discussions, is for that work to be outsourced to a private security firm or some other provider. As I understand it, it is part of the compliance that there must be at least two police officers present when people are in the cells. This issue is subject to further discussion, but there is potential for people other than police officers undertaking that role. One of the options we discussed was developing an accredited training program incorporating elements such as first aid, radio communications and a whole host of others, so that trained people could be called in as required to provide that service.
These have been some of the issues discussed at a local level within our community, but they are indicative of how the community and the police work together to overcome some of the problems.
It is pleasing that there is now provision for a pursuit vehicle to travel from Alice Springs to Tennant Creek. I understand it will be on a weekly basis for a period of three to four days. They will be stopping in at places such as Ti Tree, Ali Curung and other communities to speak to members. It will also provide a focus on the roads and Stuart Highway, with the increasing number of tourists. They will also watch for traffic infringements, such as people who may be driving under the influence. However, just the presence of the police car will act as a deterrent. In Tennant Creek, on an as-required basis, those people will be involved with breath-testing, as well as the local police officers.
These are the changes in Tennant Creek that have been brought about by the community and the police working together. This is enhanced by the commitment of the Martin Labor government, as demonstrated by the additional $75m for the provision of better resources and services. This is reflected in police officers in my region getting improved accommodation. My understanding is that there will be up to nine dwellings in Tennant Creek and Elliott that will be upgraded, and that will certainly provide a quality of life that perhaps was not there in the past. Other speakers have spoken about the need to have appropriate accommodation for police officers, particularly those with partners and small children.
The final issue - again, it is something that we talk about at a local level with the police and the community - is the Barkly Region Safer Community strategy, and the new Tennant Creek Economic Development Committee, which incorporates all the businesses. It is the group people will relate to, replacing the old Tennant Creek Concerned Businesses Committee. One thing Assistant Commissioner Payne has spoken about is a model, which I understand operates in Ontario, described as community policing. There is no doubt that community policing occurs right across the Territory, and particularly in Tennant Creek, as I have mentioned with BRSC, and also the Tennant Creek Economic Development Committee.
I wait with interest the initiative discussed by Assistant Commissioner Payne. My understanding is that it is an enhanced model of what we do already. It is described as ‘customised policing’ where, effectively, in the Barkly we would have a look at the special circumstances that relate to the community socially and demographically. What you are trying to do is customise the police force to meet the demands of a particular region. This is very much in the early stages, but it is worth looking at.
As local member, you always aspire to achieve things in your electorate. On my part, I honestly believe one of the biggest challenges is how to decrease the high level of domestic violence, assaults, etcetera. We have already seen a decrease in property-type offences and break-ins, but the challenge is how do you achieve an outcome which is going to improve the quality of life for all people across the community? I believe it is something that can be achieved by working together and for that reason I am pretty passionate about this customised policing model.
In conclusion, I congratulate the minister for police for his commitment and dedication. I pay tribute to the Martin Labor government for their concerted and concentrated response to many of the issues that we face. Last, but by no means least, to Commissioner White and to all the police officers throughout the Northern Territory, thank you very much for your commitment and dedication.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I reiterate many of the comments made by the member for Barkly, as they also apply to Katherine. Being a regional community, much of what he said in relation to the role of the police, domestic violence and housing, relate to Katherine as well.
I congratulate the police in Katherine. They have a great amount of diversity in their job. I do not know any other vocation that has such a huge diversity to deal with, and I commend them for the great work they do. The issues that they have to deal with in Katherine are very similar to those in Tennant Creek, involving a lot of distance and a lot of time, and the police do a great job. Unfortunately, I have had to call them on many occasions in the last 10 years, particularly when I was involved with Red Gum Tourist Park. Most of the matters involved vandalism or break and entry. The police were always very diligent. They attended very promptly and, even though I did not want them getting me out of bed at midnight or 2 am, they did their job extremely well.
I am not sure what the situation is like in Alice Springs and Darwin, but in Katherine it is an issue that police housing is not of the highest standard. Whilst doorknocking, I met several police wives who, while not complaining about the housing in general, did have some complaints. One example was a woman living in a high-level house in Katherine East, who had four children under six in a three-bedroom house. She was not complaining about the number of bedrooms, as the children were young, but she did find having only one airconditioner, which was in the main living area, quite challenging. She was told that they had to provide their own airconditioners for the bedroom. As you know, Katherine is no different to Darwin and it gets very hot and humid at night and you need to have a good night’s sleep to face the next day. She was not making a big issue of this, but it obviously was a problem. When she made inquiries about having airconditioning installed, she was told no, sorry it was not part of the parcel. This obviously applies to other police housing as well. We need to make sure that we have happy families at home, so we have happy policemen in the communities as well.
Another matter that is really important in Katherine is the community policing, or the foot patrols. I believe they can be manned by community police in Katherine and, while they are doing something in that area, it can go much further. This may not apply to other electorates, but it certainly does to mine. One of main issues in Katherine is the main street, and this is not the first time I have talked about this in the House. The visual impact of Katherine is extremely important to the tourists and also to the locals. The CBD is one street mainly, and you need to have pleasant surroundings to go about your business, and also to run your business, but there have been times when it has been less than desirable for us to want to be anywhere near the main street. Despite the fact that we have community patrols and the Harmony Programs working in Katherine, we still have the issue of unacceptable behaviour in the main street, and the surrounding streets, Railway Terrace and First Street.
While this is not purely the role of police as they have far more important issues to be taking care of, I do believe there should be auxiliary police or community patrols manning these areas, especially until the liquor outlets are closed. It is a huge issue. I know I keep harping on it when I come in here, but it is an absolutely huge issue for Katherine and Tennant Creek, as the member for Barkly has just said. To a lesser degree, it is also an issue for Alice Springs and Darwin, and probably other areas throughout the Territory. We need to address this as it has a huge economic impact on Katherine, for a start. People just do not want to be in our main street. I have practically beaten my head against the wall for about seven years about this area now, saying that we have to do something about it. Some of the things I have addressed in the last few days, and which I have been talking about for several months, I intend to pursue in the line of zero tolerance for public drunkenness, etcetera. I reiterate that I do not expect the Northern Territory Police to deal with this issue, but I would like to see it addressed as a policing role for community police.
Domestic violence and sexual assaults are a huge worry, and they certainly have not decreased in Katherine as they have not in other areas. I am like the member for Barkly: what the hell do we do about it? I have had to make two phone calls to police in the last three months to come to domestic violence incidents in my own street. It is not pleasant for me to hear, let alone other families living in homes nearby that have children, and it is quite distressing that people have to live in such an environment. I know that all of us in this House would be happy to work with each other to ensure that the domestic violence figures are reduced and strategies put in place to deal with them. I do not think any of us have the finite answer. If we did, we would not be sitting here discussing the level of violence that we are still experiencing.
The member for Barkly also mentioned the positive effects that police presence has in ensuring football games in Tennant Creek are incident free and a lot friendlier. I am pleased to report that this year, the Katherine AFL association, which I am proud to be patron of but had nothing to do with this decision, decided all AFL games would be alcohol-free. I applauded that decision and gave them a great pat on the back for having the initiative to do that. It has made the games a family event and they are a pleasure to attend. When I am in Katherine I take absolute enjoyment in watching the AFL, but I am not in tune with all of those other games that the Northern Territory people seem to follow. I am still southern-oriented with AFL which I understand and enjoy. It has also meant that the police have a lot less work to do on Friday and Saturday nights around the football games, and I am very pleased to say that the initiative is working very successfully.
I will always applaud and support more funding and more initiatives in the police area. I would like to see more done in the area of domestic violence and am very happy to work with government to try to get some strategies in place to deal with such serious issues as sexual assault and domestic violence. I support the police minister’s statement, and look forward to seeing especially domestic violence figures reduced in the next report.
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I welcome this update on Building Our Police Force, and congratulate our police minister for continuing to keep parliament and the public well informed of progress. The issue of law and order consumed much of my early months as the member for Karama, with consistent complaints from residents about crime incidences at their homes or in the community around the shopping centres, and the inability of police to respond appropriately.
Today it is very different. We happily live, work and play under a new era of law and order, where there are sufficient police to not only respond to any crime incidences, but the police resources applied by the Martin Labor government ensure police can be strategic with their policing to prevent and, therefore, dramatically reduce crime.
How does this translate to Karama and Malak? Our suburbs sit within the Casuarina police area, in very close proximity to the Peter McAulay Centre at Berrimah. With 109 extra police available for operations throughout the Territory, we benefit enormously from an extra 21 police being operational at Casuarina Police Station.
The extremely popular bicycle patrols are now regularly patrolling our streets and shopping centres; a terrific, proactive policing tool that the community has embraced and, I believe, is showing dividends through reduced crime rates.
We are seeing more foot patrols through the shopping centres. What a great initiative of the Martin Labor government to have daily patrols at Casuarina Shopping Centre. So many of us shop there as the major retail hub in the northern suburbs. It is a much safer shopping centre than it was a few years ago. Gone is the constant harassment and concerns about safety in the car park, which was a regular feature under the CLP era of neglect.
I was delighted to visit the new mounted patrol facility at the Peter McAulay Centre, something I argued for as a candidate and continue to support as a member. This new, purpose-built $600 000 facility allows the mounted patrol to be far more effective, with greater regularity of patrols. Previously, they had suffered through years of neglect with a run-down demountable and disgusting stables near Berrimah Prison. I visited this run-down facility under the CLP regime and was shocked by the conditions the then police minister, now retired, was prepared to have staff work in, to say nothing of the physical danger the stables presented to the horses.
I congratulate the Martin Labor government for funding the new mounted patrol facility and locating it in the Peter McAulay Centre. We recognised the need to adequately resource mounted police and responded. As a result, we are all getting used to seeing the mounted patrols as a feature of our markets, in the CBD and the suburbs, where they are very welcome. They are a terrific deterrent and part of our government’s emphasis on proactive policing patrols that are an effective crime prevention mechanism.
Clearly, there has been a resurgence in community confidence in our police brought about by the increased visibility of police and, importantly, their increased capacity to respond to incidents of crime. Recognition of the community’s desire to work with police in my electorate has been the resurgence of Neighbourhood Watch. We now have two active branches in Karama and Malak. Karama has held two Community Fun Days and created the Territory’s first Neighbourhood Watch Fun Day last year. This has been adopted by other Neighbourhood Watch branches because of its success. Malak is busy working on assessing plans for the beautification of Malak Shopping Centre, an area that in the past has been recognised as a hot spot for hoons and vandals. Again, this is proactive work with the able support and encouragement of police.
I want to single out for praise some members of the police force who have worked closely with me, as the local member, and our Neighbourhood Watch branches to improve community safety. Successive officers in charge of Casuarina station have been fantastic in their willingness to receive information about incidents, and follow-up in an operational sense. Officers Mark Coffey, Des Smith, Murray Taylor and currently Mick Read have all been highly professional and thorough, aware of the community’s needs, operational imperatives, and the resources of their staff. Working with these officers has ensured an identification of hot spots and a focus on recidivist behaviour.
In addition, we have enjoyed enormous support from Neighbourhood Watch police. I know Rod Strong has retired, and I wish him all the best after a long and distinguished career in the force. He set Karama on a healthy path and has been very willing to pass on his crime prevention through environmental design expertise, which we have appreciated. We have been working extremely closely with Senior Constable Geoff Pickering, who has been a pillar of strength and support for both Karama and Malak Neighbourhood Watch.
Neighbourhood Watch meetings are a great forum for the passage of information to police about criminal activity patterns in an area, for example, hoons at the Malak shops car park late at night. This information is used by police to inform patrols. In exchange, police provide a crime report which details all reported crime in the past month. These have shown an impressive downward trend in crime to an average of four break and enter offences and about one motor vehicle theft per month in these suburbs – hardly the crime centres that ill-informed commentators would have us believe.
It was amazing to hear one police officer say recently that a decade ago they would turn up on shift and deal with an average of 100 break and enters a week, and now they are averaging less than a handful. The officer indicated there had been something like a 257% decrease in property crime in the past decade - what a phenomenal reduction. Much of this, the officer believes, is a result of increased police resources, and intelligence-led policing introduced by Commissioner White. Much praise needs to go to Commissioner White who came to the Territory and implemented fundamental reforms in the nature of policing which, coupled with the resources provided by this government, have brought real dividends in crime reduction.
My hearty congratulations goes to our Cabinet, which had the strength to commission the O’Sullivan independent review of police, and to sign up to its recommendations by committing some $75m to police resourcing. I thank Commissioner White for his expertise and strength of professionalism to pursue important policing reforms. I also thank our hard-working police officers who have stuck it out through the lean times of under-resourcing, and are putting their all into a much rejuvenated force, teaching our new recruits the nature of policing in the Territory. I thank the men and women of the Territory who have rallied to our call to join the force and serve our community - no easy task to undertake and constant daily challenges. As a former shift worker, I know the personal toll it can take, coupled with the sometimes aggressive force they meet, and the distressing incidents they attend. Police work is a very tough job, requiring tremendous passion and dedication. Thank you to our officers who give it their all to provide our safe community.
I also thank the residents of Karama and Malak, who have stepped up to the mark and are working with me and the police to strengthen our safer community and restore our ability to move through our streets and shopping centres with a feeling of greater safety. We no longer live bunkered down in high security wondering when our home will be broken into. Our shopping centres have returned to the more peaceful and family friendly environments they were years ago. Our parks are again sites for children playing, and residents walking through, instead of antisocial behaviour that we all went out of our way to avoid.
We cannot become complacent; we need to continue to provide information to police. Reporting suspicious behaviour and nuisance crimes do work to establish hot spot policing. Staying vigilant and supportive of crime preventative measures is important. Improving the numbers of police, and improving the working conditions for police, is critical to a continued strengthening of the force. I commit myself to supporting our police and their minister in their tremendous endeavours to build a safer Territory. I commend this statement to the House.
Ms CARTER (Port Darwin): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I welcome the minister’s statement. It is always good to hear how the police are progressing in their efforts to address crime in the Northern Territory. I congratulate our police force. They have certainly developed over the years, and we all know that they are held in very high esteem in our community. It is great to see that situation is continuing.
I want to inform the House of some of the experiences I have had with regards to our great police force since I became a member of parliament. Very early on, I was called to a lady’s house in Larrakeyah, which overlooks the golf course. She was quite distressed because of the smell in the house and, as I walked through, I could smell the smell of death. It was quite concerning to both of us. The smell was coming from the escarpment underneath the house, between it and the golf course. Once I realised this, I decided not to investigate further because of what I might find, and instead phoned the police. They said they would be there to investigate in due course, and would get back to me.
About half-an-hour after I left the house, the police phoned to say that they had found the cause of the very strong smell around the house. It was, in fact, a large goanna that had died. The police did the right thing and buried it, which solved the problem. That is an example of the great service that we get from our police.
More recently, the alarm went off in my office. I had no idea this had happened until, all of a sudden, a rather excited young policeman on his motorbike screamed up to my front door. He had timed himself, and it was quite a spectacular time that he had achieved to get from Fannie Bay to my office in Larrakeyah. It is another example of a great response from the police in the work they do.
On the news tonight there was a story about the hit and run that tragically occurred on the Stuart Highway at Parap a few nights ago. The story said that the police are looking for every one of the several thousand Toyota Hilux utilities in the Territory to find, from the description given to them about the person who drove away from the hit and run, the vehicle involved. They are searching for it, and have already tracked down, and inspected, about 600 vehicles. This is the perseverance we can expect, and we congratulate our police force for their perseverance. I have no doubt that, in due course, the police will locate the person responsible for that despicable act, and we will all be able to congratulate our police for the perseverance they have shown.
Some months ago, I had the pleasure of touring the new police facilities in the Mitchell Street Centre, where I was accorded a very warm welcome and had a great tour. It was really interesting to see the way it is set out. I hope the cells are rarely filled because they are very large and, if ever required, many people could be kept there. It is, obviously, a great facility to have in the middle of the CBD. Not having to travel all the way to Berrimah, as they did only a short time ago, to process someone who has been arrested, will help our police be more efficient. It is great to see those premises right in the heart of the CBD.
It is wonderful to see in the CBD from time to time - usually on a Friday or Saturday night - the horse patrols; it is great to see those officers on their beautiful horses. More than anything, it gives people a sense of joy to see horses under great control, presented beautifully, in the midst of a city setting. It is rare to find someone who does not admire horses, and it is wonderful to see the police officers on their patrols. We know they are well trained but I would expect, and hope, that it would be very rare for police officers to have to use their horses in the Northern Territory in the riot and public control way for which they have been trained. However, should they be called upon, they will be ready and able to respond accordingly, and it gives us a sense of security to know they are there. I am sure it is part of the ongoing training that the horses and officers need to be comfortable amongst traffic in a city setting. As the night progresses into the wee small hours, the horses and their riders are probably subjected to the challenging interjections of inebriated people in the CBD. That too, I guess, is part of desensitising the animals and their riders to some of the reasonably harmless behaviour that some inebriated people may display from time to time.
In my electorate of Port Darwin, there really is only one major problem that I want to comment on. We do have some problems with break and enters, traffic and hooning and, from time to time, unfortunate problems with violence. This probably comes from the fact that we are the playground of Darwin with regards to our licensed premises. However, the biggest problem that we face in the CBD of an ongoing nature is what we term antisocial behaviour. Obviously, I am referring to the behaviour of people who are under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and the way their behaviour impacts upon the good citizens of the Northern Territory, and our visitors, as we go about our business.
The police are often the last line of defence for us in regards to antisocial behaviour. I am sure they get very frustrated and despondent having to intervene, day after day, week after week, month after month, in antisocial behavioural matters. They probably have to deal with the same people day after day, week after week, month after month. When I worked as a nurse in the casualty department at the Royal Darwin Hospital, I noticed that after a period of time, I became very intolerant of the behaviour of drunks. I got sick to death of it and it was one of the reasons why I moved into the wards. I do feel for the police when they are the ones who are expected to deal with what is really the end result of people who are despairing in life, people who feel there is nothing much for them, and as a consequence become habitual drunks.
The issue of drinking within 2 km of a licensed premise needs to be dealt with in the short term, as we will be driven crazy if we have to wait for a long-term solution. I suspect that this problem will go on for decades. The police get stuck with it, and they have to tip out the alcohol. I am sure this is a very tedious, difficult, depressing job, but I encourage the police to do it. Anyone who walks down Darwin mall right now will probably find people drinking alcohol in public, and ask themselves: ‘Where are the police? Why aren’t they coming through regularly and tipping out this alcohol? It is a yellow liquid sitting in the bottom of a Coke bottle, and it is very obvious what it is. For goodness sake, can’t somebody tip it out?’ There may be other ways. Perhaps it does not have to be the police who have to do this tipping out all the time. Another group, or agency, could be given the power to enforce the 2 km. This would release our poor police from having to do this rather tedious and unpleasant job. However, it really does work.
A year or two ago, I visited Cairns and met with their Mayor, Kevin Byrne, and the Cairns City Council. Kevin, who is still mayor, made a decision to have a zero tolerance policy in regards to drinking in public, which is something the member for Katherine mentioned earlier. The effect has been spectacular. When I met with the mayor I said to him: ‘Kevin, I do not know what you are doing in this town, but I have not been harassed by drunks once’. I looked like a tourist. I am of an age that people who are drunk like to approach. I have grey hair and the drunks do like to pick on middle-aged women in particular as they think we are a soft touch for $5. In Cairns, I did not get harassed once by anybody. This was due to the effort made, particularly by the Cairns City Council workers, to encourage people drinking in public to clear out of the public areas where tourists visit.
I encourage police to continue tipping out alcohol. If public drunkenness is allowed to continue in urban settings, the end result will be that tourists stay for shorter periods, and tourism is the lifeblood of the Northern Territory. If we are not looking after our visitors, if they do not enjoy themselves and stay as long as possible, we are diminishing the benefits that tourism brings to our community.
Many people living in my electorate despair of public drunkenness. As these constituents age, they start to think about what they are going to do and whether they will stay in Darwin. They feel the situation is getting worse, although, as the member for Araluen said, there are no statistics on this and it is very hard for us to measure antisocial behaviour at this stage. The feeling in my electorate is that it is getting worse and people are deciding at a distressing rate to retire interstate. It is my hope that the government, and the police, continue to enhance efforts to tackle antisocial behaviour.
Two years ago, a community group held a public meeting at the Mirambeena Tourist Resort to discuss antisocial behaviour in the CBD. Around 40 people attended and the result was that, after lobbying by me and the community group, the Martin Labor government introduced street patrols in CBD. They definitely had an effect and we welcomed that. However, their frequency has diminished significantly since then, and it is uncommon to see police officers on patrol, particularly at night. I urge the minister and the government to reconsider the rate at which we have foot patrols within the Darwin CBD because, once again, that has an effect on antisocial behaviour.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I congratulate the minister on his statement and I congratulate the police force. I wish them all the very best. However, my message is that antisocial behaviour needs to be tackled so tourists and locals can live in peace in the Northern Territory.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I congratulate the minister on his statement. It is a good statement. It covers a wide range of issues and highlights some of the problems as well as some of the improvements we have in our police force. The statement gives us an opportunity to praise our police. They have a difficult job, and come under a fair amount of scrutiny. Law and order is always a hot political potato, particularly around election time, and they are drawn into that whether they like it or not.
Our police do a wonderful job. There are times when I might not always agree with their policies on certain matters - and I will raise a couple of those issues - but they do a great job. It is good to see police numbers have increased. This will help the rural area to have a station at Humpty Doo which is staffed during the day, and a fire station to go with it. I believe there should also be a permanent ambulance service with a training area for St John cadets and hope this is not far away.
I congratulate the government on fulfilling its election promise to have a police and fire station at Humpty Doo. There has been some criticism in the newspaper that it is a waste of time, but I do not agree. Businesses over the last few years have been concerned about the level of crime, and I am the first to say that it is relatively low in the rural area. However, that is no an excuse for not having a police force. We want to keep it that way and there has been serious crime in the rural area. People who have read the headlines recently will know what I mean. The police are not there just for crime. They also have to attend car accidents, which are one of the difficult sides of life. Where they are placed now on the Arnhem Highway, allows them to patrol as far as the Bark Hut area and also the Noonamah, Berry Springs, Acacia areas.
People forget that police are part of the community. It is very important that they are recognised for who they are and people get to know them. Having a police station helps build a community; it is not a negative. The only people who are scared of the police are those who do not do the right thing. I believe the community as a whole will welcome the new police and fire facility to our rural area.
I appreciated the minister’s invitation to attend the turning of the first sod, but it has to be reported that the sod was already dug. There are all sorts of tricks with cameras these days, and what really happened was that the minister turned over a pre-sodded piece of ground pretending he was turning the sod. However, it was a very good day and I was particularly pleased the fire volunteers came along. There have been some issues concerning them recently and I am unsure if they have been resolved, but it was good for them to see the minister and people who are in the hierarchy of the police force and the fire service.
Because we may not see them often, we tend to forget school constables. There is a very good one at Taminmin High, which receives bad publicity at times, but is a great school. It has improved out of hand and the negative publicity does annoy me ...
Mr Bonson: I have played wheelchair basketball out there.
Mr WOOD: Have you? I know about playing basketball there. I was nearly in a wheelchair; it almost killed me. However, that is another issue.
The police constable at Taminmin, Karen O’Dwyer, does a marvellous job. She also works at some of the primary schools in the area and is a credit to the police force. Karen has helped me with other issues not necessarily related to the school. People have to realise that they are still police officers and will help with other matters in the community. This reflects that school constables are working in the community for the benefit of everyone, and should be recognised for the great work they do. It is not easy work. I imagine a school constable deals with anything from counselling to criminal matters and all types of other issues, some of which might not be called ‘strictly police matters’. She is out there dealing with those issues and that is great.
An area which needs attention is dog control. A common complain is that when you ring the police and say that the dog next door has killed half a dozen chooks, or has just chased your daughter off her bike, you are told: ‘Do not ring us, ring the Litchfield Shire Council’. The problem is that the Litchfield Shire Council does not have dog by-laws. In fact it has no by-laws – period. Therefore, it is no good for the police to tell people to ring the council. Maybe they are doing it to put some pressure on council to introduce by-laws.
The police do have the power to control dogs and I ask them to perform that duty when they can. That is not saying that if there is a murder, a car accident, or some other more serious incident they attend to a barking dog first, but they should do so when there is the opportunity. Sometimes dog control can be a serious matter. For example, if someone gets bitten, the police have power under the Summary Offences Act to take the dog, or even shoot it. They have more power than the council, because council would need to obtain a warrant before it attempted to do anything like that to a dog in the rural area. There are times when the police cannot use the council as an excuse for not carrying out that task. It is not a pleasant, I understand that; but who else do you go to? If you have tried to negotiate with the person who owns the vicious dog – and neighbours should try to resolve the issue first – without success, then sometimes the police are the only option. It is an area that needs to be looked at.
Parliament has passed legislation which allows for the confiscation of the vehicles involved in hooning offences. According to the newspaper there have been a number of these offences, and I am interested to know if any have progressed to the stage where the new penalties have been used, as that is the reason that we brought it in.
Another area I want to raise is the number of Aboriginal people in the police force. I am not talking about ACPOs. I would like to see them as, you might say, full police, and this is what we should be aiming for. Someone said to me recently that sometimes there is disparity in the way a non-indigenous domestic violence case might be handled, as against indigenous domestic violence, or there might be a reluctance to worry about someone in the gutter outside Raintree Park, rather than someone who is belting up somebody in the northern suburbs. I understand there may be some issues there, but one of the ways to solve these is to have more fully-qualified Aboriginal police officers. We need to move from having them as mainly ACPOs, which are a great idea, but we have to ensure there is a fair percentage of Aboriginal police officers.
It is nice to see an Aboriginal person in uniform; it gives you a sense of pride. It is good to see somebody walking around the footy field, smart, well dressed, and looking as if they have pride in their job. That is great and the more Aboriginal people we can have, the better. People talk about the percentage of Aboriginal people in our community, but I am not saying that, necessarily, we need that percentage in our police force. You may ask what the relationship is. It is that, if you have that many Aboriginal people in our community, it would be great to see a similar percentage in our police force. That is an area I know members of the police force would be working on, so let us encourage and promote Aboriginal people in our police force as it is a great form of employment. Being a police officer is a vocation in life to some extent. You have to love it to stay in it.
I want to thank some of the police in the higher echelons. Sometimes, I have difficult issues to deal with and I am not sure which way to go and need some legal advice, or knowledge of the law. On occasions I have phoned Deputy Commissioner Bruce Wernham for advice, or spoken to someone else if he has been unavailable. It is good to know that you can get some straight-out advice which can be passed on to the constituent and their problems solved. Perhaps not totally solved, but you can help people quickly. Some issues may need more involvement from the police; but some can be fixed with a simple phone call. I want to thank the police who give me good advice which I can pass on to my constituents. That relationship is important.
I hope one would not be blamed for saying it, or would not be accused of using it for political purposes. I do not at any time believe it is proper practice for anyone to use police for their political advantage. However, if a constituent phones with a genuine problem, I find that is what you should do. If the advice can be passed on and a result achieved, it is a benefit for the community and I want to thank the police for that.
Minister, thank you for your statement. The police do sometimes come in for a bit of a barrage, especially when law and order debates come into place. There will always be some issues that we have to look at, but overall they do a fine job. I like our men in khaki, by the way, and hope you do not change that colour.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I contribute to the Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services’ statement A New Era in Territory Policing and his update on the implementation on the $75m Building our Police Force plan and other police initiatives.
The core of this statement and any of the issues we look at in the future to deal with law and order matters should be based around extra police on the beat. I am very proud to be part of a government that guarantees it will put an extra 200 police on the beat. The minister in his statement said:
- A government can have all the best intentions and pass all the laws it likes, but the effectiveness of these laws largely comes down to the capacity to properly resource them in terms of police strength. Passing a law is the easy part. You need police on the beat to enforce the law and keep a strong presence in the community’
Residents of the Millner electorate, which includes the suburbs of Millner, Ludmilla, Coconut Grove and the RAAF Base, will be happy to hear that this government recognises a strong police force requires strong numbers.
Why have we put $25m into the plan to build a better NT police force? As the minister said in his statement, members will recall that the O’Sullivan Report identified the reasons for high levels of attrition as being the impact over a decade of under-funding and stretched resources, the standards of police housing in some centres, targeted recruitment of the Northern Territory talent and highly skilled police by other states, and officers returning to their interstate home towns.
The Police, Fire and Emergency Services Minister, in conjunction with the police force, has put out three fantastic brochures which give an update. The first one gives a plan and an outline of what we intend to do. The brochure says:
- $75m Building our Police Force Plan
doubling the number of constables entering the NT Police Force;
more Territorians recruited to the NT Police Force;
more police back to core police duties;
more police patrols;
more than 80 extra civilian support staff to get police back on the beat;
improved living and working conditions to keep our experienced police in the Territory.
These measures are aimed at creating:
safer Territory communities;
more police on the street;
faster police response times;
improved service for Territorians.
This is a fantastic initiative. The brochure goes into the key findings of the O’Sullivan Report supporting the reasons why we have made this huge investment. One of the factors was the shortage of staff due to underfunding and in particular, the recruitment freeze between 1991 and 1994 which left the NT Police with a shortage of experienced sergeants. We cannot underestimate the fact that this minister, with Cabinet, caucus, and the Martin Labor government, has decided we are going to commit monies over many years to improve our Police Force to ensure we have a safer community to live in, and that law and order issues are handled with utmost priority.
The second report, February 2004, Update No 1, addresses hitting hot spots. This is one of the big factors of why we were able to win government. It was well known that there were a number of drug houses throughout the Northern Territory which had high profiles. One, unfortunately, was in my electorate in the Coconut Grove area, another was known as Foils at Moil, and there was one at Fannie Bay. Many residents knew that these places existed and with our drug laws, we have been able to close these places down.
The reality, unfortunately, is that you will never be able to wipe out drugs. In fact, for as long as this parliament or any other parliament in the history of the human race has made laws, laws have been broken. What we can do, however, is minimise the effect of drugs in the community, and the opportunities for young people and others to access drugs and other contraband. Hopefully, this will result in lower crime rates and also lower the destruction it causes to people either using or dealing with profits of crime from drugs. It is a great result.
Bike patrols are a huge success for anyone, and both sides of parliament recognise that and look forward to their increased numbers and higher profile within the community.
The report also gives the Police Commissioner staffing figures as at 31 July 2003 for officers ranked constables and above. Since the Building Our Police Force plan began last August, there are 10 more officers at Darwin police station, 11 more at Casuarina, 12 more at Palmerston, four more at Alice Springs, six more at Katherine, two extra officers at Tennant Creek, and two extra officers available for duty in the bush. As well, there are 12 additional Aboriginal Community Police Officers on duty, including five in remote stations.
Since August 2003, 60 constables have finished training, including 14 new Aboriginal Community Police Officers, and five new police auxiliaries have started duty. In 2004, 120 constables in five recruit squads will join the NT Police. Taking into account the retirements and resignations, this record rate of recruitment is gradually increasing the number of NT Police.
Producing these pamphlets outlining what the plan is, and reporting on numbers, is a fantastic initiative by this government. It keeps us honest and also future governments, as they have to live up to this type of community reporting.
Update 2 of August 2004, focusses on the recruitment of Territorians. Police and other professions should be recruiting locals because they have an investment in our community, either being long-term Territorians or families in the Northern Territory. I definitely have been promoting to many people the fact that there is a career in police, and it gives great pay, personal challenges and offers professional rewards. The pay and conditions are excellent and we hope to improve those over the coming years.
The brochure also has a report on 109 more police officers. The strength of the NT Police is continuing to build, with 109 extra police available for operations as of June 2004 compared to 30 June 2003. It goes on to say,
- The commissioner’s staffing figures for operational police, that is, excluding police recruits and inoperative members, show that, for this period, there are 17 more police at Darwin Police Station, 21 extra police at Casuarina Police Station, an extra five police at Palmerston Police Station, 11 extra police at Katherine Police Station, four extra police at Tennant Creek Police Station, 11 extra police at Alice Springs Police Station, 17 extra Aboriginal community officers and more officers available for relief in the bush.
The brochure has a great headline, ‘Putting the Bite on Dealers’ and gives details of the new drug dog detection unit. This will be ready soon - my understanding is after Christmas this year - and I know people in remote areas look forward to having the ability to detect drugs entering or leaving their community. This service will also operate at our airports.
I thank the minister for his hard work, and the government for its commitment to address law and order issues. It is a difficult area. You are not always going to be victorious, but people are happy to see police on the beat. Both sides recognise that when you talk about the Police Force, people want to see police on patrol. They want to see them at the football, at Casuarina, down the track, at the local functions and riding their bikes through the suburbs. This has two effects: it makes honest people feel more secure; and criminals less secure. It is a fine balancing act. The police have to enforce the law, but they also have to encourage people to obey the law.
I believe that this quote from the minister’s speech summarises the feelings of everyone in this House:
- The Northern Territory Police have come a long way in 12 months, but there is still a lot of work to be done. I look forward to providing the Assembly with further updates as the $75m plan and other initiatives roll out in months and years ahead.
Mr HENDERSON (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank everyone who has contributed to this statement. There is no doubt that our police force is held in very high regard across the Northern Territory, and it is great to see that high regard reciprocated by elected members of parliament.
I thank the opposition speakers for, in the most part, being constructive and supportive of the statement. The member for Macdonnell, who is also the shadow minister for police and an ex-police officer, does have insight into the police, and some history of police and police resourcing, going back many years. I agree with his comments that, essentially, the first obligation of government is to do whatever it can to ensure a safe community. That was brought home to me very strongly when I had the pleasure of opening the new police station at Kintore, which is in his electorate. In talking to a wide cross-section of the community in Kintore that day, I will never forget the joy within the community in regards to the police station and the staffing that had been allocated to it. The police station had been open for a couple of months when the official opening was held, and the community was a much better place than it was previously. The hugs I received from members of the community, and the thanks that this government received for building the police station, will stay with me as a great joy during my time in this job.
In the specific example I gave in my statement, the health clinic had been closed 73 times the previous year as a result of violent behaviour and drunken people attempting to break-in, trying to get at victims of crime who were being treated. In the two months the police station had been open, the clinic had not been closed once, nor has it been since.
I also talked to the teachers and the principal about how hard it was to recruit and keep teachers at the Kintore School. Predominantly, the reason was that although the teachers had good housing, it was a great school and they enjoyed the job, every few months they would go to Alice Springs for a weekend in the big city, and when they returned their house had been turned over. They could put up with it the first time. The second time was really tough but, the third time, they would say: ‘That is it. I have had enough; I am out of here’. The cost was not only to the kids with an extraordinary turnover of teachers, but also to taxpayer in continual recruitment of teachers to that community - and probably to many other communities across the Northern Territory - was enormous. Since the police station and officers had been there, homes were not being broken into, and kids were going to school because the police on the ground were patrolling the petrol sniffers, driving them out of town, and getting at the sly grog runners. Kids were sleeping at night and going to school the next day. Without the police there, the entire community was dysfunctional to a large degree. Kids were not getting the opportunities they should for a decent education, and women were not safe.
The problem is the capacity of the taxpayer of the Northern Territory to replicate a fully-fledged police station in over 100 communities across the Territory is just not there. Therefore, we have to find other strategic ways to provide on-the-ground law enforcement across the Northern Territory.
The member for Macdonnell said the police force is in a healthy condition and getting healthier. I could not agree more. He spoke about the PROMIS system, which he has been briefing on, and the issue of response times. My understanding as minister for DCIS and Communications, as well as police minister, is that it is not an issue of the PROMIS system and the databases, but it is the whole-of-government network. That comms network is going to tender soon, and I am confident that, as a result, we will have significantly increased bandwidth across the Northern Territory. That is going to improve response times, not only for police, but all other government services. We did put in an additional $1m per year recurrent into upgrading the PROMIS system. The previous government installed the system, but allocated very little money to run it and that issue has been addressed. I talk to police officers across the Northern Territory. Wherever I go, I always visit the police and ask them how PROMIS is going. They say, compared to how it was a couple of years ago, they are very pleased.
We will always have debates in the parliament in regards to crime figures, but there is no doubt in my mind as I travel in the Northern Territory, and as local member, that crime across the Territory has reduced. The Police Commissioner can point to the statistics, ABS can point to the statistics, and you cannot take 6500 burglaries out of any community, let alone a community the size of 200 000 people across the Northern Territory. The fact is that there were 6500 less break-ins during the last 12 months, than the previous 12 months. That is a hell of a lot of grief that is no longer in the community at all.
As local member in Wanguri, I feel that as I go around the electorate. In fact, at the last Neighbourhood Watch meeting in my office, the sergeants at Casuarina police reported that the crime figures for the Wanguri/Leanyer area were the lowest they had been in 10 years, and I am confident they will continue to reduce with the extra resources that we are putting into the police.
The member for Macdonnell made a cute play in regards to the budget commitment for five recruit squads, 120 police officers, this year. Yes, that is what we budgeted for but that was based on calculations, estimations and historical analysis of the recruitment and retention in the Northern Territory Police Force. The commitment was an additional 200 police on the street by the end of 2006. The reality is, as a result of improved morale in the police force, police are not leaving at the rate budgeted for and, if we had not pulled back on that squad, we would have been in the position of having around 80 unfunded police officers at the end of the year. We are still on target to have those 200 extra police out on the street. That is exactly what we are going to do, and we are going to achieve that. The great result of the declining attrition rate has meant that we do not have to recruit at the level that we thought we would. It is good news as opposed to the bad news portrayed by the member for Macdonnell.
I absolutely refute the issue of Docker River. I do not know if the member for Macdonnell is making mischief or he has been badly advised, but at the meeting attended by the local community council, Michelle Roberts, the police minister from Western Australia, and our respective commissioners and I did not leave prior to saying that we would not be building a police station at Docker River. That is a total fabrication and I was at the entire meeting. The fact is, that as a result of the tri-state agreement we have with the police, Western Australia will be building a police station at Warakurna, 100 km west of Docker River, in 2005. There will be a Northern Territory police officer based at Docker River and as a result of that presence, Kintore, increased policing at Yulara, and the $2.5m commitment to a new plane in Central Australia, Docker River will be much better served by our police force than it ever was under the previous government. The member for Macdonnell is just making mischief.
Comments were made regarding the statistics on assaults and sexual assaults. Our statistics come as current figures from the PROMIS system, which are always ahead of the ABS statistics that are printed 12 months behind. Their figures are the historical analysis; our figures are the current analysis out of PROMIS. We are producing those statistics on a regular basis, and the government is not happy that assaults and sexual assaults are not down to the same levels as the property crime statistics. The reality is, we have analysed those figures and unfortunately, as we all know, with the majority of assaults and sexual assaults, alcohol is a contributing factor, and tends to be family or related violence. Until we as a Territory get across some of the grog issues in the Northern Territory, we are unlikely to see those figures decline substantially, although the police are putting additional efforts into those areas. That is why the debate we will have later this year in regards to the Alcohol Framework Review is going to be so important. If we want to see assaults and sexual assaults come down, we have to deal with the grog issues and that is a challenge for the parliament later this year.
The member for Macdonnell talked about police abandoning the streets. What a lot of rubbish! They are more visible in the streets today than they have been for many years. The police are not abandoning the streets. We are going to work on the issues of summary offences and how many people are charged with summary offences. We will go through the previous four years of the last government and see how those statistics stack up. There is no doubt that extra police are doing foot patrols and bicycle patrols. They are very visible and move people on. Possibly, as a result, there are fewer requirements for those charges. Police cannot be everywhere. They cannot be on every street corner. We will deal with those antisocial issues not only through policing activities but also programs such as Community Harmony, the itinerant strategy, and a whole range of other strategies. One thousand people were relocated from Darwin to their communities in the last year, and we have certainly put the effort into that.
The CLP has a history of rhetoric. Who can forget the former Chief Minister, Shane Stone, wanting to monster and stomp on people? We had rhetoric on mandatory sentencing for property crime. You can have all the legislation you like, but unless the police force is there to enforce the law, if the crooks know they ain’t going to get caught, it is on for young and old. The fact that property crime has reduced 30% across the Northern Territory certainly shows this Labor government is very committed to tackling crime in the Northern Territory and are getting results. The CLP has a history of rhetoric and increasing crime rates.
I pay particular tribute and thanks to my colleague the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice. We work very closely as a team in Cabinet on crime prevention issues. The crime prevention and community justice programs across the Northern Territory my colleague is establishing are getting the community involved and taking a level of responsibility which people need to take to put local programs in place, and to work cooperatively with police on the ground to reduce crime in the community.
Recently, my colleague launched the latest crime prevention community group in Alyangula on Groote Eylandt. Again, we worked closely as a team and I commend the Department of Justice and Corrections on the work they are doing. He is correct that this government has an absolute, and resolute, commitment to tackling drug-related crime in the Northern Territory, as well as property crime. That stands in stark contrast to the previous government and Chief Minister who said drug-related crime was ‘minuscule’ in the Northern Territory. It just does not hold water.
The member for Araluen mentioned the Crimes (Victims Assistance) Act decline in dollars available for lawyers. That is another debate, but I can say I recently received correspondence from Sue Lowry, the CEO of VOCAL, the Victims of Crime Assistance League, which gave a huge rap to the work police are doing, the noticeable difference it is making, and improvements in the assistance police give victims of crime and the reduction of crime in the Northern Territory. I thank Sue for that correspondence.
The member for Araluen also gave anecdotal evidence about someone who has a business selling security alarms, trying to correlate the fact that because his business was doing well, crime was going up. That is a very long bow to draw. People pay more attention to security on their own premises. I could make the same analogy that I was talking to Wayne Zerbe - everyone in this House would know Wayne - a couple of weeks ago and he told me about a glazier in Palmerston who said he was losing work hand over fist as a result of the great work the police were doing in the reduction of crime in Palmerston. So, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. We can all come up with anecdotes, but the fact is crime is on the way down.
I pay tribute to the member for Barkly who works very hard and constructively in what is about to become the largest electorate in the Northern Territory with many small communities. He is in regular contact with my office on policing issues. He has a great relationship with police across his electorate and works constructively with them. As he said, he has done some constructive thinking about how we can release police from some of there more administrative and custodial duties so they have more time in the community. We are working through some of those ideas and initiatives that he has proposed recently. I look forward to being in Ali Curung in the next couple of weeks with the member for Barkly to open their new, improved station.
It was good to hear the member for Katherine support the police in Katherine. They are doing a great job. It is a very difficult town to police, but I have spoken to businesses and the hotels and the additional police resources, such as foot patrols in the main street, are making a difference. Of the $2.5m we are allocating to improve police housing, a fair chunk of it is going to Katherine.
When we came to government and with the resourcing that the police had, Karama was certainly a hot spot. I know the member for Karama has been working very hard with the police and with the local Neighbourhood Watch committees in Karama and Malak. She has put her shoulder to the wheel, working with the community and the shopping centre. We can certainly see a big difference as a result of the work of the community, the local member and the police. The initiative the member for Karama kicked off with the Family Fun Day is one that is being replicated across the Northern Territory. It is a great idea. I had one in Leanyer just a couple of weeks ago which was attended by about 400 to 500 people. It was a fantastic day and a great initiative.
The member for Port Darwin spoke about the CBD and, yes, it is Darwin’s program. The horse patrols are very visible. I assure the member for Port Darwin that the police do not ignore the 2 km law. If people are drinking publicly in the CBD, police tip out that grog, and I have seen this happen. As well, City Safe is still operating and patrols in the CBD are increasing. It is incorrect for the local member to say that police are not patrolling the CBD. That is certainly not the case and in fact, patrols are increasing. Recent correspondence I have received from the Australian Hotels Association has been full of praise for the productive, proactive work the police are doing with local licensees, particularly in Mitchell Street. The increased presence that the licensees are seeing, and the police working with security, certainly says to me that they have not abandoned the CBD and there are increasing numbers of patrols.
Member for Nelson, yes, you will get an invitation to the opening of the shining new police station at Humpty Doo. It was an election commitment. We are going to do it, and it will be a great facility for people in the rural area. I thank the member for Millner for his contribution. He has been very proactive in working with the Bagot Community in his electorate to get a better relationship between Aboriginal Community Police Officers and the Bagot Community.
I will finish on a quote from the member for Millner that essentially says it all:
- Seeing Police out on the beat … makes honest people feel more secure and criminals less secure.
That is absolutely the intent of government policy.
I say again, my thanks to the Police Commissioner, Paul White, and all the men and women who serve the best police force in Australia and who are doing a great job.
Motion agreed to, statement noted.
ADJOURNMENT
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Sadly, I inform the House that former Royal Darwin Hospital specialist surgeon, Professor Ian O’Rourke, passed away at his home in Sydney on Monday 16 August 2004. Professor O’Rourke who only turned 60 in December last year, was diagnosed a little more than a year ago with a very aggressive form of lung cancer and was expected to live only a few months. Until that time, he had been remarkably fit and healthy, impressing all with his energy and enthusiasm for mountain bike cycling.
I am advised that Professor O’Rourke continued to work in Sydney until a few weeks ago. It would not be improper for me to inform the House that the only reason he did not continue to work even further, was that his wife Trish finally, ‘… put her foot down’ and forbade him to ‘… go to the office with a drip stand and a catheter’. When told only a few weeks ago that the cancer had spread from his lungs to his brain, while jointly examining the scans, he informed his treating doctor, in a characteristically humorous manner that there was, ‘… little to worry about because the lesions were only small’.
Professor Ian O’Rourke, as many in this House will recall, earned a reputation during his five years in Darwin and the Top End as a compassionate and tireless clinician. A man who treated all as equal and believed firmly in a fair go for everyone. Professor O’Rourke’s energy, his passion and, indeed, his sense of humour are legendary, endearing him to all who worked or came in contact with him.
By way of background, Ian O’Rourke completed his medical studies and Master of Surgery at the University of Sydney, and was a fellow of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons and the Royal College of Surgeons of England.
Before coming to Darwin, he was a senior staff specialist surgeon and Clinical Director of Medical Services at Westmead Hospital, and had already demonstrated a passion for safety and quality, at a time when these concepts were not as accepted as they are today. His ethos was a combination of first doing no harm and always considering the patient’s needs, often before his own. Following his surgical training, he became one of Australia’s pre-eminent upper gastrointestinal surgeons, pioneering aspects of a procedure called ‘total oesophagectomy, or removing of the gullet, in cancer patients.
This pre-eminence as a specialist surgeon did not stop Professor O’Rourke from taking up an appointment in Darwin in 1997 as a general surgeon; stepping aside in a sense from a super speciality so that he might help others. Consequently, Professor O’Rourke worked with his colleagues at Royal Darwin Hospital as part of the general surgical roster, responding around the clock to emergencies, trauma and elective surgical procedures. This very experience led him, after he left Darwin, to espouse the benefits of a wide-ranging generalist training, and the valuable clinical opportunities available in Darwin and, indeed, in the Northern Territory. Soon after arriving in Darwin, Professor O’Rourke successfully performed the Territory’s first ever total oesophagectomy, and went on to become the divisional head of the Royal Darwin Hospital’s Department of Surgery.
During his five years in Darwin, he worked not only in the hospital but became a familiar sight at the regional hospitals and communities. He became a key figure in championing the existing surgical outreach service based at RDH, and established the Territory’s first diabetic foot clinic; a clinical endeavour that saved and preserved the function of many Territorians’ feet and legs. The result of this work is well documented and demonstrated a significant decline in diabetic-related amputations.
Professor O’Rourke is well remembered, not only as a leader and champion, but as a teacher, mentor and loyal friend to many. He was one of the few who understood the demands upon the public system, and always assisted administrative colleagues in their often difficult activities. His regard amongst nurses and allied health professionals, as well as doctors, was and remains of the highest order, as was the respect that he commanded within the NT Clinical School. Having said this, he remained a humble and simple man of Irish extraction, and a fair share of musical flair and the blarney.
A man of passion, Professor O’Rourke worked tirelessly to address the issues of both Aboriginal and remote health, and there are many far from this place today who will sadly mourn his loss.
In 2002, reluctantly he left Darwin and the Territory to become the Chief Executive Officer of the New South Wales Institute of Clinical Excellence. Such was his passion for the Territory that he maintained close links and continued to visit Darwin regularly until a few months ago. During one such visit late last year, the small operating theatre library at RDH was named in his honour, a privilege reserved for a respected few.
In November 2003, Professor O’Rourke was awarded the Australian Council on Healthcare Standards highest honour, the gold medal; a tribute to his enduring commitment to improved quality and safety in Australian health services. At the time of the presentation, the council president said:
- Doctor O’Rourke is highly respected amongst his peers as a skilled and dedicated surgeon, an innovative and resourceful provider of outreach services in rural and remote areas and a courageous humanitarian.
He was, indeed, all of the above, as well a true ambassador for all that makes the Territory the wonderful place it is.
Professor O’Rourke’s passing is, indeed, a tragic loss to his wife, Trish, and daughters, Kate and Annie, and a significant loss, not only to the clinical world, but to all of us. To each of them, I pass my own and the House’s sincerest condolences. While Professor O’Rourke will be missed, he will also be remembered as a courageous human being who made a difference; a man with a can-do attitude that would not let anything stand in the way of justice.
I know that it is his wish to be remembered as the humble man that he was and, to this end, he invited all his friends and colleagues to a wake at Bondi Pavilion following his funeral at Waverley in Sydney this Friday. A remembrance service will be held in the auditorium of the Royal Darwin Hospital at midday on the same day, to recall a fine Australian and a true Territorian.
I thank you Mr Acting Deputy Speaker for this opportunity to remember Professor Ian O’Rourke.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I had the privilege to meet Ian O’Rourke when I was working at Danila Dilba and he came to help Aboriginal people at Danila Dilba’s diabetic foot clinic. He was a gifted clinician. He was a human being who had a passion for Aboriginal remote health. He had a great sense of humour and a great passion when it came to patient care. He was a clinician first, a gifted surgeon and he was well recognised in the Territory and other places in Australia.
He remained a fierce advocate for patients’ rights, so much so that on one occasion he left a meeting to admonish a senior clerk whom he felt was obstructing the delivery of ultimate care to a patient. Although a truly Balmain boy, he considered Darwin to be his real home and left only because of his daughters in Sydney. He loved the Territory and the challenges and opportunities it provided. He fought for equality and regarded everyone as equal.
He was an adequate musician, according to himself, and a passionate performer. When given the opportunity, he loved to perform and continued this tradition almost to the end. He is remembered as a loyal friend and dedicated clinician, who recognised the importance of patient safety and quality clinical services early in his distinguished career.
He continued in his position at the Institute of Clinical Excellence in Sydney until weeks before his death. When diagnosed with a secondary lung cancer a little less than 18 months ago, he was given limited time to live. Not to be beaten, he embraced the opportunity with good spirits and humour, and lived and worked for more than a year than had been expected. He was loved by everybody in his workplace and he will be missed by everybody. As we say in my mother country: ‘He will never be forgotten’. He was a great man; a great doctor; a great surgeon. He was a great human being.
From his comments during the adjournment yesterday, the member for Macdonnell seemed to take great offence when I said during Question Time that ‘Nationalism is the last refuge of scoundrels’. The member for Macdonnell is very passionate about this, but in his usual pompous style he is trying again to put a different spin on what I was saying and trying to prove me wrong. I am told that he said in his adjournment that I was absolutely wrong, that I did not know what I was talking about because the real quote was, ‘Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels’, and that was said by Samuel Johnson in late 18th century.
I am fully aware, and want to remind the member for Macdonnell, that my quote, ‘Nationalism is the last refuge of scoundrels’, is attributed to politicians in the mid-war years in France when right wing parties tried to claim the flag and everything else about patriotism in order to rise to power. In this, I am be supported by someone very well known - George Orwell.
George Orwell started as an artist and then became a fierce anti-communist. In his essay notes on nationalism, which were published in October 1954, he said he defined patriotism as ‘... a devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life which one believed to be the best in the world’, but he had no wish to force upon other people’. He went on to say that nationalism was inseparable from the desire for power, which was precisely my point. I did not refer to patriotism, because patriotism is different to nationalism.
What we saw yesterday was a display of arrogance, of ‘Let us claim back our flag’. What is surprising is that it is three years too late to claim back their flag. Why? Because the president of the federal Liberal Party said at the CLP Central Council conference, ‘Let us claim back our flag’. Which flag? The flag that does not belong to the CLP, the ALP, or to any other party? No, the flag that belongs to every Territorian. The member for Macdonnell tried to confuse the issue about patriotism and about ethnic groups flying their flags. The ethnic groups fly their flags because they want to have a connection with their country of origin. They do not want to impose their lifestyle, their habits, or their customs on anyone, but they will share them. At the same time, the CLP is trying to embrace the flag. They wrap themselves in it trying to prove to Terrorisations that they are the only true Territorians.
That is not the case. Territorians know who they are. If we define Territorians as ‘born and bred in the Territory’, the members for Drysdale, Goyder, and possibly the member for Daly qualify, and also the members for Barkly, Arnhem, Arafura and Millner. That is all. Most of us come from elsewhere.
It is offensive for any party –not only the CLP - or group of people to try to claim a particular symbol or a flag as their own, and that they are the only ones who can use it. That is very offensive. What I consider as my national symbol, as an Australian, is the flag with the Union Jack and the stars. That is the real Australian flag and, as an Australian by choice, what I consider to be my very own flag. However, I do not claim it for me or for the Labor Party to which I belong. This is a flag for all Australians, and the Territory flag, is a flag for every Territorian.
I looked on the Internet - as did the member for Macdonnell who claimed various quotes – and quote Ralph Waldo Emerson:
When a whole nation …
I take the liberty of changing ‘nation’ to ‘party’:
- … is roaring patriotism at the top of its voice, I am fain to explore the cleanness of its hands and purity of its heart.
I question why, three years after the election, suddenly the CLP discovers the flag is theirs. They want to embrace it; wrap it around themselves and run with it. Are they so desperate? Territorians are not going to vote for them because they wrap the flag around themselves; Territorians will vote for them if they come up with decent policies that will promote the Territory, jobs and unity in our community.
In the last few months, we have heard claims by the Leader of the Opposition that nothing has happened in the Territory and everything is in ruins. That is what he said: Everything is in ruins. Really! I do not see any ruins. I receive information from all over the Territory and there is everything but ruins out there. This year Casuarina Shopping Centre is experiencing the highest turnover since it opened and occupancy rate since 1986. I have the seen tourists and locals out there. If you want to do some work on your house, I wish you luck. You are not going to get any workers as they are all occupied.
We have reached the stage where additional money has to be allocated for public works because people are working and everything is about 30% to 40% more expensive than a year ago. We have faith in this place. We are not perfect; we make mistakes, and I am the first to admit that. But we have faith in the Territory and work very hard to promote it, both inside and outside the Territory. I find it offensive when members of the opposition tell us that everything is in ruins.
Not everyone on the other side is like that. Some are brave enough to stand up and say: ‘No, things are really good’. I was talking to the member for Katherine the other day, and she told me that Katherine is very busy with tourism. It has started to decline, as you would expect. Every year, that is the pattern. During the Dry Season, a lot of people visit the Territory, but come 1 September, everyone waves goodbye because the weather is better elsewhere.
It is offensive when people in this House resort to patriotism or nationalism and wrap the flag around themselves - be it the Territory flag, the Australian flag or any other flag - just to prove they are the true patriots, the only ones who believe in this place, and that people should vote for them because they have a flag draped around their shoulders.
As the member for Macdonnell likes quotes, I want to conclude with one from the late 18th century, when Samuel Johnson said:
- A man may have the external appearance of a patriot, without the constituent qualities; as false coins have often lustre, though they want weight.
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, on the news this morning, my colleague from Nelson talked about the appointment of Kerry Heisner as Electoral Commissioner. This follows on from yesterday’s ‘mini statement’ to the House by the Chief Minister, who told us that Kerry Heisner had been appointed and ran through some of his claims to the job. Indeed, she told us that he was a very superior applicant, as assessed by three senior public servants.
Mr Kerry Heisner is a personal friend. I have socialised with he and his family, and he used to live in my electorate. That is not the point. The point is that I believe Mr Kerry Heisner brings a significant bigotry towards the CLP. If the Chief Minister wants to set up independent organs such as the Electoral Office, the Ombudsman, the Discrimination Commissioner, the Clerk of this parliament, and the DPP, they must be seen to be squeakily independent. The sad fact is, Kerry Heisner does not carry those credentials.
For the Chief Minister to say things were wrong in the past and we have to set up an independent office, it is incumbent to make sure that in that independent office is an independent person. It is simple to provide immense protection to someone carrying a bigotry if they are untouchable in an independent office. You can go around the world and see independent offices which have been abused, and officers of high stature, including people who have run countries. If they are untouchable, and if they carry a bigotry, it is not an improvement. It is a destruction of the system. I believe the Chief Minister has made a mistake with this. It is not a matter of saying the office is independent, but the person in it is bigoted. It is my firm belief there are number of issues relating to the CLP and Kerry Heisner which are still not put to bed. There is significant animus between the CLP and Kerry Heisner, some of which has yet to be resolved.
This is not a personal attack on the man. This is a strong attack on the process where you can pick someone, stick them in an independent office, and use it as a sanctuary so they cannot be criticised. Well, I can criticise, and I can criticise in this parliament. When the Chief Minister was delivering her statement, the Deputy Leader said, `Well, you mucked it up in the past’. I thought this was a strange statement, given that a president of the ALP, Mr Charlie Phillips, also occupied this position and was appointed by the CLP government. Everybody in this House would recommend and commend the tenure of Barry Hamilton, and would readily see him as a person of great independence and impartiality. The same cannot be said for Mr Heisner.
The Chief Minister would know - and one assumes she has done some research into this - that there was a Commonwealth parliamentary report into the conduct of the 1998 federal election and matters related thereto. As members can see from the tags on the report, I could quote extensively from it, but I will only read a comment made by the Chair on 29 June 1999, after he had heard significant evidence from some members of the CLP:
- Could I come back to another matter that was raised? There is clearly a lot of bad blood between the CLP and yourself …
Given some of the evidence, that is an understatement.
If that is on the federal parliamentary record, and if in some quarters of the CLP - and I would say fairly significantly - there is still a feeling this man carries a bigotry and bias and that was evident in certain of his actions during that election, he is a poor appointment. As I said, I know Kerry personally, and suspect that after this speech our relationship will not be the same again, but I have a greater duty. It is highly offensive to appoint somebody to an independent office who is not independent …
Mr Henderson: Highly offensive. Coward’s castle. Go outside and say it.
Mr DUNHAM: I can say this on the radio tomorrow, champ. I believe the way the Chief Minister has approached this appointment is a bad signal for the system. I am saying this because if there are problems at the next election, or any by-election intervening, these matters will be scrutinised by the CLP, and they will be taken to the appropriate authorities, with this speech as its precursor. It is not good enough to say, whatever the outcome of the election is, oh well that is just sour grapes.
It is evident there is some disquiet about this man’s appointment, and there are still, I believe, unreconciled issues between the CLP and Mr Heisner. The Chief Minister has that as a matter for her solution, but if independent people are going to be appointed, it is not good enough to say to the Leader of the Opposition: ‘Here is the name, what do you think?’, and then appoint them anyway. That is not independent.
If you want to look at how the CLP did it, consider the appointment of Charlie Phillips, whose politics are pretty well known to all of us. He has been working in Parliament House on the 5th floor; he stood for the ALP, as did his wife, and he has been president of it. He is a former holder of this office. Therefore, before you start pointing fingers and saying: ‘Well, the system was corrupt and bad before’, I do not think it was too bad. You have created an independent office, but it has not solved the problem.
These matters are now on the record, and they will be ongoing. If people think I am not prepared to say this outside, I am. I believe there are matters relating to the appointment of Kerry Heisner that are not in the best interest of the CLP, because I believe he carries a bigotry towards it. I also believe some of the matters which were raised in public submissions to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters of the House of Representatives, are on the record. They are readily available to members who want to read them and can be easily researched.
I cannot understand why the current government has such a cringe about matters relating to the flag. The member for Casuarina has told us that we have been missing in action and now, three years later, we want to reclaim the flag. That is not what has happened. For years after self-government, the flag was evident everywhere. It flew proudly at the mastheads of schools, it was on government cars, government letterhead, logos, advertisements, and its colours were proudly displayed by our athletes in the form of their livery. Unique colours that made Territorians stand out in a pack of athletes.
It is not that we have, all of a sudden, worked out that we need the flag. What has happened is a gradual erosion of the use of the flag. Over the last three years, the flag has disappeared. It is quite evident. For instance, media releases from members, particularly ministers, which not that long ago had the flag on them - and incidentally the flag that was used was wrong - are now carrying this bird. I am no ornithologist, but as I pointed out once before, I think this bird is actually a bustard. It certainly looks like a bush turkey, and I do not think Territorians are that keen on having a bush turkey as an indicator of this government’s faunal logo for the Territory. Bustard is appropriate, because going back to the last speaker, there are a number of matters in the economy that are busted. However, I would think, if they are really keen to abandon the flag and take on the bustard, we are quite happy to go to an election on that basis.
When the member for Casuarina says: ‘You cannot grab the flag and have it as yours’, that is not what we are saying. We are inviting everybody to use the flag. The only people who have vacated the field are the government. What we are trying to do is resurrect their interest in this icon for Territorians. It is a proud icon that has carried us to self-government, and it will carry us to statehood. Do not abandon the field and leave the flag behind in a muddy heap, then come up with some brand new livery and flora and fauna on the emblems and some different colours, and accuse us of being infatuated with the flag. The fact is Territorians are infatuated with it. How do we know this? We gave away thousands - thousands and thousands. We went to the shows and cracker nights and, as somebody who gave away hundreds of flags, I can tell you the kids were really pleased to get them. They were pleased with their flags.
In the matter of the big booze-up for the Greek community in front of this parliament, it was interesting that the member who protesteth too much, the member for Casuarina who thinks that wrapping oneself in one’s flag is a terrible and despicable act, should probably look at the photos on the invitation from the Chief Minister. Pretty much, it is lots of people wrapped in the Greek flag.
I have a problem with putting on a function of that type. I have spoken on the radio about it and I am quite happy to talk about it again. To summarise, I am not sure we should be using the offices of government to celebrate a win for a competition that we cannot be involved in. If people say ‘You celebrated the Melbourne Cup’, yes, we did because Territorians could get involved in it. We could get involved in the Olympics. However, we could not get involved in the competition of the European Soccer match because, for some bigoted reason, we are not considered to be Europeans. I am not sure that was the best way to run the celebration. There are plenty of other much more comfortable facilities available for the worthy Greek citizens of this place.
Please do not assume that we are running the case that the flag is ours and you cannot touch it. We are inviting you to touch it; to reuse it. We are inviting you to get rid of the bustard, and reintroduce the flag on your letterhead, and on our number plates. We are inviting you to fly it proudly in front of Parliament House. We are inviting you to say when the train turns up, please give it to the school kids, and to take it to the showground.
It is not a matter of any exclusivity, or a matter of us saying this is ours and it is not yours. In fact, it is the contrary. We are saying it is ours, please participate because we think it is a matter of great heritage, and a great joy to the people who have a love and passion for this flag. We think you can get some kudos by abandoning the bustard and coming onboard with us, back to where the flag was a precious icon for governments.
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonnell): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I remember a time quite recently when the government put out a press release saying that the opposition had abandoned the Chamber. Guess what? There is not a member of government here. I am sure that any member of government who objects to being identified as not being in the Chamber, will immediately leap to their feet and object. But I do not hear a thing at all. Why? Because there is not a single member of government in this Chamber. Not one. Not the Chief Minister. Not the Leader of Government Business. Not the Treasurer.
A member interjecting.
Mr ELFERINK: Oh hello. Look at this? Welcome aboard. I am making the point because I can tell you, if the government is going to be so cute as to pull these stunts, if they live by the sword, they shall die by the sword. And isn’t it funny to get them in here I have to actually point out the fact …
Mrs AAGAARD: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker! The member for Macdonnell knows perfectly well that he is not allowed to refer to the absence or presence of members in this Chamber.
Mr ELFERINK: Well, if any one member of government was in here up until the moment I started talking about it, you would not have had to run into this Chamber and make the point of order.
Mrs AAGAARD: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I just said that the member should withdraw those comments. He is not allowed to comment on the absence or presence of members in this Chamber.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Macdonnell, you will be aware that you are not to make reference to the absence in this Chamber of any member.
Mr ELFERINK: I got them in here, didn’t I?
Dr LIM: May I speak to the point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker?
Mr ELFERINK: I have made my point. It is done.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I want to comment on the AFL Women’s Football team of the Northern Territory. Over a number of years I have been assisting them by making my office available, donations, etcetera, and I was proud to assist the most recent AFL Women’s National Championship once again. The carnival was held in Adelaide from 20 to 26 June. Each player had to raise $1400, and whilst I only gave a small donation, all small donations add up. We have a saying in my family: small fish are sweet. I donated $50 each to the following people who live in my electorate: Isobel Cummins, Sharon Fielder, Steven Lolias, Krystel Smith and Rebecca Taylor, for a total amount of $250.
I want to thank Beckie Taylor, Vice President of the AFL Women’s Football of the Northern Territory. She has been a fantastic worker for all the ladies in football. We need to assist the growth of women’s football as the reality is that 50% of the community are women. For football to grow, we need to get into the untapped market of mothers, supporters and helpers of the great game that we all love.
Beckie Taylor is a third year player. She apparently has a deadly kick into the forward line, rovers off the full forward and snaps an unbelievable goal. She also has a great chase in her defensive game. Of course, I say that half tongue-in-check.
Sharon Fielder is a first-year player with Territory Women’s Football and plays in the back pocket and wears No 1. Isobel Cummins wears No 8 and is a second-year player. She shows a lot of promise; works well in the back line and lays a strong tackle and great off-field team worker.
Krystel Smith wears No 3. She is a first-year player and has great, safe hands from her netball background. She is always looking to better herself, provides a great lead in the forward line, helps the club off the field with all sorts of fund raising and, in the words of many of her peers, is a potential champion.
Steve Lolias is the coach. I have had a lot to do with Steve over the years, and even coached him myself. He is great guy and very passionate about football. He believes in the girls and pulls them together as a team. He trains hard and once told a story about his coach bringing an animal heart to the change rooms and saying: ‘You have to have a bit of heart to play this game of football’. He picked up a lot from this coach and believes he is one of the best tactical coaches he has ever had. The coach made him feel like Andrew McCloud, I believe.
Recently, I attended the garden Olympics with the member for Karama and a great helper of the Australian Labor Party, Bronwyn Butler. We were up against Sue Carter and a team of candidates from the CLP. I must admit they won last year, but we performed very well and knocked them off this year. It is one all and next year will be the decider.
It was great to be involved with people such as Isabell Shipherd and the President of the Tropical Garden Spectacular, Simon Smith, who was one of our helpers and coaches, and he did a incredible job in supporting us. The patron is Ms Nerys Evans who was born in Wales and immigrated to Australia in 1964. She obtained Australian citizenship in 1975 and has a great love for Darwin. She moved here in 2003 when her husband was appointed as the Administrator of the Northern Territory; none other than Ted Egan of course.
I also want to thank Pete and Lisa from Mix 104.9 FM; the NT government, the Darwin City Council, Top End Sounds, Seven Darwin, and ABC 105.7 FM. It was great to see so many Territorians there, and I look forward to attending the Tropical Garden Spectacular next year. They made us feel very welcome, provided all the supplies and the hard workers down there. They did a fantastic job.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016