2002-10-17
Madam Speaker Braham took the Chair at 10 am.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I would like to bring the parliament up to date on our campaign for getting Timor Sea gas onshore. It has been, so far, a long and complex one. It has involved many meetings with oil companies, federal and state governments, and with lobby groups, and that work has gone on over many months now. It has also involved us building a coalition of interest groups: customers and industry associations that were brought together to be able to sell the message that gas onshore from the Timor Sea is in the national interest for a variety of reasons. Not the least, it has involved many Territorians brought together as Team NT. It has been a very successful team, bringing together government and industry, and we have welcomed the involvement of the opposition as well. So far, in our campaign to get gas onshore - specifically from the Sunrise field in the Timor Sea - we have come a lot further than many observers thought we would. Now, in October 2002, we are really entering a most important phase.
I will bring the House up to date on where we are with the Bayu-Undan field. The Bayu-Undan field’s outcome is resting on the ratification of the treaty between East Timor and Australia. We have reached a critical point in those negotiations about that treaty. The officials from Australia and East Timor, at this stage, appear to be deadlocked; they are arguing over whether international unitisation should be agreed to before the whole treaty is agreed to. Recently, one of the federal government officials, Dr Geoffrey Raby, told the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties - and this is a paraphrase of what he said - that the Australian government was willing to let gas stay in the ground if they do not get agreement on Sunrise international unitisation. It is an absurd response coming from the federal government.
Mr Henderson: An appalling response.
Ms MARTIN: Yes, it is an unacceptable response. What we want is a resolution of the treaty. We want is the ratification to go ahead, and constructive solutions rather than those kind of statements coming from federal government officials.
The benefits of getting Bayu-Undan gas onshore have been demonstrated; they are clearly there. Phillips has a customer - the Japanese Electricity Company has an equity in the field; those announcements were made earlier this year - and there is a delivery date for gas from Bayu-Undan for LNG into Japan. Gas may always be there, but customers might not necessarily be there; and we need to meet these time frames. Whereas it would be a great loss for Australia and the NT if we do not get Bayu-Undan gas onshore, converted to LNG and exported to Japan, it would simply be a tragedy for East Timor. At this stage, I will be contacting Prime Minister Alkatiri and our Foreign Affairs Minister, Alexander Downer, to recommend that it really is time for them to talk - and talk very constructively about how we get resolution of these treaty issues.
The other important field, of course, is Sunrise, and the time frame for decisions about whether gas will come onshore from Sunrise is next month. We have demonstrated very clearly that the customers for gas onshore are there, but there are problems, at this stage, with the conditions of commitment. We have contacted all customers as the joint venturers are doing, and there is a common theme that we are hearing back from them. The price they are being offered by the joint venturers is not a bad one, it is a competitive price; but they are certainly worried about the long period between them having to commit and the commitment from the producers. Whereas we believe that the customers are showing that they are keen to move ahead, there are issues about the time frame between committing and when that gas would be coming onshore - and quite understandably. However, it is reassuring to have back from the customers that the prices they are being offered are really competitive and are in ball park. Hopefully, the problems that seem to be there with customers and the joint venturers are not insurmountable.
We are now moving into the next phase of our campaign. I am to see the Prime Minister on 6 November. As part of his contribution to Team NT, I welcome the Opposition Leader to meet with the Prime Minister tomorrow afternoon. We will be providing the Opposition Leader with the most up-to-date briefing for that meeting; and that will happen today. I am sure that the Opposition Leader will be reinforcing the view that Sunrise gas must come onshore; that it is to the benefit of all Territorians and the country, as we have so clearly spelt out over many months now. I will be following up with the Prime Minister and the joint venturers next month, that the best prospects that we have ever had for Sunrise gas are when all joint venturers work together and work for a common interest, rather than being divided …
Madam SPEAKER: Your time has expired, Chief Minister.
Ms MARTIN: I am very disappointed, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Those are the rules.
Mr BURKE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, there are a number of issues that are raised by the Chief Minister which, I believe, that in the spirit of Team NT, I do not wish to respond to in the Chamber. I will be receiving a briefing at lunch time, as the Chief Minister said, and I will certainly be doing my utmost to raise the Territory government’s issues with the Prime Minister, and do whatever I can to prepare the way for the Chief Minister when she visits him later this month.
As the Chief Minister said, I believe the situation is urgent, certainly in terms of getting a fundamental position from the federal government. In that regard, I hope the Northern Territory government’s position - in terms of not only effort, but also contribution and options as to how this whole package could be put together - is well and truly advanced, because those are the sort of things that need to be flagged to the Prime Minister as soon as possible. Along with the Prime Minister, I will also have the opportunity to talk to Minister Macfarlane and, as a result of those visits, I will report back to the government as soon as possible.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, the whole essence of how we have come so much further in getting gas onshore in our campaign that has been run so successfully nationally, has been the joint approach that we have taken; that this is a bipartisan effort, not only through the parliament but also through our community. Strong support in our community, strong and excellent support from members of Team NT, industry representatives, and the work they have done in their own time, has really been a very critical component of our success so far.
However, I reiterate that the important thing about Sunrise is that the message to the Prime Minister will be: we have to have all players working together, we have to be establishing foundation customers for the Sunrise gas in Darwin, and we need to look very carefully at whether that is an LNG plant and have that fully discussed between the joint venturers. Certainly, I am hopeful that the Prime Minister - as he has indicated all along the way - wants to see Timor Sea gas onshore, and this the fourth gas hub for Australia.
Mrs AAGAARD (Health and Community Services): Madam Speaker, I would like to inform the House about progress on the negotiation of the Australian Health Care Agreements, which are known as AHCA. The 2003-2008 AHCA is the current single most important public policy issue for the hospital and health care sector. This agreement is a key source of direct Commonwealth funding for the Territory with AHCA payments from the Commonwealth comprising approximately 15% of the Territory’s health budget and 28% of our total spending on hospitals. The time frame for implementation of the new AHCA, the fourth of its kind, is July 2003.
At the April 2002 Australian Health Ministers’ Conference, Commonwealth, state and territory ministers outlined a new approach to the next agreement. At the meeting, ministers agreed that the process for developing the next AHCA would reflect that Commonwealth, state and territory relations in health should focus on best care in health outcomes regardless of jurisdictional boundaries. The Commonwealth, state and territories would work more collaboratively to improve the health and wellbeing of the community and also the way in which health services are provided, and that AHCA should contain principles, objectives and proposed health outcomes designed to achieve these outcomes.
This is a very different approach to the previous agreements where negotiations have focussed on funding. Ministers established reference groups and commissioned research in a number of high priority areas. To assist in these discussions, health ministers decided to form nine reference groups to study key issues in the health care system and provide suggestions as to how these issues should be progressed through the AHCAs. They covered the interaction between hospital funding and private health insurance; improving rural health; the interface between aged and acute care; the continuum between preventative, primary, chronic and acute models of care; improving indigenous health; improving mental health; information technology research and e-health; quality and safety; and collaboration on work force training and education.
I was pleased to sponsor the reference group on improving indigenous health. This group was co-chaired by Pat Anderson, whom many of you will know, and Jane Holton, the Secretary of the Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing. This is the first time that indigenous health has been considered as a significant issue in the agreement. The reference group on improving rural health also has two Northern Territory representatives as members, Miss Stephanie Bell from the Central Australian Aboriginal Congress, and Mr Bruce McKay, a remote area nurse from Yulara. Reference groups were given four months to report back to health ministers and we were presented with the final reports of reference groups on 27 September.
While the recommendations were numerous, most addressed similar themes including improving continuity of care across the health system; the need for flexibility of funding models both between the public and private sectors, and between the areas of responsibility of the Commonwealth, states and territories - our ongoing concern about the Territory’s ability to fully access Medicare is an example of these issues. We are also pursuing the need for an adequately supplied and well trained work force, obviously a key issue for the Territory; increasing the focus on prevention and early detection of disease; enhancing safety and quality to support the delivery of the best possible health care; the need to clarify and clearly identify the roles, responsibilities and accountability of each level of government; and enhancing consumer centred health planning and health delivery models which promote self-management and informed decision making.
Several reports described the current system as designed around the boundaries of funding streams rather than consumer needs; improving interaction between health and other social portfolios in recognition that health status is influenced by the availability of a number of other services, for example, housing, transport, income support, employment and training. Obviously, this was of particular interest to the reference group on indigenous health, rural health, aged care and mental health and, finally, the need for greater accountability through performance reporting and better data collections in order to assist planning of services.
Health ministers are continuing to work through the recommendations of the reference groups. We hope to identify practical solutions that can be included in the new agreements and remove the disincentives that exist in current agreements to flexible and responsive services. Officers of my department are working with their counterparts in other jurisdictions who are discussing possible strategies that could be used to argue for an increase in overall Commonwealth funding.
Health ministers will meet again at the end of November to progress the agreement. I look forward to keeping the House informed as negotiations on the new agreement continues.
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Indeed, Madam Speaker, this is one of the most important agreements that governments enter into with the Commonwealth, not just because of the magnitude of funding, but because it is an essential service and because the Territory, as with other cases, has to put a very strong case against some significant opposition from our brother states. It has been a case here in the Territory that the heritage of providing additional Commonwealth money has seen us not vacate the field, as has happened in other states and to use that to relieve the burden of health on domestic budgets, but to move it to preventative and community care. That is demonstrable. It looks like that is the way the Commonwealth is starting to think, too. It is certainly a better outcome for health to have an agreement that focusses on health outcome and best practice and core services rather than just formulae that drive costs.
Indeed, other states became so adept at manipulating this formulae that often, because of our small size, we missed out. I entreat the minister to give her best endeavours in this negotiation because it lasts for some years. I know that she is well resourced with competent staff, including the current Under Treasurer who, when she was in Melbourne or somewhere on a retainer from the government doing some work, she did work in this area many years ago on health agreement way before this. So there are some very competent people among our bureaucracy who can look at this. I would hope that the Territory comes out at the next Australian health care agreement with a bigger slice of the pie than has been the case hitherto.
Ms AAGAARD (Health and Community Services): Madam Speaker, I thank the honourable member for his comments. Certainly, the process to date has been a very cooperative one. The Commonwealth initially was, I think, concerned about the process that they were taking and given that all states, of course, were the same political colour and the Commonwealth felt that perhaps there might have been a bit of a bullying tactic there. But in fact the Honourable Senator Kay Patterson has taken our concerns on board and has been extremely cooperative and I believe that the agreement that we will be looking at will be a very good one.
In terms of the Territory, I know that the Commonwealth has taken a particular interest in issues to do with the Territory and the fact that indigenous health measures have been considered, at this stage, is a very significant matter for the Northern Territory. I can assure the honourable members of the House that I will be doing everything I can to make sure the Territory gets the best possible deal in this agreement.
Mr VATSKALIS (Transport and Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, I rise to make a ministerial report on the port open day held recently by my department and the Port Corporation.
The Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment, DIPE, together with the Darwin Port Corporation undertook to hold a port open day at East Arm Wharf to showcase the $87m Stage II works to the public. The East Arm Wharf project is one of the largest infrastructure projects undertaken by the Northern Territory government. East Arm Wharf is a busy working port as well as a construction site and it was considered that the safest and most effective way to showcase the project was to conduct bus tours of the facility from a car park outside the main gates.
A temporary car park was constructed by DIPE on the proposed joint user fuel terminal site. Marquees were erected on the site to act as bus terminals for the public. Port displays were erected in the marquees and port information was distributed by Darwin Port Corporation staff to the public as they boarded the buses. The project contractors, Henry Walker Eltin, also kindly participated in the day by arranging a number of their 80 tonne dump trunks adjacent to the bus stop so the public could get a closer look at these huge machines. The trucks were an extremely popular attraction.
The Nightcliff and Litchfield Lions supplied people to direct the parking. They also set up a sausage sizzle at the car park selling to the public. The Darwin Port Corporation made a donation to the Lions Club for their assistance on the day. Darwin Bus Service supplied up to 19 airconditioned buses on a rotational basis during the day to transport the public around the facility. A professionally pre-recorded commentary was developed to point out areas of interest on the tour of the facility and also supplied general information on the project.
The buses commenced playing the tape on departure from the bus stop and was synchronised to a number of check points on the tour. The presentation and professionalism of the Darwin Bus Service vehicles and drivers not only helped contribute to the success of the day, but it was also a good showcase for public transport in the Territory.
The public were able to leave the bus during the tour at the marquee erected on the facility to get a closer look at the facility and view the port, and government and industry displays. The government departments displaying included DIPE, Office of Territory Development, AustralAsia Railway Corporation, DBIRD and Darwin Port Corporation. Industry displays were undertaken by Phillips and the Northern Territory Livestock Exporters Association.
It is estimated from a count taken by the Darwin Bus Service that about 2500 members of the public attended the day. The feedback we received from members of the public, both on the day and subsequently, has been extremely positive, not only of the operation of the day but also the project itself.
Ms MARTIN (Senior Territorians): Madam Speaker, I rise to report on the success of Seniors Month, celebrated across the Territory in August. In 2002, government extended Seniors Week to celebrate Seniors Month. Commensurate with this change, government funding for the activities increased from $8000 last year to $30 000 in 2002. These funds were allocated to Council on the Ageing, which coordinated and supported Seniors Month activities across the Territory. Celebrate Seniors Month is a key component of our commitment to Senior Territorians, and to promoting positive attitudes to ageing, both among seniors and the community at large. The month-long calendar of events is an opportunity for all Territorians to acknowledge the significant past and continuing contribution of seniors to the Territory, as citizens, volunteers and community leaders. Seniors Month activities across the Territory were as diverse as our seniors population.
In Alice Springs, Madam Speaker, you yourself had a number of things that you took part in. The Minister for Central Australia sponsored morning tea and a movie, and in partnership with Lasseters Casino, my government sponsored a lunch for seniors, which was very successful. The Battery at Tennant Creek was the location for a seniors lunch hosted by the member for Barkly, while a dinner dance at the Alice Springs Convention Centre rounded off a busy program of events in the Centre, which I believe you enjoyed very much. A Christmas in the Dry celebration, and a picnic at Edith Falls were among the events organised in the Katherine region to celebrate Seniors Month.
In Darwin, it was my pleasure, as Minister for Senior Territorians, to host a morning tea here at Parliament and attend the COTA dinner dance, also here at Parliament House. During the month, the Minister for Housing hosted a series of morning and afternoon teas for senior public housing tenants. These gatherings, held at Nightcliff, Casuarina, Katherine, Nhulunbuy and Alice Springs, were a resounding success and provided an opportunity for senior housing clients to meet directly with the minister. In the Barkly, the member for Barkly kindly met with the senior housing tenants on the minister’s behalf. Free buses were provided for a number of events, and for the entire last week of August. The buses were also free to interstate seniors as a reflection of the increasing value of grey tourism to the Territory.
In addition, Council on the Ageing administered a community grants program to assist community organisations planning and holding Seniors Month events. Eighteen such grants were provided to organisations ranging from the DEMED Association from Oenpelli, which held an elders gathering, to the St Francis of Assisi School for a grandparents day. A preliminary report on Seniors Month highlights the success of the event. It also makes a number of practical recommendations to enrich planning for Seniors Month 2003.
Consideration of the report will take place through the Office of Senior Territorians, and the new Seniors Advisory Council, nominations for which closed on 9 September. Almost 60 applications have been received for the 10 council positions, demonstrating the high level of interest in the council among Senior Territorians. The formation of the council will allow government to hear first-hand the perspectives of seniors on the issues that are important to them. I have directed the Office of Senior Territorians to take on the task of preparing the materials necessary to assist the council in its key activity, that of forming the development of a whole of government strategy for seniors. This will be the first time that issues of concern to Senior Territorians have had such a high priority in government policy and decision making.
This government continues to recognise the important contribution that our seniors make to the community. While our population remains the youngest in the country, the proportion of aged people in our community is growing. My government is alert to these changes, and is committed to ensuring that issues of significance to seniors are recognised in our decision making. I look forward to announcing the membership of the council shortly, and to meeting regularly with the council over the months to come. I commend this report to honourable members.
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, the Chief Minister has presented a report similar to one which was presented to this parliament, and I will make similar comments to most of it. This government has to do more than just present reports to this parliament saying how much they like older Territorians. They have actually have to do it.
I was fortunate enough to go the COTA dinner dance. The Chief Minister shot through before the announcement of the Senior Territorian of the Year was made, which was evident to everybody. The morning tea - and I have said this before on the Parliamentary Record, was attended by half the numbers I have ever seen at the previous ones that have been held in this place. There was a significant number of empty chairs. There must be something wrong, either with the invitations that have gone out or, perhaps, it is a message to the current government about how this has been done.
Seniors do remember too. At show time in Alice Springs, when the current Minister for Community Development churlishly refused to continue a long-held tradition of inviting seniors to lunch on show day. I would like to thank my colleague, the member for Greatorex, for doing that. I was fortunate enough to meet many of those seniors, and they were aghast at the attitude of this government where, such a slap in the face - given that it is held by the Chief Minister’s Department - was offered to them.
I would like a copy of the report and the recommendations on Seniors Month. It is something that we would like to peruse. I thank the Chief Minister for finally making up her mind about the Seniors Advisory Board; applications closed well over a month ago. I know several of the candidates and they are extremely good candidates. I look forward to the announcement of those candidates and a copy of the review and recommendations arising from Seniors Month.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I quickly put on record one important function in the rural area that was not mentioned today. The member for Goyder and I had a very nice morning tea with the seniors in the rural area. One difference we did have was we invited the management of Phillips Petroleum to come and talk to the seniors in the rural area. The feedback we got was that they were most impressed and happy that they had been made part of the debate about such an important issue. They felt, a lot of times, that we invite seniors along for a cup of tea and discuss the weather and the football. Here was an important issue that was being debated and they were most appreciative that both the member for Goyder and I had got together to create a forum where they could participate. It is something that, perhaps, we should do more often.
Ms MARTIN (Senior Territorians): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for his contribution, but I only have three words for the member for Drysdale’s contribution: churlish, negative and unconstructive. I am only pleased that he is no longer the minister for seniors.
Reports noted pursuant to Sessional Order.
Mr STIRLING (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly, at its rising on Thursday, 17 October 2002, adjourn until Tuesday, 26 November 2002 at 10 am or such other time and/or date as may be set by Madam Speaker, pursuant to sessional order.
Motion agreed to.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I move that so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent bills entitled Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill 2002 (Serial 108), and Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2002 (Serial 109):
(a) being presented and read a first time together and one motion being put in regard to
respectively, the second readings, the committee’s report stage and the third readings
of the bills together; and
(b) consideration of the bills separately in the Committee of the Whole.
Motion agreed to.
Bills presented and read a first time.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I move that the bills be now read a second time.
Today I am introducing the second package of the bills foreshadowed by the Chief Minister and Treasurer during the August sittings in the ministerial report on the insurance crisis. As the Assembly is aware, the increasing cost and reduced availability of public liability and medical indemnity insurance has had a serious impact on key sections of the community, not only here in the Territory, but across Australia. This is part of the consequence of short term difficulties in the insurance market, caused by some exceptional events, nationally and internationally. These have included the collapse of HIH Insurance in 2001, the more recent collapse of Australia’s largest medical defence organisation, United Medical Protection and, of course, the events of 11 September 2001.
However, the insurance crisis is also the result of a long term trend in increasing claim costs, particularly for personal injury claims. In the Territory, over the past five years, the average cost of bodily injury claims has increased at a rate of about 18% per year. In response to the latter, long term component of the problem, at a national meeting on 30 May 2002, Commonwealth, state and territory ministers agreed to a range of reform measures. Subsequently, the Territory and other governments have been progressing the development of legislation to implement these reforms.
The overriding aim has been to improve the availability and affordability of personal injuries’ insurance for all sections of the community. As most of the reforms relate to liability for personal injuries, more generally, they are expected to have benefits for both public liability and medical indemnity insurance.
At the most recent ministerial meeting on 2 October 2002, the insurance ministers discussed the recommendations of the recently released Review of the Law of Negligence, chaired by the Hon Justice David Ipp. Ministers agreed in principle to consider nationally consistent legislation covering liability for personal injury or death resulting from negligence. This would provide a consistent national approach to defining matters such as the appropriate standards of care, foreseeability of risk, causation, and statute of limitation periods. A report on reforms that should be implemented on a nationally consistent basis will be considered at further ministerial meetings during November 2002. In the meantime, jurisdictions are proceeding with their own legislation in other areas where national uniformity may not necessarily be required, or where there is little chance of achieving such uniformity.
In August 2002, I introduced the first component of the Territory government’s package of legislative reforms, the Consumer Affairs and Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 2) 2002. This bill seeks to remove a statutory impediment to the self-presumption of risk by people undertaking risky recreational activities. As that bill is intended to mirror changes in the Commonwealth’s Trade Practices Act 1974, we are awaiting passage of the Commonwealth’s Trade Practices (Liability for Recreational Services) Bill 2002. Committee stage amendments to the Commonwealth’s bill seem likely to be required in response to the Ipp Review, which is recommending some further tightening of the definitions in the bill. Committee stage amendments are therefore also likely to the Territory’s bill when it is debated, probably in November this year.
In a ministerial report on insurance in August, the Chief Minister indicated that three further Territory bills are proposed: the first covering general tort law and related reforms; the second dealing with court processes and legal costs; and the third amending the Legal Practitioners Act in relation to the regulation of legal fees in no win/no fee cases, and advertising for personal injury matters.
While the government had intended to introduce the tort law bill in September, development of the bill has taken longer than expected. In any case, the time required for the Estimates Committee process meant introduction in September was not achievable. It is this bill, formerly titled the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill 2002 that I am presenting to the Assembly today, together with a bill providing for amendments consequential to the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill 2002.
A consultation draft of the main bill was released in late September, to provide an opportunity for comment by the legal and medical professions, and other members of the community. To date, the government has received little in the way of formal comment on the bill. The Law Society and the Plaintiff Lawyers Association have made substantial written submissions, and have also met with ministers and officials, including me.
The Law Society supports most of the provisions of the bill. However, it opposes certain elements of the bill, particularly caps and thresholds on damages awards. The Law Society has also provided very useful comments on technical details of the bill. The government has amended the discussion draft of the bill to take into account those comments. Additionally, the government will, prior to passage, further consider other policy issues that have arisen from the discussions between the officers and representatives of the Law Society. The medical profession has indicated its general support for the bill. Further consultation will occur before the bills are debated in November. The government will take account of community reaction to the bills as well as the national response to the Ipp Review in considering any committee stage amendments to the bills.
As the Chief Minister has previously indicated, I will shortly release consultation drafts of another two bills. These will deal with court processes, legal costs and legal advertising. The two draft bills will be subject to detailed consideration and public consultation by a working group of representatives from the judiciary, the legal profession and the government. The working party will be asked to report as a matter of urgency. The government would hope to receive a report in November but recognises this may not be possible. A formal reporting date will be 31 December 2002.
In line with the outcomes of the national meeting held on 30 May, the government’s legislative package is intended to reduce the cost of personal injury claims and the future rate of growth of claims costs. The package is broadly consistent with legislation recently or soon to be introduced into almost all other jurisdictions. It is important to emphasise this factor: the Northern Territory must play an appropriate role in the national reforms in order to ensure that the people of the Northern Territory receive the benefits of those reforms; the main such benefit being more affordable insurance. We are dependent on insurance companies being willing to provide such insurance on a competitive basis. Despite these national strictures, the government has been keen to ensure that the proposals can be justified in the Northern Territory’s circumstances. To test the proposition that the Northern Territory would benefit from similar reforms to those being adopted in some large jurisdictions, the Territory government commissioned the national advisors, Trowbridge Consulting, to advise on the likely effects of reforms in the Territory.
Trowbridge estimates savings in claims costs of around 12% to 13% under the limitations on damages award included in the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill. Apart from the direct impact on claims costs, the capping of certain components of damages awards is an important measure for increasing certainty for insurers by providing a ceiling on damages. This should also improve the community’s access to affordable insurance cover. While the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill will limit some entitlements to compensation, it is important to note that not everybody seeks to pursue compensation, especially for pain and suffering, through the legal system. Moreover, reforms of this nature are not new. Similar provisions are already in place for workers compensation and motor accident schemes in several Australian jurisdictions including the Northern Territory. In making these reforms, this government does not intend to limit entitlement to compensation on any discriminatory basis. The impact of the bill will be monitored to ensure that where the aged, the young and the poor in our community choose to seek compensation through the legal system, they are not particularly disadvantaged by these reforms.
Some sectors of the community have expressed concerns that these savings in claims costs may end up lining the pockets of insurers rather than benefiting policy holders. In the Territory, the Territory Insurance Office has a significant market share in public liability insurance. Competition between TIO and other insurers should result in savings in claims costs being past on in insurance premiums. The government will speak to TIO about the impact of this bill on access to affordable insurance for the people of the Northern Territory. Reinforcing market pressures, the Commonwealth government has asked the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to keep an eye on insurance premiums over the next couple of years.
The government acknowledges that if current insurance premiums are still too low, the effect of the reforms may be to contain future increases rather than reduce premiums. Nevertheless, the nett long-term impact of the reform should be lower premiums and a more widely available insurance cover than would otherwise occur without these reforms.
I now turn to the key elements of the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill 2002. The bill has a very broad application. It applies to personal injuries or deaths arising from negligence, regardless of the possibility that the cause of action may be found in a statute or in some other area of the common law. However, clause 4 of the bill provides that regulations may be made which exclude certain kinds of claims from the operation of the act.
In the main, it is proposed that excluded claims will those regulated by other statutory schemes. An example of such schemes are those in place regarding workers’ compensation under the Work Health Act, motor accident claims under the Motor Accidents (Compensation) Act, and compensation for victims of crime under the Crime (Victims Assistance) Act. Additionally, regulations may be made concerning other specific kinds of claims where there may be a policy imperative demanding that some or all of the provisions of the act should not apply.
Some examples of the kinds of claims that may potentially be subject of such regulations include: civil claims in respect of intentional wrongs; civil claims in respect of damages arising from a breach of mandatory product safety orders; and dust diseases claims. However, the content of the regulations is yet to be considered by the government. The government seeks comment from the community, the professions and the insurance industry on what might be covered in such regulations.
I must, however, emphasis that the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill, unlike legislation introduced in some other jurisdictions, is not intended to have any retrospective application, except for those provisions of the bill which are purely remedial. Accordingly, the bill will only apply to claims for injuries sustained after the bill has become law. The bill will therefore not have any adverse impact on those people already pursuing or contemplating making a compensation claim. In the main, the bill seeks to modify some entitlements to damages for personal injuries, including by placing limits on certain components of the damages awards.
By way of background to the bill, I mention the critical requirements that must, under the common law, be met by a person, referred to as the plaintiff, seeking from another person or that person’s insurer, referred to as the respondent, compensation under the law of negligence. The components are: the respondent must owe a duty of care to the plaintiff; the respondent must have breached that duty of care; and the plaintiff must have suffered damage as a result of the breach of the duty of care. This bill deals with all three components. However, the major focus is on the assessment of damages. The other two components are likely to be the subject of further major reforms during 2003, including in response to the review.
From time to time there are media reports of claims and court decisions whereby persons engaged in criminal activities seek or, in fact, obtain, compensation for injuries they suffer in the course of criminal activity. Clauses 9 and 10 of the bill make it clear that, in such circumstances, there is only a limited duty of care. The bill prohibits the recovery of damages if the injured person was engaged in a criminal activity, and provides protection to owners and occupiers for claims by a person who is injured while committing, in homes or premises, offences for which a possible maximum penalty is 12 months or more imprisonment.
There have been reports of injured persons obtaining compensation where it is relatively plain that the person’s intoxication has contributed to the damage that has been suffered, or that that person was aware of the intoxication of the person who committed the negligent act. Clause 17 clarifies the law by providing that a plaintiff who suffers injuries in these circumstances will be deemed to have contributed to the injuries and will have his or her damages reduced by at least 25%. This rule will not apply if the claimant can show that his intoxication did not materially contribute to the accident that caused the damages, that the intoxication was involuntary or, in the case of the intoxicated respondent, the plaintiff was less than 16 years of age, and in the case of the intoxicated respondent, that the person’s intoxication did not materially contribute to the incident of the plaintiff, could not reasonably have been expected to have avoided the risk that caused the injury.
Clause 7 of the bill provides that volunteers have a limited duty of care in respect of voluntary work provided for community organisations or for government. Such persons will have no personal liability as long as their actions are done in good faith and without recklessness. These liabilities will be taken on by the community organisation or government body responsible for arranging for the volunteer’s services. The extent of the liability will be determined as is the volunteer were employed by the community or government organisation.
The bill also protects ‘good Samaritans’ who go to the aid of a person in need of emergency assistance. This protection also covers persons with medical qualifications who provide emergency medical assistance. Clause 8(1) and (2) provide that good Samaritans are protected so long as their actions are done in good faith and without recklessness. The community expects that people who are doing a good turn for others should be protected from liability in these circumstances. However, the protection does not apply to intoxicated good Samaritans.
There are a number of elements to determination of damages payable under common law. Such damages are assessed having regard to matters such as:
pecuniary losses - these are losses due to the loss of income or the loss of earning capacity;
Aside from damages for gratuitous care services, which I will outline later, the bill does not affect the amounts of compensation for medical fees, hospital expenses or for personal care. In clause 20, the bill provides for a cap on pecuniary damages. The bill provides that the maximum rate at which the court may assess the loss of income or earning capacity will be three times average weekly earnings. This is higher than the current limits for motor accidents and workers compensation, which are no-fault schemes. Additionally, it is more than the amount of ‘twice average weekly earnings’ recommended by the review. However, it is in line with the limit adopted by almost all of the states. This cap amounts to around $2450 per week. Accordingly, it will only adversely affect very high income earners.
In clause 24, the bill also caps awards for non-pecuniary loss, more commonly referred to as general damages - that is, damages for pain and suffering, loss of amenities of life, a loss of expectation of life, and disfigurement. Under the bill, awards for general damages will be limited to a maximum of $250 000, the amount recommended by the Ipp Review. Again, this limit is higher than for the Northern Territory no-fault motor accident and workers compensation schemes, which set limits of around $170 000. It is lower than the $350 000-plus limits in New South Wales, and those proposed for Victoria, but broadly in line with the $240 000 limit proposed for South Australia.
It must be understood that these limits on awards for pecuniary and non-pecuniary loss are not expected to have a significant immediate impact on the cost of claims in the Northern Territory. Few Northern Territory plaintiffs are persons in receipt of incomes greater than $2450 per week. Few plaintiffs suffer pain and suffering to such an extent that they would be awarded amounts for pain and suffering that exceed $250 000. Thus, it is fair to say that the immediate impact will be minimal. However, by providing a ceiling on these components of damages awards, the caps are considered by expert advisors, such as Trowbridge, as being fundamental to increasing certainty and predictability for insurers and improving the availability of insurance. They are part of the community’s insurance against future growth and claims costs. It remains to be seen whether the insurers respond appropriately to these caps. This is something that all Australian governments will monitor. It may also be the case that governments, over the coming months, seek to achieve greater uniformity as to what will be the upper amount.
Both nationally and in the Territory, Trowbridge has indicated that the imposition of a threshold on the size of claims represents the greatest savings that can be made in respect to personal injury matters. In deciding on this threshold, the Northern Territory government had a number of options to consider. These are, firstly, the permanent impairment model. This is a model based on that in section 71 of the Work Health Act and in section 17 of the Motor Accidents (Compensation) Act. Under this model, no damages for pain and suffering would be paid unless the plaintiff had suffered permanent impairment. The issue of whether a person is permanently impaired would depend on assessment by a medical panel. The amount would range from zero for 5% or less impairment to the maximum prescribed amount for total impairment.
Second, the New South Wales impairment model. Under this model no amount is paid for impairment that is 15% or less. Amounts for impairment between 15% and 100% would vary in accordance with step gradations based on the prescribed relationship between the maximum amount which is $350 000 in New South Wales and a percentage of impairment.
Third, the South Australian model. Under this model no amount is paid for pain and suffering if the claimant has not been either substantially out of action for a week or has not incurred medical expenses greater than $2750. The maximum amount payable is around $240 000 for damage of the worst kind and for lesser damage, an amount calculated by reference to the relationship between the percentage damage and the maximum amount.
Fourth, the Western Australian model where there is a monetary figure of $12 000 set as a threshold.
The bill adopts the same approach as in Western Australia except that the threshold is set at $15 000. Clause 25 provides that general damages for pain and suffering are not payable if pain and suffering is less than $15 000. This would reduce the number and costs of lesser claims, for example, for minor slip and fall events and in cases where a patient was required to spend say an extra couple of days in hospital as a result of medical complications. These claims also tend to involve a high proportion of legal costs relative to the compensation being sought.
The $15 000 threshold is higher than the Northern Territory threshold for motor accidents and workers compensation but these schemes require permanent impairment before such damages would be payable. The threshold is similar to Western Australia’s threshold of $12 000, however, it is well below the threshold of 15% of the most extreme case recommended by the Ipp Review and adopted in New South Wales where it equates to general damages of around $52 500. If the Northern Territory adopted the New South Wales approach the effective threshold would be $35 750. In terms of the expected impact on the cost of claims, the $15 000 threshold is by far the most significant component of the Territory’s reforms with Trowbridge estimating savings of over 11% in the levels of claims. Applying the higher threshold as in New South Wales would reduce claims costs in the Territory by around one third. However, in the government’s view, a threshold of that magnitude would be too severe in the Territory’s circumstances.
Because there is no precise science for setting caps and thresholds the government invites further submissions prior to the passage of the bill. In particular, I am keen to receive information about past successful claims for pain and suffering that have been less than $15 000. Equally, I am interested in the damages creep anticipated by both insurers and the legal profession. Regardless of which option is eventually settled on there will be a further review by the end of 2005 as to how the threshold has worked.
The Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill also places limits on compensation for certain kinds of attendant care services. These are domestic or nursing services provided by family or friends on a voluntary basis. There has been a tendency for courts to provide compensation for these services at commercial rates. In line with several other jurisdictions and the recommendations of the Ipp Review, the bill precludes damages being awarded unless there is reasonable need for care; that need has arisen solely from the injury to which the claim relates; and the services are provided for more than six hours a week over a period of at least six months. The bill will also ensure that the rate of payment does not exceed average weekly earnings.
A number of other provisions in the bill will also impact on the determination of awards for damages. In particular, the bill precludes a court from rewarding aggravated or exemplary damages in respect of personal injury arising from negligence. These are rarely awarded by the courts anyway. Interest is not to be awarded on damages for non-pecuniary loss and attendant care services of the kind described above. As damages for non-pecuniary loss are awarded in terms of real values at the time of settlement, there is no justification for including interest. Prejudgment interest on damages awards will be set at the 10-year Commonwealth Bond rate with scope to vary the rate by regulation. As legislation does not currently prescribe an interest rate for prejudgment debts, this will provide greater certainty and ensure adequate compensation for past losses.
The discount rate for calculating awards and future pecuniary loss will be set at 5% with the provision for this rate to also be varied by regulation. The discount rate is applied in respect of amounts being allowed for future losses, recognising the payment of compensation is being made in advance of those losses occurring. The higher the discount rate, the lower the assessed up-front benefit. The current discount rate set by the courts is 3% which arguably over-compensates for future losses. While the Ipp Review proposes no change, almost all of the states are legislating for a 5% discount rate.
The bill makes a number of other amendments designed to clarify or improve the law. The first of these is found in clause 13. This clause sets out that a person, including a medical practitioner or a hospital involved in an incident that may have caused a personal injury, may express regret. This can be done without the person being concerned that this may be construed as an admission of liability. As is currently the case, a person will still need to be careful that their expression of regret does not contain an acknowledgement of fault.
The second such change is clause 30. It provides that a court in the Northern Territory may approve or make a consent order for a structured settlement as an alternative to a lump sum payment. This will permit the parties and the courts to reach settlements by which claimants receive periodic payments over the course of their lives. Such orders reduce a claimant’s exposure to losses which may result from investment or expenditure decisions regarding lump sums. The Northern Territory amendments reinforce taxation changes proposed by the Commonwealth in its Taxation Law Amendment (Structured Settlements) Bill 2002.
The second bill, called the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Consequential Amendments Bill 2002, deals with matters consequential to the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill 2002. The main amendment is the repeal of sections 10 and 10A of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act. This amendment is consequent on the re-enactment of the clauses in similar terms to clause 9 of the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill 2002. These provisions deal with the duty of care owed to trespassers and persons engaged in criminal activities. It is appropriate that they be located in the legislation and will deal with the generality of such matters.
In conclusion, there are a number of broader issues that are yet to be dealt with concerning the operation of the law of negligence, in particular arising out of the Ipp Review. These include matters such as professional negligence, including that for medical practitioners; foreseeability of risks, causation and limitation periods in which to claim. Together with other jurisdictions, the government is currently considering its response to the proposals of the review. It is also considering the reforms to medical litigation recently recommended by the Australian Health Ministers’ Advisory Council Legal Process Reform Group chaired by Professor Marcia Neave.
Further legislation seems likely to be required in response to these reviews early in the new year. However, the current bills represent a significant step in the reform process. The measures in the bills are expected to help contain future growth in claim costs. In turn, this should improve the availability and affordability of insurance to small businesses, not for profit organisations, medical practitioners and other sections of the community hardest hit by the current problems.
As I mentioned earlier, the impact of this bill will be monitored to ensure that where the aged, the young and the poor in our community choose to seek compensation through the legal system, they will not be particularly disadvantaged by these reforms. As I have indicated, the government will take account of further community reaction to this bill in considering any committee stage amendments where the bills are debated in November.
The reforms are consistent with those introduced or being contemplated by other jurisdictions and with the outcome of the national meeting on 30 May. Moreover, reforms of this nature are not new. Territorians have accepted similar reforms in the past for motor accidents and workers compensation as reflecting what the community should be entitled to and can afford. The government, on the advice currently before it, considers that the bills are balanced and fair for the community as a whole. Madam Speaker, I commend the bills to the Assembly.
Debate adjourned.
Mr AH KIT (Community Development): Madam Speaker, I move that so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent bills entitled Swimming Pool Fencing Bill 2002 (Serial 106) and Swimming Pool Fencing (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2002 (Serial 107):
(a) being presented and read a first time together and one motion being put in regard to,
respectively, the second readings, the committee’s report stage and the third readings
of the bills together; and
Motion agreed to.
Bills presented and read a first time.
Mr AH KIT (Community Development): Madam Speaker, I move that the bills be now read a second time.
I take this opportunity to introduce the Swimming Pool Fencing Bill 2002 and the Swimming Pool (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2002. There has been a considerable amount of media coverage on this issue since government first announced in April 2002 that it was undertaking a review of swimming pool fencing legislation in the Northern Territory. Following consultation with municipal and community councils, the Chief Minister announced on 30 June 2002 that the government would legislate and enforce swimming pool fencing laws in the Northern Territory.
On 19 September 2002, the Chief Minister and I announced the government’s five point water safety plan to help prevent children drowning. The five point plan covers:
1. the introduction of swimming pool fencing legislation to Australian Standards, which is the
subject of the bill that I introduce today;
3. interest free five year loans to help fund upgrades;
4. a government subsidised water awareness program for children under five; and
5. the establishment of a Water Safety Advisory Council to advise government on broader water
safety issues.
The government wants to work with the community and do as much as we can to help to reduce the numbers of children drowning. Government is committed to ensuring that we provide the safest possible environment for children around water. The five point water safety plan is designed to help prevent the tragedy of children drowning and strikes the right balance between protecting our children and preserving our outdoor life style. We know it is the right thing to do. It is also about gaining parents some time.
Water safety is a much larger issue than swimming pool fencing alone. It is important that we adopt a range of measures that help prevent the tragedy of drownings. Government has put a lot of thought into designing the plan and we want to ensure that we encourage parents and carers to raise the water safety levels of the under five age group. The government will financially help parents with a water safety voucher that will help offset the cost of water safety or swimming lessons for under fives. This, and other safety measures under the five point water safety plan, will be the responsibility of the Water Safety Advisory Council.
The main objective of this legislation is to ensure that the requirements for swimming pool fencing in the Northern Territory are brought up to Australian standards as soon as possible. The overall aim of the legislation is for improved swimming pool fencing standards to give those who care for children more time to react to prevent a child drowning.
The legislation will apply to the fencing of swimming pools and spas, outdoor and indoor, in the Northern Territory. Above ground pools must be fenced, unless the wall of the pool is at least 1.2 m high, providing that the latter site is isolated, and pool supports are also isolated. Fencing for new swimming pools will be required to comply with the Australian standards with the commencement of this legislation. Existing swimming pool owners will not be required to upgrade to Australian standards for swimming pool fencing until their property is sold.
However, as the government wants to encourage Territorians to upgrade their existing pools as quickly as possible, for the first 18 months following the commencement of the legislation the government will provide an early registration incentive scheme, including a cash bonus, and an interest free loan to help out. These incentives for the upgrading or installation of the fencing and barriers are designed to encourage existing swimming pool owners to bring the swimming pool fencing up to the Australian standards as soon as possible. What this means is that government will provide a cash bonus up to one-third of the estimated amount required to upgrade or install a fence or barriers, to a maximum of $1667. The interest free loan for up to five years, for owner/occupiers only, will be paid to eligible persons to meet the balance of the cost of upgrading swimming pool barriers, and would be capped at $3333; that is, a $5000 swimming pool barrier less the cash bonus of $1667. The amount of the cash bonus and any loan would be determined following registration of the swimming pool, the presentation of the inspector’s report, and recommendation to the Swimming Pool Fencing Authority. It is the Swimming Pool Fencing Authority which will approve the amount of the cash bonus and loan payable under the schemes.
Owners of investment properties will need to upgrade their pool fencing when there is a change in occupancy. Changes will be made to the Residential Tenancies Act to ensure that the responsibility for swimming pool fencing compliance rests with the landlord. The interest free loan will not be available to investors, as they have access to other means of finance, and this expense relates to commercial property; that is, it is not their principle place of residence.
Those with pools on a property of two hectares or larger will be exempt from the requirement to fence their swimming pools under the legislation. However, they may choose to register their swimming pool under the new system. Because we want as many swimming pools upgraded as soon as possible, registered swimming pool owners on large properties will be eligible to apply under the early registration incentive scheme, therefore benefiting from the cash bonus and loan scheme. All other swimming pool owners will be required to register their swimming pools within 18 months of the commencement of this legislation. Where swimming pools are registered within the first 18 months, the early registration incentive scheme will be available to those who choose to upgrade their pool fencing to the new standards.
The minimum requirement for registering a swimming pool or spa will be that the fencing complies with a current local government requirements in particular areas; that is, pool and spa owners should ensure that their fencing meets the current legal requirements.
My department will have the responsibility for the administration of the swimming pool fencing legislation. A dedicated unit will be established in the Department of Community Development, Sport and Cultural Affairs consisting of technical and administrative staff, including a telephone advisory service. The hotline number is 1300 301 059 which may be contacted during normal business hours. There will be an inspection of all swimming pools on registration, that is, of all existing swimming pools and all the new swimming pools with subsequent self-regulation. However, there will be compliance checking by inspectors each year.
My department has met with representatives of the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory, commonly known as LGANT, and has listened and taken on board their views on how to implement the proposed legislation. The government will take on the task of implementation of the legislation. There is power to allow swimming pool fencing regulation to be delegated to local governing bodies and others in the future but this will only be considered after there is an effective system in place.
The government well appreciates the need to achieve a flexible, realistic approach in the implementation of this legislation. The staging of implementation will assist. The legislation also provides that the Swimming Pool Fencing Authority will have the power to vary the standards in some circumstances to achieve a practical and reasonable effect in providing a barrier between a residential building and a swimming pool. The legislation includes a range of provisions which will allow pool and spa owners to apply for registration with non-standard fencing. The application process will be straightforward and for existing pools and spas there will be no cost to register under the new system. The guiding principle that will be applied will be that which has guided the development of the legislation: the need to give those who care for children time to react. This is in addition to the general exemption for properties larger than two hectares.
A two-stage appeal process will be available where people are not happy with the decision of officers of my department or the Swimming Pool Fencing Authority. A review committee would be established consisting of a senior public servant, a representative of the Water Safety Advisory Committee and another person determined by me. Finally, if the person is still not satisfied with the decision of the Review Committee, then an appeal could be made to the Land and Mining Tribunal.
A widespread public education and community awareness campaign will be conducted prior to the new laws coming into effect. In addition, there will be an ongoing water safety education and awareness program. This will also include advice to swimming pool owners on a regular basis to remind them of their responsibilities to maintain fences, gates and other child resistant barriers.
Finally, the Swimming Pool Fencing (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2002 will amend the Residential Tenancies Act to ensure that a landlord complies with the Swimming Pool Fencing Act and that any swimming pool meets the required standards as soon as there is a change in tenancy.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bills to honourable members.
Debate adjourned.
Mr BURKE (Opposition Leader) (by leave): Madam Speaker, I move - That the member for Port Darwin be discharged from membership of the Standing Orders Committee and that the member for Katherine be made a member of the Standing Committee on Standing Orders.
Motion agreed to.
Mr STIRLING (Leader of Government Business) (by leave): Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition’s motion is very timely in view of the motion I need to put before the House. I move - that the Standing Orders Committee be given an extension of time until February 2003 to report to the Assembly on the reference moved by the Chief Minister on 20 June 2002 that the Draft Members Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards and the Draft Amendments to the Legislative Assembly (Register of Members Interests) Act be referred to the Standing Orders Committee for inquiry and report to the Assembly during the October 2002 sittings.
Quite clearly, the Standing Orders Committee is not going to make an October report particularly in view of the fact that it now has the reference to deal with the review, revision and suggestions for improvements to the Estimates Committee, a work that simply does have to be back before parliament in February. There is no question of that because we need the time for the staff and the Assembly to be organised for later in the year when the Estimates Committee takes place. So, in view of that work and this issue not yet being worked through, I would not want decisions taken without proper, thorough consideration by members of the Standing Orders Committee. I ask for support for the motion that the report back be extended until February 2003.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, the opposition would not have any problems with that.
Motion agreed to.
Continued from 15 October 2002.
Ms MARTIN (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, in closing debate on Building a Better Territory the Economic Development Strategy for the Territory, I thank honourable members for their contributions. It is indicative of the importance of the strategy that so many members from both sides of this Assembly have participated and, I must add, thought carefully about the strategy in preparing to do so.
I make particular note of the detailed audit of priority actions due for completion by July 2002 which was undertaken by the member for Daly. He appears to be far more concerned about the time lines with respect to this document than he was when he was minister for Industries and Development and signed off on the previous government’s Foundations for Our Future, 180 pages in all, and yet there was not one completion date set in that entire document. So it is good to see that the member for Daly has actually moved on some and realised that documents are all very well, but unless you have time lines set and commitments for completion date, then they simply become what the Foundations for Our Future did: a good glossy document.
The member for Daly also made much of the fact that the work in Building a Better Territory had similarities to Foundations for Our Future. Of course, that is going to be the case. We are talking about building the Territory, and the previous government had that as their ambition. It is also ours, and I would say that of course we are not reinventing the wheel. Much good work was done right across our public and private sectors, and this government has of course drawn on that. But this government is clearly a new government with a new vision for the development of the Territory and some of those key aspects of that development are inclusiveness; a constructive vision; building on partnerships throughout our community spanning urban, regional and remote communities; celebrating the cultural diversity of the Territory as well as the aspirations, importantly, of indigenous Territorians. Bringing this together is the core element of Building a Better Territory.
Whilst I recognise the many of the directions of Foundations for Our Future, this is a very different document and it is built on a very different premise, one of partnerships of inclusiveness and not just being able to say: ‘We are doing the work in terms of somewhere like Darwin or Alice Springs’ but right across the Territory.
Building a Better Territory draws on Labor’s election statement and is part of the transition of many of those commitments into reality. Symbolic in our approach is Team NT. Through this initiative, my government is displaying the sincerity of its commitment to collaborate with the business community and, furthermore, the opposition in partnership to secure gas onshore. Let me take this opportunity to once again say that we will be unrelenting in pursuing this goal, as I indicated this morning in our report. The prize is long-term sustainable jobs for Territorians and greater financial autonomy for the Territory.
To refer to the contribution in this debate from the member for Nelson, one of the things key to the Building a Better Territory is a spirit of innovation, and we certainly must note the spirit of innovation that emanates strongly from the strategy, and the member for Nelson’s own vision with his velcro double pyjamas, which we note with interest. I trust he has patented the idea prior to sharing it with us in the Assembly back in July. And you have?
Mr Wood: I think they are advertising to sell those little blocks of land right now.
Ms MARTIN: I would like to move on to acknowledge the bipartisan supports, as expressed by the member for Araluen, for the efforts of this government in pursuing telecommunications services for all Territorians. Our very clear intention is the enhancement of economic opportunities for indigenous and regional Territorians, and one of the things we have to get right for this to happen is the provision of access to affordable and reliable telecommunications. It certainly is a key element of our Building a Better Territory, and one that is in the very committed and capable hands, specifically, of the Minister for Communications, the member for Stuart.
One of the things that sets this government apart from our predecessors is our preparedness to commit to action to develop the economy, to impose time lines in those actions and to make sure that those time lines are met. Building a Better Territory sets out our vision for the economic development of the Territory, and explains how we will deliver on that vision.
Since the strategy was tabled in June, I am pleased to advise members that an implementation and reporting framework has been developed by the Office of Territory Development, and that progress reports have been regularly presented to my office and the officer of every minister. I am pleased to report that many of these milestones have now been achieved. I take this opportunity to provide a snapshot of what this means in real terms for Territorians.
Implementation of the Economic Development Strategy is proceeding well, as at the end of September 2002. The government made a conscious decision to adopt a challenging set of targets in pursuing the strategy, and I am pleased that this has resulted in significant progress. It is also important to recognise that government is focussing not only on those actions that have specific due-by dates, but continues to manage the implementation of the overall strategy, which contains some 357 separate initiatives. In terms of those that do have a due-by date up to the end of September 2002, I note that there are 45 such actions, of which 34 have been successfully completed on time. Two were completed after the specified date, with the remaining nine in the process of implementation by 30 September. Details of the 11 actions that were either completed beyond the due-date, or were outstanding as of 30 September, include:
in Primary Industry and Fisheries, the NT Fisheries Forum. The forum’s establishment was
delayed, with the first meeting held in August, and with the next planned for next week, 22 October;
in Transport, the overview of existing capability and expected developments in transport, which was
scheduled for September. A final draft of the overview is being reviewed by agencies before being
considered by government, which will come to us shortly;
in Investment and Trade, the International Trade Strategy was to be launched by 30 September. The
strategy has yet to be launched, since it is at the printer’s, but the implementation of the International
Trade Strategy has commenced, and we will see it publicly released this week;
in Knowledge and Innovation, the Tropical Knowledge Forum, which was due in September, a number of
forums were held over the first week of October, and there were some constraints on being able to hold
that due to difficulties in time of getting some of the key participants. That has been held, and very successfully, and there will be a full report back to the Assembly in the next sittings;
in terms of Indigenous Economic Development, the Indigenous Economic Forum was scheduled for
September. Again, due to availability constraints on the part of some key participants, the forum will
now be held in Alice Springs on 21 and 22 November. It certainly is a very important forum that will
really focus the attention of government, and those right across the Territory, on what are the key factors
we need to be progressing in Indigenous Economic Development;
in Business Environment and Growth, implementing a business case manager approach, which had a July
target, the case manager/coordinator commenced work in September;
again, in the Business Environment and Growth review, the Territory Business Centre model, the review
report has been completed and is with government for consideration, but had a September date against it
and, again, that has been met in October;
again, in the Business Environment and Growth, the commercial tenancy legislation discussion paper which
had a target date of July is under preparation by the Department of Justice and is expected to be available for consideration later this month. It is a very complex and important piece of legislation and some of that
complexity has delayed the process, but not the commitment of this government to introduce commercial
tenancy legislation;
Public private partnerships, a discussion paper for August, was available from the commencement of
September, with a policy release in November which is right on target; and
in the area of Employment, Education and Training, a Northern Territory Public Service indigenous
recruitment and career development strategy has been completed and it is under consideration by
government. It is a good one and we are going to be very proud when we release that indigenous
recruitment and career development strategy. With something less than 5% of indigenous employment
in our public sector, and when you consider that 28% of the Territory is indigenous, it is a target that we
have to lift and one that has great benefits for the Territory - if we do and when we do.
In summary, the delays have been minor with many being merely trivial in nature. This underscores the importance the government attaches to this strategy and its approach to adopting challenging time frames in order to achieve real results. Government will continue with this process which is already proving to be so successful.
I now move to provide an overview of progress by industry sector. The key initiatives I will cover here include both those with specific target dates, as well as work in progress on actions whose targets are some way into the future.
In mining and minerals processing, there has been the completion of the Central Regional Minerals Study. Considerable progress has been achieved in the adoption of the National Mine Safety Framework. The new Mine Management Act is now in effect and the Indigenous Mining and Enterprise Task Force, which most recently met on Groote Eylandt in mid-September, is considered to be a national model.
In primary industry and fisheries, considerable progress has been made on industry development plans including plans for the cut flower, citrus and mango industries. My government has approved increased funding for disease surveillance and preparedness, and a national foot and mouth simulation was completed in September. This important exercise highlighted several issues that are being addressed as a matter of priority.
In tourism, the development of the Territory’s strategic tourism plan is on target and collaborative arrangements are in place with the Northern Territory Airports Corporation, including the appointment of an executive to promote new aviation services to the Territory. In Transport, business cases have been developed and delivered to a number of aviation companies to better service Darwin, Alice Springs and Yulara. These have included business cases presented to Australian Airlines, Silk Air and Malaysia Airlines, and an alternative schedule study that was undertaken for Royal Brunei. There has been continual communication with Qantas and Virgin Blue management for increased seat and freight capacity.
In utilities and infrastructure, the Power and Water Corporation was established on 1 July 2002. The other key initiative implemented in this period was putting in place the program for road, water and power services to the Phillips LNG facility at Wickham Point.
In land use, the NT Planning Scheme is to be amended. The Litchfield Planning Concepts and Land Use Objectives will be gazetted this month - and that is after a seven year gestation period, the longest land use planning in our history. The Larrakia Development Corporation accepted the government’s offer of a Crown lease over an area of Rosebery in Palmerston, thereby allowing further land to be released for subdivision.
With oil and gas, working with producers, consumers and the federal government in reviewing the domestic gas option; draft heads of agreements have gone from producers to customers for the domestic gas option. Specialist consultants have been commissioned to undertake economic modelling of floating LNG, relative to domestic gas production for the Sunrise Field, which clearly demonstrates the economic superiority of domestic gas in terms of jobs, taxation and industrial development and general benefits to this country. We have lobbied the federal government for the domestic gas option and are continuing to do that. There have been meetings with state Premiers of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and South Australia, to promote the domestic gas option, together with industry association and customers. Also, preliminary engineering and environmental investigations are under way for the Glyde Point industrial estate, with road design being complete.
In investment and trade, engagements together with FreightLink, with major transport and trading companies, and evaluation of expressions of interest from major freight forwarders in relation to the development of the East Arm Business Park; a major produce consolidator and processor is expected to invest in large cold store facilities at East Arm this financial year; and work is progressing well on the investment attraction strategy due for completion and release by December 2002 - that is this December.
With information and communications technology, a very successful strategic forum of industry and government representatives was held in September. An additional $24m has been allocated recently to improve telecommunications infrastructure and services to remote communities, and the Department of Justice has adopted the use of video conferencing to allow court hearings to be conducted via telecommunications for some remote residents, and to facilitate prison visits for families in remote locations. On telecommunications and use of video conferencing, it has also assisted the Cabinet process with the video conferencing facility being in Central Australia, and the Minister for Central Australia able to join in Cabinet by the video conferencing link.
In knowledge and innovation, the Desert Knowledge Cooperative Research Centre proposal has reached the third and final stage of the selection process with a detailed interview held in Alice Springs on 7 October. The Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal Health has also reached the third and final stage of the selection process and interviews were held here in Darwin on 8 October. The success of these proposals will be known before Christmas. Discussions have commenced between the Territory, Queensland and Western Australian officials in relation to a framework agreement on tropical science and knowledge, and a review of the Northern Territory Research and Development Advisory Council has commenced.
Indigenous economic development: as stated earlier, the Indigenous Economic Forum is now scheduled for 21 and 22 November in Alice Springs. The Office of Indigenous Policy was established on 1 July 2002 and welcomed onboard a very important player for this Territory, Neil Westbury. Wadeye has been identified as a priority community by COAG to pilot more flexible and coordinated service delivery mechanisms at all levels of government and in partnership with the community.
In regional development, support for community control of education and health services is proceeding with health zones identified, including the Westmax and Gulf regions and self-managing school pilots identified. The Indigenous Housing Authority has construction programs, including five apprentice building teams operating at Hermannsburg, Laramba, Santa Teresa, Papunya and Yuendumu.
In the business environment and growth, promotion of Territory capabilities to service defence needs, including facilitation of information regarding the impending navy patrol boat contract and the Air 87 helicopter initiative to be located at Robertson Barracks, and promotion in Jakarta during September of Darwin as a service and supply centre, including meetings with Indonesian ministers and mining and energy based resource companies.
In employment, education and training specific to the Economic Development Strategy, progressively implementing a program to address the recommendations of Learning Lessons, implementation of enrolment, attendance and retention strategies commenced, and development of programs in schools that address the essential learnings has been adopted as a priority area in the new NT curriculum framework.
In the area of natural resources and environment, working with the Commonwealth Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act on environmental impact assessment of several major development proposals; and mapping and analysis of water availability within the Daly River catchment, Sturt Plateau and Darwin regions.
These are just some of the initiatives that are being progressed within the Economic Development Strategy and, of course, that is just one area of one key focus of what this government is progressing as we stand here in October 2002.
The development of the complementary social development policy is also progressing with a lot of work done across the public sector. That initiative is being headed by the head of social policy in the Department of Chief Minister, Dr Rolf Gerritsen, and community forums are scheduled throughout the remainder of this year.
So, on one hand, an economic development strategy, key focus for the Territory, but at a complementary and importance sense, a social development policy to progress all those important issues that have to do with how we are living in this Territory. These are just some of the outcomes already achieved since the implementation of Building a Better Territory, and this is just the start.
In closing, I reiterate the sincere thanks of my government to all those who gave so much of their valuable time and effort in making this strategy the widely accepted document it is today. There is no doubt that its success is rooted deeply in the proceedings of last November’s Economic Development Summit built on by the intense involvement of the community in the formulation of the strategy over subsequent months and the commitment already being displayed by departmental staff in making sure that implementation proceeds smoothly.
The government will continue to receive regular status reports on progress of the strategy and it is my intention to provide an end of year report to the Assembly during the November sittings.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
Continued from 16 October 2002.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I rise to make my contribution and the contribution from this side of the House with regards to the illicit drugs strategy statement.
It has made interesting reading. There were two documents. One is this Illicit Drugs Strategy and the publication that was released which forms the basis of this debate, but also it coincides with a report on the review of the NT school-based policing scheme. Both carry very similar themes, and it is from the perspective of education and drug and alcohol issues that I will be making my comments.
It is difficult to know where to start in defining a response, but we need to know where we stand. This is a social and community issue and, sadly, when these matters fall into the hands of politicians, it is the case that these issues become inflated and distorted. The issue then has a certain additional life that does not address the core issue.
Fundamentally, I stand on the side which is quite wary of harm minimisation as a principle. I understand the theoretical basis behind that, but it is not a place I can comfortably stand as a father and as an educator. I have found it far more useful to provide a very clear direction and a guideline as to what is right and what is wrong as the foundation for an approach to social issues in this case. Once we establish that quite clearly, subordinate to it comes the individual frailties that impinge upon individuals when they find themselves in a situation in which they make poor choices. It is argued and misunderstood too easily by those who are opposed to this view that if someone finds themselves in difficulty, they have acquired some kind of substance addiction, the response of those who are not supportive of a harm minimisation approach would then condemn the person who has found themselves in difficulty. Far from it.
In fact, unless you have a clear guideline and a clear standard it is very difficult to make sense of the issue for the person who is involved in the problem and, second, it is very difficult to guide them from the trouble they are in to a new place. Therefore, I stand quite clearly in that position where we must make sure that we know the best way out of a difficult situation. I set that as a bit of a preamble to what I will say with regard to this statement.
First, I attended one of the hearings that was held in Palmerston. I was surprised in a sense by the lack of attendance by the wider community. I see in the Executive Summary of the task force report that 67 attendees of the general public - and I found that in Palmerston when I attended it that it was predominantly a collection of people who had specific issues with regards to illicit drugs. The general public was the distinct minority. And the voice of those who were the general public was quite different than those who were, let’s say, in the industry. The first one was a very general comment like, what about marijuana, is this in this, because this is the drug we are most concerned about, and no, it was not. Yet that was the issue that most people really wanted to talk about.
Second, they wanted to talk about alcohol, which clearly has the most devastating effect on our community, and that was not there. Well, it was understood we are not talking about alcohol. However, when we pared it back to find out what it really was about, there were a very limited number of people who had actual experience from the general public. Sadly, there were people there, in the one I attended, who had had direct experience as parents, but they were in the distinct minority. The rest had a sense and an opinion - nobody likes illicit drugs, but the whole exercise seemed to have focussed on an area that really is, in the broader scheme of things, not as large on the landscape as perhaps it actually is.
That is not to be interpreted as to underplay or downplay this in any respect. The torment that a person goes through and their family go through when they have some kind of substance addiction is profound, and I just thank God that I have not had that situation to deal with. However, I know others who have, and it is only right that we as a society, and we as legislators, understand that and respond appropriately. The issue of this discussion is, what is an appropriate response as a community. First, I think to gain some perspective of this. Second, to be seriously sober in recognising that whatever decisions we make and whatever policies we implement are well formed and well considered, and we do not fall into the trap of using such issues for political purposes.
That being said, I note with significant interest that the Executive Summary confirms the position that has been articulated on this side, though in the political context it has been distorted, that relative to internationally, Australia is in a fortunate position, and in the nation, the situation in the Northern Territory is relatively small. That does not mean, of course, if someone jumps, well, you say that there is nothing – well, it is relatively small. It does not mean that we do not need to respond to it. But the fact is, we have presented here in the executive summary a great opportunity to respond to this issue at this formative stage. It is controllable, there is something that we can do, and that is the beauty of the Northern Territory. That we as a community of Territorians can respond to this appropriately, because it is not out of control, generally, and we can form well considered policy to make an actual difference.
The fact that only 67 people turned up really shows that there is a lot more work that needs to be done. In fact, this task group probably needed to be pitching their discussion in a different area. The impression I got was, it was clear that this group was actually charged to ascertain and to come up with recommendations that were already prepared, in a sense, which is often the case, sadly, with reviews. You very rarely find a very honest and genuine review that is sincerely seeking to know what people are actually thinking. Usually it is a mechanism to deliver a predetermined outcome; it is a promotional exercise.
I know that some of the findings contained in the executive summary really strike, I believe, where we need to be looking. First of all, without a doubt, alcohol is a problem. Second, cannabis is a grave concern in our community. We need to know where we actually stand with cannabis; and we need to know what is our clear and genuine position. We do not need to be sending confused messages with regard to cannabis to the wider community. Sadly, even the media, I believe, are guilty of raising the notion that cannabis is perhaps not that harmful; it is a bit sexy. Sadly, the Chief Minister has actually added to that perception. The current findings dispel that dramatically: cannabis is a drug of serious concern and is really out of control in our community. It is largely due, I believe, to confused messages that are coming from community leaders. That is simply to be refuted. If you look internationally, you will discover that other communities have started to draw back from their community acceptance of cannabis, whereas in Australia it is on the increase. The problems are largely due to a culture where we have not stood on a very clear position with regard to cannabis. I, for one, will make sure that we never, ever send out a confused message with regards to cannabis.
Going to some of the findings that are contained in executive summary, as I said before, they lay the foundations of where we need to be looking as a community. I will read them:
That tells me quite clearly that the community sees that education, properly formed policy, and properly resourced curriculum and policy delivery is really where it lies. That is where we can drive this, and where we can make the difference. Another point says:
That is the core of the DARE program; the building of a capacity to say no. That is in the education domain, and that will be a recurring theme. I really think this is where the challenge lies. No more confusing messages; we know that this is clearly the path we have to go down. We have to, very genuinely, develop policies that do address the issue, and properly resource them and make the difference with a real will to do something, to make a change - not a will to come up with a program that sounds fantastic, that is pitched to an election that is to come, and to position yourself as sounding okay. Forget that! We are here to deliver something to make an actual difference.
It is a policy translated into action. The issue here is making a difference to the problems; not talking about the problems and structuring policies and outcomes that sound fine: ‘We are going to get ourselves organised to do something’. That is what we are dealing with at the moment: we are dealing with the creation of a sense of activity and movement, when really we need to be dropping the plough into the soil and turning it over and making something happen. The energy will be in education firstly, certainly from my point of view.
Support for families, of course, comes from that, and that is further mentioned in this. Going back to what I said at the outset, I do have concerns about this theme that seems to lodge in there and flavour the whole tone of this position of the current government, with regards to a response to the illicit drug problem or licit drug problems. It is actually contained in the review of the NT school-based policing scheme. It is benign and it just seems to permeate all of the literature that we read on this area, but I reckon that this is where alarm bells ring.
Effective drug education should reflect an understanding of the characteristics of the individual, the social context, the drug, and the interrelationship between these factors. We can have a big argument about this because I reckon if we weigh that as the predominant driver of how we form policy and how we respond to problems, we are going to come up with a very relativist position where everything is sort of okay. I understand that you have some difficulties and I understand why you are doing this and we explain everything away and we provide excuses and a very limp-wristed response to real problems.
Let’s just take the simple context of school situation where kids have a few fags behind the shed and find that they end up being addicted to nicotine. So what do you say? What would be a response in a school situation if you actually found that some of your junior high school kids went past having a bit of a muck-around behind the shed and became hooked on tobacco. What would you do? Would you go and get them a nicorette program and whack it behind their ears so that they end up weaning themselves off it? I tell you what I would do as a principal. It would be simply the matter of saying: ‘Stop doing it. That is it. Cold turkey. It was easy to get into this. I want you to understand how serious this problem is, you are going to have to get out of this. You have genuine support. You have a relationship but you have to get out of this. You have to choose to walk out of it. You walked into it, you walk out of it and I will be there every step of the way to help you get out of it’. And you will talk to the families. But you do not come up with some sort of harm minimisation program where we say: ‘Well look, I know how difficult it is and I know how tempted you were and I know all the other kids were smoking and I know that now you are addicted, I know how unpleasant it is to give up. We will find some way of keeping you off this thing until you get to that right, good, wonderful feeling to be able to say “no” one day’.
Well, that is absolute rot. We would end up with a situation where we would have a whole bureaucracy to support people who cannot make up their own mind and have the guts to make a decision and walk out of it with genuine, compassionate support. To me, that really is the distinguishing difference.
Going now to the DARE program. I would have to say that once again, as I made reference to reviews, reviews are often set up to deliver an outcome. The 216 people who entered the DARE review as opposed to the 67 I might add, the general public who went to the Illicit Drug Strategy Paper - the 216 were flushed out because they knew exactly what was going on here, in spite of the smokescreen saying, ‘No, we are not going to get rid of the School-Based Constable Scheme’. I cannot imagine any government, anywhere, ever having the courage to scrap such a popular scheme. People attended that, not to defend the School-Based Constable Scheme, to defend the DARE program. That was in the middle of it, that is what this is about and people were at those reviews saying, ‘What is this about? We know you are not getting rid of the School-Based Constable Scheme, what is this about?’ Well, it was quite clearly the 5000 hours, I believe, that are attached to the School-Based Constable Scheme in delivering DARE.
I am not going to have a direct attack on that, but in the context of this we need to be aware of this, that if we are talking about a strategy which does involve - and it is reinforced through the statement - that education is the key, then we have a move on the DARE program which is a very successful program, developed here in the Northern Territory …
Members interjecting.
Mr MILLS: Just hear me out. At this particular time we argue that the DARE program needs to be reassessed. We will remove the DARE program in the time that we are talking about improving outcomes and strengthening policy with regards to education in drug education.
There may be discussions that can be had about the effectiveness of the DARE program, however that discussion should have been had. We cannot be in a position where we wheel something out and we have a gap in the middle in the context of what we are discussing here, and there is nothing to be put back in its place other than something is being developed. I reckon that is the height of arrogance and it is a very shoddy attempt of addressing and responding very genuinely to this serious problem.
Mr DUNHAM: Madam Speaker, I move an extension of time such that the member for Blain may complete his remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker and honourable members, my comments are just about concluded but it is in this position that I want to leave my comments. The review of school-based policing suggests that there are perhaps better ways.
I do not stand aside from that.
I do not stand away from that either. You need to start to think a little bit independently here. The issue here is that there are 5000 funded hours to deliver at this moment a drug education program in schools. It has always been the case, though it has been created as something jolly new, that the teachers are meant to be now working in conjunction with the school-based constables. It always has been the case. Any genuine and caring teacher would work with the school-based constable, and that is the way it is meant to be. That has been an ongoing issue.
But the thing is if this government is really serious about responding to this statement and their attention is drawn to this - let’s just down play the effectiveness, let’s argue that the DARE program has its limitations and therefore should be removed - and you are genuinely interested in strengthening the education policy and the resourcing to teachers, you would have the equivalent amount of time funded to deliver the affective alternate program.
Debate adjourned.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have been asked by the member for Nelson to allow him to make a personal explanation.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, referring to the issue that the Attorney-General mentioned in Question Time regarding the motion that I put forward last week, having the Standing Committee on Constitutional and Legal Affairs look at the appointment of the Information Commissioner, I just need to make it clear that when I started that debate I used the word ‘approve’ the particular person’s appointment. Later on in the day the word ‘select’ came up. I think there was some various matters made. The word was that that body would ‘approve’ and that was what was meant to be established the whole way through that debate. It did not start off that way and it moved to the word ‘select’ I needed to say that so the Attorney-General understood how that body would operate.
Mr STIRLING (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): Madam Speaker, this is a ministerial statement on DNA. Recent events have highlighted the urgent need for all states and territories to have access to a national DNA database in order to facilitate the solving of crimes and to avoid costly delays in the justice system. Recent events have shown that Australia does not have the DNA exchange arrangements that it needs. As always in these matters, there is a balance to be struck between the demands of crime solving and individual rights.
The Territory government is very concerned that the national DNA database is not functioning as it should, and the current approach of the Commonwealth is to exclude the Northern Territory from its operation. This is despite Territory laws getting the balance right and it is our considered view that they are soundly in line with modern crime solving demands whilst protecting individual rights.
The Chief Minister has confirmed the Territory’s commitment to the concept of a national DNA database by her signing of the Commonwealth, states’ and territories’ Agreement on Terrorism and Multi-jurisdictional Crime on 5 April 2002. In the agreement, heads of government around Australia committed to modernise the criminal law by legislating in the priority areas of model forensic procedures to enhance the capacity in each jurisdiction for the collection and processing of samples to create DNA profiles. The government committed to this agreement in the knowledge that the Territory had already modernised its law in respect of forensic procedures. We believe there is no technical reason why we cannot participate in the national DNA database. But, at this stage, the Commonwealth appears to be saying that until the Northern Territory laws are watered down, we will be barred from the national DNA scheme.
If the Territory were to move any further toward current model legislation as contained in the Crimes (Forensic Procedures) Act 2001 of the Commonwealth, it would seriously reduce the capacity of the Northern Territory police to collect samples and analyse and retain DNA profiles. From the Territory’s point of view, adoption of the model legislation would defeat the objects laid out by the Commonwealth itself. For instance, if introduced into the Territory, the Commonwealth model legislation would prevent collection and analysis of samples from persons in respect of less serious volume crime such as burglary and car theft. It would prevent collection and analysis of samples from suspects and offenders without the order of a magistrate or informed consent. It would allow a suspect to insist that a mouth swab must only be taken in the presence of a doctor or dentist of their own choice. It would require the destruction of samples and profiles if prosecution is not instituted within 12 months of taking the sample or of being discontinued. It would require the destruction of samples and profiles where the offender has been acquitted or has had their conviction quashed, thus preventing the retention of DNA profiles as part of police intelligence.
It would require return of the sample to the suspect or offender. It would generally impose complex procedures and time limits which would delay investigations and invite legal challenge. It would not protect the privacy of profiles once accessed by other jurisdictions through the national DNA database. It would prescriptively direct the Territory’s scientific quality assurance and quality control programs in a way which removes the flexibility of the Territory to participate in the most appropriate accreditation program. It would require commitment of additional resources to ensure that DNA profiles are continuously monitored against the progress of their donor through the justice system so that they are contained in the currently correct index or category, and consequent liabilities if profiles are not retained under the currently correct index.
As far as the Territory is concerned, the regular exchange of police intelligence, including DNA information, is something that is to be encouraged, not some kind of mischief to be prevented by legislation. The success of the National Automated Fingerprint Identification System, NAFIS, well illustrates the effectiveness of the exchange of police intelligence that is not encumbered by restrictive legislation. We do not believe legislative uniformity is necessary for the national DNA database to operate. It is also intrusive into the legislative competency of jurisdictions which wish to participate in the national DNA database but can only do so by compliance with the Commonwealth’s model. If other jurisdictions wish to limit access to certain categories of DNA profile, for instance, profiles obtained from crime scenes and serious offenders, then these can easily be achieved by the provision of these profiles to the national DNA database and the withholding of others which are not compliant with the model.
Given the importance, accuracy and lack of intrusiveness of DNA as a means of identifying people, the Territory does question what purpose is served by restricting its use, and attempting to restrict all Australian jurisdictions to conservative legislation. It is the Territory’s position that Commonwealth model legislation continues to inhibit and delay the implementation of the national DNA database. It may also inhibit the flow of police information and intelligence through direct exchange of Crimtrac which is seen as the only permitted method of exchange. If this is the case, then Crimtrac will simply not serve its purpose of effectively reducing crime in Australia.
Concerns about individual civil liberties and privacy may arise from misunderstanding the nature of the DNA profile and how DNA profiles are used by law enforcement agencies. Police only use the Profiler Plus process of DNA analysis. This involves just one short stretch of DNA which has no known function in the human blueprint but is, nonetheless, almost unique to each individual. Profiler Plus looks at ten places, loci, on this stretch of DNA and determines which base pairs are present. It then portrays this numerically in the form of a graph. The process tells us nothing about the individual, not even reliably whether the individual is male or female.
Although the technology exists in research laboratories around the world to decode the whole human genome, this technology is not available to the police, nor is it desired. A good written description or a photograph tells us far more about an individual, and is far more accessible and useful in many ways.
The obvious use of a DNA profile is to link a suspect to a crime and to eventually provide evidence in court, which may lead to a conviction. However, in the majority of cases, when an individual’s DNA profile is compared with that taken from the scene of a crime, the general result is that that individual can be conclusively excluded from police inquiries and is no longer under suspicion. Without DNA evidence, there could seldom be that level of certainty. DNA evidence can, and has, led to individuals who may have been mis-identified by victims or other witnesses being proved not to be the perpetrator of the crime and being exonerated. DNA information links crimes and allows police to focus on offenders rather than offences, which maximises the use of investigative resources. DNA screening is invaluable to exclude suspects from inquiries with the minimum of conflict, stress and involvement of police.
Retention of an individual’s profile on the database means that the individual need not be troubled to give further samples, and can be rapidly excluded from other enquiries. The use of DNA profiles reduce the involvement of innocent persons in police investigations.
There is also potential use for DNA to be used to identify human remains and trace missing persons, especially if the individual has previously provided a sample for DNA analysis.
In the USA, there is no attempt at insisting on uniformity of state laws regarding the collection of DNA samples and the use, for evidential and other law-enforcement purposes, of DNA profiles. The US National Database operates without legislative uniformity. However, US Federal DNA legislation concentrates on ensuring that the standards of scientific analysis are acceptable.
Media exposure of difficulties with DNA evidence shows that these difficulties do not arise from the nature of DNA profiling and would not have been prevented by model legislation. Scientific evidence may be misinterpreted or given undue weight. Defence lawyers may omit to ask relevant questions and not fully understand the science involved.
The UK first legislated for taking DNA samples in 1984 and limited the taking of body samples except from people suspected of serious arrestable offences and where the sample was relevant to the offence under investigation, rather than as a tool for identification. Since then, it has become progressively less restrictive. Changes to the UK legislation in 1994 included the treatment of mouth swabs as non-intimate samples in the same way as fingerprints, rather than as intimate samples, and permitted the taking of samples from persons suspected of recordable offences, rather than only serious crimes.
Further changes made in 2001 allowed the retention of all DNA data, even after an acquittal. Judicial interpretation of the UK law by the House of Lords has been in favour of admitting DNA evidence and weighing the balance in favour of the public interest in fighting crime, rather than minor intrusions into the personal privacy of people who give forensic samples. The UK national database, interestingly, would not meet the requirements of the Australian model legislation.
In effect, the UK legislation is now more like the Northern Territory legislation than any other. A recent challenge to the UK legislation, with reference to the European Convention on Human Rights, failed. In a recent challenge to the English legislation, the English High Court considered the retention of DNA information and other intelligence held by police regarding a person after they have been acquitted, and concluded:
It is also the Territory’s position that police intelligence should not be routinely destroyed, nor that the collection and exchange of forensic information be restricted. No jurisdiction routinely destroys police intelligence relevant to an investigation simply because it does not result in a conviction. The Territory regards forensic information as a particularly important part of this intelligence, and regards it as undesirable and illogical for this information to be lost.
In the past, police forces have exchanged information and intelligence without legislated restrictions. Why should restrictions on legitimate exchange of information now be required, especially at a time when organised crime and trans-border terrorism is on the increase? Law enforcement is constantly faced with new and emerging crime types - for example, high-tech crime and identity fraud - in an environment characterised by increasing complexity.
The application of DNA is the most significant, scientific contribution to law enforcement efforts to reduce crime and improve public safety. In July/August 2002 Northern Territory police conducted an operation code name Gene Sweep based on DNA evidence. The operation culminated in the arrest and reporting of 112 offenders for 393 outstanding crimes, ranging from serious sex offences, house breaking, through to larceny and property damage. Northern Territory police will continue with this type of operation, given its potential to significantly impact on offending behaviour and crime reduction.
It is predictable that other jurisdictions, where the law is more complexed and restrictive, will eventually look to the Northern Territory law on DNA as a precedent to follow and to enhance their capacities. Whilst the Territory remains committed to Crimtrac and the national DNA database, this must not be at the expense of its obligation to provide effective policing services to the people of the Northern Territory, including the effective detection of volume crime. No jurisdiction has recorded a higher success rate than the Territory on a per capita basis in the application of DNA technology to the investigation of crime, and this success is due to the commitment by the Territory to resourcing DNA programs and to the effectiveness of the Police Administration Act and other Territory DNA legislation.
The Territory is pursing all options to facilitate the exchange of DNA and other police information through ministerial arrangements with other jurisdictions. However, this government firmly recommends that the Commonwealth should re-examine the need for specific aspects of the Commonwealth’s Crimes (Forensic Proceedings) Act 2001 that are excluding jurisdictions from the national DNA database through not being regarded as having corresponding legislation. This is a position we have to put to the Commonwealth; we have put to the Commonwealth, and it is one we hold very strongly. I should also say that it is our firm belief that all jurisdictions should ensure their legislation is sufficiently flexible to accommodate inter-jurisdictional sharing of information outside of the national DNA database. This is the way to get the best results for crime prevention and crime solving in Australia.
This statement is mainly focussed on the Commonwealth but to be fair it is not just an issue for the Commonwealth. The responsibility for getting the national regime right also rests with the other states and territories. I believe they need to start to get more realistic about the type of regime Australia needs as well. That is why the Northern Territory will be taking this argument to the Police Minsters Conference to be held in Darwin on 4 November. I will raise these matters there with the hope it will lead to fruitful discussion with federal and, importantly, state colleagues so that they increase their preparedness to fight for a regime that is better and more effective. If there is some willingness for this issue to be freely and frankly discussed, I am sure there is potential for advances to be made.
Mr BURKE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing the statement forward and, as I am sure he would expect, the opposition absolutely supports the intent of the government. It is very pleasing in fact that the Labor government now in government, have firmed in their belief in the value of this legislation as it is now framed because there is no doubt that when the legislation was passed, whilst the support of the CLP government of the time from the Labor opposition was there, it was certainly qualified in terms of concerns about privacy issues and how the legislation would be seen in its practical use. It is very pleasing from my perspective that the government in seeing this legislation practiced and now experiencing government themselves, understands very clearly the importance of this legislation and the fact that it was courageous of the Northern Territory government to bring this legislation forward in the way that we did at the time and now the fight is only half won.
I say to you, minister, that it was a very good statement except from my point of view, and also for the view of others I would imagine reading it, perhaps when you sum up you need to, just a matter of record, lay out where the areas of concern are from the Commonwealth. It is one thing to say the Commonwealth is opposing these areas, but there must be logical arguments from the Commonwealth’s perspective as to why they insist on certain provisions, notwithstanding the fact that we do not agree with any of them. It is important for the record that those issues are on the table for the purpose of good debate, and we are well and truly aware and can address our comments to them.
There is certainly a problem with the Commonwealth attitude. It can only stem from, I would guess, the fact that some states share a similar point of view, because certainly the way model legislation has been framed in the past is that a number of state jurisdictions volunteer to frame the Commonwealth representative’s model legislation and that is the legislation that eventually comes through endorsed as the Commonwealth requirements. So, in certainly addressing the last point you made that the minister intends to take up these issues with his ministerial counterparts from the other states, I am sure you are doing that already - it certainly needs a lot more effort - but I remain totally perplexed as to why, given the comments that are there in your statement for all to read - they are totally convincing from my point of view - I just cannot understand why there is a situation that exists where the Northern Territory could in the interim be excluded from access to the national database. Certainly, the interim arrangements that you asked for, to my mind, are self-evident. But if the Commonwealth has concerns as to how the Northern Territory and the broad perimeters of our legislation, certainly the Commonwealth should allow the Territory to access the national database and we should be able to input the national database those aspects of our DNA testing that meet the Commonwealth perimeters as an interim requirement. Why that is objected to is beyond me.
The simple fact is - and the minister has laid it our very clearly - that if you look at the experience of the United Kingdom, if you look at the experience of the United States in particular, it seems to me that the United States has it absolutely right. And that is that the restrictions that are imposed by any model legislation should really pertain to the science of collection so that the DNA that is collected, when it eventually is used, is absolutely beyond criticism in terms of the science of its collection having met all the parameters to ensure that it stands up in a court of law. That is the way we should be going, to ensure that is where the Commonwealth keeps its focus.
Certainly, I cannot understand it. Any police force in Australia would want restrictions on their ability to collect it; maybe they do. Maybe there are different attitudes in different states. I am not aware of what they are and I would certainly be interested to hear much more about that. My colleague, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the former Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services has nurtured this legislation from its outset. I do not wish to be repetitive in my comments. I am sure that in his contribution he will speak on the legislation and those aspects that he feels need to be addressed.
I would only be repetitive if I spoke longer. I simply say once again: thank you, minister, for bringing it forward, thank you for ensuring that the intent of the Territory legislation is not only sustained, won’t be changed, and that we will fight in the face of all efforts to change it. If necessary we will be excluded from the national database, but the system we have in place in the Northern Territory will remain, and certainly I reckon it is a winner.
I applaud the minister to take this, at every opportunity, on talk shows like John Laws and those sorts of programs, because to my mind, the public sentiment would be overwhelmingly behind you and in some ways that might move some of these jurisdictions far faster than some of these ministerial councils. So, all the best, and thank you for maintaining the rage, so to speak. I support the ministerial statement.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I would like to start by going back to when the member for Katherine did bring this legislation into the House when we were still in opposition. History very clearly records that we offered strong support for that legislation, even to the point where I think we all went out with our cotton buds at the front of the House and did our buccal swabs just to show the Territory public how simple and unobtrusive the process of sampling DNA was. I do not want to hear any rewriting of history on that matter. We were very definitely supporting the legislation.
At the time, I also raised some issues regarding the security of the database, the use of the information. Those were not peculiar to our position on this type of scheme; they were simply making sure that within the implementation of the DNA database in the Northern Territory we were aware of issues that were extant around the use of this technology by police in many other jurisdictions at that time.
DNA is a very important tool for use in police investigations and as evidence in criminal prosecutions. As we all know, DNA evidence can be critical in helping police to solve very serious crimes. A good example is the case of the murder of Kathleen Marshall, the President of the Queensland Cat Protection Society, in 1998. The murderer, Andrew Richard, denied ever having met her or telephoning her. DNA was critical to the police investigation of that case in alerting the police to the suspect who turned out the be the offender and was convicted of that particularly vicious murder. There are plenty of other cases like that.
A DNA database has been operating in the UK since 1995 and their statistics are quite interesting. As at February 2000, DNA evidence connecting a suspect with the crime scene has helped to solve 212 murders or manslaughter offences, 868 sexual assaults, and 479 serious robberies. It has also helped to solve 34 outstanding murder cases which the police had not been able to solve using traditional policing methods.
Another vital role of DNA is its use to link crime scenes in serial crimes. DNA evidence taken from crime scenes can tell police that the same suspect has been involved in a series of crimes in the Northern Territory or across Australia. While they may not be able to identify that suspect, this information enables police to ensure different investigations are not being conducted on the same person to get an accurate picture of the offending pattern they are investigating and the areas in which the offender is operating.
It is also important to note that DNA is available for more than just crimes like murder and sexual assault. It can play a valuable role in helping to solve car thefts and property break-ins, and that is where its ability to link crime scenes becomes particularly powerful. DNA evidence can enable police to link a series of house break-ins and gather evidence to ensure an offender is convicted for all the break-ins he has committed, rather than just one or two that would be apparent using other methods of police investigation. If an offender is charged with all his offences of this nature, it will also assist the court to hand down an appropriate sentence if a person is convicted, as the court will have more complete information about the full scale of the criminal behaviour of the offender.
The availability of DNA as a tool for use in these types of crimes is an important element of this government’s strategies to combat property crime, effective law enforcement in conjunction with crime prevention. This is clearly demonstrated by the results of the operation named Gene Sweep conducted by the NT Police in July and August this year, and that the minister for police has talked about in his statement. It is worth repeating the outcomes of that operation which saw the arrest and reporting of 112 offenders for 393 outstanding crimes, including serious sex offences, housebreaking, larceny and property crime.
DNA is not just used to connect suspects with crime scenes. Let’s not forget that DNA can be used as a tool by police to quickly eliminate a person from suspicion, reducing the stress of being under investigation, and releasing innocent people from the process. It can also assist victims of crime by encouraging guilty pleas, hence avoiding often traumatic and lengthy contested court proceedings. It can also be used to free innocent people. In fact, the first time that DNA was ever used to solve a crime in the United Kingdom, it freed an innocent man, Richard Buckland who, at the age of 17, had confessed to a murder that he did not commit. DNA evidence in that case helped police find the real perpetrator of that murder, and another, and bring him to justice.
In the USA, the Innocence Project, operating out of Benjamin N. Cardoza School of Law, provides pro bono legal assistance to inmates who are challenging their convictions based on DNA testing of evidence. Founded in 1992, the project has represented or assisted in more than 100 cases where convictions have been reversed or overturned, including freeing people from death row. There could be no more powerful infringement of civil liberties than to see a person put to death for some crime that he or she did not do.
It is important to remember that DNA is only one tool in the police officers’ kit. They will still need to assemble a brief of evidence against the offender; DNA alone will not convict. Having said that, let me also place on record my commitment to ensuring the proper balance between providing the police with effective crime fighting tools and the protections of individual rights.
It is important that there be sound evidence gathering and handling techniques employed by police to ensure that there be no doubt attached to the DNA samples obtained from the crime scenes and from suspects. It is important that samples are analysed in accredited laboratories and that strong security and proper controls are in place for the DNA database. It is important that the right balance is found between the rights of suspects and the needs of law enforcement, crime solving and community safety. I believe a practical balance can and has been struck in the Northern Territory.
I have been advised police have detailed standard operating procedures in place to ensure that samples taken from individuals retain their integrity and are properly handled. Similarly, only persons who are trained, assessed, approved and authorised can take items or samples from a crime scene. For all samples and items entering the forensic science laboratory, there are policies and procedures that ensure their integrity, security and continuity. There is seldom a requirement for an investigating officer of the police to enter an operational area in the laboratory, but should the need arise, the officer would be escorted at all times by senior members of the laboratory staff. The laboratory operates at national standards as determined by the National Association of Testing Authorities, NATA. It is preparing for an accreditation inspection early in the new year.
In the past, I expressed concern that the NT legislation was operating without comprehensive freedom of information and privacy laws in place. At the start of these sittings, the parliament passed our Information Bill, which will now provide the safeguards I was concerned about some number of years ago. Under those laws, an appropriate balance is struck between the rights of people to information, and law enforcement interests. Under section 16 of the Information Act, people have the right to access their personal information held by government agencies, unless that information would prejudice the investigation of a possible unlawful activity.
Information privacy principle 10 provides that public sector organisations must not collect sensitive information unless there is consent, or the organisation is required by law to collect that information. Sensitive information is defined to include genetic information that is, or could be, predictive about a person’s health. This provides a general protection for DNA material. It would prevent, for example, information that could indicate health information to an insurance company. But, in relation to DNA used in criminal investigations - as we have heard from the minister for police - the Profiler Plus process used by police for DNA analysis uses 10 loci from a part of the DNA strand which has no known function in the human blueprint; that is, it cannot be used to identify any characteristics about the person such as their health status, gender or any other distinguishing features. It is even difficult to determine the gender of the person from this particular sampling of DNA.
Finally, I note that the Ombudsman has powers to investigate complaints against actions of members of the NT Police Force. DNA is the fingerprint of the 21st century, and I believe it is important that critical police investigations are not hampered by complicated and unworkable regimes that do not achieve the balance that we are looking for. I believe it is critical that the NT police have access to the national DNA database - crime is not confined to state boundaries, nor are the suspects. The police services of Australia need to be able to work together to solve crime across Australia. It is critical that investigations being conducted by police is not endangered by the NT police not having the same access to criminal intelligence as other police around Australia.
Another case that springs to mind concerns several murders in the UK which had the police baffled. Eventually, DNA from the crime scenes was linked to a prisoner who was serving time for another serious offence. Police initially thought there must have been some mistake, until their investigations revealed that the prisoner was being unofficially released from gaol to work on a prison officer’s house. The murders coincided with the dates of his release for this purpose.
There probably would not be any argument in this House that the current regime of DNA collection and the use of DNA profiles in crime investigations would be fully supported. I pledge my support to the minister for police, in terms of defending the very effective regime we have here in the Northern Territory. I will certainly be putting a similar point of view to the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General when we discuss the same topic.
Mr REED (Katherine): Madam Speaker, I am keen to participate in this debate. The legislation and procedures that the minister has laid before the House today emanate directly from some actions that I took as then police minister in sponsoring this legislation in the Assembly, having it subsequently passed, and now acting to the benefit of the Northern Territory community.
To reflect on that process a little, that followed directly from my attendance at Australian Police Ministers Council with then Commissioner Bates in New Zealand, where the use of DNA in crime scenes was the primary subject of debate on the agenda for that meeting. It was one of those extraordinary, but not unusual, ministerial council meetings in that the debate soon started going around and around in circles, and was getting nowhere and was particularly frustrating. We had discussed, prior to this, the view that the Northern Territory should have adequate DNA legislation. We were sitting at the conference hearing all of the negative aspects and the difficulties and the intrusive application of it in getting samples, and the rights of citizens, and how awful it would be to have something on the record of someone whom it was later found did not commit a crime. In other words, the focus was principally on not the catching the baddie but sort of looking after others who were being looked after in any event and we were trying to look after better.
I recall towards the end of the day I asked Commissioner Bates how long this matter had been on Police Ministers Council’s agenda and it had been discussed for something like four or five years and no progress had been made. I said to him then: ‘On the way home we are going to start laying down the principles to give to the parliamentary draftsman and to get to Cabinet to introduce DNA legislation. This is ridiculous’. I did indeed espouse those views within the Police Ministers Council. To the horror of some who asked different questions about what we might or might not include in our legislation, and one of those was the intrusiveness of getting a sample, and I remember I quite vividly explained that if a person is suspected of committing a crime was not prepared to provide a sample then yes, I think it would be appropriate to give police the powers to be intrusive and get one. It all developed from there without going into too much detail. That finally resulted in legislation being put in place.
It was criticised very strongly nationally. I must say that at this time it is appropriate to thank Dr Peter Thatcher who is sitting in the Chamber today in the advisor’s box for his professional advice and the suggestions that he made so that we might be able to, me particularly as minister, be better aware of what we were facing. That resulted in visits to the police laboratory in Victoria and some very extensive information and background detail as to what we should have in our legislation and how the legislation had worked overseas. Indeed, to a large extent, we used the British model and came up with legislation that by some has been held up as the example as, ‘This what you want if you want DNA legislation’, and by others it has been derided. I would classify them as them as the hand wringers, who are more concerned about protecting someone who may be offended because of the application of the legislation, rather than giving police appropriate powers to do what we pay them to do, and that is to protect the community.
If someone in the community has been harmed in some way, and I take the very broad view of the application to DNA legislation, ‘some way’ includes anything from testing an item in a vehicle that may have been used in a break and enter, or testing the material in a vehicle and taking DNA samples from a vehicle, or some other piece of equipment that may have been used in committing a murder or some other serious crime. So, it is open to everything. I cannot see why in this day and age when criminals have so much on their side and there is so much technical assistance that they can draw on to commit a crime, why we do not afford police every possible opportunity and stronger legislation with appropriate controls to be able to apprehend them.
What are we on about if we cannot come up with something fairly simple and straightforward to arm our police effectively, not in the firearm sense, but of course legislatively, to be able to undertake their duties to the best opportunities that they have to protect and serve the community.
So, it is with great concern, and this is not a recent occurrence in terms of the Commonwealth’s opposition to our legislation. It started virtually when we introduced it. I can remember having some rather lengthy and even heated discussions with then Minister Vanstone about our legislation, and indeed with other police ministers around the country. It is most important that we continue to pursue this matter. But in pursuing it, if in the end we are not successful I do not think that we should give in. We should maintain our legislation. It would be tragic if we were not part of the national DNA database, but I don’t think that our legislation should be watered down to allow us to be so. The reason I think that is: sooner or later, the other states and/or territories, and certainly the Commonwealth, are going to be exceedingly embarrassed by their actions if they make us water down our legislation because they are going to find, at one time or other in the future, with one case that has a high public profile, that either we in the Territory might have the DNA sample of the person who committed a heinous crime, or someone interstate has, of a person that committed a crime here in the Territory, and the information cannot be exchanged or there will be some other bureaucratic or perhaps court decision that prevents the exchange of information.
The mood of the Australian public today - and I don’t think it is going to weaken; it will strengthen - is not sympathetic to those circumstances. The sooner the Commonwealth appreciates that, the better.
In terms of a national DNA database, I don’t want it to be a thought that I do not support it; I do. I support a national DNA database very strongly. But I think the Commonwealth’s role is not one which says what type of legislation a particular jurisdiction should have because the Commonwealth does not have the responsibility of policing in the jurisdictions, apart from the federal matters that fall within the arena of the Australian Federal Police.
If the Commonwealth could only realise it is interfering in the responsibilities of jurisdictions and the policing of those jurisdictions and quickly come to understand the very important and effective role that it could play is one which sets a standard and maintains those standards in their application across the country, within the bounds that the jurisdictions themselves want to apply, then the better off we will all be as a nation. And the better off all the police forces will be because at the moment there is too much effort being directed by respective forces across the country to solving this nonsensical problem.
This debate has been going on for years, just as the debate to introduce DNA legislation was. It is just incomprehensible to consider that we have senior officers of government around the country - ministers, police commissioners and a bevy of other important personnel in police forces - arguing this case for no logical reason. It is a nonsense that we are even having this debate because the Commonwealth’s role is really quite separate, or should be, in relation to this matter in my view. I support, minister, your approach in relation to this matter with one very important exception: the Commonwealth is not the only obstacle.
There are other jurisdictions which do not support our legislation and because of that, the protocols are not in place. And we have seen a recent very high profile case in relation to the Falconio case with the difficulties that were in place and the protocols that have had to be established to be able to exchange DNA samples. A nonsense. If I recall it correctly, that partly stems from the legislation that South Australia has because it does not allow intrusiveness in relation to getting a sample. I do not think DNA samples can be retained if prosecution does not proceed. Because of those conflicts or what are seen as conflicts, without recognising that our legislation allows that and their legislation provides for something different, but notwithstanding that, why can’t we just agree to have a process that enables an exchange of information?
We are about extracting out of the community people who have perpetrated, and in this particular case potentially, a heinous crime. And here we are, we have to have protocols in place and discussions between governments as to whether we going to let our police force catch a baddie. It is just a nonsense!
Minister, where I differ from your approach is this - and it is a shame you have not indicated in your statement what jurisdictions do not agree with our particular stance, that is, you have indicated clearly that we are fighting with the Commonwealth, but you have not indicated which states and territories we are fighting as regards their concerns about our legislation. Where I differ with the minister’s approach is that he should have, first of all, indicated to us just what jurisdictions we are having difficulty with. And in relation to the Australian Police Ministers Council meeting that is to be held here on 4 November, and the minister’s advice to us that he is going to strongly argue the case on 4 November, I think it is going to be ‘all too late, she cried’, in terms of arguing your case on that day.
Minister, what you have to do is get around to these jurisdictions and get into the ear of the respective police ministers and Premiers and Chief Ministers, and get them to come to the meeting, and collectively, and there is an opportunity to do it from a political point of view, because they are all Labor governments. And if you cannot get some understanding in relation to this crucial issue to the safety of Australians, and Territorians, in our case, then what are you all on about in terms of saying how wonderful it is that you all have the same political colour as each other?
So, the minister has to become very active very quickly and get round to the jurisdictions and bring to the APMC meeting in Darwin on 4 November a view that is one in terms of the states and the territories. It is no good waiting for the day, because when you get here, you are going to be in the same position as I found myself in New Zealand some years ago, and they will all be bickering about sweet nothings, in effect. Minister, I applaud your attitude and I applaud what you are trying to achieve, but you have to get busy and you have to get busy quickly, and you have to do this at the political level.
I would be surprised if most of the police forces are not supportive of the legislation that we have, certainly from the comments they expressed to me when I was police minister. They were somewhat jealous in terms of having legislation that they had to apply that was, in their view, substandard to ours. They were very supportive in terms of what they would like, and it was very much our model.
If the meeting on 4 November is going to have a chance of being successful, then minister, you have to get into aeroplanes and go around to those jurisdictions and be able to get them to bring to this meeting a singular view, and be able then to apply pressure from all states and territories, and the Commonwealth, to the federal government. That is the only chance at the moment that I see of success. Just sitting back comfortably and saying, oh, we are going to have a lovely cosy meeting on 4 November, is not going to achieve anything.
I would appeal to you to do that. I suspect that you have probably done it to some extent, but clearly the agreements are not there, or if they are you have not indicated in this speech that they are, and if they aren’t, then get on your bike, or your aeroplane, or whatever you can to get to the other jurisdictions and do it, would be my advice.
I don’t think people fully appreciate the benefits of DNA legislation. There has been some reference by the previous speaker, in fact, to some awful cases that were solved. I seem to recall some other examples that, in a way, better demonstrated the advantages of having sound DNA legislation and databases. If I recall correctly, there were some cases in the UK where persons who had been convicted of the type of crime that had been more recently committed, came forward and asked to have their DNA tested against the DNA that was collected at the scene so they would not be questioned by police; that is, so they would be excluded because they had like convictions in the past. It is just as important for some people to be able to be excluded and taken out of the focus of police attention in relation to the investigation of a crime, as it is for the crime to be investigated and the baddie caught. That has other very distinct benefits in terms of police time, because they are not investigating someone and wasting their time on a person who did not commit the crime, but has come forward.
All of my family have samples on the DNA database. I am not adverse to people having their DNA recorded at birth. I know that civil libertarians have great concern about that, but if we look at the current circumstances of the tragedy - to use that example - in Bali and the identification of persons who, very sadly, tragically lost their lives in the bombing last weekend, there is an awful task at hand now to identify the remains and the bodies that were taken from that scene. If, however, there was a database of every Australian, there would not be the task at the moment at the home scene, so to speak, to go into the bedroom and get the toothbrush of the victim from back home, take the DNA sample and go through that very lengthy and complex process, and then compare that with DNA samples that were taken from the remains of the people from the bombing. Half of the exercise would be not required because it would already be on the database.
It would then be a matter of comparing the samples taken from the scene in Bali and comparing them with a national database. That would very much overcome many of the problems that the grieving parents have today about the delays in identifying their loved ones. It would not eliminate the time but it might halve it, cut it by two-thirds or what have you. It is only in these times, with those tragedies clear in our mind, that we can perhaps focus on some of the benefits of the legislation that faces us today.
It has many advantages both in the pursuit of the criminal or the suspect and being able to take evidence that will stand up in court - very strong evidence; being able to eliminate people who might have been suspects but are quickly excluded because there is no DNA match; and as I say, the graphic example of the tragic circumstances that are facing the relatives of people who lost their lives last weekend in Bali, and the ability in those circumstances to be able to use a DNA database to the very best advantage of people in those tragic circumstances.
I support the statement very strongly, minister. I hope that you will get around and harass - do whatever you can - harangue all the jurisdictions to get their support before they come to the meeting on 4 November. As regards the Commonwealth: do not give an inch; do not water down our legislation - keep it to serve Territorians in the best possible way and to provide the strongest legislation that we possibly can for our police force to serve Territorians.
Mr STIRLING (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the Attorney-General for their contribution to the debate and for their strong voice of support in the position that we find ourselves.
The Leader of the Opposition went to the question of the difference and what the Commonwealth model would mean in the Territory. There were a number of items outlined within the ministerial statement: those differences of not being able to retain the data under certain circumstances; this idea of the practice of obtaining a DNA by a mouth swab being an intrusive practice - meaning that the person that you want to obtain from is entitled to have the doctor or dentist of their choice present whilst the sample is being taken; you could only use DNA for those more serious crimes; you must get magistrate’s consent before obtaining that sample; and you would be required to return the sample to the suspect or the offender. Generally, a complication of all of the procedures that are currently in place in the Northern Territory, including even down to the accreditation and scientific quality assurance of what we do here in the Northern Territory.
I do share the bewilderment, I suppose, to some extent, with the Leader of the Opposition in his questioning of why the Commonwealth maintains such a strong stance on this matter. Compare this to the question of fingerprints, which have been around for many years. No one seems to be frightened by the fact of fingerprints and having a national database on fingerprints. Maybe it comes down to the point that everyone understands that a fingerprint is a thumb print and finger prints. It is an understood procedure. It is a print that is kept and it is recorded and it can be compared. DNA is scientific, beyond most people’s understanding of just what DNA is, how it is recorded, what form it is, what it actually consists of, what it means, and how far does it go in building the profile of the person. Senator Allison gave me some ideas in relation to this, that because of this lack of understanding that people have a view that a DNA sample can produce all sorts of information about an individual that may be misused. Well, it is simply not true.
The use of DNA, under our legislation here in the Northern Territory, is restricted in itself to being able to be compared with another sample. I used the example in the ministerial statement, it would not tell you, for example, if the person was male or female, nor do you need to know. So, some of that stance of the Commonwealth, and others and particularly the civil libertarians in the community, I think is because they do not understand exactly what it is. They think that it tells you much more and provides much more information than it actually does.
Other concerns are that police get too much power and that police generally need detailed, prescribed procedures to regulate their operations and you cannot always rely on courts to ensure that evidence is excluded if unfairly obtained. They are the sorts of views that might be prevailing in this attitude and, of course, the Commonwealth officials themselves perhaps do not fully understand exactly how it is used in the practical sense. There may be other reasons that the Commonwealth is bound to the originator of their model legislation. Why, I do not know, but they are hell bent on preserving the reputation or the authorship of the original model legislation and won’t have it questioned in any way. Well, that is a view that does not help anyone at all. But they are the sorts of questions that I have and can only share what sort of views have come to me and Senator Allison, more informed on these matters, is able to provide me with.
I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for his background on the origins of Northern Territory legislation. The role and nature of ministerial councils is interesting in that governments come and go, but ministerial councils do not seem to change. The question, as he said, was before police ministerial councils for some four or five years and he found that, obviously, frustrating with former Commissioner Bates and on the way back he made the decision to advance legislation in the Northern Territory.
I take his point that it is not just the Commonwealth that we are up against here; it is other jurisdictions. I made that point very clearly today with the media, and I made it in this ministerial statement today, that our call in the Northern Territory is not just on the Commonwealth to reconsider their stance with DNA legislation, but it is on the Commonwealth and every other jurisdiction in Australia.
We have the situation, and this is interesting, because the jurisdictions that would seem not to agree with the Northern Territory - New South Wales and South Australia in particular - but we have established limited protocols with them as a result of the need to recently in relation to one case, so maybe there is a view that they are coming around. It is interesting that New South Wales would seem to have that view, because it was Minister Costa, the New South Wales Minister for Police, at the last ministerial council who stepped up to offer me, representing the Northern Territory, support on this matter when I raised it with Senator Allison who was representing the federal government.
So, whilst New South Wales would seem to have that attitude at one level, the minister himself seemed inclined, at least at the ministerial council, to have some sympathy with our position as an individual. I am certainly not sitting here thinking: ‘Oh yes, we will roll this through on 4 November’. I would not dare think that. That work will be ongoing with the other jurisdictions to try to get what support we may be able to. New South Wales does the most restrictive legislation on DNA in Australia, but we do have a protocol with them, albeit limited. In the event that we do not get up, we are not included on the national database, negotiations continue for protocols for exchange with Tasmania, Western Australia and Queensland. I am told that those negotiations are well advanced. The ACT will prescribe Northern Territory law as a corresponding law, and Tasmania and Western Australia have also prescribed NT law which gets us across the line in terms of those exchange situations.
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I take the Deputy Leader of the Opposition’s point that we should not give in on this. All is not lost. If we don’t win this, and we do not change our legislation and don’t win the battle to turn other jurisdictions and the Commonwealth around, and remain outside the national database, there will still be a level of cooperation by way of exchange agreements and protocols with those other jurisdictions. Not ideal; clearly not as effective and efficient as having that ready and almost instantaneous exchange in comparison by way of the national database. But we will not resile from the position adopted by our predecessors because we think it simply weakens the potential use of DNA as an effective tool far too far. Other jurisdictions need to understand just how potent this can be as an effective crime fighting tool and need to look at their own legislation.
The Deputy Leader of the Opposition said he would not have a problem with taking DNA at birth across Australia so you would have the biggest national database, indeed, everyone in it. I think we have enough of a fight on our hands at the moment in relation to getting the other jurisdictions somewhat up to where we are now. I don’t think that is a battle I am about to embark on. Nonetheless, his point is well made in relation to what has occurred in Bali and the ability to have that register to fairly readily tick off the comparisons for purposes of victim identification following a disaster such as that in Bali.
It is not a fight we are going to win easily, Madam Speaker. I do not mean to suggest that we are going to win it necessarily on 4 November. Work will go on between the Northern Territory and the other jurisdictions in relation to the difficulties that are being thrown up over the different legislative regimes. We will continue to make that point and work with those other jurisdictions and the Commonwealth to see that we can get some shift, at least – if not on 4 November - a shift in mood over time so that there is a greater understanding of where the Northern Territory is coming from.
When you consider the UK model that was provided in the ministerial statement and the fact that it was passed in 1984 originally, amended in 1994, and amended again in 2001, it represents most closely the Northern Territory model out of any other DNA legislation around. It survived challenges all the way to the English High Court. Interestingly, it would not get in to the national DNA database in Australia under the Commonwealth protocols that we have.
I thank Dr Peter Thatcher for being here this afternoon, and Alison Worsnop from the police for their work as well in bringing this statement forward. It is a comprehensive statement. It certainly covered all of the issues at difference, and I thank them for being here today to assist with those queries that came forward.
Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
Dr BURNS (Johnston): Madam Speaker, pursuant to a resolution of the House, I wish to lay on the table Questions on Notice Nos 1969 to 2016 inclusive, and their corresponding answers, which arose during the public hearings conducted by the Estimates Committee during the week commencing Tuesday, 17 September 2002.
I also table supplementary answers to questions asked during the hearings which agencies have provided to the committee secretariat.
Mr VATSKALIS (Transport and Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Madam Speaker, I have been invited to open the Oktoberfest on Saturday, 19 October 2002 at the Darwin Showgrounds. The government, through the Ethnic Affairs Sponsorship Program, has provided assistance of $12 000 for the 2002 Oktoberfest. This event is the 32nd Oktoberfest to be organised and celebrated in Darwin by the Deutscher Klub of Darwin.
Oktoberfest dates back to 12 October 1810, when it began as a celebration of the marriage of the future King of Bavaria, Ludwig to Princess Therese of Saxony. The citizens of Munich were invited to attend the festivities held on the fields in front of the city gates to celebrate the royal event. The event has been celebrated for the 169th time in Munich. It has not run every year because of war and other problems. Munich, of course, is the home of the Oktoberfest.
In the Territory, the Deutscher Klub was established in 1965 and was incorporated in 1969. The club has about 104 members. Mr Karl Schrimpf, who has been actively involved with the club for some 30 years, has recently had to stand down as the club secretary due to illness. I have to say that, according to the 2001 Census, 1096 Territorians were born in Germany. As such, German born represent the second largest group of non-English speaking background immigrants in the Territory after the Philippines, having surpassed Greeks and Indonesians. Further, the 2001 Census statistics show that almost 8400 Territorians reported that they had German ancestry. The ancestry data also shows that 3319 Territorians reported that at least one of their parents was born in Germany.
Further to that, most early German settlements in Australia and the Territory were related to religious activity. We had German settlement from the beginning of the 19th century in Australia and in the Northern Territory, through South Australia. The Lutheran Church has a long history of settlement in the Territory and, in fact, at the 1991 Census, the Northern Territory had the second highest proportion of its population, after South Australia, who were Lutheran adherents.
Despite this close attachment to a particular religion or birthplace, there is a high proportion of Catholics, with very few Anglicans. The German community in the Territory is very active. They have been living here in peaceful harmony with every other community and share in the multicultural society of the Northern Territory. Since I am wearing my hat, one of the people here who has German ancestry, I believe, is the member for Macdonnell, who in his adjournment yesterday mentioned that his father is either of Germanic origin or German.
Since I am wearing my hat as the Minister for Ethnic Affairs, I would like to advise members that this week Darwin is hosting the 48th Congress of the Australian Hellenic Education and Progress Association, an association of Greek Australians from all states in Australia. They are meeting in Darwin. One of the things that is very close to their heart is the Elgin Marbles, and there was a discussion today on the radio about this. In 1799, Lord Elgin was Britain’s Ambassador to Constantinople, now Istanbul, which was at the centre of the Ottoman Empire, with Greece among one of its colonies or occupations. Elgin got permission to send artists to Greece to sketch and excavate in and around many ancient sites, including the Parthenon, one of the several sacred buildings from the Acropolis rock that dominates Athens.
Once there, Elgin’s men began removing as many of the surviving sculptures as they could. Actually, they had saw the marble sculptures out of the Parthenon to take it with them. Lord Elgin alleged he had a contract of sale from the Ottoman Empire, but no such contract was ever found. The only thing that existed was an Italian translation that was then translated to English to justify Lord Elgin’s removal of the Elgin marbles.
Elgin wanted to take the marble and decorate his mansion because he promised his then future wife that he was going to build her a marvellous mansion in Scotland that would resemble some of the ancient Greek houses. Unfortunately, Elgin did not have good fortune. On his way to England from Turkey, he was captured by the French and was imprisoned for four years. When he arrived in England, he found that his wife had run away with another man, and his estate was nearly bankrupt. Elgin sought from the British Government 78 000 then, to give them the marble. The English government managed to get all the marbles for 35 000.
In 1831, when the Greeks defeated the Turks and gained independence, the return of the marbles in Greece was very significant, and they repeatedly asked the British Government. One of the stories I read when I was at high school was that, during the war of independence, the Greeks had surrounded the Acropolis Rock and the embattled Turks inside the rock were left without ammunition, until they discovered that the Parthenon columns were held together by lead which was poured in the core. They started breaking the marble to take the lead out, melt it and make bullets. When the Greeks found out what was happening, they sent some messengers to offer the Turks ammunition so they would continue the war and stop smashing the columns. The English generals who were assisting the Greeks expressed their surprise about this, until one of the Greeks said: ‘Well, we are fighting for those marbles, we do not want them destroyed’.
So, the marbles of Parthenon and the Elgin marbles are very, very significant to the Greeks. The Greeks said: ‘Now you have promised $A120m to the museum to have the Elgin marbles’. But they also promised if they do not return the marbles by the Olympics in 2004, the section of the museum that was built to house these marbles will remain empty, pointing the finger at the English all the time.
The British Museum has alleged that the marbles were removed by Lord Elgin to protect them from destruction. Unfortunately, in a secret report that was disclosed recently, it revealed that in 1938 and 1940, the British Museum tried to whiten the marbles using acid or other whitening material and, as a result, it nearly destroyed the marbles. In March this year, Britain signed the 1970 United Nations convention to protect cultural property from illegal trade and new criminal offences were created. Of course, that does not sit very well with the refusal of the museum to return the marbles.
The Greeks have pointed out that the return of the marbles is so significant they are prepared to withdraw any claims to any other Greek antiquities from the museum just to have the marbles back. However, the British Museum is afraid that, if they return the Elgin Marbles, they then open the door for further claims to the antiquities. I have to admit that if the Greek, Roman, Egyptian, and Babylonian antiquities are removed from the British Museum, together with the Egyptian, I do not think there will be much left for the British Museum to exhibit. I would like to advise the House that, in the near future, I am prepared to put a motion that will support the return of the Elgin Marbles to their birthplace in Greece.
I would conclude my adjournment with a few comments with regards to the taxi industry. Having had a look at the adjournment comments made by the member for Greatorex yesterday, I have to explain some things because the member for Greatorex may have read the papers but, quite obviously, he does not understand anything that was included in these papers. First of all his comments about the $20m debt: the previous government borrowed $20m to buy back the licences. When they bought back the licences, they changed the legislation so that the licences do not exist any more. But people are hiring the licences because you cannot buy then any more. When you borrow $20m and you pay interest, you have a debt. It does not matter what you call it; the reality is a debt - a $20m debt. The payments were amortised for the next 10 or 20 years, so the money that was paid now by the taxi owners to acquire the taxi licences, is going to pay this debt. It does not matter what you call it, it is a $20m debt.
With regards to the industry consultation for the 12 months; in reality the White Paper was released in May 2002 and we have had consultations since May. That hardly makes it 14 months; it is actually five months. We discussed with industry; there was a lot of interest, but we had to get it right otherwise the industry would be completely ruined. The board we put in place, the member for Greatorex quite rightly says, why should he have one board in Darwin; why you don’t have a board in Alice Springs and Katherine? That taxi board is not to be a Darwin taxi board. It is going to be a Northern Territory board with representation from other areas. I agree with the member for Greatorex, we should not be parochial. We should be looking for the whole Territory and that is exactly what we are doing.
With regards to the training that every driver who starts training after 16 October has to have completed the new 78 hours training. The reason for making it after 16 October, we now see what is going to happen from March 2003. It was very easy for somebody to jump in now and do the 24-hour training and then claim he is a qualified driver. No, we want drivers who will be fully qualified in order to include a service to the clientele. Everybody who wants to be a driver as from yesterday has to complete the new 78 hours. Let’s not forget in the past few months we have seen some complaints about taxi drivers. I believe one in particular was from the daughter of a councillor from Alice Springs whom the member for Greatorex knows very well. I do not want women to be abused or assaulted by taxi drivers. I do not want clients to be abused verbally or otherwise. I want a quality industry to provide quality service to the clientele.
The training provided to taxi drivers would be provided by accredited trainers whilst in the smaller centres it will be the responsibility of the base operator. But even the base operator has to provide an accredited course and I do not think any operator would be qualified to provide this course so he or she has to actually employ the services of a qualified trainer to provide this course to the taxi industry.
As for the requirement to hold a licence for five years, with further representation from the member for Braitling, we have decided that in the smaller centres if there is a need the board will have the ability to use discretion and give the H endorsement licence to people with less than five years driving experience. However, in Darwin with a population of 150 000 and a much busier place than Katherine and Alice Springs, it is absolutely necessary that the person who drives a vehicle that carries four or five passengers, or twelve passengers in a mini bus, is an experienced person who knows very well where he is going and where he drives and how to drive.
I recall recently I got off the aeroplane at the Darwin Airport, got in a car and I told him to drive home to Nightcliff. The person spoke to me in broken English and said: ‘You show me; I drive’. We do not want these kind of people. We do not want people who came to Australia as migrants or otherwise and because they think taxi is an easy job, they jump in a taxi and drive around and they have only had a driving licence for six months or eight months or a year.
Some other issues that the member for Greatorex was worried about a bit were about the limousines and the special function cars. The limousine is a limousine in the same way limousines operate down south. A special function car is a vintage car like a Rolls Royce from the 1950s and 1960s that you usually get to transport a bride to the church. They are not a limousine. If you want to take a vintage car, you can hire a vintage car. If you want to get a limousine to the church, get a limousine to the church. If you want to get a taxi, get a taxi. But a vintage car is not going to be on the road every day transporting people from the airport or from the port to their destination. It is used only in special circumstances and we recognised that hence the reduced fees.
His comments about the opening of the market and the number of taxis which came to the industry and people took risks, yes, I agree with you. The market was opened. As a result we saw a significant increase in taxis, unfortunately resulting in the destruction of the industry with people moving out of the industry. What we now want to do is bring back the driver/owner because the driver/owner has a special interest not only in his taxi but also his clientele because he does not want to lose his clients. I know people who actually own taxis or drive taxis and I would much rather use these people than people because they do not have another job, and they don’t it is an easy job.
But as I said before, I would be prepared to give a briefing to any member of this House. I believe the member for Greatorex has a briefing with my officers tomorrow morning since I will be away in Alice Springs opening the Hugh Bridge. I do not apologise for the time we took with the industry. We listened to the industry. The comments we have received are very good. One comment that was made today was that there are too many taxis, 140 taxis. I want to advise the House that in Darwin there are not 140 taxis, there are 120 taxis and that falls within the formula of one taxi per 900 head of population.
Apart from that, the comments we have received are very good, very positive. The industry now will settle down, despite the fact that we are removing the cap and we will see the industry returning back to normal, providing quality service to its clientele not only in Darwin, but in other places such as Alice Springs, Katherine and Nhulunbuy.
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Madam Speaker, I rise to talk about my attendance at the Annual General Meeting of the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory on Friday, 6 September. It was a very well attended AGM and it was heartening to see such a representative group of our society. There were people from many diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds. I congratulate the outgoing President, Beryl Mulder, for her tireless efforts to raise the profile of the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory and to participate in public debate on issues that are relevant to people from a culturally and linguistically diverse background.
I also take the opportunity this evening to congratulate the elected Executive Committee for 2002-03. I sincerely welcome back to the role of President, Yogan Sathianathan. Yogan has been, as many people here know in the Territory, president before. He is a very distinguished and hardworking member of our community, and I am sure that he will continue to promote the racial harmony that we enjoy in the Territory. So, Yogan, congratulations on your elevation to president, and I look forward to working closely with you.
The Senior Vice-President is Isabelle Harrison. Isabelle is also no stranger to the people in the Territory. She has put in many years of hard work for the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory and her community. Beryl Mulder steps down to the Vice-Presidential position, very much a key and active position within the committee.
The Secretary is Madhu Dasgupta, someone who is held in very high esteem and regard by those who have worked with her and know her. She will have a specific portfolio of Seniors, working closely with Maria Koukouvas on the Board.
Prath is, by no surprise to many, the Treasurer of the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory, with a special focus on education, training, research and immigration.
Thyra Ou, a Cambodian member of my community, continues on as a committee member. Her focus will Centrelink and working women’s health. Thyra is a dynamic representative of the Cambodian community. She is an exceptionally hard worker and was recognised as such with a special award presentation by the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory this year.
Katherine Yuen is a highly regarded member of the Chinese community here in the Northern Territory. I congratulate Katherine on her election to the committee. She will be focussing specifically on children’s services.
Asad Mohsin, as we all know, is a respected member of the Muslim community, the leader of his community who was again elected to the committee, and he will be focussing on education, training and research.
Another committee member is Umi Rashmi. Umi is an absolutely delightful person. I have had the good fortune to meet her a number of times now. She will be focussing on women’s affairs.
Also on the committee is Jaya Srinivas. Jaya will be focussing on children’s’ services and representing the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory on the Police Ethnic Advisory Group, a very important linkage there.
Finally, a committee member is Emma Sullivan. Emma is a wonderful member of our Samoan community and, quite appropriately, she is focussing on arts and culture.
Two coopted executives onto the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory are Dawn Lawrie, who will be the reconciliation link person, and Micheline Lee, disability advisor. We all know that Micheline is a fantastic advocate for people with disabilities.
I wish the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory a very successful 2002-03 year. What an incredibly dynamic, capable, intelligent and harmonious committee they have elected themselves.
I make the point that, at the AGM, people were presented with a report, the Northern Territory News Watch Report. It was reporting on indigenous, multicultural and minority group issues. The report was compiled by Gail Dawson for the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory. I recommend it as reading to every member of the Assembly. It makes an interesting, analytical analysis of the Northern Territory news and broader media reporting. I have to say that there are some very concerning issues that this report indeed raises. It is worth reading. Get a hold of a copy of it. It is available from the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory, and I recommend it to every member of the Assembly.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, I would like to report on the Chinese Moon Festival, which was held in Darwin on 21 September. It was a very well attended festival, the fourth we have had in the last five years. It is one of the two Chinese festivals in Darwin that has all the Chinese members of the community coming together to share with the rest of Darwin what a significant Chinese festival is like.
The Moon Festival is a tradition that is steeped in history. We have many stories told about how it began. It is celebrated on 15th day of the eighth month of the Lunar Calendar. On that particular day, we have a full moon and Chinese people celebrate the moon, or mid-autumn or harvest festival. The round shape of the moon to the Chinese means unity, and hence it is also a time for family reunion.
The Moon Festival is a holiday and family members get together whenever it is possible. The reunion includes the sharing of special cakes, and these are called moon cakes. In remembrance of the legend of Chang E, moon cakes are very special sweet cakes made in the shape of the moon, containing lotus seeds paste, or even sometimes red bean paste.
The legend of the Moon Festival, the story that I told this year dated back around 2170 BC. The story goes like this. The earth once had 10 suns circling over it. Each took its turn to illuminate the earth. Legend says that during Emperor Yao’s rule, by some calamity all 10 suns appeared in the sky at the same time, thus scorching the earth with their heat. Because the heat from these suns endangered crops and vegetation, wildlife and the very existence of people, Emperor Yao asked a very famous archer to shoot down nine of the 10 suns. After shooting the extra suns down, the archer Houyi asked, as a reward for his heroic deed, for the hand of the emperor’s beautiful daughter Chang E. Houyi took care of Chang E, but she remained indifferent to him, always considering herself the most beautiful woman in the world, and Houyi not worthy of her.
Meanwhile, the emperor was worried that the extra suns would reappear and cause a new disaster, so he thought he should keep Houyi alive forever to make sure that the great archer would be around to repeat his magical effort. The emperor gave Houyi the elixir of life that was said to ensure immortality, but Chang E learned of the elixir of life and decided that she could make better use of it herself. She was the most beautiful woman in the world, or so she thought, and she wanted to live forever. So Chang E swallowed the magic potion but, alas, she immediately started floating into the air. She soon reached the moon, where she remains today, transformed into the scars on the moon as punishment, and leaving poor Houyi to see only the shadow of his vain wife, and only when the moon is full.
As I say, this celebration on 21 September was the fourth occasion that the Chinese in Darwin have celebrated this festival. Some 450 people turned up, each family bringing their own food, and sharing it with the rest of the gathering. There was more food than you could possibly consume that night. In spite of the rather chaotic start to dinner, everybody had their fill of various types of Chinese food cooked in different styles. This was one occasion where you could actually sample just about every different type of Chinese cooking that is available in Darwin.
We had many sponsors for the function. Most important of all was the Department of Ethnic Affairs, which provided us with seed funding to get the function going. Other sponsors were Alfred’s, through Stanley and Frank Chin who are always very supportive of the efforts of the Chinese community, Jape Homemaker Village also provided, through Connie Jape, two items as door prizes for our raffle. Leeon Chinatown Consortium, through Jason Lee, provided us with support also. Happy Gardens Restaurant, through the outlets at Nightcliff, Parap, Casuarina and the city, provided us with fried rice to feed some 100 people. The Chinese Emporium, through Kivi Lay, provided us with a hamper of assorted goods and also two pots. The Noodle House gave us a voucher, generously donated by its owner, Nelson Jong. Kathy Ling from Goldmark gave us a gift which was also raffled that night. Sabine Foodstores was the Happy Store that provided us with some 30 tins, altogether, of moon cakes which were sold that night at a special price to those that attended the function.
Moon cakes are traditionally very expensive. Apart from the paste that it contains, usually they add eight egg yolks into the paste and the more egg yolks there are, the more expensive it becomes. Some moon cakes can sell - to the discovery of the member for Port Darwin – for up to about $10 each! So, they are quite expensive articles. As usual, Lo Castro Foods have supported us every year we have held the Moon Festival, and they came through with the free ice cream to provide ice creams for every person who came to the function that night - that was very generous of them.
The function was attended by His Honour the Administrator, and Mrs Jeanette Anictomatis as well. They have been very supportive of our function. Throughout the night, we had cultural performances; we had children singing songs in Chinese - that is one way of teaching the language. I thought they did very well, and I could understand the Mandarin that they used to sing the songs, as well. I will not go into Chinese for you, because nobody will understand it anyway.
Louise and Winnie Wong performed two Cantonese opera songs translated into ‘Taming of the Shrew’, a light comedy drama describing the fight between a newly married couple: the difficult princess and her impulsive husband. They were sung very well. The other song that they sang was ‘Thundering Golden Drums versus Barbarian Horns’, a romantic but tragic story depicting the moment when two lovers are forced to separate for the sake of the survival of the mother country. The story took place during the Seven Waring States period in Ancient China, about 2300 years ago.
Then we had a very great rendition by a young women called Andrea Ngai, on her lute. It is a string instrument that you play holding it vertically. It is a strumming instrument, just like a guitar, but held upright. Haunting Chinese music floated right through the compound of the Chung Wah Society. While she played, the children came around with a lantern parade. There must have been 150 children carrying individual lanterns, some they had made themselves during a lantern workshop that we held earlier that afternoon with parents coming into help, making the frames with wire then gluing cellophane paper over the wire frame. I can remember when I was a kid that playing around with the lanterns during the Moon Festival was one of the highlights. Unfortunately, as a child too, you are not to careful and the lanterns end up burning because the candle inside the lantern tends to fall over in its bracket and of course the whole thing can go up in flames.
But that night with 150 kids walking around with the lanterns, it was a terrific sight. Some of them were standing on the stage while others remained on the ground, and in the dark of the night with all the lights turned out and only the candle-lit lanterns shining and the lute playing in the background it was really terrific. And then Andrea Ngai was accompanied in a solo Mandarin song sung by Madam Wang Ning. The song, translated, described a woman’s feelings in her heart that they are like the moon, meaning that they change from time to time or perhaps regularly - I am not quite sure!
Then the Chunlien Dance Group, that is a group normally of 12 young women from the Chung Wah Society, performed on stage. Unfortunately, six of them were not able to attend that night so we only had one group of six young women dancing the Feather Dance. The cultural performance was concluded with three items. One was the Kung Fu demonstration by Vernon Lowe and his troupe and to top it off we had the Dragon Dance performance. The Lion Dance had been performed earlier in the evening to open the festival following the arrival of His Honour the Administrator. At the end of the night we had the Dragon Dance. The Chung Wah Dragon Dance troupe had been training all week following the visit of a group from Penang which came to Darwin to train them. This cultural exchange was facilitated through the Office of Ethnic Affairs and brought five people across. They were led by the head of the Seow Hay San Association, Mr Gooi Teong Hup; accompanying him was Linda Tay Gaik Sim who came as the interpreter; Perry Tan Hin Hoe, who had been here previously some four years ago teaching the Lion Dance; Ong Kean Hin, a drummer who was particularly good at training the Chung Wah Society with the drumming, using the cymbals and the gongs; and Kenny Hew Yuen Hoay who is a very good performer in the Dragon Dance. The five of them together were able to transfer the skills to the Chung Wah Society Lion and Dragon dance troupes.
David Tollner was there to present the Australian flags to the presidents of each of the five Chinese associations that were represented at the Moon Festival. They were Bill Van der Veen, Po Chow, Adam Lowe, Jason Lee and Stephen Au.
The Moon Festival would not have been successful had it not been for the very dedicated and regular meetings and work put in by many of the people from all the organisations. I would like to list the names of the people. They were Daryl Chin; Po Chow, Jong Pah Fong, John Lopez, Jason Lee, Val Van der Veen, Horace Yau, Daniel Chow, Sam Chow, Chaplin Hsiong, Adam Lowe, Bill Van der Veen, Henry Yap, and Stephanie Zhang. They are the people who came to meetings regularly and rolled their sleeves up when help was required and helped put up the stage, pull down the stage, picked up the stage from the Marrara stadium and took it back there again.
In all, it was a very good function that night and I recognise the presence of the Minister for Ethnic Affairs and also the Minister for Asian Relations and Trade who were there for parts of the night. I understand that other members were also there including the members for Port Darwin and Drysdale and, yes, for a short while I noticed the presence of the member for Johnston. I did not see the member for Sanderson. Maybe he was just a little bit small for me to see. Anyway, it was a good night.
In closing, just a quick point for the minister to consider. When you borrow money to buy taxi licence plates or CVLs, you still own the asset, just like you mortgage or borrow money to buy a house. You might owe the money to a bank, but you still own the house so you still have property. If you want to get rid of the debt, you sell your house and you will be able to get rid of your debt.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I want to place on record tonight some of the very exciting events that have been happening in my electorate of Braitling. The Australian Open Garden Scheme, as you know, each year awards prizes throughout the Territory. This year I am pleased to say that two prizes were awarded to community groups in the Braitling electorate.
The Grant Road residents under the leadership of Mien and Fred Blom have worked tirelessly over some time to establish a lovely little park area. It is interesting that our town council has in fact announced that they will sell off some of their parks, but this little group of residents was so determined that that would not happen to their little space of land that they have worked tirelessly to establish what I call a basic park, but a very useable park. It is all sand. It has one piece of play equipment, it has a basketball hoop, it has a bicycle track, a cement track, and it fulfills the needs of many of the youngsters in the area. They received their $1000 grant from the Open Garden Scheme. Sarah Amies came down to Alice Springs for the occasion. They intend to spend that money on some seating and some shade. As I say, it is a basic park but it is just what a small community needs and all the residents in the little cul-de-sac are to be commended for getting together and working on their park. I know they were quite delighted to be recognised in this way.
The other award went to the Larapinta Primary School where I am very pleased to say that the children are establishing what they call a mini-desert park. It is a duplication of the big Desert Park in Alice Springs where they are establishing different areas. There are woodland, sand dune, riverina and mulga habitats. Their $1000 will go toward helping to establish more of these habitats to actually reflect what is at the Desert Park. Their teacher Mel Phillips was there with Geoff Myers and the Mayor Fran Kilgariff, and I am very pleased to say that this will become a community asset for the Larapinta residents. They deserve congratulations for being able to achieve this award which was quite unique.
I also had visit me in my offices – I am sure the member for Araluen did, too – the Anzac Hill High School Z Club members. These are young students who, in 1997 at Anzac Hill High School, formed a Z Club which is a young group of the Zonta Service Club. They were taking part in a five kilometre walk for women in Afghanistan, fund raising as they went. That particular morning they walked to the National Women’s Pioneer Hall of Fame, the town council lawns, the Olive Pink Botanic Gardens and to my office. Since the formation of this club not so long ago, their members have helped in a number of ways in the local community. They have helped the local Red Cross with their doorknock, they have assisted the Women’s Hall of Fame with fundraising, they compiled a goods box for the women’s shelter. They have also prepared boxes for Papua New Guinea and Timor. They have assisted at the Alice Springs Show, and have exhibited in the annual Alice Springs Quilting Exhibition. It is a great way to start young people doing things for their community to have this club established in a junior high school and see these young girls respond in such a way.
While I am talking about quilting, I am very pleased to say that I will be opening on 27 October this year’s Alice Springs Quilting Exhibition. The Alice Springs Quilting Club has been very active over the years. The exhibition theme this year is: The Quilts are Out Back, and it is a, theme, obviously linked to the Year of the Outback. They have 80 members at the moment, some who live interstate and some overseas, so it is quite a big club. The response has been very good; a total of 175 articles have been entered this year. There are 11 categories in this exhibition, with only two of them judged by the Alice Springs Quilting Club members. There will be other prizes given as well.
The Quilting Club began in 1981, and they have met at various places as they have been established, but this is the first year they have actually not been able to exhibit in the Araluen Centre Gallery. They are exhibiting in Witchettey’s, which I think is a bit of a shame because there is always a bit of prestige about the fact that they could be in one of the galleries at Araluen. I hope next year they will be able to go back so they are acknowledged in that way. But certainly, the work they produce is of an extremely high standard.
I also want to make mention of the fact that Teppa Hill Preschool, which is in my electorate, has celebrated their 30th birthday. The Northern Territory has been far ahead of the rest of Australia in that the preschools have been under the Education Department for so long, and this preschool would have been perhaps the third preschool established in Alice Springs. It was a great evening with many parents there and some former students. I was very pleased to be able to commemorate the birthday by unveiling a plaque which was made of sandstone and really is quite a feature of the school now. Mr Newland did it and incorporated the Teppa Hill design with the teddy bears on it, so it is really a great little memento for Teppa Hill Preschool and I commend the teachers, Heather Parkinson and her staff for what they have done.
I was very pleased to open the new Cancer Council office in Alice Springs, which is just down the corridor from my office in the building I am in. They have moved from where they were in Todd Mall to the office where they are now. They were really concerned about privacy of people going into the Cancer Council for counselling or what have you, and it seems to have been a good move. It is a bigger office. They now have additional staff, which is great. They have a counsellor, a coordinator, a fundraiser and an administrator. I was very pleased that Brian McCarthy, the Northern Territory president, came down for the occasion. It is very important that we all support very much the work of the Cancer Council.
So, therefore, I urge all members tomorrow morning to attend the Mini Field of Women in the Great Hall. I am very pleased to say that the member for Port Darwin will be MC-ing the event, the Chief Minister, the wife of the Administrator, and I will be leading the walk. We will have the choir from Darwin and Palmerston High Schools, led by Nora Lewis. It is going to be a great occasion. At the walk we will plant our silhouettes in memory of all those women who have either survived or not survived from cancer. The silhouettes we will be planting will be sent to Sydney to be incorporated in the Main Field of Women that will be held on Sunday, 27 October, but in 2004 it will be the Northern Territory’s turn to host the Main Field, so it is a very special occasion for it.
I guess we can all tell stories of how we have been touched with cancer in some ways. I certainly will be relaying one of those stories to the group tomorrow morning. But we should be proud of the way the Cancer Council supports women with breast cancer. I am aware of the inaugural Dragons Abreast Regatta on 25 August this year, which was the first national dragon boat regatta, where officers of my department started developing their muscles after training for the Chamber Rats team, and the money raised from this event went towards buying recliner chairs for the chemo lounge.
There are a large number of women diagnosed with breast cancer each year in Australia, and it seems to be in the Northern Territory. We all seem to come across someone we know who is touched by this unfortunate disease. We need to say that the height of awareness is increasing year by year. Tomorrow will feature the very young girls from the high schools to the very mature women such as me; and the message is right across all women to be aware and make sure that you do what you should do.
All members should come to this event tomorrow, and you could show your support by sponsoring a silhouette, or buying a raffle ticket, or purchasing something from the wide range that will be there because, obviously, those funds will go towards breast cancer research. It is a very important day, and I wish them all the success. Congratulations to the people who have been involved; particularly Katie Tchia, my secretary, who has been very busy with all this; and also Michelle Hanton and Susan Tully from the Northern Territory Cancer Voice, who also have been very involved. Of course, Pat Hancock, a member of the staff, will be down there to lead us, as well.
Mr KIELY (Sanderson): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I talk about all the events that have been happening in the Chinese community over the last month or so; events that I have had the pleasure of attending and participating in. I met quite a number of my parliamentary colleagues there.
Early in September was the Moon Festival. As a prelude to Moon Festival festivities at the Chung Wah Society, there was a special function held here in Parliament House hosted by the Minister for Ethnic Affairs, in consultation with the Chief Minister, where approximately 500 people of the Chinese community attended. This was a great night; a fantastic night. There was lion dancers. In fact, quite a number of local Chinese community members who attended said: ‘Well, this is fantastic. This is the first time we have really had such a crowd. Last year we had the Moon Festival in here, but this year everyone has got on board, and it is great’. I was speaking to a really nice bloke, a man I have had business dealings with, Mr Adam Lowe, who is president of the Chung Wah Society. He and I were talking and he was really happy about it. It was good to talk to Adam about how good it was to have all these people in the people’s hall out here - because this belongs to all of the Darwin, Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and all the people of the Territory, no matter what race, what religion. That is what this place is all about.
We are all out there having a good time. The lion dance was just fantastic. It is the hallmark of the Chung Wah Society, as far as I can see. They just get around everywhere, out at Hibiscus Shopping Centre; I have seen them going through town. I love it. I love how they do that lettuce thing; it is just fantastic.
Anyway, I was moving through the crowd talking to people. I had a bit of a chat to Mr Sung Ki Lee and Mr Toi Ki Lee. They are just local people from around the area. There was just so many people there that I was just chatting, and they were chatting back. There was Mr Teng Ki Mu, Mr Martin Lai, and John Lai who I have had quite a number of dealings with over our way. He is a great worker for the Chinese community. Mr John Lai just about epitomises the spirit of the Chinese community in this town; he gets in there and he works hard. I heard the member for Greatorex mention his donations to the Chung Wah Society for the Moon Festival and how he contributed there. That just about sums up a lot of people like him who just cannot do enough for their community, and that is a commendable spirit.
I also attended the Moon Festival the following night at the Chung Wah Society at the Chinese Temple. That was fantastic. I used to live behind there and listen to a lot of festivals. I enjoyed going there. As a matter of fact, when I was a young fellow growing up in Melbourne, I used to go out to Bendigo to the Easter Fair and they have a great time there. We used to love it.
I tell you something else that the House might not know, but I actually have Chinese relatives. I have cousins, two of my aunties have husbands, partners, who are of Chinese extraction. One lives on the Gold Coast. I have another couple of cousins in Melbourne. I do have some affiliations with the Chinese community.
Anyway, we were over at the Moon Festival. The member for Johnston, the Minister for Ethnic Affairs, the minister for industries and …
Dr Burns: The member for Port Darwin?
Mr KIELY: The member for Port Darwin and her husband, John, were there. They were having a good time. The Administrator was there. There was the member for Solomon. Look, that is the spirit of this place: all the politicians either side, all got in there and had a really good time with the community. I noticed in the crowd that it was not only strictly Chinese members of the community. It was open to everyone and everyone went, and you had to bring along food, and if you did not bring along food there was a $10 entry fee, and that was great.
The member for Greatorex, I think he is the patron of the Chung Wah Society, was up there MC-ing, and he did a wonderful job. He told this great joke. He is talking about the Moon Festival, and I have heard different versions of it and the version he actually told, I went home and told my kids because I thought that was a great story. But he told this tale, he is talking about the moon and he is pointing up to it, and he said: ‘The moon over here when it rises’. And everyone cracked up, and he is going: ‘That’s it, that’s the moon over there’, and then the joke was it rising behind him and every one is pointing. It carried the bar, it carried the night, it set the tone, got everyone going. Everyone had a really good laugh. I was glad. I thought this guy has such a funny streak that I have never seen before, but that was wonderful, that was just simply marvellous.
Following on from that event, we had here a very special occasion in the Hall on 11 October - a visiting delegation from China. The Chief Minister was happy to welcome a delegation of 13 senior Chinese officials and I would like to read their names into the Parliamentary Record. They were: Mr Guo Fucheng, the head of the delegation, Deputy General of the Standing Committee of Baotou Municipal People’s Congress, Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region; Mr Shi Peide, Director General of Shangqui Municipal People’s Congress of Henan Province; Mr Pang Lipang, Secretary General of Hunan Provincial People’s Friendship Association; Mr Wang Chongming, Deputy Secretary General of Baotou Municipal Government, Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region; Ms Ma Hairong, Secretary General of the Chinese delegation, Director of the Division for Oceanian and Canadian Affairs of the Chinese People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries; Mr Shi Jianmin, Director General of the Committee on Science, Education, Culture and Public Health, Shangqiu Municipal People’s Congress, Henan Province; Mr Chu Qingfu, Honorary President, Nanyang People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries, Henan Province; Mr Li Jinwang, Director General, Nanyang Municipal Planning Bureau, Henan Province; Mr Sun Jianhua, Deputy Director General of the Construction Committee, Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region; Mr Wang Xudong, Deputy Director of the Gardening Division, Baotou City, Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region; Mr Wang Jianjun, Deputy Director General of the Standing Committee of Dongcheng District People’s Congress, Beijing; Ms Jia Feng, Deputy Director, Miyun County Foreign Affairs Office, Beijing and Ms Wang Lidan, Interpreter, the Division of Oceanian and Canadian Affairs, Chinese People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries.
I had the honour and great privilege of walking these people into the Hall, lead by Mr Guo Fucheng, Deputy Director General of the Standing Committee of Baotou. It was truly an honour. All the local people felt very honoured that this delegation from China should come and visit us here in the Territory. The Chief Minister gave a beautiful welcome speech and so did Mr Guo Fucheng. He presented the Chief Minister with a wonderful tapestry of pandas that she could actually rotate and there was two panels to this. Our government, our Chief Minister, reciprocated with a beautiful bark painting. I am sure that will be greatly treasured by the recipient.
I was also pleased to see the shadow minister for Ethnic Affairs there. He was mingling in the crowd. I am also pleased that our Minister for Ethnic Affairs presented a cheque to the Australian China Friendship Society to assist in the functions that were planned as they were hosting the delegation. The delegation is a very business-focussed delegation. It is a good thing for the community that these people are visiting our districts and having a look at opportunities. They were very busy. They were welcomed of course, they were met by Ms Song Wei, Secretary of the Australia-China Friendship Society and Mr Pedro Yap, who is a great believer in the friendship between Australian and China and the advantages that it has to offer both of our societies, and Dr Chaplin Hsiong who is the Deputy of the Australia-China Friendship Society. The event in the hall was wonderful. They then went to a dinner hosted by the Minister for Ethnic Affairs which I heard was absolutely fabulous. Everyone had a really good time.
The next day the delegation was out and about. They have been over to Gow’s Reptile Farm, they travelled to the Wharf Precinct to have a look at what was happening down there, they went to Crocodylus Park, they were all up and down the place. They were over at The Esplanade and at the Cruise Ship Passenger Terminal.
They were looking at the things that Darwin had to offer because in future years, this is a great destination for tourists from their country. There are a lot of people coming from China now on tourist visas and having a look around the place, and this delegation will go back with good reports about Darwin. They were even presented with some local produce – some local mangoes –which I am sure they would have enjoyed.
On the Saturday, I had the pleasure of being invited to lunch, with the Australia-China Friendship Society. Sitting at my table was Mr Pang Liping and Mr Shi Peide from the delegation along with Dr Chaplin Hsiong. It was really good to be able to sit down in a relaxed atmosphere. We were talking about how good Darwin was, what a great place, what an opportunity. We were also talking about the Chinese community and the contributions they have made. You can see it in this town, you can see it all around the place. The community here is a very proud community and it is proud because it has contributed so much to the way we are today. I thank them for all the work they have put in here.
There are a couple of great stories that I could tell which really strike home the longevity of the Chinese connection in this town. When I first arrived, I was at a display at the Botanic Gardens and I heard two older women talking about Darwin in the old days, in the 1930s, and they were talking in a great north Australian accent. I turned around because the stories were so interesting, and here they were, two old Chinese ladies in national dress for the day, and I thought: ‘Well, that’s pretty well it, isn’t it? Look at this’.
I also have a friend and work colleague, Narelle Hee, whom I have worked with for many, many years and I have travelled away on work trips with. We were in Katherine. We were work colleagues and we were having a beer in the bar there and this chap comes up and decides he would introduce himself. He said to Narelle: ‘Where are you from?’ because she is Chinese. She said: ‘I am from Darwin.’ He says, ‘No, no, no. Where are your parents from?’ And she said: ‘Darwin.’ And he said, ‘No, no, no, no. Your grandparents?’ ‘Well, they’re from Darwin too.’ He goes: ‘Yeah, but you’re Chinese.’ She goes: ‘No, no. I am from Darwin. I’m a Territorian’. That just about sums up how long these people have been contributing, how long the Chinese have been coming to this country, and I think it is wonderful that after all that time, over 100 years or more, they are still maintaining their cultural links which speaks a lot of the diversity, the tolerance and the greatness of the multiculturalism of the Territory and of this town and of the contribution of the Chinese community 100 years ago.
I am sure that 100 years in the future, they will still be the great contributing factor to this proud community of ours.
Ms CARTER (Port Darwin): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I rise tonight to reflect on Saturday’s activity which I know Madam Acting Deputy Speaker participated in and, no doubt, enjoyed.
On Saturday, a group of women members of parliament and women from councils and from the federal arena got together to help the Women’s Advisory Council’s Women and Politics group deliver what was called the Don’t Get Mad, Get Elected seminar held here in Parliament House. Over 100 local women attended this free event which was hosted by the Chief Minister, and I will explain later on some of the comments of evaluation from the day, but it was definitely a rip-roaring success.
The day commenced with the Chief Minister making the opening address, and that was followed by a panel consisting of women who are in local government. Those women were Anne Shepherd from Katherine Town Council, Annette Burke, the mayor of Palmerston, Jo Sangster from the Darwin City Council, and Mary Walshe from the Litchfield Shire Council. What came out of their delivery was, to some extent, a feeling of exasperation that people working at that level of government are seen as the third, ergo the lowest, tier of government. These women expressed quite soundly their frustration with that problem and the way that society in some ways reacts to that.
The reality, as I know all of us are aware here in this legislature, is that local councils provide a vital and essential role to us and to our constituents. I am sure you will all agree with me that a significant proportion of the complaints that we get from constituents, we have to hand ball to the local councils, because it is really there that they belong, and it is the local councils which are providing, for constituents, a very real and important service. The women involved in the panel spoke about their experiences on council, and how the debate in councils can be extremely vigorous, and how they are all, I got the impression, enjoying their experience as councillors.
The next session was with the media, called Under The Spotlight. The media panel consisted of Julia Christiensen, Cam Smith and Barbara McCarthy. That was a very interesting session. Essentially, what happened during it, was that the media were forced to justify the way they behave towards politicians across the board. Quite a few members of parliament and councillors raised issues with the media of some of the experiences they have had. The media, I felt, were pretty blunt in how they described their approach to the job, which essentially is that, if you are in politics, at whatever level, you are a public person. Whatever happens to you is fair game for the media and they are there to ask the questions.
What came out of the audience, I felt, was a significant concern about that approach, and certainly for the women there, it was one of the main things which turns them off getting interested in becoming public figures and involved in politics. I do not know whether or not the media are aware of the impact that they have on the community in deterring people from becoming involved in politics. Certainly, the floor put very strongly to this media panel their feelings of concern about how politicians are treated from time to time, and the media panel certainly spoke strongly and stuck to their guns that that is their job.
Barbara McCarthy made an interesting point, however, and I do not think it is one that many of us take up, or our supporters, and our supporters of course are often our families. Barbara’s comment was that, if you are ever upset by the way that the media are handling an issue for you, you have every right, and your supporters also have every right, to contact the media and express your concerns about that. The inference was that the management of that media agency would take those concerns into consideration if you believe you are being unfairly targetted.
After lunch which, of course, was an excellent experience, we had the panel of MLAs. The member for Karama, the member for Arafura, the member for Araluen, and I were on the panel. The program that we were asked to present was essentially the continuum between when you get that thought of becoming a member of parliament, through to working as a member of parliament. The member for Karama spoke on making yourself known, and that, of course, was the process by which you get involved with your community, people become aware of who you are, your values and your concerns become public knowledge and, I guess, to some degree, you have an idea that, ‘I might be interested in becoming a member of parliament and so I need to get out there and get active in the community’.
The member for Arafura spoke on pre-selection, and her session was particularly interesting for those of us in the CLP because I certainly did not know much about how the Labor Party pre-selects, but what I can say is it is very similar in the instance that she reported to us, as to how we go about doing it. The member for Arafura described how difficult it was to get pre-selected, and all the hoops that you have to jump through and, as we all know, it is often said that the most difficult thing about getting into parliament is actually getting through pre-selection.
The member for Araluen spoke on after you have gained pre-selection and the election campaign. I am sure all the members here are well aware the excitement that that generates. The member for Araluen gave a gripping account of her experience and, particularly, her love of dogs and cats in her electorate, and the things that she will do to get a vote. You had to be there to hear it, and I am not going to share it with you.
I spoke on the experience of being a member of the parliament after the election. I will not go into the details there as you are all very well aware of what that is like.
After each of the sessions, members of the public were able to ask us questions, and we had some great questions asked. The panels then were more or less finished and we had a session then from the federal member for …
Ms Carney: The Northern Territory
Ms CARTER: … the Northern Territory …
Ms Lawrie: Senator.
Ms CARTER: Senator, the Senator for the Northern Territory, a female one …
Mr Henderson: And a very fine Senator she is, as well.
Ms CARTER: Indeed she is. She gave an excellent account of her experiences in parliament. She elaborated on her experience and her interpretation of recent media hysteria over several members of federal parliament whom, in the past had an affair. That was riveting information for a group of over 100 women, I can assure you.
The day concluded with our Honourable Speaker, who spoke on her experiences as a person who is now an Independent member of parliament. I know that her session was very well received.
I would like to thank, therefore, I hope on behalf of my colleagues here in the Chamber, the women who are with the Women and Politics group. It was chaired by Gail Humble. Other members were Mary Cunningham, Jenny Scullion, Leigh Hillman, Margaret Bowen, Danella Cross and Teri Robson who really put on a fantastic one-day program.
Just to confirm my thoughts here, I have been provided with a collation of the evaluations from the day. I will read a few of the comments out from the women who put in evaluations. The question was: ‘Did today’s conference change your perspective on politics; and if yes, how did it change it?’ The responses included: ‘It inspired me. It showed me CLP politicians are human too’ - I note the member for Araluen is chuckling with delight - ‘It is nice to know that elected members did not know a lot at the start either’; ‘The conference reduced the preconception that being a woman in politics is not totally overwhelming and barely attainable’; ‘Powerful insight into the mechanics of party politics’; ‘An honest perspective on the role of women in politics’; ‘More empathy for politicians’. And to conclude with this comment from one of the women who put in an evaluation: ‘It appears that humour is the key ingredient to surviving in politics’.
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonnell): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I take up the cudgels of an organisation – as I have done on a couple of occasions in the past. This organisation is Anglicare and the Anglican Lodge in Alice Springs. The last couple of occasions where I have taken this issue to government, I have actually taken the issue to the former CLP government which saw fit, on those occasions, to extend the hand of financial friendship to the organisation so that it could continue doing its good work in the Alice Springs community.
However, once again, the Anglican Lodge finds itself in the situation where it may well have to close its doors. That is of great concern to me because it does provide an important service, and up until very recently, provided the only service of its kind in the Alice Springs community. I know that the representatives from the Anglican Lodge have written to the government; the last occasion on 3 June. The matter has received some exposure on ABC Radio. However since that time, the issue seems to have gone quiet. I am concerned that in terms of government, it is falling on deaf ears. It is unfortunate that the current state of play is that the ground floor of the lodge was closed approximately a month ago. This took 13 beds out of crisis accommodation in Alice Springs, and bearing in mind that the recent opening of the Red Shield Hostel only put ten of those beds back into circulation, it is a shortfall of three for the Alice Springs community but it is actually a shortfall of 13 for the Anglican Lodge.
I believe that the current government’s approach to homelessness in Alice Springs is inadequate. I say that because in former times, the former government was keen to keep these sorts of institutions running. Of course, one of the policies that was started by the former government, and is still continued by this government, as I understand it, is that beds are purchased for the night. The approach certainly might take people off the street but it does little to help people in their situation. It is also difficult for Anglicare because the cost of running one of those beds every night is some $30 and unfortunately, the payment that they receive from government or the person paying the bill is $17. You do not have to be a genius to realise that if you spend $30 and only get $17 in, sooner or later your funding arrangements are going to be in some sort of trouble.
I understand that the application before government is arguing for about $160 000 a year for recurrent funding. That application takes in alone the $80 000 of bad debt that the lodge basically has from the last financial year. When you consider that other services such as the women’s shelter and youth spending in Alice Springs is in the order of some $700 000 plus, it places the amount expended into perspective. I am concerned that not enough is being done to be able to make that sort of crisis accommodation available. As I understand it at the moment, there is some $65 000 with the Salvation Army for supporting people with dual diagnosis, that is mental health and drug problems, and some $85 000 was also expended in the Bill Braitling flats which supports both males and females who are in transition.
In the case of Anglicare, this government, and indeed the former government, had always taken the approach that the lodge was a commercial venture. Clearly from what I have just said, the lodge is not a commercial venture at all. It is in essence a charitable institution and as far as I am concerned, it should be treated as such. From July last year, the lodge was the only crisis accommodation in town for men and women other than those women who were escaping domestic violence. The lodge took a great burden from the community and was the only form, as I said earlier, of crisis accommodation in the town. At the opening of the Red Shield Hostel, the minister acknowledged the support of Anglicare and indicated that people from her department would be talking to representatives from Anglicare in the near future.
It appears that the only thing that the minister had in mind was talks of developing future options but what those talks mean, or where those talks were going to go, or whether it coalesces into any real expenditure for the Anglican Lodge is something that is not clear at all. The problem is that in the meantime the Anglican Lodge waits and is dangling in limbo. It cannot afford to do so for long. And it is that limbo that concerns me because eventually the Anglican Lodge will have to close its doors. What the government did in establishing the Red Shield Hostel and its functions will be for naught simply because the Red Shield Hostel is going to take over where the Anglican Lodge can no longer operate.
It is not a good result for the people of Alice Springs; it is not a good result for crisis care in Alice Springs. I am deeply concerned that this is not something that the Anglican Lodge can do nor should it do. Anglicare is a charitable organisation which cares for the less privileged of us in society, but it can not continue to pour huge amounts of money into a single institution such as this without expecting some sort of support from government.
The lodge has for many years provided an important service to the community of Alice Springs and I fear that without support, the future of the lodge is very limited. I would urge the government to heed this message - in fact, all members in this Chamber - and know that what they are going to ultimately lose is a good service provider which has provided a good service to the community of Alice Springs for the past many years. To abandon this service now would be to the detriment not only of the community of Alice Springs, but ultimately to the detriment of government because the expenditure that will be required in other areas to fill up or pick up the shortfall is going to be greater than proper support for the lodge.
Mr HENDERSON (Wanguri): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I would like to talk about a constituent who passed away who was a dearly loved friend of mine and a strong supporter of the Labor Party. Mr Jimmy Clarke, who was born on 16 April 1929, died on 6 July 2002. He was a much loved member of the community. I first came to know him when I was door knocking in the by-election for Wanguri, at his home in Martinis Street in Wanguri. We sat down and had a long chat and we have been friends ever since. He was a staunch supporter of the ALP not only helping me in Wanguri, but over the years helping the Labor Party scrutineer in remote communities.
Like many at the time, Jimmy was involved in the rebuilding of Darwin after Cyclone Tracy in 1974-75. Jimmy’s son, Barry, tells a story which captures Jimmy’s selflessness, some of the essence of why people loved him so much. During the cyclone, it was Jimmy’s actions that perhaps saved the lives of at least three other families. He ventured out during the eye of the storm, collected and relocated these families to his home, where they all sat in one single room, sheltering against the elements.
Wanguri Primary School was close to Jimmy’s heart, and he spent many hours there helping staff and students, particularly on the ASPA program. All of his children went to the school and he was involved with the school from day one, which was for 25 years. It will be my pleasure to dedicate a garden at Wanguri Primary to Jimmy’s memory, the Jim Clarke Memorial Bush Walk. The bush walk was one of Jimmy’s ambitions for the school. Jimmy initiated the garden - it was his idea - which will be commemorated to his memory. It was he who planted the first cuttings and seedlings and they will live on for Jimmy. Jimmy was also an active participant in the Wanguri School Homework Centre.
He was a life member of the Wanderer’s footy club and the Miscellaneous Workers Union. He was a founding member of the Top End Country Music Association. Jimmy gave much to our community and country, not the least of which was a tour of duty in Korea. He had a distinguished service career. I know the tour of duty was hard for Jimmy and we as a community are always grateful to our veterans.
Jimmy left behind too many relatives to count; a large and extended family, and I cannot put all of their names on the record because we will probably miss some of them and get into trouble. However, my thoughts do go out particularly to his beautiful wife, Maria. Jimmy, you were a great man, you were well loved, and your memory will live on, particularly within the bush walk at Wanguri School.
I would like to talk now about the Casuarina Junior Soccer Club and the Casuarina Soccer Club. I recently attended the Juniors’ Trophy Presentation at Lake Alexander as Club Patron; that was on Sunday. It was a fantastic day, pretty hot and it was great to see such a great club thrive in Darwin. Casuarina Soccer Club celebrates its 25th anniversary this year, and I take this opportunity to talk about the history of the club and some of the important players and contributors to the club.
In 1975, the occupation of East Timor by Indonesia led to large groups of refugees fleeing to Darwin. These people were a mix of Timorese and Portuguese, and after a time to settle, they played socially in the community in 1976. In 1977, a committee made up of several families, both who came in 1975 and several who had migrated earlier, was formed and formally established the Casuarina Soccer Club within the local Darwin Soccer Association competition. It was initially made up of three teams, consisting of A, B and the Colts, under 17’s. The junior soccer club was formed some time after this.
Other clubs, Alawa, now Olympic, and Moil, now Hellenic, already existed at this time, and the club use to train at Jingili oval. The name Casuarina was adopted. The original coach was Manuel Da Cruz. The club’s founding members and families were a driving force in the establishment and growth of the club. Some of these included the Tinoco, Godhinho, Casimiro, Ingles, Goncalves, Sabino, Bentes, Santos, Gil, Almeida, Ferreira, Bernardino, Rodrigues, De Araujo, Monteiro, De Castro, Morato, Cameirao and many others. Being a community club, these people also had strong ties in the formation of the Portuguese and Timorese Social Club, and Casuarina soccer played under them for many years.
Most founding members of the PTSC were the same people involved in setting up the soccer team. Many of these names and families are still around today, and their children and grandchildren still play for the club. Around 1984-85, the PTSC was set up at its current location in Batten Road, Marrara and soccer moved there and trained on a small oval and used several demountables as the club.
In 1988, through government grants assistance, a larger oval was built to be utilised by the entire club, with soccer being the driving force behind its creation and completion. The club grew from strength to strength in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and had a developing relationship with players from both the Anula Junior Soccer Club and the Casuarina Junior Soccer Club. Phil Piper was a tireless worker who has developed the Anula club in the Junior Association, and wants to give players direction after they were too old for the juniors, and hence the relationship between Anula and Casuarina was born.
In 1995, the Casuarina Soccer Club, Anula Junior Soccer Club and the Casuarina Junior Soccer Club formally amalgamated to form a major club within the Darwin area, which catered for all age groups from Under 6’s all the way through to Senior A Grade team. The senior men’s team was invited by the sporting minister of the interim government to travel to East Timor in 2000 after winning the competition as a goodwill trip. With a high percentage of the country still in ruin from the 1999 problems, the visit was a complete success. Several games were played in Dili Stadium and Baucau Stadium. The lack of grass on the ovals was evident, but the smiles all the players received from both the local players and spectators, numbered up to several thousand, was well worth it.
In early 2001, the club was incorporated in its own right and has its own constitution, logo and committee of hard workers whose love of soccer has allowed the club continue to grow and develop even more. The club now has two committees, one for each of the junior and senior divisions, which number about 10 to 15 strong, and have worked together to establish the club as one which is continuing to foster and develop soccer in Darwin communities today.
The current senior president, Tim Byfield, has been with the club since his playing days in the Under 8’s. Shaun Hall is the current junior president who has come on board this year and been a real driving force in fundraising. He managed to get a signed letter from Alex Ferguson, Manager of Manchester United, to auction. At present day, there are 207 junior players in 10 age groups - Under 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16 and 18. Sixty senior players in Casuarina have started a women’s team this year.
I would like to highlight some of the successful players that have come through the club:
Luis Casimiro, a National Soccer League player in the early to mid 1980s with Adelaide City;
Hamilton Thorpe, Australia Side Selections - Schoolboys, played professionally in England for
Portsmouth, played in the National Soccer League for Perth Glory and Parramatta Power, and is
currently playing for National Soccer League Club, Eastern Pride;
Scott Piper, Australian Side Selection - Schoolboys, State League in South Australia for White City;
Alberto Serra, Australian Side Selection - Schoolboys;
Hercules Lopes, Australian Side Selection - Schoolboys;
Simon Bernardino, Australian Side Selection - Schoolboys, currently playing State League in
South Australia for White City; and
Thomas Willis, currently in the Under 19 Australian Side, Under 23 Olyroos, and playing for Newcastle
United in the National Soccer League, trialled in Europe with Juventus, Torino and other clubs.
As you can see, Madam Speaker, the Casuarina Soccer Club is a great and proud sporting club of Darwin. It is great to see such a club be successful. I wish them the best of luck for the coming years. My two boys are now playing for them; Alistair in the Under 8s and Liam in the Under 6’s. I am proud to be the patron of the junior soccer club. It is my one treasured refuge from the life of politics and parliament and as minister. I book out Sunday mornings; nothing interferes with Sunday mornings and taking my kids to the soccer which they love so much. So, Casuarina Soccer Club, congratulations on your 25th anniversary, and looking forward to the reception we will be hosting for you in Parliament House in November.
I would like to bring to your attention the contribution made to the pastoral industry of the Northern Territory by Stuart and Meg Maclean of Margaret Downs in the Sturt Plateau area. They have recently sold their property and are touring around Australia at the moment. Because of this, Stuart has resigned as chairman of the Katherine Pastoral Industry Advisory Committee (KPIAC).
Stuart and Meg come from a long-established sheep squatter family property in southern New South Wales by the Murray River near Albury-Wodonga. They bought Margaret River Downs Station on the Sturt Plateau when the old Dry River Station was first subdivided about 1986; at first as a form of investment and diversification, but by about 1989, they came up to live full-time.
Subsequently the sheep property was sold. I believe they sold at the bottom of the slump and they walked away with just about nothing, so their livelihood depended solely on the profits of Margaret Downs. They ran the place and on an unusual basis - they had no staff, just a pair of well-trained kelpies, and got the cattle mustered by gradually closing off waters until they were near enough for a bike and the dogs to run them in. They did the yard work, just the two of them - steady, steady, a few at a time. If all this took a long time and they missed premium markets, they were prepared to put up with that.
It was quite an impressive operation and a couple of times, groups of rural college students visited there. At first, the students were very dismissive about this small scale family operation but, by the time they had listened to Stuart explain everything, they had a great change of mind. Stuart became interested in marketing and Internet technology long before these became commonplace. He also undertook rural leadership training – I do not think it was the same as the one that Alister has recently completed, but it was on a similar scale.
One of the Stuart’s and Meg’s achievements would have been their contribution to the Sturt Plateau Group, notably successfully lobbying the government to build the new road through the Sturt Plateau that has made the whole area a more financially viable proposition. Stuart joined KPIAC as a member in late 1997 and took over as chairman in 1998. I would say his attributes were as follows: he was great at chairing meetings - firm, but allowing everybody to have their say; under his leadership KPIAC was never a rubberstamp - every plan submitted to them underwent serious examination; once a plan was approved, KPIAC backed it to the hilt in a very active manner; in particular, Stuart would lobby at North Australian Beef Research Advisory Committee for projects that KPIAC had approved; Stuart would always deal with things at length out of session and consult widely with members of his committee when issues came up between meetings; under his leadership, KPIAC became proactive in terms of asking the department for work to be done, lobbying ministers and promoting the pastoral industry to the general public with displays and leaflets; and Stuart always came to every public occasion and meeting asked of him, and carried whatever role allocated. He was one of the drivers behind the Meat Profit Day in Katherine two years ago.
Stuart and Meg may have sold their property, but not their cattle. They are now agisted on a neighbouring property and the Macleans will maintain their contact with the Territory through them.
I did not know Stuart and Meg for as long, as the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries but, when I first met with Stuart – I am trying to think where it was now; I think it was in Katherine - he made an immediate impression on me as a man who was absolutely committed to the developments of the pastoral industry here in the Northern Territory. I met his wife as well at the Kidman Springs open day just recently, and spent an hour or so chatting with them. They obviously have made a huge contribution to the Northern Territory pastoral industry, particularly in the Sturt Plateau area. I know that they will be very much missed by many of their friends and colleagues in the industry. I wish them both well for the future.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, it is fortunate that the last question at Question Time was asked, and the question answered, because I was going to give a report on the Relay for Life event. Now I have a little more to say.
This is the second year that this Relay for Life organised by the Cancer Council has been run. It surprised everybody in the first year - I gave a report this time last year on the event - it surprised everybody at the actual success of the event. It is an event that has been run in other places and for the very first time, the committee was a bit nervous last year and it really was a great success. I do not have the details or do not recall the details of last year, but it was very successful.
This year their goal was to raise $60 000. I am pleased to announce they exceeded that with $67 000 already accounted for and with small amounts still to be received. This year there were more teams than last year. There were 47 teams with 715 participants. The issue that was alluded to, really I think what fuelled the question that was asked as the last question at Question Time was borne out of this angst that has been felt by the Cancer Council with the short notice of having to relocate from the agreed venue to a new venue, which has actually increased their costs this year. I am aware that they will be, or probably already have, placed a request for some compensation for the relocation at very short notice. I wholeheartedly support that no matter which side I represent. It really was not a very good situation to have a magnificent group of volunteers supported by 715 Territorians being mucked around with very little time to adjust to a new location. I believe that it could have been handled a lot better. The request for compensation or assistance from the Territory government, I think is well justified.
Second, this important group, in their second year, do receive a dollar for dollar grant from the AMP Foundation and also request assistance from the Territory government in a like manner so that they know that they actually do have the support of the Northern Territory government. I am not being cute but it was noticeable that there was no actual support on the day. It was said to me, I mean maybe I am in politics and people say these things, but the greatest concern was being mucked around with a very little window of opportunity to adjust to the relocation.
That leads me to what I learnt from Question Time. Obviously the minister is sensitive about this. It could have been handled a heck of a lot better and to mask this as though there were budget deliberations going on and we were not able to communicate this information to the Cancer Council, I think is a bit cute. Budget was announced on 20 August and the minister was able to put out on 9 August, a very substantial press release with a smiling face talking about this great announcement of $800 000 to upgrade the athletics track. Now, 9 August would have probably been a good time to let the Cancer Council know. But when you read the press release, it indicates quite clearly that there had been a fair amount of work already going on. There had been consultation with Athletics Australia NT as well as Athletics Australia nationally. You cannot just put a press release out on 9 August and have no third party endorsement until that day unless you have already gone through extensive community consultation with the Athletics Foundation. The evidence is there that really if the eye was on the ball, then the information could have passed most directly and far more fortuitously to the Cancer Council. With that being said, I support this fine group and I am more than happy to continue to offer that support because it is a tremendous event that really does build community.
I now move to another matter. This one is the solving of a great mystery that I am sure has kept members on the 5th floor awake at night wondering about this great catastrophe or apparent misappropriation of funds that has occurred which they have hunted down, without bothering to ascertain the real nature of the amount or the issue at hand rather than to create some mischief. It is in regards to Palmerston & Beyond last week. There was an extensive list of recipients of the Community Benefit Fund that had been directed from The Hub to community sporting and cultural groups. Right in the middle of that list of groups was the Palmerston Branch of the CLP.
I would have to tell you quite honestly that caught me and my colleagues in Palmerston by surprise. There are two of us here who are members of the Palmerston branch, the Leader of the Opposition and me. To see that there – really, we had no idea what it was about, completely an issue of The Hub. I immediately phoned The Hub and said: ‘Tell us what that is about because we have no recollection or understanding of any kind of support being offered’. There was $60 000-odd which was spread amongst a number of groups. Now, it did not look good, I admit, but I certainly wanted to know because I knew jolly well that we had not received anything as a political group.
Nonetheless, it did not stop those who were intent on mischief going around and speaking to all the groups and to rattle the possum and say: ‘Isn’t this terrible? They are receiving this amount of money, and what do you think?’ Of course it is terrible – well, the way it was presented. I was a bit puzzled, too, when I was asked by the NT News. I said: ‘I really do not know what this about’. Not to just rest on that, I had to find out what it was about.
I have to tell you that the Palmerston branch of the CLP was listed as a beneficiary; no reference was made to the amount or the nature of the benefit. Here are the facts: the Palmerston branch of the CLP did not benefit from the Community Benefit Fund. The amount in question concerns a $25 meal voucher. This voucher was offered as a door prize at a morning tea. This morning tea was a meeting between Defence families and the federal Minister for Defence support, Danna Vale. The only connection to the Palmerston branch of the CLP is that the branch booked the room and the local members advertised the event as a service and support to the Federal minister for local Defence families. I am pleased to inform the House that it was a local Defence family who benefited from the $25 meal voucher. I can understand how those with other agendas would like to make a bit of fuss and mischief of that, and I regret that, but the facts speak quite clearly.
I put on the record, supported by my colleagues, the member for Brennan and the member for Drysdale, that we wholeheartedly support The Hub. It has caused them a little trouble, too, trying to get to the bottom of this because it was an honest listing of different recipients and, of course, they wanted to list as many recipients as possible which is fitting because they do benefit so many of our groups in Palmerston. We offer our support to the board of The Hub and thank them for their great support to community groups.
In concluding, I would like to make reference to a member of NT Athletics who has resigned and is moving on to another position. Cherry Harvey has resigned her position effective from 11 October and will be taking a position at the NT University Sports Association. The Board and those who are involved in athletics appreciate the contribution that she has made, and I offer my support as well. She took up the new role as NTA’s development officer in November 1999 and has established a foundation for the development of athletics and set standards of excellence and professionalism in all areas. She has become the first full-time employed athletics coach in the Northern Territory and there has been continual improvement during her tenure in coach education and athletic performance highlighted by the extremely successful venture to compete in the North Queensland Championships recently.
She has established, managed and implemented a thorough development program for athletics and built partnerships with affiliated bodies, members, the Office of Sport and Recreation, Australian Track and Field, Coaches Association, Athletics Australia and more. So for my part as the Shadow Minister for Sport and Recreation, I offer my support and appreciation for what she has contributed and what she will continue to contribute in the NT University Sports Association.
Mr STIRLING (Nhulunbuy): Thank you, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, for recognising, as you always would, first risen.
The issue of cannabis use in indigenous communities has been a concern, and a growing concern over the last, I guess, four or five years, and right through remote areas of the Northern Territory. I have information from a recent Medical Journal of Australia I want to quote and put on the Parliamentary Record. Under the heading, ‘Rising cannabis use in indigenous communities’:
Mr Clough said:
Mr Clough said:
In concluding, Mr Clough said:
And the Medical Journal of Australia is a publication of the Australian Medical Association.
I commend the work of Mr Allan Clough -he is a constituent of mine in Nhulunbuy - and the ongoing support from the Menzies School of Health and Research into these issues. Mr Clough has been involved in researching kava over many years. He has strong credentials in this area of researching patterns of substance use and abuse.
These figures are frankly frightening when you consider the comparison of the rates of these people, and I quote: ‘Cannabis use now very high, with from 62% to 76% of males, and 9% to 35% of females, compared to 34% to 41%, and 33% of females in the broader community’. This is simply out of hand. Some people are making lots of money from trafficking these illicit substances into these communities.
The last time I spoke with the health clinic at Galiwinku, Elcho Island, there were at least ten cases of young men being admitted to hospital with psychotic conditions from cannabis use. There are plenty of advocates out there that will tell you, look, it is dope, it is grass, call it what you will, it is harmless. Well, it is not, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker. I do not know what transformation marijuana has undergone in the last 25 years, but there is no doubt that, with sophisticated growing methods, the actual substance, the THC content, is considerably increased under certain growing conditions so that you get these variations of ‘super grass’. This is the strength of the marijuana itself. The level of use in these communities and the outbreaks of psychotic disturbance and psychotic behaviour being exhibited, simply has to be pulled into line because we saw - in some examples with kava out of control and we already have enough problems with alcohol - that this, left to go its own way, will render these communities beyond any functional purpose at all.
I commend Mr Clough and the Menzies School of Health Research. I will be directing this research paper to my colleague, the minister for health so that the Health Department knows what they are up against. I will be directing it to our police so that they know, on the basis of this research, just how far out of hand it is getting. It is not restricted to north-east Arnhem Land. I have had discussions with the member for Daly at different times, and he tells me that the large communities through his and other members’ electorates are the same thing; that this is right across the board. This research has been restricted to eastern Arnhem Land communities but, I dare say, the Menzies School of Health would get considerably consistent findings if they were to go to the western communities and probably the Centre communities as well.
It puts us on notice that we have a growing problem that is already out of hand and getting worse. Those figures - when you compare with the comparison figures five and six years ago - by 1999 it increased to 55% of males from 31% and it is an exponential increase, because it is now getting up around that 62% to 76% of males. That is out of hand.
I thank them and I am serious that it puts the government on notice that a great deal of work has to be done here. I would be interested in Mr Clough’s interventions when they are brought forward - this idea of educational intervention. Simply, every strategy that we can bring to bear on this from policing, down to education, down to health intervention, needs to be right at the forefront of government. I will be doing my best to ensure that an appropriate government response occurs from all of the agencies with the responsibility in this.
I also take the opportunity to provide the House with further information regarding the remote skills intern project. Last week, I advised the House that eight interns have already accepted full-time teaching positions for term 4 this year - eight out of 15 originally. I am pleased to advise the House that the number has now risen to nine, with another intern - a male from the University of Sydney - taking up a position for fourth term as a professional support resource adviser for Alice Springs East groups schools. That now gives us nine out of the 15 original interns. Of those six remaining there are some indications that some of those may return for the school year 2003. We would certainly welcome them on the back of the experience they have had out in the communities.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, this afternoon, I pay credit to a community organisation in my electorate called Holyoake. I had the pleasure of attending that service and meeting with staff some weeks ago. This is a service that I am very proud to say is in my electorate of Araluen. It is a service that offers a broad range of assistance for people experiencing difficulties with drugs and alcohol. It also offers general counselling in a number of areas.
It is a non-government, non-religious organisation that offers counselling, education and awareness to those affected by alcohol and other drugs. These services include assistance in confidential counselling; dealing with things like issues that people experience about not having enough money and having trouble making ends meet; and for people experiencing relationship problems. It also assists people having problems with gambling, domestic violence or work related issues. It assists people who just want someone to talk to about a range of any problems; the service also assists those suffering from stress or abuse or low self-esteem. So as you can see, Holyoake provides a service that is very broad indeed.
In essence, it provides support for anyone who attends with a variety of problems, and as we know, sadly there are many in our community who have trouble navigating their way around some of the problems that life throws up. It provides a number of specific programs such as ‘Skills for Life’, information and awareness program, ‘the Young People’s program’, and ‘Parent Talk’ program, which is for parents and/or guardians who are concerned about the behaviour of children or possible use of alcohol and other drugs by their children. This program, not surprisingly, has a number of participants on a regular basis, and perhaps says something about the difficulty young people experience these days, and the consequent problems that causes for their parents.
I am aware that in various Family Court proceedings in Alice Springs, lawyers often refer children who are the subject of those proceedings to Holyoake for assistance, and assistance in a range of areas, and also for general counselling. Of course children experience these stresses and rigours of being involved in Family Court proceedings, and in fact I have referred children to Holyoake in years gone by.
However, I knew relatively little about the service in any real sense until I went there recently and I can say it was a pleasure to do so. It was very educational for me, and as a local politician, I can now with great confidence refer people to Holyoake for a range of assistance. I am sure that all members of this parliament would like to join with me to offer my thanks to the staff of this invaluable and fantastic service. The staff are doing what can only be described as a hard but rewarding job.
In particular, I would like to thank Holyoake’s manager, Barbara Low, and Janet Sherrah, the program coordinator, and Sharon Harris. I met with these three women and it was very clear from very early on that they were dedicated and passionate about their jobs and Holyoake itself, and having met with them and having them explain what Holyoake does and how it does it, I can well understand their enthusiasm and their commitment. Once again, on behalf of members of this Assembly, I offer my thanks to them. I am sure that they will all keep up the very good work for the betterment of many individuals in Alice Springs.
Dr TOYNE (Stuart): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, it is terrific you have such prescience. I acknowledge tonight a number of public servants who have retired recently from the Department of Corporate and Information Services. In speaking about these four retirees, I am talking about 95 years of cumulative service to the Northern Territory and its people. That is an enormous contribution.
The first is Jeff Wilkinson who retired in July 2002. Jeff was recruited to the Power and Water Authority on 12 June 1985. At the formation of DCIS, he transferred to Budgets and Commercial as a senior commercial officer until his retirement. During his time at DCIS he played an integral role in the development and implementation of control procedures and performance excellence. His contribution to establishing the current procedures for the PAWA bank reconciliation was greatly appreciated. I wish him well in his retirement.
Ms Judy North retired on 12 August 2002 after 28 years in the Northern Territory Public Service. Judy was recruited to the Housing Commission on 1 August 1974. At the formation of DCIS, Judy was transferred to Budgets as a commercial officer. During her time with DCIS, Judy played an important role in the development and implementation of financial reporting and annual report preparations. I wish Judy best wishes in her retirement.
Paul Richards retired on 5 September 2002 after 23 years in the Northern Territory Public Service. Paul commenced employment in 1970 and was a compulsory transferee to the Northern Territory Public Service in July 1978. Paul embarked on his career in the Assets Section of the Health Department and has remained in this area for the length of his service. At the inception of DCIS, Paul transferred from Territory Health Services with the Asset Management Unit. Paul was an instrumental member of the Asset Management team and helped setup the centralised management of assets, and I wish him well.
Pam Kwong retired from the Northern Territory Public Service on 16 August 2002 after 27 years of service. Pam was initially employed with the Commonwealth Department of Health and was a compulsory transferee to the Northern Territory Public Service in July 1979. Pam had worked mainly with the Department of Health and Community Services in its various incarnations and early in 1999 joined DCIS. Pam rose through the ranks to obtain the position of Manager of Recruitment Services at Casuarina Regional Office and provided an excellent service to the Department of Health and Community Services. I wish Pam all the best in her retirement.
We certainly wish all of these public servants the best. I do not think we can adequately acknowledge these very long term commitments by public servants within Northern Territory government agencies.
The second thing that I would like to quickly cover in this adjournment is the opening of the Alice Springs hockey field which coincided with the jubilee, the 50 year celebration of the Central Australian Hockey Association. I was very grateful for the hospitality of Dave and Debbie Moore. It was a fantastic night attended by a large number of past and present hockey players within Central Australia. We even had a delegation of Mount Isa players who were there for some competition with the local hockey players. We opened what has now been dubbed ‘the paddock’ which is the $750 000 worth of the new artificial turf surface, with six big water cannons to flood the surface prior to games. It was fantastic to see that new facility. As it is bedded down over the near future, I am sure it will go on to provide an icon facility for that sport in Alice Springs.
One absolute highlight was to see what we called The Originals which was a group of women players who actually started the hockey code in Alice Springs in 1953, from memory. The Originals turned up and we insisted that we get a photo of them on the new turf surface which was a far cry from the goat paddock on which they started hockey off in Alice Springs where there was absolutely no guarantee which way the ball would go next. We handed out hockey sticks and balls - that was a bad mistake. The next minute we had, dare I say, mature players fanning out all over the new surface belting hockey balls around. It became quite dangerous, so I cleared the area and left them to it. I wish hockey in Central Australia all the best into the future. We have a very strong code down there and we are ready to take on all comers in the Masters Games and I am sure they will have their customary success when taking on teams from all over regional Australia.
The last thing I want to talk about tonight is somewhat sadder. It is the passing of two very dear friends from out in the my home community, as I see it, Yuendumu and nearby Nyirripi. Well, it is about 190 km away but that felt pretty near at the time. Gibson Japanangka Granites, who is brother to my best friend out there, Robin Granites, passed away this week very suddenly, and certainly well before the time he should have departed this earth. My condolences go out to the Granites family, particularly Robin and Rex as his surviving brothers, and to his mother. I will always remember Gibson as one of the steadiest workers around the community, always someone who supported the people around him, a very good family man and a very responsible community member. It is very sad to see someone die so young as Japanangka.
The other friend I want to pay tribute to is an old man, and that is Tiger Japaljarri from Nyrripi. Tiger Japaljarri was a very senior man in the Nyrripi community, and he was always a person who, when I went out to visit Nyrripi, both when I was living at Yuendumu and more recently as the local member, was always so delighted when I arrived, to take me around, make sure I saw people, make sure I heard the issues that I needed to work on for the community, just make sure that I got back together with people I have known and loved for a long time. Japaljarri will be sorely missed in my life. We see the old men, the Pulkas, passing away. Going out there now, you feel like the era that I belong to is gradually receding as these old men whom I spent so much time with go.
One of the tragic things in Yuendumu and Nyrripi at the moment, and it is the other side of the debate we have been having about customary law and how it affects court decisions and all the other things you see at this end of life in the Territory, but at the moment, Nyrripi has just been through a very traumatic time as a community, following the killing of one of the young people from that community. What community of less than 200 people would not be devastated by the loss of a young man, killed absolutely without reason or without warning in Alice Springs? If you go to Yuendumu, you will see exactly the same thing - people, families trying to work their way through very traumatic circumstances, having lost a young person. We have to keep that in mind when we debate these issues, that there is a human cost to this. To see what that human cost is of loss to these families, the grieving of these families, you have to go out bush to see that, and that has so far been pretty invisible in this debate. I just feel for the people in those two communities as they try to resolve what are very traumatic situations.
I would like to pledge, not only myself, but our government, to continue to work to provide at least some clarity, at least some balance in the public debate and in the potential reforms that might be brought forward as a result of our inquiry. In the meantime, there is an absolute need that sensitivity be shown to the situation of these families. I look forward to a time when the world is a little bit better in these situations for the communities of Yuendumu and Nyrripi.
Dr BURNS (Johnston): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to continue my remarks about Moil Primary School. Last night I was talking about the NT Athletics Championships. Isaac Taulelei won gold medals for the 800m and 400m, discus, shotput, long jump and high jump for 10 year old boys. Isaac won silver in the 60m hurdle. Here is an athlete of the present but certainly, hopefully, an athlete of the future for the Northern Territory. Kiana Fiorenza from Moil Primary School made it to the National Tae kwon do Championships to be held in Queensland this month, and I wish her all the best.
Moil Primary School students won a very important award. This year, for the first time, the NT Minerals Council conducted a competition to encourage schools and the students in them to examine closely their environmental practices, and to develop a plan to address concerns which are highlighted in an ‘Envirosmart’ audit. I am proud to tell the House tonight that Moil school won the inaugural primary school award for the Territory. A very impressive presentation was put together by students and presented to delegates who attended the ‘Sustainable Development’ workshop at the Casino on 25 September.
The worthy winners were awarded $1000 - their school was awarded $1000 - by the Minister for Resource Development, Hon Paul Henderson, which will help them realise some of the proposals listed in their plan. Congratulations to Mrs Christine Collins and her Form 4-7 students: Zachary Anderson, Paul Anderson, Oliver Bruckers, Marion Caraher, Millicent Crowe, Emma Fisher, Ayrial Harburn, John Kandiah, Samantha Leung, Erica Miskovits, Ian Moriarty, Leonard Quong, Kyan Standish, Isaac Taulelei - there is Isaac again, certainly doing his bit in the academic and environment world - and Jake Toogood, Rebecca Waddington and Iona Watson.
Congratulations to Rebecca Waddington of Moil Primary School who won the national cartooning competition’s primary school category, the Junior Stanley Award for Media Art. Rebecca’s cartoon entitled Picatso - so there is a fine play on words - depicts a feline version of the great artist Picasso. That sounds very interesting. It was one of the more than 3000 entries by school students of all ages in this year’s competition run by the Australian Cartoonists Association. Rebecca will go to Canberra to be presented with her award on 26 October.
I turn now to Wagaman Primary School. There is a new chairperson on the Wagaman Primary School Council, Jim Hughes, and I wish Jim all the best in that role. Certainly have been some fine chairs of Wagaman School Council, and I am sure Jim is going to do a great job. Wagaman Primary’s entry, ‘Colour Our World with Cultures’, in the Festival of Darwin was incredibly vibrant and wonderfully inclusive. The entry won this year’s Grand Parade Thematic Section. The Wagaman Preschool raised $832 in a Bike-a-thon, with special thanks to Paige Lay, Adam Turner, Kai Kajewski-Zio, Will Nery, Izzy Jarvis and Tristan Cole for raising the highest amount of money.
Congratulations to Eric Moyle who received a gold medal for being a winner in the Northern Cluster cricket team, and was the only representative from Wagaman Primary School.
In the time that remains, I would like to talk a little about drug education in schools, because it is an issue that was raised in the House earlier this week; it is a very important issue. There is also the context of the review of school-based constables and the intention of the government, as foreshadowed by the education minister, to develop a new approach to drug education in schools.
I placed on the record previously that I used my RTD travel recently to investigate best practice regarding drug education in schools, a matter of great importance to all in the Northern Territory community. I refer members to my speech on 14 August 2002.
What seems to have arisen as an issue appears to be who is best placed to deliver drug education in schools, and some members opposite appear to disbelieve my claim that the research evidence clearly shows that well-trained and well-resourced teachers are best placed to deliver drug education.
I would like to quote some of this research evidence. However, I say at the outset that what I have to say is in no way, or could be construed in no way, as a criticism of the fine policemen and women who have delivered the DARE program in the Northern Territory schools for 15 or so years - or probably a bit more. Quite the contrary, I believe that the development of a new drug education curriculum framework provides new opportunities for police to add to their significant skills in this area. In addition, I believe that school-based constables should also play a pivotal role in supporting our schoolchildren to develop life skills which promote resilience to drug taking and other destructive behaviours.
First, in relation to who is the best placed to deliver drug education in schools, there is certainly quite a lot of evidence in this regard. Even in the Commonwealth’s National School Drug Education Strategy, which was released in May 1999 by the Commonwealth government, high up in the principles for drug education in schools I quote, well I quote the first two principles that have been outlined here. The first one is ‘drug education is best taught in the curriculum of the school health curriculum’. So, that is very important. Secondly, ‘drug education in schools should be conducted by the teacher of the health curriculum’. Obviously, the Commonwealth within this agreed framework, the National School Drug Education, has put that up in lights.
When I was in Perth investigating and examining this matter further, I talked with officials of the Education Department, and also researchers in the field. Certainly, Richard Midford, a researcher at the National Drug Research Institute which is part of Curtin University, is recognised not only in Australia but internationally for his work in relation to drug education in schools. I would like firstly to quote from a chapter which he has authored along with Nyanda McBride whom I also met in Perth, who is doing a PhD in this particular area. It is chapter 40 of the International Handbook of Alcohol Dependence and Problems published by John Wiley & Sons in 2001. It is called Alcohol Education in Schools, although the particular chapter goes a lot wider than alcohol education in schools. On page 793, there is a table under the heading of ‘Summary of Critical Elements in Effective School Based Drug Education and Prevention’. Under who is to deliver it, it is says ‘Teachers. Teachers should be trained and supported to conduct drug education’. And then it says the comment there, and this is all based on literature and a review of the literature. The comment is:
So it is right up there in lights, that teachers who are adequately trained and resourced are actually the best ones to be delivering drug education in schools. That is the model that has been adopted by the Commonwealth. That is the model that the research shows. I will be tabling these papers so that members opposite who might have queries about what I am saying here might be able to access those particular papers.
In another paper that Richard Midford has written, it is actually a review, Does drug education work?, in the prestigious journal, Drug and Alcohol Review, and it is in the year 2000, volume 19, pages 441 to 446. In this he is talking about drug education and effective drug education in schools. He says in his review, and he has extensively reviewed the literature, some 30-odd publications:
He then mentions a couple of authors who looked at a selection of drug education programs in American schools and found that while much was known about the components of the more promising drug education curricular, most of the money spent on drug education in that country was not being spent on promising programs. Project DARE, Drug Abuse Resistance Education, which the Northern Territory scheme is modelled on, uses specially trained police officers to provide drug education lectures and has been taken up by approximately 50% of school districts in America and in almost 20 other countries, yet evaluations of this program have indicated repeatedly that it is not only less effective than other programs which emphasise social skills development and interactive teaching techniques, but in some cases it actually has an adverse effect on drug use.
That is pretty plain to me. Here is someone who is a world expert, who has done a lot of work in this area - I think he has done a lot of work for the Commonwealth government, the Western Australian government and the Victorian government - looking at this whole issue of drug education in schools. I would like to commend some of the work that has gone on in Western Australia developing this school based curriculum in the area of drug education. They started it in about 1997 under the Court government and they got together a task force which was very representative of the community. The Catholic Education Office was represented, Alcohol and Drug Coordination Unit of the WA Police Service - and let me say at the outset, in all the models that I saw in other states, the police have a pivotal role in lending their experience and support and the prestige that they bring to drug education.
No one for one instant is saying that police should be excluded from drug education. What I found as I went around was yes, people say that the teacher is the best person placed, particularly in secondary schools, but the police have such an important role along with health professionals. Really, the teacher acts as a coordinator to ask these different groups to come along.
There are others from the education department. There are community groups, people involved in Aboriginal education, people involved in health and physical education, educators, the state school organisation, the researchers from the National Drug Research Institute and Corpus Christi College, the National Heart Foundation, the general practice divisions, and independent schools. There is a whole range of specialist people who are involved in the development of this curriculum framework which is now being implemented in Western Australia. I have quite a lot of the curriculum materials here with me. I am not going to table them because they are the only copies I have, but the framework which they developed in Western Australia is elegantly simple, but effective.
They looked at the curriculum. What are the materials that can support drug education in school? The training of teachers, not only in-service but pre-service. Policy, how to support schools to develop policies and guidelines for a whole school approach from K to Year 12 in drug and health education and management of drug issues for all schools. Most importantly, they are seeking to involve the parent and the community. It is a very important element to get the community and the parents involved to build up resilience amongst our young people and within our community to drug abuse. Then, of course, built in to all of that is evaluation and promotion. These are very important elements.
I am not saying that the Northern Territory should adopt the Western Australian model holus-bolus, however I think they have gone down this path. It took them four years through their task force to develop their curriculum, and I am saying that we could learn quite a lot from them. In terms of development of the framework in the Northern Territory situation, it is very important that we learn from their experience.
In summary, I believe that the evidence clearly shows that the model is classroom based with the teacher as the manager. The teacher has to be properly trained and resourced, but the teacher should be calling on the important resources in our community, and the police force is an important part of that. I was heartened to hear the education minister say that there would be a continuation of the school-based constable program because I know that the school-based constables have so much to offer in terms of teaching life skills, particularly to primary and secondary school students. It is exciting that we are standing on the threshold of developing a new curriculum framework for drug education in schools and I support it wholeheartedly. I hope that members opposite also support it because it is of crucial importance to our community. We are all aware of the threat of drugs and the harms that they do. Let us try and move in there and support our young people and our schools, our parents and families and communities to combat it.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
MINISTERIAL REPORTS
Timor Sea Gas - Update
Timor Sea Gas - Update
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I would like to bring the parliament up to date on our campaign for getting Timor Sea gas onshore. It has been, so far, a long and complex one. It has involved many meetings with oil companies, federal and state governments, and with lobby groups, and that work has gone on over many months now. It has also involved us building a coalition of interest groups: customers and industry associations that were brought together to be able to sell the message that gas onshore from the Timor Sea is in the national interest for a variety of reasons. Not the least, it has involved many Territorians brought together as Team NT. It has been a very successful team, bringing together government and industry, and we have welcomed the involvement of the opposition as well. So far, in our campaign to get gas onshore - specifically from the Sunrise field in the Timor Sea - we have come a lot further than many observers thought we would. Now, in October 2002, we are really entering a most important phase.
I will bring the House up to date on where we are with the Bayu-Undan field. The Bayu-Undan field’s outcome is resting on the ratification of the treaty between East Timor and Australia. We have reached a critical point in those negotiations about that treaty. The officials from Australia and East Timor, at this stage, appear to be deadlocked; they are arguing over whether international unitisation should be agreed to before the whole treaty is agreed to. Recently, one of the federal government officials, Dr Geoffrey Raby, told the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties - and this is a paraphrase of what he said - that the Australian government was willing to let gas stay in the ground if they do not get agreement on Sunrise international unitisation. It is an absurd response coming from the federal government.
Mr Henderson: An appalling response.
Ms MARTIN: Yes, it is an unacceptable response. What we want is a resolution of the treaty. We want is the ratification to go ahead, and constructive solutions rather than those kind of statements coming from federal government officials.
The benefits of getting Bayu-Undan gas onshore have been demonstrated; they are clearly there. Phillips has a customer - the Japanese Electricity Company has an equity in the field; those announcements were made earlier this year - and there is a delivery date for gas from Bayu-Undan for LNG into Japan. Gas may always be there, but customers might not necessarily be there; and we need to meet these time frames. Whereas it would be a great loss for Australia and the NT if we do not get Bayu-Undan gas onshore, converted to LNG and exported to Japan, it would simply be a tragedy for East Timor. At this stage, I will be contacting Prime Minister Alkatiri and our Foreign Affairs Minister, Alexander Downer, to recommend that it really is time for them to talk - and talk very constructively about how we get resolution of these treaty issues.
The other important field, of course, is Sunrise, and the time frame for decisions about whether gas will come onshore from Sunrise is next month. We have demonstrated very clearly that the customers for gas onshore are there, but there are problems, at this stage, with the conditions of commitment. We have contacted all customers as the joint venturers are doing, and there is a common theme that we are hearing back from them. The price they are being offered by the joint venturers is not a bad one, it is a competitive price; but they are certainly worried about the long period between them having to commit and the commitment from the producers. Whereas we believe that the customers are showing that they are keen to move ahead, there are issues about the time frame between committing and when that gas would be coming onshore - and quite understandably. However, it is reassuring to have back from the customers that the prices they are being offered are really competitive and are in ball park. Hopefully, the problems that seem to be there with customers and the joint venturers are not insurmountable.
We are now moving into the next phase of our campaign. I am to see the Prime Minister on 6 November. As part of his contribution to Team NT, I welcome the Opposition Leader to meet with the Prime Minister tomorrow afternoon. We will be providing the Opposition Leader with the most up-to-date briefing for that meeting; and that will happen today. I am sure that the Opposition Leader will be reinforcing the view that Sunrise gas must come onshore; that it is to the benefit of all Territorians and the country, as we have so clearly spelt out over many months now. I will be following up with the Prime Minister and the joint venturers next month, that the best prospects that we have ever had for Sunrise gas are when all joint venturers work together and work for a common interest, rather than being divided …
Madam SPEAKER: Your time has expired, Chief Minister.
Ms MARTIN: I am very disappointed, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Those are the rules.
Mr BURKE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, there are a number of issues that are raised by the Chief Minister which, I believe, that in the spirit of Team NT, I do not wish to respond to in the Chamber. I will be receiving a briefing at lunch time, as the Chief Minister said, and I will certainly be doing my utmost to raise the Territory government’s issues with the Prime Minister, and do whatever I can to prepare the way for the Chief Minister when she visits him later this month.
As the Chief Minister said, I believe the situation is urgent, certainly in terms of getting a fundamental position from the federal government. In that regard, I hope the Northern Territory government’s position - in terms of not only effort, but also contribution and options as to how this whole package could be put together - is well and truly advanced, because those are the sort of things that need to be flagged to the Prime Minister as soon as possible. Along with the Prime Minister, I will also have the opportunity to talk to Minister Macfarlane and, as a result of those visits, I will report back to the government as soon as possible.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, the whole essence of how we have come so much further in getting gas onshore in our campaign that has been run so successfully nationally, has been the joint approach that we have taken; that this is a bipartisan effort, not only through the parliament but also through our community. Strong support in our community, strong and excellent support from members of Team NT, industry representatives, and the work they have done in their own time, has really been a very critical component of our success so far.
However, I reiterate that the important thing about Sunrise is that the message to the Prime Minister will be: we have to have all players working together, we have to be establishing foundation customers for the Sunrise gas in Darwin, and we need to look very carefully at whether that is an LNG plant and have that fully discussed between the joint venturers. Certainly, I am hopeful that the Prime Minister - as he has indicated all along the way - wants to see Timor Sea gas onshore, and this the fourth gas hub for Australia.
Health Care Agreement 2002-03
Mrs AAGAARD (Health and Community Services): Madam Speaker, I would like to inform the House about progress on the negotiation of the Australian Health Care Agreements, which are known as AHCA. The 2003-2008 AHCA is the current single most important public policy issue for the hospital and health care sector. This agreement is a key source of direct Commonwealth funding for the Territory with AHCA payments from the Commonwealth comprising approximately 15% of the Territory’s health budget and 28% of our total spending on hospitals. The time frame for implementation of the new AHCA, the fourth of its kind, is July 2003.
At the April 2002 Australian Health Ministers’ Conference, Commonwealth, state and territory ministers outlined a new approach to the next agreement. At the meeting, ministers agreed that the process for developing the next AHCA would reflect that Commonwealth, state and territory relations in health should focus on best care in health outcomes regardless of jurisdictional boundaries. The Commonwealth, state and territories would work more collaboratively to improve the health and wellbeing of the community and also the way in which health services are provided, and that AHCA should contain principles, objectives and proposed health outcomes designed to achieve these outcomes.
This is a very different approach to the previous agreements where negotiations have focussed on funding. Ministers established reference groups and commissioned research in a number of high priority areas. To assist in these discussions, health ministers decided to form nine reference groups to study key issues in the health care system and provide suggestions as to how these issues should be progressed through the AHCAs. They covered the interaction between hospital funding and private health insurance; improving rural health; the interface between aged and acute care; the continuum between preventative, primary, chronic and acute models of care; improving indigenous health; improving mental health; information technology research and e-health; quality and safety; and collaboration on work force training and education.
I was pleased to sponsor the reference group on improving indigenous health. This group was co-chaired by Pat Anderson, whom many of you will know, and Jane Holton, the Secretary of the Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing. This is the first time that indigenous health has been considered as a significant issue in the agreement. The reference group on improving rural health also has two Northern Territory representatives as members, Miss Stephanie Bell from the Central Australian Aboriginal Congress, and Mr Bruce McKay, a remote area nurse from Yulara. Reference groups were given four months to report back to health ministers and we were presented with the final reports of reference groups on 27 September.
While the recommendations were numerous, most addressed similar themes including improving continuity of care across the health system; the need for flexibility of funding models both between the public and private sectors, and between the areas of responsibility of the Commonwealth, states and territories - our ongoing concern about the Territory’s ability to fully access Medicare is an example of these issues. We are also pursuing the need for an adequately supplied and well trained work force, obviously a key issue for the Territory; increasing the focus on prevention and early detection of disease; enhancing safety and quality to support the delivery of the best possible health care; the need to clarify and clearly identify the roles, responsibilities and accountability of each level of government; and enhancing consumer centred health planning and health delivery models which promote self-management and informed decision making.
Several reports described the current system as designed around the boundaries of funding streams rather than consumer needs; improving interaction between health and other social portfolios in recognition that health status is influenced by the availability of a number of other services, for example, housing, transport, income support, employment and training. Obviously, this was of particular interest to the reference group on indigenous health, rural health, aged care and mental health and, finally, the need for greater accountability through performance reporting and better data collections in order to assist planning of services.
Health ministers are continuing to work through the recommendations of the reference groups. We hope to identify practical solutions that can be included in the new agreements and remove the disincentives that exist in current agreements to flexible and responsive services. Officers of my department are working with their counterparts in other jurisdictions who are discussing possible strategies that could be used to argue for an increase in overall Commonwealth funding.
Health ministers will meet again at the end of November to progress the agreement. I look forward to keeping the House informed as negotiations on the new agreement continues.
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Indeed, Madam Speaker, this is one of the most important agreements that governments enter into with the Commonwealth, not just because of the magnitude of funding, but because it is an essential service and because the Territory, as with other cases, has to put a very strong case against some significant opposition from our brother states. It has been a case here in the Territory that the heritage of providing additional Commonwealth money has seen us not vacate the field, as has happened in other states and to use that to relieve the burden of health on domestic budgets, but to move it to preventative and community care. That is demonstrable. It looks like that is the way the Commonwealth is starting to think, too. It is certainly a better outcome for health to have an agreement that focusses on health outcome and best practice and core services rather than just formulae that drive costs.
Indeed, other states became so adept at manipulating this formulae that often, because of our small size, we missed out. I entreat the minister to give her best endeavours in this negotiation because it lasts for some years. I know that she is well resourced with competent staff, including the current Under Treasurer who, when she was in Melbourne or somewhere on a retainer from the government doing some work, she did work in this area many years ago on health agreement way before this. So there are some very competent people among our bureaucracy who can look at this. I would hope that the Territory comes out at the next Australian health care agreement with a bigger slice of the pie than has been the case hitherto.
Ms AAGAARD (Health and Community Services): Madam Speaker, I thank the honourable member for his comments. Certainly, the process to date has been a very cooperative one. The Commonwealth initially was, I think, concerned about the process that they were taking and given that all states, of course, were the same political colour and the Commonwealth felt that perhaps there might have been a bit of a bullying tactic there. But in fact the Honourable Senator Kay Patterson has taken our concerns on board and has been extremely cooperative and I believe that the agreement that we will be looking at will be a very good one.
In terms of the Territory, I know that the Commonwealth has taken a particular interest in issues to do with the Territory and the fact that indigenous health measures have been considered, at this stage, is a very significant matter for the Northern Territory. I can assure the honourable members of the House that I will be doing everything I can to make sure the Territory gets the best possible deal in this agreement.
East Arm Wharf Open Day
Mr VATSKALIS (Transport and Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, I rise to make a ministerial report on the port open day held recently by my department and the Port Corporation.
The Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment, DIPE, together with the Darwin Port Corporation undertook to hold a port open day at East Arm Wharf to showcase the $87m Stage II works to the public. The East Arm Wharf project is one of the largest infrastructure projects undertaken by the Northern Territory government. East Arm Wharf is a busy working port as well as a construction site and it was considered that the safest and most effective way to showcase the project was to conduct bus tours of the facility from a car park outside the main gates.
A temporary car park was constructed by DIPE on the proposed joint user fuel terminal site. Marquees were erected on the site to act as bus terminals for the public. Port displays were erected in the marquees and port information was distributed by Darwin Port Corporation staff to the public as they boarded the buses. The project contractors, Henry Walker Eltin, also kindly participated in the day by arranging a number of their 80 tonne dump trunks adjacent to the bus stop so the public could get a closer look at these huge machines. The trucks were an extremely popular attraction.
The Nightcliff and Litchfield Lions supplied people to direct the parking. They also set up a sausage sizzle at the car park selling to the public. The Darwin Port Corporation made a donation to the Lions Club for their assistance on the day. Darwin Bus Service supplied up to 19 airconditioned buses on a rotational basis during the day to transport the public around the facility. A professionally pre-recorded commentary was developed to point out areas of interest on the tour of the facility and also supplied general information on the project.
The buses commenced playing the tape on departure from the bus stop and was synchronised to a number of check points on the tour. The presentation and professionalism of the Darwin Bus Service vehicles and drivers not only helped contribute to the success of the day, but it was also a good showcase for public transport in the Territory.
The public were able to leave the bus during the tour at the marquee erected on the facility to get a closer look at the facility and view the port, and government and industry displays. The government departments displaying included DIPE, Office of Territory Development, AustralAsia Railway Corporation, DBIRD and Darwin Port Corporation. Industry displays were undertaken by Phillips and the Northern Territory Livestock Exporters Association.
It is estimated from a count taken by the Darwin Bus Service that about 2500 members of the public attended the day. The feedback we received from members of the public, both on the day and subsequently, has been extremely positive, not only of the operation of the day but also the project itself.
Seniors Month
Ms MARTIN (Senior Territorians): Madam Speaker, I rise to report on the success of Seniors Month, celebrated across the Territory in August. In 2002, government extended Seniors Week to celebrate Seniors Month. Commensurate with this change, government funding for the activities increased from $8000 last year to $30 000 in 2002. These funds were allocated to Council on the Ageing, which coordinated and supported Seniors Month activities across the Territory. Celebrate Seniors Month is a key component of our commitment to Senior Territorians, and to promoting positive attitudes to ageing, both among seniors and the community at large. The month-long calendar of events is an opportunity for all Territorians to acknowledge the significant past and continuing contribution of seniors to the Territory, as citizens, volunteers and community leaders. Seniors Month activities across the Territory were as diverse as our seniors population.
In Alice Springs, Madam Speaker, you yourself had a number of things that you took part in. The Minister for Central Australia sponsored morning tea and a movie, and in partnership with Lasseters Casino, my government sponsored a lunch for seniors, which was very successful. The Battery at Tennant Creek was the location for a seniors lunch hosted by the member for Barkly, while a dinner dance at the Alice Springs Convention Centre rounded off a busy program of events in the Centre, which I believe you enjoyed very much. A Christmas in the Dry celebration, and a picnic at Edith Falls were among the events organised in the Katherine region to celebrate Seniors Month.
In Darwin, it was my pleasure, as Minister for Senior Territorians, to host a morning tea here at Parliament and attend the COTA dinner dance, also here at Parliament House. During the month, the Minister for Housing hosted a series of morning and afternoon teas for senior public housing tenants. These gatherings, held at Nightcliff, Casuarina, Katherine, Nhulunbuy and Alice Springs, were a resounding success and provided an opportunity for senior housing clients to meet directly with the minister. In the Barkly, the member for Barkly kindly met with the senior housing tenants on the minister’s behalf. Free buses were provided for a number of events, and for the entire last week of August. The buses were also free to interstate seniors as a reflection of the increasing value of grey tourism to the Territory.
In addition, Council on the Ageing administered a community grants program to assist community organisations planning and holding Seniors Month events. Eighteen such grants were provided to organisations ranging from the DEMED Association from Oenpelli, which held an elders gathering, to the St Francis of Assisi School for a grandparents day. A preliminary report on Seniors Month highlights the success of the event. It also makes a number of practical recommendations to enrich planning for Seniors Month 2003.
Consideration of the report will take place through the Office of Senior Territorians, and the new Seniors Advisory Council, nominations for which closed on 9 September. Almost 60 applications have been received for the 10 council positions, demonstrating the high level of interest in the council among Senior Territorians. The formation of the council will allow government to hear first-hand the perspectives of seniors on the issues that are important to them. I have directed the Office of Senior Territorians to take on the task of preparing the materials necessary to assist the council in its key activity, that of forming the development of a whole of government strategy for seniors. This will be the first time that issues of concern to Senior Territorians have had such a high priority in government policy and decision making.
This government continues to recognise the important contribution that our seniors make to the community. While our population remains the youngest in the country, the proportion of aged people in our community is growing. My government is alert to these changes, and is committed to ensuring that issues of significance to seniors are recognised in our decision making. I look forward to announcing the membership of the council shortly, and to meeting regularly with the council over the months to come. I commend this report to honourable members.
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, the Chief Minister has presented a report similar to one which was presented to this parliament, and I will make similar comments to most of it. This government has to do more than just present reports to this parliament saying how much they like older Territorians. They have actually have to do it.
I was fortunate enough to go the COTA dinner dance. The Chief Minister shot through before the announcement of the Senior Territorian of the Year was made, which was evident to everybody. The morning tea - and I have said this before on the Parliamentary Record, was attended by half the numbers I have ever seen at the previous ones that have been held in this place. There was a significant number of empty chairs. There must be something wrong, either with the invitations that have gone out or, perhaps, it is a message to the current government about how this has been done.
Seniors do remember too. At show time in Alice Springs, when the current Minister for Community Development churlishly refused to continue a long-held tradition of inviting seniors to lunch on show day. I would like to thank my colleague, the member for Greatorex, for doing that. I was fortunate enough to meet many of those seniors, and they were aghast at the attitude of this government where, such a slap in the face - given that it is held by the Chief Minister’s Department - was offered to them.
I would like a copy of the report and the recommendations on Seniors Month. It is something that we would like to peruse. I thank the Chief Minister for finally making up her mind about the Seniors Advisory Board; applications closed well over a month ago. I know several of the candidates and they are extremely good candidates. I look forward to the announcement of those candidates and a copy of the review and recommendations arising from Seniors Month.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I quickly put on record one important function in the rural area that was not mentioned today. The member for Goyder and I had a very nice morning tea with the seniors in the rural area. One difference we did have was we invited the management of Phillips Petroleum to come and talk to the seniors in the rural area. The feedback we got was that they were most impressed and happy that they had been made part of the debate about such an important issue. They felt, a lot of times, that we invite seniors along for a cup of tea and discuss the weather and the football. Here was an important issue that was being debated and they were most appreciative that both the member for Goyder and I had got together to create a forum where they could participate. It is something that, perhaps, we should do more often.
Ms MARTIN (Senior Territorians): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nelson for his contribution, but I only have three words for the member for Drysdale’s contribution: churlish, negative and unconstructive. I am only pleased that he is no longer the minister for seniors.
Reports noted pursuant to Sessional Order.
SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT
Mr STIRLING (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly, at its rising on Thursday, 17 October 2002, adjourn until Tuesday, 26 November 2002 at 10 am or such other time and/or date as may be set by Madam Speaker, pursuant to sessional order.
Motion agreed to.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS
Take two bills together
Take two bills together
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I move that so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent bills entitled Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill 2002 (Serial 108), and Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2002 (Serial 109):
(a) being presented and read a first time together and one motion being put in regard to
respectively, the second readings, the committee’s report stage and the third readings
of the bills together; and
(b) consideration of the bills separately in the Committee of the Whole.
Motion agreed to.
PERSONAL INJURIES (LIABILITIES AND DAMAGES) BILL
(Serial 108)
PERSONAL INJURIES (LIABILITIES AND DAMAGES)
(CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL
(Serial 109)
(Serial 108)
PERSONAL INJURIES (LIABILITIES AND DAMAGES)
(CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL
(Serial 109)
Bills presented and read a first time.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I move that the bills be now read a second time.
Today I am introducing the second package of the bills foreshadowed by the Chief Minister and Treasurer during the August sittings in the ministerial report on the insurance crisis. As the Assembly is aware, the increasing cost and reduced availability of public liability and medical indemnity insurance has had a serious impact on key sections of the community, not only here in the Territory, but across Australia. This is part of the consequence of short term difficulties in the insurance market, caused by some exceptional events, nationally and internationally. These have included the collapse of HIH Insurance in 2001, the more recent collapse of Australia’s largest medical defence organisation, United Medical Protection and, of course, the events of 11 September 2001.
However, the insurance crisis is also the result of a long term trend in increasing claim costs, particularly for personal injury claims. In the Territory, over the past five years, the average cost of bodily injury claims has increased at a rate of about 18% per year. In response to the latter, long term component of the problem, at a national meeting on 30 May 2002, Commonwealth, state and territory ministers agreed to a range of reform measures. Subsequently, the Territory and other governments have been progressing the development of legislation to implement these reforms.
The overriding aim has been to improve the availability and affordability of personal injuries’ insurance for all sections of the community. As most of the reforms relate to liability for personal injuries, more generally, they are expected to have benefits for both public liability and medical indemnity insurance.
At the most recent ministerial meeting on 2 October 2002, the insurance ministers discussed the recommendations of the recently released Review of the Law of Negligence, chaired by the Hon Justice David Ipp. Ministers agreed in principle to consider nationally consistent legislation covering liability for personal injury or death resulting from negligence. This would provide a consistent national approach to defining matters such as the appropriate standards of care, foreseeability of risk, causation, and statute of limitation periods. A report on reforms that should be implemented on a nationally consistent basis will be considered at further ministerial meetings during November 2002. In the meantime, jurisdictions are proceeding with their own legislation in other areas where national uniformity may not necessarily be required, or where there is little chance of achieving such uniformity.
In August 2002, I introduced the first component of the Territory government’s package of legislative reforms, the Consumer Affairs and Fair Trading Amendment Bill (No 2) 2002. This bill seeks to remove a statutory impediment to the self-presumption of risk by people undertaking risky recreational activities. As that bill is intended to mirror changes in the Commonwealth’s Trade Practices Act 1974, we are awaiting passage of the Commonwealth’s Trade Practices (Liability for Recreational Services) Bill 2002. Committee stage amendments to the Commonwealth’s bill seem likely to be required in response to the Ipp Review, which is recommending some further tightening of the definitions in the bill. Committee stage amendments are therefore also likely to the Territory’s bill when it is debated, probably in November this year.
In a ministerial report on insurance in August, the Chief Minister indicated that three further Territory bills are proposed: the first covering general tort law and related reforms; the second dealing with court processes and legal costs; and the third amending the Legal Practitioners Act in relation to the regulation of legal fees in no win/no fee cases, and advertising for personal injury matters.
While the government had intended to introduce the tort law bill in September, development of the bill has taken longer than expected. In any case, the time required for the Estimates Committee process meant introduction in September was not achievable. It is this bill, formerly titled the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill 2002 that I am presenting to the Assembly today, together with a bill providing for amendments consequential to the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill 2002.
A consultation draft of the main bill was released in late September, to provide an opportunity for comment by the legal and medical professions, and other members of the community. To date, the government has received little in the way of formal comment on the bill. The Law Society and the Plaintiff Lawyers Association have made substantial written submissions, and have also met with ministers and officials, including me.
The Law Society supports most of the provisions of the bill. However, it opposes certain elements of the bill, particularly caps and thresholds on damages awards. The Law Society has also provided very useful comments on technical details of the bill. The government has amended the discussion draft of the bill to take into account those comments. Additionally, the government will, prior to passage, further consider other policy issues that have arisen from the discussions between the officers and representatives of the Law Society. The medical profession has indicated its general support for the bill. Further consultation will occur before the bills are debated in November. The government will take account of community reaction to the bills as well as the national response to the Ipp Review in considering any committee stage amendments to the bills.
As the Chief Minister has previously indicated, I will shortly release consultation drafts of another two bills. These will deal with court processes, legal costs and legal advertising. The two draft bills will be subject to detailed consideration and public consultation by a working group of representatives from the judiciary, the legal profession and the government. The working party will be asked to report as a matter of urgency. The government would hope to receive a report in November but recognises this may not be possible. A formal reporting date will be 31 December 2002.
In line with the outcomes of the national meeting held on 30 May, the government’s legislative package is intended to reduce the cost of personal injury claims and the future rate of growth of claims costs. The package is broadly consistent with legislation recently or soon to be introduced into almost all other jurisdictions. It is important to emphasise this factor: the Northern Territory must play an appropriate role in the national reforms in order to ensure that the people of the Northern Territory receive the benefits of those reforms; the main such benefit being more affordable insurance. We are dependent on insurance companies being willing to provide such insurance on a competitive basis. Despite these national strictures, the government has been keen to ensure that the proposals can be justified in the Northern Territory’s circumstances. To test the proposition that the Northern Territory would benefit from similar reforms to those being adopted in some large jurisdictions, the Territory government commissioned the national advisors, Trowbridge Consulting, to advise on the likely effects of reforms in the Territory.
Trowbridge estimates savings in claims costs of around 12% to 13% under the limitations on damages award included in the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill. Apart from the direct impact on claims costs, the capping of certain components of damages awards is an important measure for increasing certainty for insurers by providing a ceiling on damages. This should also improve the community’s access to affordable insurance cover. While the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill will limit some entitlements to compensation, it is important to note that not everybody seeks to pursue compensation, especially for pain and suffering, through the legal system. Moreover, reforms of this nature are not new. Similar provisions are already in place for workers compensation and motor accident schemes in several Australian jurisdictions including the Northern Territory. In making these reforms, this government does not intend to limit entitlement to compensation on any discriminatory basis. The impact of the bill will be monitored to ensure that where the aged, the young and the poor in our community choose to seek compensation through the legal system, they are not particularly disadvantaged by these reforms.
Some sectors of the community have expressed concerns that these savings in claims costs may end up lining the pockets of insurers rather than benefiting policy holders. In the Territory, the Territory Insurance Office has a significant market share in public liability insurance. Competition between TIO and other insurers should result in savings in claims costs being past on in insurance premiums. The government will speak to TIO about the impact of this bill on access to affordable insurance for the people of the Northern Territory. Reinforcing market pressures, the Commonwealth government has asked the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to keep an eye on insurance premiums over the next couple of years.
The government acknowledges that if current insurance premiums are still too low, the effect of the reforms may be to contain future increases rather than reduce premiums. Nevertheless, the nett long-term impact of the reform should be lower premiums and a more widely available insurance cover than would otherwise occur without these reforms.
I now turn to the key elements of the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill 2002. The bill has a very broad application. It applies to personal injuries or deaths arising from negligence, regardless of the possibility that the cause of action may be found in a statute or in some other area of the common law. However, clause 4 of the bill provides that regulations may be made which exclude certain kinds of claims from the operation of the act.
In the main, it is proposed that excluded claims will those regulated by other statutory schemes. An example of such schemes are those in place regarding workers’ compensation under the Work Health Act, motor accident claims under the Motor Accidents (Compensation) Act, and compensation for victims of crime under the Crime (Victims Assistance) Act. Additionally, regulations may be made concerning other specific kinds of claims where there may be a policy imperative demanding that some or all of the provisions of the act should not apply.
Some examples of the kinds of claims that may potentially be subject of such regulations include: civil claims in respect of intentional wrongs; civil claims in respect of damages arising from a breach of mandatory product safety orders; and dust diseases claims. However, the content of the regulations is yet to be considered by the government. The government seeks comment from the community, the professions and the insurance industry on what might be covered in such regulations.
I must, however, emphasis that the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill, unlike legislation introduced in some other jurisdictions, is not intended to have any retrospective application, except for those provisions of the bill which are purely remedial. Accordingly, the bill will only apply to claims for injuries sustained after the bill has become law. The bill will therefore not have any adverse impact on those people already pursuing or contemplating making a compensation claim. In the main, the bill seeks to modify some entitlements to damages for personal injuries, including by placing limits on certain components of the damages awards.
By way of background to the bill, I mention the critical requirements that must, under the common law, be met by a person, referred to as the plaintiff, seeking from another person or that person’s insurer, referred to as the respondent, compensation under the law of negligence. The components are: the respondent must owe a duty of care to the plaintiff; the respondent must have breached that duty of care; and the plaintiff must have suffered damage as a result of the breach of the duty of care. This bill deals with all three components. However, the major focus is on the assessment of damages. The other two components are likely to be the subject of further major reforms during 2003, including in response to the review.
From time to time there are media reports of claims and court decisions whereby persons engaged in criminal activities seek or, in fact, obtain, compensation for injuries they suffer in the course of criminal activity. Clauses 9 and 10 of the bill make it clear that, in such circumstances, there is only a limited duty of care. The bill prohibits the recovery of damages if the injured person was engaged in a criminal activity, and provides protection to owners and occupiers for claims by a person who is injured while committing, in homes or premises, offences for which a possible maximum penalty is 12 months or more imprisonment.
There have been reports of injured persons obtaining compensation where it is relatively plain that the person’s intoxication has contributed to the damage that has been suffered, or that that person was aware of the intoxication of the person who committed the negligent act. Clause 17 clarifies the law by providing that a plaintiff who suffers injuries in these circumstances will be deemed to have contributed to the injuries and will have his or her damages reduced by at least 25%. This rule will not apply if the claimant can show that his intoxication did not materially contribute to the accident that caused the damages, that the intoxication was involuntary or, in the case of the intoxicated respondent, the plaintiff was less than 16 years of age, and in the case of the intoxicated respondent, that the person’s intoxication did not materially contribute to the incident of the plaintiff, could not reasonably have been expected to have avoided the risk that caused the injury.
Clause 7 of the bill provides that volunteers have a limited duty of care in respect of voluntary work provided for community organisations or for government. Such persons will have no personal liability as long as their actions are done in good faith and without recklessness. These liabilities will be taken on by the community organisation or government body responsible for arranging for the volunteer’s services. The extent of the liability will be determined as is the volunteer were employed by the community or government organisation.
The bill also protects ‘good Samaritans’ who go to the aid of a person in need of emergency assistance. This protection also covers persons with medical qualifications who provide emergency medical assistance. Clause 8(1) and (2) provide that good Samaritans are protected so long as their actions are done in good faith and without recklessness. The community expects that people who are doing a good turn for others should be protected from liability in these circumstances. However, the protection does not apply to intoxicated good Samaritans.
There are a number of elements to determination of damages payable under common law. Such damages are assessed having regard to matters such as:
pecuniary losses - these are losses due to the loss of income or the loss of earning capacity;
Aside from damages for gratuitous care services, which I will outline later, the bill does not affect the amounts of compensation for medical fees, hospital expenses or for personal care. In clause 20, the bill provides for a cap on pecuniary damages. The bill provides that the maximum rate at which the court may assess the loss of income or earning capacity will be three times average weekly earnings. This is higher than the current limits for motor accidents and workers compensation, which are no-fault schemes. Additionally, it is more than the amount of ‘twice average weekly earnings’ recommended by the review. However, it is in line with the limit adopted by almost all of the states. This cap amounts to around $2450 per week. Accordingly, it will only adversely affect very high income earners.
In clause 24, the bill also caps awards for non-pecuniary loss, more commonly referred to as general damages - that is, damages for pain and suffering, loss of amenities of life, a loss of expectation of life, and disfigurement. Under the bill, awards for general damages will be limited to a maximum of $250 000, the amount recommended by the Ipp Review. Again, this limit is higher than for the Northern Territory no-fault motor accident and workers compensation schemes, which set limits of around $170 000. It is lower than the $350 000-plus limits in New South Wales, and those proposed for Victoria, but broadly in line with the $240 000 limit proposed for South Australia.
It must be understood that these limits on awards for pecuniary and non-pecuniary loss are not expected to have a significant immediate impact on the cost of claims in the Northern Territory. Few Northern Territory plaintiffs are persons in receipt of incomes greater than $2450 per week. Few plaintiffs suffer pain and suffering to such an extent that they would be awarded amounts for pain and suffering that exceed $250 000. Thus, it is fair to say that the immediate impact will be minimal. However, by providing a ceiling on these components of damages awards, the caps are considered by expert advisors, such as Trowbridge, as being fundamental to increasing certainty and predictability for insurers and improving the availability of insurance. They are part of the community’s insurance against future growth and claims costs. It remains to be seen whether the insurers respond appropriately to these caps. This is something that all Australian governments will monitor. It may also be the case that governments, over the coming months, seek to achieve greater uniformity as to what will be the upper amount.
Both nationally and in the Territory, Trowbridge has indicated that the imposition of a threshold on the size of claims represents the greatest savings that can be made in respect to personal injury matters. In deciding on this threshold, the Northern Territory government had a number of options to consider. These are, firstly, the permanent impairment model. This is a model based on that in section 71 of the Work Health Act and in section 17 of the Motor Accidents (Compensation) Act. Under this model, no damages for pain and suffering would be paid unless the plaintiff had suffered permanent impairment. The issue of whether a person is permanently impaired would depend on assessment by a medical panel. The amount would range from zero for 5% or less impairment to the maximum prescribed amount for total impairment.
Second, the New South Wales impairment model. Under this model no amount is paid for impairment that is 15% or less. Amounts for impairment between 15% and 100% would vary in accordance with step gradations based on the prescribed relationship between the maximum amount which is $350 000 in New South Wales and a percentage of impairment.
Third, the South Australian model. Under this model no amount is paid for pain and suffering if the claimant has not been either substantially out of action for a week or has not incurred medical expenses greater than $2750. The maximum amount payable is around $240 000 for damage of the worst kind and for lesser damage, an amount calculated by reference to the relationship between the percentage damage and the maximum amount.
Fourth, the Western Australian model where there is a monetary figure of $12 000 set as a threshold.
The bill adopts the same approach as in Western Australia except that the threshold is set at $15 000. Clause 25 provides that general damages for pain and suffering are not payable if pain and suffering is less than $15 000. This would reduce the number and costs of lesser claims, for example, for minor slip and fall events and in cases where a patient was required to spend say an extra couple of days in hospital as a result of medical complications. These claims also tend to involve a high proportion of legal costs relative to the compensation being sought.
The $15 000 threshold is higher than the Northern Territory threshold for motor accidents and workers compensation but these schemes require permanent impairment before such damages would be payable. The threshold is similar to Western Australia’s threshold of $12 000, however, it is well below the threshold of 15% of the most extreme case recommended by the Ipp Review and adopted in New South Wales where it equates to general damages of around $52 500. If the Northern Territory adopted the New South Wales approach the effective threshold would be $35 750. In terms of the expected impact on the cost of claims, the $15 000 threshold is by far the most significant component of the Territory’s reforms with Trowbridge estimating savings of over 11% in the levels of claims. Applying the higher threshold as in New South Wales would reduce claims costs in the Territory by around one third. However, in the government’s view, a threshold of that magnitude would be too severe in the Territory’s circumstances.
Because there is no precise science for setting caps and thresholds the government invites further submissions prior to the passage of the bill. In particular, I am keen to receive information about past successful claims for pain and suffering that have been less than $15 000. Equally, I am interested in the damages creep anticipated by both insurers and the legal profession. Regardless of which option is eventually settled on there will be a further review by the end of 2005 as to how the threshold has worked.
The Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill also places limits on compensation for certain kinds of attendant care services. These are domestic or nursing services provided by family or friends on a voluntary basis. There has been a tendency for courts to provide compensation for these services at commercial rates. In line with several other jurisdictions and the recommendations of the Ipp Review, the bill precludes damages being awarded unless there is reasonable need for care; that need has arisen solely from the injury to which the claim relates; and the services are provided for more than six hours a week over a period of at least six months. The bill will also ensure that the rate of payment does not exceed average weekly earnings.
A number of other provisions in the bill will also impact on the determination of awards for damages. In particular, the bill precludes a court from rewarding aggravated or exemplary damages in respect of personal injury arising from negligence. These are rarely awarded by the courts anyway. Interest is not to be awarded on damages for non-pecuniary loss and attendant care services of the kind described above. As damages for non-pecuniary loss are awarded in terms of real values at the time of settlement, there is no justification for including interest. Prejudgment interest on damages awards will be set at the 10-year Commonwealth Bond rate with scope to vary the rate by regulation. As legislation does not currently prescribe an interest rate for prejudgment debts, this will provide greater certainty and ensure adequate compensation for past losses.
The discount rate for calculating awards and future pecuniary loss will be set at 5% with the provision for this rate to also be varied by regulation. The discount rate is applied in respect of amounts being allowed for future losses, recognising the payment of compensation is being made in advance of those losses occurring. The higher the discount rate, the lower the assessed up-front benefit. The current discount rate set by the courts is 3% which arguably over-compensates for future losses. While the Ipp Review proposes no change, almost all of the states are legislating for a 5% discount rate.
The bill makes a number of other amendments designed to clarify or improve the law. The first of these is found in clause 13. This clause sets out that a person, including a medical practitioner or a hospital involved in an incident that may have caused a personal injury, may express regret. This can be done without the person being concerned that this may be construed as an admission of liability. As is currently the case, a person will still need to be careful that their expression of regret does not contain an acknowledgement of fault.
The second such change is clause 30. It provides that a court in the Northern Territory may approve or make a consent order for a structured settlement as an alternative to a lump sum payment. This will permit the parties and the courts to reach settlements by which claimants receive periodic payments over the course of their lives. Such orders reduce a claimant’s exposure to losses which may result from investment or expenditure decisions regarding lump sums. The Northern Territory amendments reinforce taxation changes proposed by the Commonwealth in its Taxation Law Amendment (Structured Settlements) Bill 2002.
The second bill, called the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Consequential Amendments Bill 2002, deals with matters consequential to the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill 2002. The main amendment is the repeal of sections 10 and 10A of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act. This amendment is consequent on the re-enactment of the clauses in similar terms to clause 9 of the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Bill 2002. These provisions deal with the duty of care owed to trespassers and persons engaged in criminal activities. It is appropriate that they be located in the legislation and will deal with the generality of such matters.
In conclusion, there are a number of broader issues that are yet to be dealt with concerning the operation of the law of negligence, in particular arising out of the Ipp Review. These include matters such as professional negligence, including that for medical practitioners; foreseeability of risks, causation and limitation periods in which to claim. Together with other jurisdictions, the government is currently considering its response to the proposals of the review. It is also considering the reforms to medical litigation recently recommended by the Australian Health Ministers’ Advisory Council Legal Process Reform Group chaired by Professor Marcia Neave.
Further legislation seems likely to be required in response to these reviews early in the new year. However, the current bills represent a significant step in the reform process. The measures in the bills are expected to help contain future growth in claim costs. In turn, this should improve the availability and affordability of insurance to small businesses, not for profit organisations, medical practitioners and other sections of the community hardest hit by the current problems.
As I mentioned earlier, the impact of this bill will be monitored to ensure that where the aged, the young and the poor in our community choose to seek compensation through the legal system, they will not be particularly disadvantaged by these reforms. As I have indicated, the government will take account of further community reaction to this bill in considering any committee stage amendments where the bills are debated in November.
The reforms are consistent with those introduced or being contemplated by other jurisdictions and with the outcome of the national meeting on 30 May. Moreover, reforms of this nature are not new. Territorians have accepted similar reforms in the past for motor accidents and workers compensation as reflecting what the community should be entitled to and can afford. The government, on the advice currently before it, considers that the bills are balanced and fair for the community as a whole. Madam Speaker, I commend the bills to the Assembly.
Debate adjourned.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS
Pass all stages
Pass all stages
Mr AH KIT (Community Development): Madam Speaker, I move that so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent bills entitled Swimming Pool Fencing Bill 2002 (Serial 106) and Swimming Pool Fencing (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2002 (Serial 107):
(a) being presented and read a first time together and one motion being put in regard to,
respectively, the second readings, the committee’s report stage and the third readings
of the bills together; and
Motion agreed to.
SWIMMING POOL FENCING BILL
(Serial 106)
SWIMMING POOL FENCING (CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL
(Serial 107)
(Serial 106)
SWIMMING POOL FENCING (CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL
(Serial 107)
Bills presented and read a first time.
Mr AH KIT (Community Development): Madam Speaker, I move that the bills be now read a second time.
I take this opportunity to introduce the Swimming Pool Fencing Bill 2002 and the Swimming Pool (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2002. There has been a considerable amount of media coverage on this issue since government first announced in April 2002 that it was undertaking a review of swimming pool fencing legislation in the Northern Territory. Following consultation with municipal and community councils, the Chief Minister announced on 30 June 2002 that the government would legislate and enforce swimming pool fencing laws in the Northern Territory.
On 19 September 2002, the Chief Minister and I announced the government’s five point water safety plan to help prevent children drowning. The five point plan covers:
1. the introduction of swimming pool fencing legislation to Australian Standards, which is the
subject of the bill that I introduce today;
3. interest free five year loans to help fund upgrades;
4. a government subsidised water awareness program for children under five; and
5. the establishment of a Water Safety Advisory Council to advise government on broader water
safety issues.
The government wants to work with the community and do as much as we can to help to reduce the numbers of children drowning. Government is committed to ensuring that we provide the safest possible environment for children around water. The five point water safety plan is designed to help prevent the tragedy of children drowning and strikes the right balance between protecting our children and preserving our outdoor life style. We know it is the right thing to do. It is also about gaining parents some time.
Water safety is a much larger issue than swimming pool fencing alone. It is important that we adopt a range of measures that help prevent the tragedy of drownings. Government has put a lot of thought into designing the plan and we want to ensure that we encourage parents and carers to raise the water safety levels of the under five age group. The government will financially help parents with a water safety voucher that will help offset the cost of water safety or swimming lessons for under fives. This, and other safety measures under the five point water safety plan, will be the responsibility of the Water Safety Advisory Council.
The main objective of this legislation is to ensure that the requirements for swimming pool fencing in the Northern Territory are brought up to Australian standards as soon as possible. The overall aim of the legislation is for improved swimming pool fencing standards to give those who care for children more time to react to prevent a child drowning.
The legislation will apply to the fencing of swimming pools and spas, outdoor and indoor, in the Northern Territory. Above ground pools must be fenced, unless the wall of the pool is at least 1.2 m high, providing that the latter site is isolated, and pool supports are also isolated. Fencing for new swimming pools will be required to comply with the Australian standards with the commencement of this legislation. Existing swimming pool owners will not be required to upgrade to Australian standards for swimming pool fencing until their property is sold.
However, as the government wants to encourage Territorians to upgrade their existing pools as quickly as possible, for the first 18 months following the commencement of the legislation the government will provide an early registration incentive scheme, including a cash bonus, and an interest free loan to help out. These incentives for the upgrading or installation of the fencing and barriers are designed to encourage existing swimming pool owners to bring the swimming pool fencing up to the Australian standards as soon as possible. What this means is that government will provide a cash bonus up to one-third of the estimated amount required to upgrade or install a fence or barriers, to a maximum of $1667. The interest free loan for up to five years, for owner/occupiers only, will be paid to eligible persons to meet the balance of the cost of upgrading swimming pool barriers, and would be capped at $3333; that is, a $5000 swimming pool barrier less the cash bonus of $1667. The amount of the cash bonus and any loan would be determined following registration of the swimming pool, the presentation of the inspector’s report, and recommendation to the Swimming Pool Fencing Authority. It is the Swimming Pool Fencing Authority which will approve the amount of the cash bonus and loan payable under the schemes.
Owners of investment properties will need to upgrade their pool fencing when there is a change in occupancy. Changes will be made to the Residential Tenancies Act to ensure that the responsibility for swimming pool fencing compliance rests with the landlord. The interest free loan will not be available to investors, as they have access to other means of finance, and this expense relates to commercial property; that is, it is not their principle place of residence.
Those with pools on a property of two hectares or larger will be exempt from the requirement to fence their swimming pools under the legislation. However, they may choose to register their swimming pool under the new system. Because we want as many swimming pools upgraded as soon as possible, registered swimming pool owners on large properties will be eligible to apply under the early registration incentive scheme, therefore benefiting from the cash bonus and loan scheme. All other swimming pool owners will be required to register their swimming pools within 18 months of the commencement of this legislation. Where swimming pools are registered within the first 18 months, the early registration incentive scheme will be available to those who choose to upgrade their pool fencing to the new standards.
The minimum requirement for registering a swimming pool or spa will be that the fencing complies with a current local government requirements in particular areas; that is, pool and spa owners should ensure that their fencing meets the current legal requirements.
My department will have the responsibility for the administration of the swimming pool fencing legislation. A dedicated unit will be established in the Department of Community Development, Sport and Cultural Affairs consisting of technical and administrative staff, including a telephone advisory service. The hotline number is 1300 301 059 which may be contacted during normal business hours. There will be an inspection of all swimming pools on registration, that is, of all existing swimming pools and all the new swimming pools with subsequent self-regulation. However, there will be compliance checking by inspectors each year.
My department has met with representatives of the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory, commonly known as LGANT, and has listened and taken on board their views on how to implement the proposed legislation. The government will take on the task of implementation of the legislation. There is power to allow swimming pool fencing regulation to be delegated to local governing bodies and others in the future but this will only be considered after there is an effective system in place.
The government well appreciates the need to achieve a flexible, realistic approach in the implementation of this legislation. The staging of implementation will assist. The legislation also provides that the Swimming Pool Fencing Authority will have the power to vary the standards in some circumstances to achieve a practical and reasonable effect in providing a barrier between a residential building and a swimming pool. The legislation includes a range of provisions which will allow pool and spa owners to apply for registration with non-standard fencing. The application process will be straightforward and for existing pools and spas there will be no cost to register under the new system. The guiding principle that will be applied will be that which has guided the development of the legislation: the need to give those who care for children time to react. This is in addition to the general exemption for properties larger than two hectares.
A two-stage appeal process will be available where people are not happy with the decision of officers of my department or the Swimming Pool Fencing Authority. A review committee would be established consisting of a senior public servant, a representative of the Water Safety Advisory Committee and another person determined by me. Finally, if the person is still not satisfied with the decision of the Review Committee, then an appeal could be made to the Land and Mining Tribunal.
A widespread public education and community awareness campaign will be conducted prior to the new laws coming into effect. In addition, there will be an ongoing water safety education and awareness program. This will also include advice to swimming pool owners on a regular basis to remind them of their responsibilities to maintain fences, gates and other child resistant barriers.
Finally, the Swimming Pool Fencing (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2002 will amend the Residential Tenancies Act to ensure that a landlord complies with the Swimming Pool Fencing Act and that any swimming pool meets the required standards as soon as there is a change in tenancy.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bills to honourable members.
Debate adjourned.
MOTION
Standing Orders Committee – Change of Membership
Standing Orders Committee – Change of Membership
Mr BURKE (Opposition Leader) (by leave): Madam Speaker, I move - That the member for Port Darwin be discharged from membership of the Standing Orders Committee and that the member for Katherine be made a member of the Standing Committee on Standing Orders.
Motion agreed to.
MOTION
Standing Orders Committee – Code of Conduct Reference - Extension of Time to Report
Standing Orders Committee – Code of Conduct Reference - Extension of Time to Report
Mr STIRLING (Leader of Government Business) (by leave): Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition’s motion is very timely in view of the motion I need to put before the House. I move - that the Standing Orders Committee be given an extension of time until February 2003 to report to the Assembly on the reference moved by the Chief Minister on 20 June 2002 that the Draft Members Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards and the Draft Amendments to the Legislative Assembly (Register of Members Interests) Act be referred to the Standing Orders Committee for inquiry and report to the Assembly during the October 2002 sittings.
Quite clearly, the Standing Orders Committee is not going to make an October report particularly in view of the fact that it now has the reference to deal with the review, revision and suggestions for improvements to the Estimates Committee, a work that simply does have to be back before parliament in February. There is no question of that because we need the time for the staff and the Assembly to be organised for later in the year when the Estimates Committee takes place. So, in view of that work and this issue not yet being worked through, I would not want decisions taken without proper, thorough consideration by members of the Standing Orders Committee. I ask for support for the motion that the report back be extended until February 2003.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, the opposition would not have any problems with that.
Motion agreed to.
MOTION
Note Statement - Economic Development Strategy: Building a Better Territory
Note Statement - Economic Development Strategy: Building a Better Territory
Continued from 15 October 2002.
Ms MARTIN (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, in closing debate on Building a Better Territory the Economic Development Strategy for the Territory, I thank honourable members for their contributions. It is indicative of the importance of the strategy that so many members from both sides of this Assembly have participated and, I must add, thought carefully about the strategy in preparing to do so.
I make particular note of the detailed audit of priority actions due for completion by July 2002 which was undertaken by the member for Daly. He appears to be far more concerned about the time lines with respect to this document than he was when he was minister for Industries and Development and signed off on the previous government’s Foundations for Our Future, 180 pages in all, and yet there was not one completion date set in that entire document. So it is good to see that the member for Daly has actually moved on some and realised that documents are all very well, but unless you have time lines set and commitments for completion date, then they simply become what the Foundations for Our Future did: a good glossy document.
The member for Daly also made much of the fact that the work in Building a Better Territory had similarities to Foundations for Our Future. Of course, that is going to be the case. We are talking about building the Territory, and the previous government had that as their ambition. It is also ours, and I would say that of course we are not reinventing the wheel. Much good work was done right across our public and private sectors, and this government has of course drawn on that. But this government is clearly a new government with a new vision for the development of the Territory and some of those key aspects of that development are inclusiveness; a constructive vision; building on partnerships throughout our community spanning urban, regional and remote communities; celebrating the cultural diversity of the Territory as well as the aspirations, importantly, of indigenous Territorians. Bringing this together is the core element of Building a Better Territory.
Whilst I recognise the many of the directions of Foundations for Our Future, this is a very different document and it is built on a very different premise, one of partnerships of inclusiveness and not just being able to say: ‘We are doing the work in terms of somewhere like Darwin or Alice Springs’ but right across the Territory.
Building a Better Territory draws on Labor’s election statement and is part of the transition of many of those commitments into reality. Symbolic in our approach is Team NT. Through this initiative, my government is displaying the sincerity of its commitment to collaborate with the business community and, furthermore, the opposition in partnership to secure gas onshore. Let me take this opportunity to once again say that we will be unrelenting in pursuing this goal, as I indicated this morning in our report. The prize is long-term sustainable jobs for Territorians and greater financial autonomy for the Territory.
To refer to the contribution in this debate from the member for Nelson, one of the things key to the Building a Better Territory is a spirit of innovation, and we certainly must note the spirit of innovation that emanates strongly from the strategy, and the member for Nelson’s own vision with his velcro double pyjamas, which we note with interest. I trust he has patented the idea prior to sharing it with us in the Assembly back in July. And you have?
Mr Wood: I think they are advertising to sell those little blocks of land right now.
Ms MARTIN: I would like to move on to acknowledge the bipartisan supports, as expressed by the member for Araluen, for the efforts of this government in pursuing telecommunications services for all Territorians. Our very clear intention is the enhancement of economic opportunities for indigenous and regional Territorians, and one of the things we have to get right for this to happen is the provision of access to affordable and reliable telecommunications. It certainly is a key element of our Building a Better Territory, and one that is in the very committed and capable hands, specifically, of the Minister for Communications, the member for Stuart.
One of the things that sets this government apart from our predecessors is our preparedness to commit to action to develop the economy, to impose time lines in those actions and to make sure that those time lines are met. Building a Better Territory sets out our vision for the economic development of the Territory, and explains how we will deliver on that vision.
Since the strategy was tabled in June, I am pleased to advise members that an implementation and reporting framework has been developed by the Office of Territory Development, and that progress reports have been regularly presented to my office and the officer of every minister. I am pleased to report that many of these milestones have now been achieved. I take this opportunity to provide a snapshot of what this means in real terms for Territorians.
Implementation of the Economic Development Strategy is proceeding well, as at the end of September 2002. The government made a conscious decision to adopt a challenging set of targets in pursuing the strategy, and I am pleased that this has resulted in significant progress. It is also important to recognise that government is focussing not only on those actions that have specific due-by dates, but continues to manage the implementation of the overall strategy, which contains some 357 separate initiatives. In terms of those that do have a due-by date up to the end of September 2002, I note that there are 45 such actions, of which 34 have been successfully completed on time. Two were completed after the specified date, with the remaining nine in the process of implementation by 30 September. Details of the 11 actions that were either completed beyond the due-date, or were outstanding as of 30 September, include:
in Primary Industry and Fisheries, the NT Fisheries Forum. The forum’s establishment was
delayed, with the first meeting held in August, and with the next planned for next week, 22 October;
in Transport, the overview of existing capability and expected developments in transport, which was
scheduled for September. A final draft of the overview is being reviewed by agencies before being
considered by government, which will come to us shortly;
in Investment and Trade, the International Trade Strategy was to be launched by 30 September. The
strategy has yet to be launched, since it is at the printer’s, but the implementation of the International
Trade Strategy has commenced, and we will see it publicly released this week;
in Knowledge and Innovation, the Tropical Knowledge Forum, which was due in September, a number of
forums were held over the first week of October, and there were some constraints on being able to hold
that due to difficulties in time of getting some of the key participants. That has been held, and very successfully, and there will be a full report back to the Assembly in the next sittings;
in terms of Indigenous Economic Development, the Indigenous Economic Forum was scheduled for
September. Again, due to availability constraints on the part of some key participants, the forum will
now be held in Alice Springs on 21 and 22 November. It certainly is a very important forum that will
really focus the attention of government, and those right across the Territory, on what are the key factors
we need to be progressing in Indigenous Economic Development;
in Business Environment and Growth, implementing a business case manager approach, which had a July
target, the case manager/coordinator commenced work in September;
again, in the Business Environment and Growth review, the Territory Business Centre model, the review
report has been completed and is with government for consideration, but had a September date against it
and, again, that has been met in October;
again, in the Business Environment and Growth, the commercial tenancy legislation discussion paper which
had a target date of July is under preparation by the Department of Justice and is expected to be available for consideration later this month. It is a very complex and important piece of legislation and some of that
complexity has delayed the process, but not the commitment of this government to introduce commercial
tenancy legislation;
Public private partnerships, a discussion paper for August, was available from the commencement of
September, with a policy release in November which is right on target; and
in the area of Employment, Education and Training, a Northern Territory Public Service indigenous
recruitment and career development strategy has been completed and it is under consideration by
government. It is a good one and we are going to be very proud when we release that indigenous
recruitment and career development strategy. With something less than 5% of indigenous employment
in our public sector, and when you consider that 28% of the Territory is indigenous, it is a target that we
have to lift and one that has great benefits for the Territory - if we do and when we do.
In summary, the delays have been minor with many being merely trivial in nature. This underscores the importance the government attaches to this strategy and its approach to adopting challenging time frames in order to achieve real results. Government will continue with this process which is already proving to be so successful.
I now move to provide an overview of progress by industry sector. The key initiatives I will cover here include both those with specific target dates, as well as work in progress on actions whose targets are some way into the future.
In mining and minerals processing, there has been the completion of the Central Regional Minerals Study. Considerable progress has been achieved in the adoption of the National Mine Safety Framework. The new Mine Management Act is now in effect and the Indigenous Mining and Enterprise Task Force, which most recently met on Groote Eylandt in mid-September, is considered to be a national model.
In primary industry and fisheries, considerable progress has been made on industry development plans including plans for the cut flower, citrus and mango industries. My government has approved increased funding for disease surveillance and preparedness, and a national foot and mouth simulation was completed in September. This important exercise highlighted several issues that are being addressed as a matter of priority.
In tourism, the development of the Territory’s strategic tourism plan is on target and collaborative arrangements are in place with the Northern Territory Airports Corporation, including the appointment of an executive to promote new aviation services to the Territory. In Transport, business cases have been developed and delivered to a number of aviation companies to better service Darwin, Alice Springs and Yulara. These have included business cases presented to Australian Airlines, Silk Air and Malaysia Airlines, and an alternative schedule study that was undertaken for Royal Brunei. There has been continual communication with Qantas and Virgin Blue management for increased seat and freight capacity.
In utilities and infrastructure, the Power and Water Corporation was established on 1 July 2002. The other key initiative implemented in this period was putting in place the program for road, water and power services to the Phillips LNG facility at Wickham Point.
In land use, the NT Planning Scheme is to be amended. The Litchfield Planning Concepts and Land Use Objectives will be gazetted this month - and that is after a seven year gestation period, the longest land use planning in our history. The Larrakia Development Corporation accepted the government’s offer of a Crown lease over an area of Rosebery in Palmerston, thereby allowing further land to be released for subdivision.
With oil and gas, working with producers, consumers and the federal government in reviewing the domestic gas option; draft heads of agreements have gone from producers to customers for the domestic gas option. Specialist consultants have been commissioned to undertake economic modelling of floating LNG, relative to domestic gas production for the Sunrise Field, which clearly demonstrates the economic superiority of domestic gas in terms of jobs, taxation and industrial development and general benefits to this country. We have lobbied the federal government for the domestic gas option and are continuing to do that. There have been meetings with state Premiers of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and South Australia, to promote the domestic gas option, together with industry association and customers. Also, preliminary engineering and environmental investigations are under way for the Glyde Point industrial estate, with road design being complete.
In investment and trade, engagements together with FreightLink, with major transport and trading companies, and evaluation of expressions of interest from major freight forwarders in relation to the development of the East Arm Business Park; a major produce consolidator and processor is expected to invest in large cold store facilities at East Arm this financial year; and work is progressing well on the investment attraction strategy due for completion and release by December 2002 - that is this December.
With information and communications technology, a very successful strategic forum of industry and government representatives was held in September. An additional $24m has been allocated recently to improve telecommunications infrastructure and services to remote communities, and the Department of Justice has adopted the use of video conferencing to allow court hearings to be conducted via telecommunications for some remote residents, and to facilitate prison visits for families in remote locations. On telecommunications and use of video conferencing, it has also assisted the Cabinet process with the video conferencing facility being in Central Australia, and the Minister for Central Australia able to join in Cabinet by the video conferencing link.
In knowledge and innovation, the Desert Knowledge Cooperative Research Centre proposal has reached the third and final stage of the selection process with a detailed interview held in Alice Springs on 7 October. The Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal Health has also reached the third and final stage of the selection process and interviews were held here in Darwin on 8 October. The success of these proposals will be known before Christmas. Discussions have commenced between the Territory, Queensland and Western Australian officials in relation to a framework agreement on tropical science and knowledge, and a review of the Northern Territory Research and Development Advisory Council has commenced.
Indigenous economic development: as stated earlier, the Indigenous Economic Forum is now scheduled for 21 and 22 November in Alice Springs. The Office of Indigenous Policy was established on 1 July 2002 and welcomed onboard a very important player for this Territory, Neil Westbury. Wadeye has been identified as a priority community by COAG to pilot more flexible and coordinated service delivery mechanisms at all levels of government and in partnership with the community.
In regional development, support for community control of education and health services is proceeding with health zones identified, including the Westmax and Gulf regions and self-managing school pilots identified. The Indigenous Housing Authority has construction programs, including five apprentice building teams operating at Hermannsburg, Laramba, Santa Teresa, Papunya and Yuendumu.
In the business environment and growth, promotion of Territory capabilities to service defence needs, including facilitation of information regarding the impending navy patrol boat contract and the Air 87 helicopter initiative to be located at Robertson Barracks, and promotion in Jakarta during September of Darwin as a service and supply centre, including meetings with Indonesian ministers and mining and energy based resource companies.
In employment, education and training specific to the Economic Development Strategy, progressively implementing a program to address the recommendations of Learning Lessons, implementation of enrolment, attendance and retention strategies commenced, and development of programs in schools that address the essential learnings has been adopted as a priority area in the new NT curriculum framework.
In the area of natural resources and environment, working with the Commonwealth Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act on environmental impact assessment of several major development proposals; and mapping and analysis of water availability within the Daly River catchment, Sturt Plateau and Darwin regions.
These are just some of the initiatives that are being progressed within the Economic Development Strategy and, of course, that is just one area of one key focus of what this government is progressing as we stand here in October 2002.
The development of the complementary social development policy is also progressing with a lot of work done across the public sector. That initiative is being headed by the head of social policy in the Department of Chief Minister, Dr Rolf Gerritsen, and community forums are scheduled throughout the remainder of this year.
So, on one hand, an economic development strategy, key focus for the Territory, but at a complementary and importance sense, a social development policy to progress all those important issues that have to do with how we are living in this Territory. These are just some of the outcomes already achieved since the implementation of Building a Better Territory, and this is just the start.
In closing, I reiterate the sincere thanks of my government to all those who gave so much of their valuable time and effort in making this strategy the widely accepted document it is today. There is no doubt that its success is rooted deeply in the proceedings of last November’s Economic Development Summit built on by the intense involvement of the community in the formulation of the strategy over subsequent months and the commitment already being displayed by departmental staff in making sure that implementation proceeds smoothly.
The government will continue to receive regular status reports on progress of the strategy and it is my intention to provide an end of year report to the Assembly during the November sittings.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
MOTION
Note Statement – Illicit Drug Use in the Territory
Note Statement – Illicit Drug Use in the Territory
Continued from 16 October 2002.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I rise to make my contribution and the contribution from this side of the House with regards to the illicit drugs strategy statement.
It has made interesting reading. There were two documents. One is this Illicit Drugs Strategy and the publication that was released which forms the basis of this debate, but also it coincides with a report on the review of the NT school-based policing scheme. Both carry very similar themes, and it is from the perspective of education and drug and alcohol issues that I will be making my comments.
It is difficult to know where to start in defining a response, but we need to know where we stand. This is a social and community issue and, sadly, when these matters fall into the hands of politicians, it is the case that these issues become inflated and distorted. The issue then has a certain additional life that does not address the core issue.
Fundamentally, I stand on the side which is quite wary of harm minimisation as a principle. I understand the theoretical basis behind that, but it is not a place I can comfortably stand as a father and as an educator. I have found it far more useful to provide a very clear direction and a guideline as to what is right and what is wrong as the foundation for an approach to social issues in this case. Once we establish that quite clearly, subordinate to it comes the individual frailties that impinge upon individuals when they find themselves in a situation in which they make poor choices. It is argued and misunderstood too easily by those who are opposed to this view that if someone finds themselves in difficulty, they have acquired some kind of substance addiction, the response of those who are not supportive of a harm minimisation approach would then condemn the person who has found themselves in difficulty. Far from it.
In fact, unless you have a clear guideline and a clear standard it is very difficult to make sense of the issue for the person who is involved in the problem and, second, it is very difficult to guide them from the trouble they are in to a new place. Therefore, I stand quite clearly in that position where we must make sure that we know the best way out of a difficult situation. I set that as a bit of a preamble to what I will say with regard to this statement.
First, I attended one of the hearings that was held in Palmerston. I was surprised in a sense by the lack of attendance by the wider community. I see in the Executive Summary of the task force report that 67 attendees of the general public - and I found that in Palmerston when I attended it that it was predominantly a collection of people who had specific issues with regards to illicit drugs. The general public was the distinct minority. And the voice of those who were the general public was quite different than those who were, let’s say, in the industry. The first one was a very general comment like, what about marijuana, is this in this, because this is the drug we are most concerned about, and no, it was not. Yet that was the issue that most people really wanted to talk about.
Second, they wanted to talk about alcohol, which clearly has the most devastating effect on our community, and that was not there. Well, it was understood we are not talking about alcohol. However, when we pared it back to find out what it really was about, there were a very limited number of people who had actual experience from the general public. Sadly, there were people there, in the one I attended, who had had direct experience as parents, but they were in the distinct minority. The rest had a sense and an opinion - nobody likes illicit drugs, but the whole exercise seemed to have focussed on an area that really is, in the broader scheme of things, not as large on the landscape as perhaps it actually is.
That is not to be interpreted as to underplay or downplay this in any respect. The torment that a person goes through and their family go through when they have some kind of substance addiction is profound, and I just thank God that I have not had that situation to deal with. However, I know others who have, and it is only right that we as a society, and we as legislators, understand that and respond appropriately. The issue of this discussion is, what is an appropriate response as a community. First, I think to gain some perspective of this. Second, to be seriously sober in recognising that whatever decisions we make and whatever policies we implement are well formed and well considered, and we do not fall into the trap of using such issues for political purposes.
That being said, I note with significant interest that the Executive Summary confirms the position that has been articulated on this side, though in the political context it has been distorted, that relative to internationally, Australia is in a fortunate position, and in the nation, the situation in the Northern Territory is relatively small. That does not mean, of course, if someone jumps, well, you say that there is nothing – well, it is relatively small. It does not mean that we do not need to respond to it. But the fact is, we have presented here in the executive summary a great opportunity to respond to this issue at this formative stage. It is controllable, there is something that we can do, and that is the beauty of the Northern Territory. That we as a community of Territorians can respond to this appropriately, because it is not out of control, generally, and we can form well considered policy to make an actual difference.
The fact that only 67 people turned up really shows that there is a lot more work that needs to be done. In fact, this task group probably needed to be pitching their discussion in a different area. The impression I got was, it was clear that this group was actually charged to ascertain and to come up with recommendations that were already prepared, in a sense, which is often the case, sadly, with reviews. You very rarely find a very honest and genuine review that is sincerely seeking to know what people are actually thinking. Usually it is a mechanism to deliver a predetermined outcome; it is a promotional exercise.
I know that some of the findings contained in the executive summary really strike, I believe, where we need to be looking. First of all, without a doubt, alcohol is a problem. Second, cannabis is a grave concern in our community. We need to know where we actually stand with cannabis; and we need to know what is our clear and genuine position. We do not need to be sending confused messages with regard to cannabis to the wider community. Sadly, even the media, I believe, are guilty of raising the notion that cannabis is perhaps not that harmful; it is a bit sexy. Sadly, the Chief Minister has actually added to that perception. The current findings dispel that dramatically: cannabis is a drug of serious concern and is really out of control in our community. It is largely due, I believe, to confused messages that are coming from community leaders. That is simply to be refuted. If you look internationally, you will discover that other communities have started to draw back from their community acceptance of cannabis, whereas in Australia it is on the increase. The problems are largely due to a culture where we have not stood on a very clear position with regard to cannabis. I, for one, will make sure that we never, ever send out a confused message with regards to cannabis.
Going to some of the findings that are contained in executive summary, as I said before, they lay the foundations of where we need to be looking as a community. I will read them:
- In response to the perceived trend for the use of illicit drugs by younger people, the general community response
was often to propose earlier and better education to prevent the drug use problems, although this was often more
in hope than expectations of success.
That tells me quite clearly that the community sees that education, properly formed policy, and properly resourced curriculum and policy delivery is really where it lies. That is where we can drive this, and where we can make the difference. Another point says:
- General agreement that resilient skills such as building on strengths, self-esteem and coping skills should be part
of the school curriculum as early as possible to enhance their preventative value.
That is the core of the DARE program; the building of a capacity to say no. That is in the education domain, and that will be a recurring theme. I really think this is where the challenge lies. No more confusing messages; we know that this is clearly the path we have to go down. We have to, very genuinely, develop policies that do address the issue, and properly resource them and make the difference with a real will to do something, to make a change - not a will to come up with a program that sounds fantastic, that is pitched to an election that is to come, and to position yourself as sounding okay. Forget that! We are here to deliver something to make an actual difference.
It is a policy translated into action. The issue here is making a difference to the problems; not talking about the problems and structuring policies and outcomes that sound fine: ‘We are going to get ourselves organised to do something’. That is what we are dealing with at the moment: we are dealing with the creation of a sense of activity and movement, when really we need to be dropping the plough into the soil and turning it over and making something happen. The energy will be in education firstly, certainly from my point of view.
Support for families, of course, comes from that, and that is further mentioned in this. Going back to what I said at the outset, I do have concerns about this theme that seems to lodge in there and flavour the whole tone of this position of the current government, with regards to a response to the illicit drug problem or licit drug problems. It is actually contained in the review of the NT school-based policing scheme. It is benign and it just seems to permeate all of the literature that we read on this area, but I reckon that this is where alarm bells ring.
Effective drug education should reflect an understanding of the characteristics of the individual, the social context, the drug, and the interrelationship between these factors. We can have a big argument about this because I reckon if we weigh that as the predominant driver of how we form policy and how we respond to problems, we are going to come up with a very relativist position where everything is sort of okay. I understand that you have some difficulties and I understand why you are doing this and we explain everything away and we provide excuses and a very limp-wristed response to real problems.
Let’s just take the simple context of school situation where kids have a few fags behind the shed and find that they end up being addicted to nicotine. So what do you say? What would be a response in a school situation if you actually found that some of your junior high school kids went past having a bit of a muck-around behind the shed and became hooked on tobacco. What would you do? Would you go and get them a nicorette program and whack it behind their ears so that they end up weaning themselves off it? I tell you what I would do as a principal. It would be simply the matter of saying: ‘Stop doing it. That is it. Cold turkey. It was easy to get into this. I want you to understand how serious this problem is, you are going to have to get out of this. You have genuine support. You have a relationship but you have to get out of this. You have to choose to walk out of it. You walked into it, you walk out of it and I will be there every step of the way to help you get out of it’. And you will talk to the families. But you do not come up with some sort of harm minimisation program where we say: ‘Well look, I know how difficult it is and I know how tempted you were and I know all the other kids were smoking and I know that now you are addicted, I know how unpleasant it is to give up. We will find some way of keeping you off this thing until you get to that right, good, wonderful feeling to be able to say “no” one day’.
Well, that is absolute rot. We would end up with a situation where we would have a whole bureaucracy to support people who cannot make up their own mind and have the guts to make a decision and walk out of it with genuine, compassionate support. To me, that really is the distinguishing difference.
Going now to the DARE program. I would have to say that once again, as I made reference to reviews, reviews are often set up to deliver an outcome. The 216 people who entered the DARE review as opposed to the 67 I might add, the general public who went to the Illicit Drug Strategy Paper - the 216 were flushed out because they knew exactly what was going on here, in spite of the smokescreen saying, ‘No, we are not going to get rid of the School-Based Constable Scheme’. I cannot imagine any government, anywhere, ever having the courage to scrap such a popular scheme. People attended that, not to defend the School-Based Constable Scheme, to defend the DARE program. That was in the middle of it, that is what this is about and people were at those reviews saying, ‘What is this about? We know you are not getting rid of the School-Based Constable Scheme, what is this about?’ Well, it was quite clearly the 5000 hours, I believe, that are attached to the School-Based Constable Scheme in delivering DARE.
I am not going to have a direct attack on that, but in the context of this we need to be aware of this, that if we are talking about a strategy which does involve - and it is reinforced through the statement - that education is the key, then we have a move on the DARE program which is a very successful program, developed here in the Northern Territory …
Members interjecting.
Mr MILLS: Just hear me out. At this particular time we argue that the DARE program needs to be reassessed. We will remove the DARE program in the time that we are talking about improving outcomes and strengthening policy with regards to education in drug education.
There may be discussions that can be had about the effectiveness of the DARE program, however that discussion should have been had. We cannot be in a position where we wheel something out and we have a gap in the middle in the context of what we are discussing here, and there is nothing to be put back in its place other than something is being developed. I reckon that is the height of arrogance and it is a very shoddy attempt of addressing and responding very genuinely to this serious problem.
Mr DUNHAM: Madam Speaker, I move an extension of time such that the member for Blain may complete his remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker and honourable members, my comments are just about concluded but it is in this position that I want to leave my comments. The review of school-based policing suggests that there are perhaps better ways.
- Written comments from respondents regarding DARE NT reveal the general theme that DARE NT is valued,
but its limitations are recognised.
I do not stand aside from that.
- Limitations raised were the lack of follow-up or continuation into secondary schools and the delivery of drug
education solely by school-based constables is insufficient.
I do not stand away from that either. You need to start to think a little bit independently here. The issue here is that there are 5000 funded hours to deliver at this moment a drug education program in schools. It has always been the case, though it has been created as something jolly new, that the teachers are meant to be now working in conjunction with the school-based constables. It always has been the case. Any genuine and caring teacher would work with the school-based constable, and that is the way it is meant to be. That has been an ongoing issue.
But the thing is if this government is really serious about responding to this statement and their attention is drawn to this - let’s just down play the effectiveness, let’s argue that the DARE program has its limitations and therefore should be removed - and you are genuinely interested in strengthening the education policy and the resourcing to teachers, you would have the equivalent amount of time funded to deliver the affective alternate program.
Debate adjourned.
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have been asked by the member for Nelson to allow him to make a personal explanation.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, referring to the issue that the Attorney-General mentioned in Question Time regarding the motion that I put forward last week, having the Standing Committee on Constitutional and Legal Affairs look at the appointment of the Information Commissioner, I just need to make it clear that when I started that debate I used the word ‘approve’ the particular person’s appointment. Later on in the day the word ‘select’ came up. I think there was some various matters made. The word was that that body would ‘approve’ and that was what was meant to be established the whole way through that debate. It did not start off that way and it moved to the word ‘select’ I needed to say that so the Attorney-General understood how that body would operate.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
National DNA Database
National DNA Database
Mr STIRLING (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): Madam Speaker, this is a ministerial statement on DNA. Recent events have highlighted the urgent need for all states and territories to have access to a national DNA database in order to facilitate the solving of crimes and to avoid costly delays in the justice system. Recent events have shown that Australia does not have the DNA exchange arrangements that it needs. As always in these matters, there is a balance to be struck between the demands of crime solving and individual rights.
The Territory government is very concerned that the national DNA database is not functioning as it should, and the current approach of the Commonwealth is to exclude the Northern Territory from its operation. This is despite Territory laws getting the balance right and it is our considered view that they are soundly in line with modern crime solving demands whilst protecting individual rights.
The Chief Minister has confirmed the Territory’s commitment to the concept of a national DNA database by her signing of the Commonwealth, states’ and territories’ Agreement on Terrorism and Multi-jurisdictional Crime on 5 April 2002. In the agreement, heads of government around Australia committed to modernise the criminal law by legislating in the priority areas of model forensic procedures to enhance the capacity in each jurisdiction for the collection and processing of samples to create DNA profiles. The government committed to this agreement in the knowledge that the Territory had already modernised its law in respect of forensic procedures. We believe there is no technical reason why we cannot participate in the national DNA database. But, at this stage, the Commonwealth appears to be saying that until the Northern Territory laws are watered down, we will be barred from the national DNA scheme.
If the Territory were to move any further toward current model legislation as contained in the Crimes (Forensic Procedures) Act 2001 of the Commonwealth, it would seriously reduce the capacity of the Northern Territory police to collect samples and analyse and retain DNA profiles. From the Territory’s point of view, adoption of the model legislation would defeat the objects laid out by the Commonwealth itself. For instance, if introduced into the Territory, the Commonwealth model legislation would prevent collection and analysis of samples from persons in respect of less serious volume crime such as burglary and car theft. It would prevent collection and analysis of samples from suspects and offenders without the order of a magistrate or informed consent. It would allow a suspect to insist that a mouth swab must only be taken in the presence of a doctor or dentist of their own choice. It would require the destruction of samples and profiles if prosecution is not instituted within 12 months of taking the sample or of being discontinued. It would require the destruction of samples and profiles where the offender has been acquitted or has had their conviction quashed, thus preventing the retention of DNA profiles as part of police intelligence.
It would require return of the sample to the suspect or offender. It would generally impose complex procedures and time limits which would delay investigations and invite legal challenge. It would not protect the privacy of profiles once accessed by other jurisdictions through the national DNA database. It would prescriptively direct the Territory’s scientific quality assurance and quality control programs in a way which removes the flexibility of the Territory to participate in the most appropriate accreditation program. It would require commitment of additional resources to ensure that DNA profiles are continuously monitored against the progress of their donor through the justice system so that they are contained in the currently correct index or category, and consequent liabilities if profiles are not retained under the currently correct index.
As far as the Territory is concerned, the regular exchange of police intelligence, including DNA information, is something that is to be encouraged, not some kind of mischief to be prevented by legislation. The success of the National Automated Fingerprint Identification System, NAFIS, well illustrates the effectiveness of the exchange of police intelligence that is not encumbered by restrictive legislation. We do not believe legislative uniformity is necessary for the national DNA database to operate. It is also intrusive into the legislative competency of jurisdictions which wish to participate in the national DNA database but can only do so by compliance with the Commonwealth’s model. If other jurisdictions wish to limit access to certain categories of DNA profile, for instance, profiles obtained from crime scenes and serious offenders, then these can easily be achieved by the provision of these profiles to the national DNA database and the withholding of others which are not compliant with the model.
Given the importance, accuracy and lack of intrusiveness of DNA as a means of identifying people, the Territory does question what purpose is served by restricting its use, and attempting to restrict all Australian jurisdictions to conservative legislation. It is the Territory’s position that Commonwealth model legislation continues to inhibit and delay the implementation of the national DNA database. It may also inhibit the flow of police information and intelligence through direct exchange of Crimtrac which is seen as the only permitted method of exchange. If this is the case, then Crimtrac will simply not serve its purpose of effectively reducing crime in Australia.
Concerns about individual civil liberties and privacy may arise from misunderstanding the nature of the DNA profile and how DNA profiles are used by law enforcement agencies. Police only use the Profiler Plus process of DNA analysis. This involves just one short stretch of DNA which has no known function in the human blueprint but is, nonetheless, almost unique to each individual. Profiler Plus looks at ten places, loci, on this stretch of DNA and determines which base pairs are present. It then portrays this numerically in the form of a graph. The process tells us nothing about the individual, not even reliably whether the individual is male or female.
Although the technology exists in research laboratories around the world to decode the whole human genome, this technology is not available to the police, nor is it desired. A good written description or a photograph tells us far more about an individual, and is far more accessible and useful in many ways.
The obvious use of a DNA profile is to link a suspect to a crime and to eventually provide evidence in court, which may lead to a conviction. However, in the majority of cases, when an individual’s DNA profile is compared with that taken from the scene of a crime, the general result is that that individual can be conclusively excluded from police inquiries and is no longer under suspicion. Without DNA evidence, there could seldom be that level of certainty. DNA evidence can, and has, led to individuals who may have been mis-identified by victims or other witnesses being proved not to be the perpetrator of the crime and being exonerated. DNA information links crimes and allows police to focus on offenders rather than offences, which maximises the use of investigative resources. DNA screening is invaluable to exclude suspects from inquiries with the minimum of conflict, stress and involvement of police.
Retention of an individual’s profile on the database means that the individual need not be troubled to give further samples, and can be rapidly excluded from other enquiries. The use of DNA profiles reduce the involvement of innocent persons in police investigations.
There is also potential use for DNA to be used to identify human remains and trace missing persons, especially if the individual has previously provided a sample for DNA analysis.
In the USA, there is no attempt at insisting on uniformity of state laws regarding the collection of DNA samples and the use, for evidential and other law-enforcement purposes, of DNA profiles. The US National Database operates without legislative uniformity. However, US Federal DNA legislation concentrates on ensuring that the standards of scientific analysis are acceptable.
Media exposure of difficulties with DNA evidence shows that these difficulties do not arise from the nature of DNA profiling and would not have been prevented by model legislation. Scientific evidence may be misinterpreted or given undue weight. Defence lawyers may omit to ask relevant questions and not fully understand the science involved.
The UK first legislated for taking DNA samples in 1984 and limited the taking of body samples except from people suspected of serious arrestable offences and where the sample was relevant to the offence under investigation, rather than as a tool for identification. Since then, it has become progressively less restrictive. Changes to the UK legislation in 1994 included the treatment of mouth swabs as non-intimate samples in the same way as fingerprints, rather than as intimate samples, and permitted the taking of samples from persons suspected of recordable offences, rather than only serious crimes.
Further changes made in 2001 allowed the retention of all DNA data, even after an acquittal. Judicial interpretation of the UK law by the House of Lords has been in favour of admitting DNA evidence and weighing the balance in favour of the public interest in fighting crime, rather than minor intrusions into the personal privacy of people who give forensic samples. The UK national database, interestingly, would not meet the requirements of the Australian model legislation.
In effect, the UK legislation is now more like the Northern Territory legislation than any other. A recent challenge to the UK legislation, with reference to the European Convention on Human Rights, failed. In a recent challenge to the English legislation, the English High Court considered the retention of DNA information and other intelligence held by police regarding a person after they have been acquitted, and concluded:
It is not the offence for which any person was in the past investigated that is relevant; rather it is the possibility,
however remote, of some future offence. It is very difficult to say that once the police have lawfully obtained
such data because a particular person has come within the spotlight of the criminal justice system, they should be
required to give it up.
In the course of investigating any particular crime, or perhaps the targeting of an individual for investigation,
police gather a large amount of evidence in intelligence about any number of people. Nobody suggests that
when that particular case has been concluded, to such an extent as that evidence or intelligence impinges on
others not the subject of investigational target, it should be destroyed. It enters the databanks of the police
and is available for them to use in other investigations should it be relevant for them to do so.
It is also the Territory’s position that police intelligence should not be routinely destroyed, nor that the collection and exchange of forensic information be restricted. No jurisdiction routinely destroys police intelligence relevant to an investigation simply because it does not result in a conviction. The Territory regards forensic information as a particularly important part of this intelligence, and regards it as undesirable and illogical for this information to be lost.
In the past, police forces have exchanged information and intelligence without legislated restrictions. Why should restrictions on legitimate exchange of information now be required, especially at a time when organised crime and trans-border terrorism is on the increase? Law enforcement is constantly faced with new and emerging crime types - for example, high-tech crime and identity fraud - in an environment characterised by increasing complexity.
The application of DNA is the most significant, scientific contribution to law enforcement efforts to reduce crime and improve public safety. In July/August 2002 Northern Territory police conducted an operation code name Gene Sweep based on DNA evidence. The operation culminated in the arrest and reporting of 112 offenders for 393 outstanding crimes, ranging from serious sex offences, house breaking, through to larceny and property damage. Northern Territory police will continue with this type of operation, given its potential to significantly impact on offending behaviour and crime reduction.
It is predictable that other jurisdictions, where the law is more complexed and restrictive, will eventually look to the Northern Territory law on DNA as a precedent to follow and to enhance their capacities. Whilst the Territory remains committed to Crimtrac and the national DNA database, this must not be at the expense of its obligation to provide effective policing services to the people of the Northern Territory, including the effective detection of volume crime. No jurisdiction has recorded a higher success rate than the Territory on a per capita basis in the application of DNA technology to the investigation of crime, and this success is due to the commitment by the Territory to resourcing DNA programs and to the effectiveness of the Police Administration Act and other Territory DNA legislation.
The Territory is pursing all options to facilitate the exchange of DNA and other police information through ministerial arrangements with other jurisdictions. However, this government firmly recommends that the Commonwealth should re-examine the need for specific aspects of the Commonwealth’s Crimes (Forensic Proceedings) Act 2001 that are excluding jurisdictions from the national DNA database through not being regarded as having corresponding legislation. This is a position we have to put to the Commonwealth; we have put to the Commonwealth, and it is one we hold very strongly. I should also say that it is our firm belief that all jurisdictions should ensure their legislation is sufficiently flexible to accommodate inter-jurisdictional sharing of information outside of the national DNA database. This is the way to get the best results for crime prevention and crime solving in Australia.
This statement is mainly focussed on the Commonwealth but to be fair it is not just an issue for the Commonwealth. The responsibility for getting the national regime right also rests with the other states and territories. I believe they need to start to get more realistic about the type of regime Australia needs as well. That is why the Northern Territory will be taking this argument to the Police Minsters Conference to be held in Darwin on 4 November. I will raise these matters there with the hope it will lead to fruitful discussion with federal and, importantly, state colleagues so that they increase their preparedness to fight for a regime that is better and more effective. If there is some willingness for this issue to be freely and frankly discussed, I am sure there is potential for advances to be made.
Mr BURKE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for bringing the statement forward and, as I am sure he would expect, the opposition absolutely supports the intent of the government. It is very pleasing in fact that the Labor government now in government, have firmed in their belief in the value of this legislation as it is now framed because there is no doubt that when the legislation was passed, whilst the support of the CLP government of the time from the Labor opposition was there, it was certainly qualified in terms of concerns about privacy issues and how the legislation would be seen in its practical use. It is very pleasing from my perspective that the government in seeing this legislation practiced and now experiencing government themselves, understands very clearly the importance of this legislation and the fact that it was courageous of the Northern Territory government to bring this legislation forward in the way that we did at the time and now the fight is only half won.
I say to you, minister, that it was a very good statement except from my point of view, and also for the view of others I would imagine reading it, perhaps when you sum up you need to, just a matter of record, lay out where the areas of concern are from the Commonwealth. It is one thing to say the Commonwealth is opposing these areas, but there must be logical arguments from the Commonwealth’s perspective as to why they insist on certain provisions, notwithstanding the fact that we do not agree with any of them. It is important for the record that those issues are on the table for the purpose of good debate, and we are well and truly aware and can address our comments to them.
There is certainly a problem with the Commonwealth attitude. It can only stem from, I would guess, the fact that some states share a similar point of view, because certainly the way model legislation has been framed in the past is that a number of state jurisdictions volunteer to frame the Commonwealth representative’s model legislation and that is the legislation that eventually comes through endorsed as the Commonwealth requirements. So, in certainly addressing the last point you made that the minister intends to take up these issues with his ministerial counterparts from the other states, I am sure you are doing that already - it certainly needs a lot more effort - but I remain totally perplexed as to why, given the comments that are there in your statement for all to read - they are totally convincing from my point of view - I just cannot understand why there is a situation that exists where the Northern Territory could in the interim be excluded from access to the national database. Certainly, the interim arrangements that you asked for, to my mind, are self-evident. But if the Commonwealth has concerns as to how the Northern Territory and the broad perimeters of our legislation, certainly the Commonwealth should allow the Territory to access the national database and we should be able to input the national database those aspects of our DNA testing that meet the Commonwealth perimeters as an interim requirement. Why that is objected to is beyond me.
The simple fact is - and the minister has laid it our very clearly - that if you look at the experience of the United Kingdom, if you look at the experience of the United States in particular, it seems to me that the United States has it absolutely right. And that is that the restrictions that are imposed by any model legislation should really pertain to the science of collection so that the DNA that is collected, when it eventually is used, is absolutely beyond criticism in terms of the science of its collection having met all the parameters to ensure that it stands up in a court of law. That is the way we should be going, to ensure that is where the Commonwealth keeps its focus.
Certainly, I cannot understand it. Any police force in Australia would want restrictions on their ability to collect it; maybe they do. Maybe there are different attitudes in different states. I am not aware of what they are and I would certainly be interested to hear much more about that. My colleague, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the former Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services has nurtured this legislation from its outset. I do not wish to be repetitive in my comments. I am sure that in his contribution he will speak on the legislation and those aspects that he feels need to be addressed.
I would only be repetitive if I spoke longer. I simply say once again: thank you, minister, for bringing it forward, thank you for ensuring that the intent of the Territory legislation is not only sustained, won’t be changed, and that we will fight in the face of all efforts to change it. If necessary we will be excluded from the national database, but the system we have in place in the Northern Territory will remain, and certainly I reckon it is a winner.
I applaud the minister to take this, at every opportunity, on talk shows like John Laws and those sorts of programs, because to my mind, the public sentiment would be overwhelmingly behind you and in some ways that might move some of these jurisdictions far faster than some of these ministerial councils. So, all the best, and thank you for maintaining the rage, so to speak. I support the ministerial statement.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I would like to start by going back to when the member for Katherine did bring this legislation into the House when we were still in opposition. History very clearly records that we offered strong support for that legislation, even to the point where I think we all went out with our cotton buds at the front of the House and did our buccal swabs just to show the Territory public how simple and unobtrusive the process of sampling DNA was. I do not want to hear any rewriting of history on that matter. We were very definitely supporting the legislation.
At the time, I also raised some issues regarding the security of the database, the use of the information. Those were not peculiar to our position on this type of scheme; they were simply making sure that within the implementation of the DNA database in the Northern Territory we were aware of issues that were extant around the use of this technology by police in many other jurisdictions at that time.
DNA is a very important tool for use in police investigations and as evidence in criminal prosecutions. As we all know, DNA evidence can be critical in helping police to solve very serious crimes. A good example is the case of the murder of Kathleen Marshall, the President of the Queensland Cat Protection Society, in 1998. The murderer, Andrew Richard, denied ever having met her or telephoning her. DNA was critical to the police investigation of that case in alerting the police to the suspect who turned out the be the offender and was convicted of that particularly vicious murder. There are plenty of other cases like that.
A DNA database has been operating in the UK since 1995 and their statistics are quite interesting. As at February 2000, DNA evidence connecting a suspect with the crime scene has helped to solve 212 murders or manslaughter offences, 868 sexual assaults, and 479 serious robberies. It has also helped to solve 34 outstanding murder cases which the police had not been able to solve using traditional policing methods.
Another vital role of DNA is its use to link crime scenes in serial crimes. DNA evidence taken from crime scenes can tell police that the same suspect has been involved in a series of crimes in the Northern Territory or across Australia. While they may not be able to identify that suspect, this information enables police to ensure different investigations are not being conducted on the same person to get an accurate picture of the offending pattern they are investigating and the areas in which the offender is operating.
It is also important to note that DNA is available for more than just crimes like murder and sexual assault. It can play a valuable role in helping to solve car thefts and property break-ins, and that is where its ability to link crime scenes becomes particularly powerful. DNA evidence can enable police to link a series of house break-ins and gather evidence to ensure an offender is convicted for all the break-ins he has committed, rather than just one or two that would be apparent using other methods of police investigation. If an offender is charged with all his offences of this nature, it will also assist the court to hand down an appropriate sentence if a person is convicted, as the court will have more complete information about the full scale of the criminal behaviour of the offender.
The availability of DNA as a tool for use in these types of crimes is an important element of this government’s strategies to combat property crime, effective law enforcement in conjunction with crime prevention. This is clearly demonstrated by the results of the operation named Gene Sweep conducted by the NT Police in July and August this year, and that the minister for police has talked about in his statement. It is worth repeating the outcomes of that operation which saw the arrest and reporting of 112 offenders for 393 outstanding crimes, including serious sex offences, housebreaking, larceny and property crime.
DNA is not just used to connect suspects with crime scenes. Let’s not forget that DNA can be used as a tool by police to quickly eliminate a person from suspicion, reducing the stress of being under investigation, and releasing innocent people from the process. It can also assist victims of crime by encouraging guilty pleas, hence avoiding often traumatic and lengthy contested court proceedings. It can also be used to free innocent people. In fact, the first time that DNA was ever used to solve a crime in the United Kingdom, it freed an innocent man, Richard Buckland who, at the age of 17, had confessed to a murder that he did not commit. DNA evidence in that case helped police find the real perpetrator of that murder, and another, and bring him to justice.
In the USA, the Innocence Project, operating out of Benjamin N. Cardoza School of Law, provides pro bono legal assistance to inmates who are challenging their convictions based on DNA testing of evidence. Founded in 1992, the project has represented or assisted in more than 100 cases where convictions have been reversed or overturned, including freeing people from death row. There could be no more powerful infringement of civil liberties than to see a person put to death for some crime that he or she did not do.
It is important to remember that DNA is only one tool in the police officers’ kit. They will still need to assemble a brief of evidence against the offender; DNA alone will not convict. Having said that, let me also place on record my commitment to ensuring the proper balance between providing the police with effective crime fighting tools and the protections of individual rights.
It is important that there be sound evidence gathering and handling techniques employed by police to ensure that there be no doubt attached to the DNA samples obtained from the crime scenes and from suspects. It is important that samples are analysed in accredited laboratories and that strong security and proper controls are in place for the DNA database. It is important that the right balance is found between the rights of suspects and the needs of law enforcement, crime solving and community safety. I believe a practical balance can and has been struck in the Northern Territory.
I have been advised police have detailed standard operating procedures in place to ensure that samples taken from individuals retain their integrity and are properly handled. Similarly, only persons who are trained, assessed, approved and authorised can take items or samples from a crime scene. For all samples and items entering the forensic science laboratory, there are policies and procedures that ensure their integrity, security and continuity. There is seldom a requirement for an investigating officer of the police to enter an operational area in the laboratory, but should the need arise, the officer would be escorted at all times by senior members of the laboratory staff. The laboratory operates at national standards as determined by the National Association of Testing Authorities, NATA. It is preparing for an accreditation inspection early in the new year.
In the past, I expressed concern that the NT legislation was operating without comprehensive freedom of information and privacy laws in place. At the start of these sittings, the parliament passed our Information Bill, which will now provide the safeguards I was concerned about some number of years ago. Under those laws, an appropriate balance is struck between the rights of people to information, and law enforcement interests. Under section 16 of the Information Act, people have the right to access their personal information held by government agencies, unless that information would prejudice the investigation of a possible unlawful activity.
Information privacy principle 10 provides that public sector organisations must not collect sensitive information unless there is consent, or the organisation is required by law to collect that information. Sensitive information is defined to include genetic information that is, or could be, predictive about a person’s health. This provides a general protection for DNA material. It would prevent, for example, information that could indicate health information to an insurance company. But, in relation to DNA used in criminal investigations - as we have heard from the minister for police - the Profiler Plus process used by police for DNA analysis uses 10 loci from a part of the DNA strand which has no known function in the human blueprint; that is, it cannot be used to identify any characteristics about the person such as their health status, gender or any other distinguishing features. It is even difficult to determine the gender of the person from this particular sampling of DNA.
Finally, I note that the Ombudsman has powers to investigate complaints against actions of members of the NT Police Force. DNA is the fingerprint of the 21st century, and I believe it is important that critical police investigations are not hampered by complicated and unworkable regimes that do not achieve the balance that we are looking for. I believe it is critical that the NT police have access to the national DNA database - crime is not confined to state boundaries, nor are the suspects. The police services of Australia need to be able to work together to solve crime across Australia. It is critical that investigations being conducted by police is not endangered by the NT police not having the same access to criminal intelligence as other police around Australia.
Another case that springs to mind concerns several murders in the UK which had the police baffled. Eventually, DNA from the crime scenes was linked to a prisoner who was serving time for another serious offence. Police initially thought there must have been some mistake, until their investigations revealed that the prisoner was being unofficially released from gaol to work on a prison officer’s house. The murders coincided with the dates of his release for this purpose.
There probably would not be any argument in this House that the current regime of DNA collection and the use of DNA profiles in crime investigations would be fully supported. I pledge my support to the minister for police, in terms of defending the very effective regime we have here in the Northern Territory. I will certainly be putting a similar point of view to the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General when we discuss the same topic.
Mr REED (Katherine): Madam Speaker, I am keen to participate in this debate. The legislation and procedures that the minister has laid before the House today emanate directly from some actions that I took as then police minister in sponsoring this legislation in the Assembly, having it subsequently passed, and now acting to the benefit of the Northern Territory community.
To reflect on that process a little, that followed directly from my attendance at Australian Police Ministers Council with then Commissioner Bates in New Zealand, where the use of DNA in crime scenes was the primary subject of debate on the agenda for that meeting. It was one of those extraordinary, but not unusual, ministerial council meetings in that the debate soon started going around and around in circles, and was getting nowhere and was particularly frustrating. We had discussed, prior to this, the view that the Northern Territory should have adequate DNA legislation. We were sitting at the conference hearing all of the negative aspects and the difficulties and the intrusive application of it in getting samples, and the rights of citizens, and how awful it would be to have something on the record of someone whom it was later found did not commit a crime. In other words, the focus was principally on not the catching the baddie but sort of looking after others who were being looked after in any event and we were trying to look after better.
I recall towards the end of the day I asked Commissioner Bates how long this matter had been on Police Ministers Council’s agenda and it had been discussed for something like four or five years and no progress had been made. I said to him then: ‘On the way home we are going to start laying down the principles to give to the parliamentary draftsman and to get to Cabinet to introduce DNA legislation. This is ridiculous’. I did indeed espouse those views within the Police Ministers Council. To the horror of some who asked different questions about what we might or might not include in our legislation, and one of those was the intrusiveness of getting a sample, and I remember I quite vividly explained that if a person is suspected of committing a crime was not prepared to provide a sample then yes, I think it would be appropriate to give police the powers to be intrusive and get one. It all developed from there without going into too much detail. That finally resulted in legislation being put in place.
It was criticised very strongly nationally. I must say that at this time it is appropriate to thank Dr Peter Thatcher who is sitting in the Chamber today in the advisor’s box for his professional advice and the suggestions that he made so that we might be able to, me particularly as minister, be better aware of what we were facing. That resulted in visits to the police laboratory in Victoria and some very extensive information and background detail as to what we should have in our legislation and how the legislation had worked overseas. Indeed, to a large extent, we used the British model and came up with legislation that by some has been held up as the example as, ‘This what you want if you want DNA legislation’, and by others it has been derided. I would classify them as them as the hand wringers, who are more concerned about protecting someone who may be offended because of the application of the legislation, rather than giving police appropriate powers to do what we pay them to do, and that is to protect the community.
If someone in the community has been harmed in some way, and I take the very broad view of the application to DNA legislation, ‘some way’ includes anything from testing an item in a vehicle that may have been used in a break and enter, or testing the material in a vehicle and taking DNA samples from a vehicle, or some other piece of equipment that may have been used in committing a murder or some other serious crime. So, it is open to everything. I cannot see why in this day and age when criminals have so much on their side and there is so much technical assistance that they can draw on to commit a crime, why we do not afford police every possible opportunity and stronger legislation with appropriate controls to be able to apprehend them.
What are we on about if we cannot come up with something fairly simple and straightforward to arm our police effectively, not in the firearm sense, but of course legislatively, to be able to undertake their duties to the best opportunities that they have to protect and serve the community.
So, it is with great concern, and this is not a recent occurrence in terms of the Commonwealth’s opposition to our legislation. It started virtually when we introduced it. I can remember having some rather lengthy and even heated discussions with then Minister Vanstone about our legislation, and indeed with other police ministers around the country. It is most important that we continue to pursue this matter. But in pursuing it, if in the end we are not successful I do not think that we should give in. We should maintain our legislation. It would be tragic if we were not part of the national DNA database, but I don’t think that our legislation should be watered down to allow us to be so. The reason I think that is: sooner or later, the other states and/or territories, and certainly the Commonwealth, are going to be exceedingly embarrassed by their actions if they make us water down our legislation because they are going to find, at one time or other in the future, with one case that has a high public profile, that either we in the Territory might have the DNA sample of the person who committed a heinous crime, or someone interstate has, of a person that committed a crime here in the Territory, and the information cannot be exchanged or there will be some other bureaucratic or perhaps court decision that prevents the exchange of information.
The mood of the Australian public today - and I don’t think it is going to weaken; it will strengthen - is not sympathetic to those circumstances. The sooner the Commonwealth appreciates that, the better.
In terms of a national DNA database, I don’t want it to be a thought that I do not support it; I do. I support a national DNA database very strongly. But I think the Commonwealth’s role is not one which says what type of legislation a particular jurisdiction should have because the Commonwealth does not have the responsibility of policing in the jurisdictions, apart from the federal matters that fall within the arena of the Australian Federal Police.
If the Commonwealth could only realise it is interfering in the responsibilities of jurisdictions and the policing of those jurisdictions and quickly come to understand the very important and effective role that it could play is one which sets a standard and maintains those standards in their application across the country, within the bounds that the jurisdictions themselves want to apply, then the better off we will all be as a nation. And the better off all the police forces will be because at the moment there is too much effort being directed by respective forces across the country to solving this nonsensical problem.
This debate has been going on for years, just as the debate to introduce DNA legislation was. It is just incomprehensible to consider that we have senior officers of government around the country - ministers, police commissioners and a bevy of other important personnel in police forces - arguing this case for no logical reason. It is a nonsense that we are even having this debate because the Commonwealth’s role is really quite separate, or should be, in relation to this matter in my view. I support, minister, your approach in relation to this matter with one very important exception: the Commonwealth is not the only obstacle.
There are other jurisdictions which do not support our legislation and because of that, the protocols are not in place. And we have seen a recent very high profile case in relation to the Falconio case with the difficulties that were in place and the protocols that have had to be established to be able to exchange DNA samples. A nonsense. If I recall it correctly, that partly stems from the legislation that South Australia has because it does not allow intrusiveness in relation to getting a sample. I do not think DNA samples can be retained if prosecution does not proceed. Because of those conflicts or what are seen as conflicts, without recognising that our legislation allows that and their legislation provides for something different, but notwithstanding that, why can’t we just agree to have a process that enables an exchange of information?
We are about extracting out of the community people who have perpetrated, and in this particular case potentially, a heinous crime. And here we are, we have to have protocols in place and discussions between governments as to whether we going to let our police force catch a baddie. It is just a nonsense!
Minister, where I differ from your approach is this - and it is a shame you have not indicated in your statement what jurisdictions do not agree with our particular stance, that is, you have indicated clearly that we are fighting with the Commonwealth, but you have not indicated which states and territories we are fighting as regards their concerns about our legislation. Where I differ with the minister’s approach is that he should have, first of all, indicated to us just what jurisdictions we are having difficulty with. And in relation to the Australian Police Ministers Council meeting that is to be held here on 4 November, and the minister’s advice to us that he is going to strongly argue the case on 4 November, I think it is going to be ‘all too late, she cried’, in terms of arguing your case on that day.
Minister, what you have to do is get around to these jurisdictions and get into the ear of the respective police ministers and Premiers and Chief Ministers, and get them to come to the meeting, and collectively, and there is an opportunity to do it from a political point of view, because they are all Labor governments. And if you cannot get some understanding in relation to this crucial issue to the safety of Australians, and Territorians, in our case, then what are you all on about in terms of saying how wonderful it is that you all have the same political colour as each other?
So, the minister has to become very active very quickly and get round to the jurisdictions and bring to the APMC meeting in Darwin on 4 November a view that is one in terms of the states and the territories. It is no good waiting for the day, because when you get here, you are going to be in the same position as I found myself in New Zealand some years ago, and they will all be bickering about sweet nothings, in effect. Minister, I applaud your attitude and I applaud what you are trying to achieve, but you have to get busy and you have to get busy quickly, and you have to do this at the political level.
I would be surprised if most of the police forces are not supportive of the legislation that we have, certainly from the comments they expressed to me when I was police minister. They were somewhat jealous in terms of having legislation that they had to apply that was, in their view, substandard to ours. They were very supportive in terms of what they would like, and it was very much our model.
If the meeting on 4 November is going to have a chance of being successful, then minister, you have to get into aeroplanes and go around to those jurisdictions and be able to get them to bring to this meeting a singular view, and be able then to apply pressure from all states and territories, and the Commonwealth, to the federal government. That is the only chance at the moment that I see of success. Just sitting back comfortably and saying, oh, we are going to have a lovely cosy meeting on 4 November, is not going to achieve anything.
I would appeal to you to do that. I suspect that you have probably done it to some extent, but clearly the agreements are not there, or if they are you have not indicated in this speech that they are, and if they aren’t, then get on your bike, or your aeroplane, or whatever you can to get to the other jurisdictions and do it, would be my advice.
I don’t think people fully appreciate the benefits of DNA legislation. There has been some reference by the previous speaker, in fact, to some awful cases that were solved. I seem to recall some other examples that, in a way, better demonstrated the advantages of having sound DNA legislation and databases. If I recall correctly, there were some cases in the UK where persons who had been convicted of the type of crime that had been more recently committed, came forward and asked to have their DNA tested against the DNA that was collected at the scene so they would not be questioned by police; that is, so they would be excluded because they had like convictions in the past. It is just as important for some people to be able to be excluded and taken out of the focus of police attention in relation to the investigation of a crime, as it is for the crime to be investigated and the baddie caught. That has other very distinct benefits in terms of police time, because they are not investigating someone and wasting their time on a person who did not commit the crime, but has come forward.
All of my family have samples on the DNA database. I am not adverse to people having their DNA recorded at birth. I know that civil libertarians have great concern about that, but if we look at the current circumstances of the tragedy - to use that example - in Bali and the identification of persons who, very sadly, tragically lost their lives in the bombing last weekend, there is an awful task at hand now to identify the remains and the bodies that were taken from that scene. If, however, there was a database of every Australian, there would not be the task at the moment at the home scene, so to speak, to go into the bedroom and get the toothbrush of the victim from back home, take the DNA sample and go through that very lengthy and complex process, and then compare that with DNA samples that were taken from the remains of the people from the bombing. Half of the exercise would be not required because it would already be on the database.
It would then be a matter of comparing the samples taken from the scene in Bali and comparing them with a national database. That would very much overcome many of the problems that the grieving parents have today about the delays in identifying their loved ones. It would not eliminate the time but it might halve it, cut it by two-thirds or what have you. It is only in these times, with those tragedies clear in our mind, that we can perhaps focus on some of the benefits of the legislation that faces us today.
It has many advantages both in the pursuit of the criminal or the suspect and being able to take evidence that will stand up in court - very strong evidence; being able to eliminate people who might have been suspects but are quickly excluded because there is no DNA match; and as I say, the graphic example of the tragic circumstances that are facing the relatives of people who lost their lives last weekend in Bali, and the ability in those circumstances to be able to use a DNA database to the very best advantage of people in those tragic circumstances.
I support the statement very strongly, minister. I hope that you will get around and harass - do whatever you can - harangue all the jurisdictions to get their support before they come to the meeting on 4 November. As regards the Commonwealth: do not give an inch; do not water down our legislation - keep it to serve Territorians in the best possible way and to provide the strongest legislation that we possibly can for our police force to serve Territorians.
Mr STIRLING (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the Attorney-General for their contribution to the debate and for their strong voice of support in the position that we find ourselves.
The Leader of the Opposition went to the question of the difference and what the Commonwealth model would mean in the Territory. There were a number of items outlined within the ministerial statement: those differences of not being able to retain the data under certain circumstances; this idea of the practice of obtaining a DNA by a mouth swab being an intrusive practice - meaning that the person that you want to obtain from is entitled to have the doctor or dentist of their choice present whilst the sample is being taken; you could only use DNA for those more serious crimes; you must get magistrate’s consent before obtaining that sample; and you would be required to return the sample to the suspect or the offender. Generally, a complication of all of the procedures that are currently in place in the Northern Territory, including even down to the accreditation and scientific quality assurance of what we do here in the Northern Territory.
I do share the bewilderment, I suppose, to some extent, with the Leader of the Opposition in his questioning of why the Commonwealth maintains such a strong stance on this matter. Compare this to the question of fingerprints, which have been around for many years. No one seems to be frightened by the fact of fingerprints and having a national database on fingerprints. Maybe it comes down to the point that everyone understands that a fingerprint is a thumb print and finger prints. It is an understood procedure. It is a print that is kept and it is recorded and it can be compared. DNA is scientific, beyond most people’s understanding of just what DNA is, how it is recorded, what form it is, what it actually consists of, what it means, and how far does it go in building the profile of the person. Senator Allison gave me some ideas in relation to this, that because of this lack of understanding that people have a view that a DNA sample can produce all sorts of information about an individual that may be misused. Well, it is simply not true.
The use of DNA, under our legislation here in the Northern Territory, is restricted in itself to being able to be compared with another sample. I used the example in the ministerial statement, it would not tell you, for example, if the person was male or female, nor do you need to know. So, some of that stance of the Commonwealth, and others and particularly the civil libertarians in the community, I think is because they do not understand exactly what it is. They think that it tells you much more and provides much more information than it actually does.
Other concerns are that police get too much power and that police generally need detailed, prescribed procedures to regulate their operations and you cannot always rely on courts to ensure that evidence is excluded if unfairly obtained. They are the sorts of views that might be prevailing in this attitude and, of course, the Commonwealth officials themselves perhaps do not fully understand exactly how it is used in the practical sense. There may be other reasons that the Commonwealth is bound to the originator of their model legislation. Why, I do not know, but they are hell bent on preserving the reputation or the authorship of the original model legislation and won’t have it questioned in any way. Well, that is a view that does not help anyone at all. But they are the sorts of questions that I have and can only share what sort of views have come to me and Senator Allison, more informed on these matters, is able to provide me with.
I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for his background on the origins of Northern Territory legislation. The role and nature of ministerial councils is interesting in that governments come and go, but ministerial councils do not seem to change. The question, as he said, was before police ministerial councils for some four or five years and he found that, obviously, frustrating with former Commissioner Bates and on the way back he made the decision to advance legislation in the Northern Territory.
I take his point that it is not just the Commonwealth that we are up against here; it is other jurisdictions. I made that point very clearly today with the media, and I made it in this ministerial statement today, that our call in the Northern Territory is not just on the Commonwealth to reconsider their stance with DNA legislation, but it is on the Commonwealth and every other jurisdiction in Australia.
We have the situation, and this is interesting, because the jurisdictions that would seem not to agree with the Northern Territory - New South Wales and South Australia in particular - but we have established limited protocols with them as a result of the need to recently in relation to one case, so maybe there is a view that they are coming around. It is interesting that New South Wales would seem to have that view, because it was Minister Costa, the New South Wales Minister for Police, at the last ministerial council who stepped up to offer me, representing the Northern Territory, support on this matter when I raised it with Senator Allison who was representing the federal government.
So, whilst New South Wales would seem to have that attitude at one level, the minister himself seemed inclined, at least at the ministerial council, to have some sympathy with our position as an individual. I am certainly not sitting here thinking: ‘Oh yes, we will roll this through on 4 November’. I would not dare think that. That work will be ongoing with the other jurisdictions to try to get what support we may be able to. New South Wales does the most restrictive legislation on DNA in Australia, but we do have a protocol with them, albeit limited. In the event that we do not get up, we are not included on the national database, negotiations continue for protocols for exchange with Tasmania, Western Australia and Queensland. I am told that those negotiations are well advanced. The ACT will prescribe Northern Territory law as a corresponding law, and Tasmania and Western Australia have also prescribed NT law which gets us across the line in terms of those exchange situations.
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I take the Deputy Leader of the Opposition’s point that we should not give in on this. All is not lost. If we don’t win this, and we do not change our legislation and don’t win the battle to turn other jurisdictions and the Commonwealth around, and remain outside the national database, there will still be a level of cooperation by way of exchange agreements and protocols with those other jurisdictions. Not ideal; clearly not as effective and efficient as having that ready and almost instantaneous exchange in comparison by way of the national database. But we will not resile from the position adopted by our predecessors because we think it simply weakens the potential use of DNA as an effective tool far too far. Other jurisdictions need to understand just how potent this can be as an effective crime fighting tool and need to look at their own legislation.
The Deputy Leader of the Opposition said he would not have a problem with taking DNA at birth across Australia so you would have the biggest national database, indeed, everyone in it. I think we have enough of a fight on our hands at the moment in relation to getting the other jurisdictions somewhat up to where we are now. I don’t think that is a battle I am about to embark on. Nonetheless, his point is well made in relation to what has occurred in Bali and the ability to have that register to fairly readily tick off the comparisons for purposes of victim identification following a disaster such as that in Bali.
It is not a fight we are going to win easily, Madam Speaker. I do not mean to suggest that we are going to win it necessarily on 4 November. Work will go on between the Northern Territory and the other jurisdictions in relation to the difficulties that are being thrown up over the different legislative regimes. We will continue to make that point and work with those other jurisdictions and the Commonwealth to see that we can get some shift, at least – if not on 4 November - a shift in mood over time so that there is a greater understanding of where the Northern Territory is coming from.
When you consider the UK model that was provided in the ministerial statement and the fact that it was passed in 1984 originally, amended in 1994, and amended again in 2001, it represents most closely the Northern Territory model out of any other DNA legislation around. It survived challenges all the way to the English High Court. Interestingly, it would not get in to the national DNA database in Australia under the Commonwealth protocols that we have.
I thank Dr Peter Thatcher for being here this afternoon, and Alison Worsnop from the police for their work as well in bringing this statement forward. It is a comprehensive statement. It certainly covered all of the issues at difference, and I thank them for being here today to assist with those queries that came forward.
Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
TABLED PAPERS
Estimates Committee - Questions on Notice, Answers and
Supplementary Answers to Questions
Estimates Committee - Questions on Notice, Answers and
Supplementary Answers to Questions
Dr BURNS (Johnston): Madam Speaker, pursuant to a resolution of the House, I wish to lay on the table Questions on Notice Nos 1969 to 2016 inclusive, and their corresponding answers, which arose during the public hearings conducted by the Estimates Committee during the week commencing Tuesday, 17 September 2002.
I also table supplementary answers to questions asked during the hearings which agencies have provided to the committee secretariat.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr VATSKALIS (Transport and Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Madam Speaker, I have been invited to open the Oktoberfest on Saturday, 19 October 2002 at the Darwin Showgrounds. The government, through the Ethnic Affairs Sponsorship Program, has provided assistance of $12 000 for the 2002 Oktoberfest. This event is the 32nd Oktoberfest to be organised and celebrated in Darwin by the Deutscher Klub of Darwin.
Oktoberfest dates back to 12 October 1810, when it began as a celebration of the marriage of the future King of Bavaria, Ludwig to Princess Therese of Saxony. The citizens of Munich were invited to attend the festivities held on the fields in front of the city gates to celebrate the royal event. The event has been celebrated for the 169th time in Munich. It has not run every year because of war and other problems. Munich, of course, is the home of the Oktoberfest.
In the Territory, the Deutscher Klub was established in 1965 and was incorporated in 1969. The club has about 104 members. Mr Karl Schrimpf, who has been actively involved with the club for some 30 years, has recently had to stand down as the club secretary due to illness. I have to say that, according to the 2001 Census, 1096 Territorians were born in Germany. As such, German born represent the second largest group of non-English speaking background immigrants in the Territory after the Philippines, having surpassed Greeks and Indonesians. Further, the 2001 Census statistics show that almost 8400 Territorians reported that they had German ancestry. The ancestry data also shows that 3319 Territorians reported that at least one of their parents was born in Germany.
Further to that, most early German settlements in Australia and the Territory were related to religious activity. We had German settlement from the beginning of the 19th century in Australia and in the Northern Territory, through South Australia. The Lutheran Church has a long history of settlement in the Territory and, in fact, at the 1991 Census, the Northern Territory had the second highest proportion of its population, after South Australia, who were Lutheran adherents.
Despite this close attachment to a particular religion or birthplace, there is a high proportion of Catholics, with very few Anglicans. The German community in the Territory is very active. They have been living here in peaceful harmony with every other community and share in the multicultural society of the Northern Territory. Since I am wearing my hat, one of the people here who has German ancestry, I believe, is the member for Macdonnell, who in his adjournment yesterday mentioned that his father is either of Germanic origin or German.
Since I am wearing my hat as the Minister for Ethnic Affairs, I would like to advise members that this week Darwin is hosting the 48th Congress of the Australian Hellenic Education and Progress Association, an association of Greek Australians from all states in Australia. They are meeting in Darwin. One of the things that is very close to their heart is the Elgin Marbles, and there was a discussion today on the radio about this. In 1799, Lord Elgin was Britain’s Ambassador to Constantinople, now Istanbul, which was at the centre of the Ottoman Empire, with Greece among one of its colonies or occupations. Elgin got permission to send artists to Greece to sketch and excavate in and around many ancient sites, including the Parthenon, one of the several sacred buildings from the Acropolis rock that dominates Athens.
Once there, Elgin’s men began removing as many of the surviving sculptures as they could. Actually, they had saw the marble sculptures out of the Parthenon to take it with them. Lord Elgin alleged he had a contract of sale from the Ottoman Empire, but no such contract was ever found. The only thing that existed was an Italian translation that was then translated to English to justify Lord Elgin’s removal of the Elgin marbles.
Elgin wanted to take the marble and decorate his mansion because he promised his then future wife that he was going to build her a marvellous mansion in Scotland that would resemble some of the ancient Greek houses. Unfortunately, Elgin did not have good fortune. On his way to England from Turkey, he was captured by the French and was imprisoned for four years. When he arrived in England, he found that his wife had run away with another man, and his estate was nearly bankrupt. Elgin sought from the British Government 78 000 then, to give them the marble. The English government managed to get all the marbles for 35 000.
In 1831, when the Greeks defeated the Turks and gained independence, the return of the marbles in Greece was very significant, and they repeatedly asked the British Government. One of the stories I read when I was at high school was that, during the war of independence, the Greeks had surrounded the Acropolis Rock and the embattled Turks inside the rock were left without ammunition, until they discovered that the Parthenon columns were held together by lead which was poured in the core. They started breaking the marble to take the lead out, melt it and make bullets. When the Greeks found out what was happening, they sent some messengers to offer the Turks ammunition so they would continue the war and stop smashing the columns. The English generals who were assisting the Greeks expressed their surprise about this, until one of the Greeks said: ‘Well, we are fighting for those marbles, we do not want them destroyed’.
So, the marbles of Parthenon and the Elgin marbles are very, very significant to the Greeks. The Greeks said: ‘Now you have promised $A120m to the museum to have the Elgin marbles’. But they also promised if they do not return the marbles by the Olympics in 2004, the section of the museum that was built to house these marbles will remain empty, pointing the finger at the English all the time.
The British Museum has alleged that the marbles were removed by Lord Elgin to protect them from destruction. Unfortunately, in a secret report that was disclosed recently, it revealed that in 1938 and 1940, the British Museum tried to whiten the marbles using acid or other whitening material and, as a result, it nearly destroyed the marbles. In March this year, Britain signed the 1970 United Nations convention to protect cultural property from illegal trade and new criminal offences were created. Of course, that does not sit very well with the refusal of the museum to return the marbles.
The Greeks have pointed out that the return of the marbles is so significant they are prepared to withdraw any claims to any other Greek antiquities from the museum just to have the marbles back. However, the British Museum is afraid that, if they return the Elgin Marbles, they then open the door for further claims to the antiquities. I have to admit that if the Greek, Roman, Egyptian, and Babylonian antiquities are removed from the British Museum, together with the Egyptian, I do not think there will be much left for the British Museum to exhibit. I would like to advise the House that, in the near future, I am prepared to put a motion that will support the return of the Elgin Marbles to their birthplace in Greece.
I would conclude my adjournment with a few comments with regards to the taxi industry. Having had a look at the adjournment comments made by the member for Greatorex yesterday, I have to explain some things because the member for Greatorex may have read the papers but, quite obviously, he does not understand anything that was included in these papers. First of all his comments about the $20m debt: the previous government borrowed $20m to buy back the licences. When they bought back the licences, they changed the legislation so that the licences do not exist any more. But people are hiring the licences because you cannot buy then any more. When you borrow $20m and you pay interest, you have a debt. It does not matter what you call it; the reality is a debt - a $20m debt. The payments were amortised for the next 10 or 20 years, so the money that was paid now by the taxi owners to acquire the taxi licences, is going to pay this debt. It does not matter what you call it, it is a $20m debt.
With regards to the industry consultation for the 12 months; in reality the White Paper was released in May 2002 and we have had consultations since May. That hardly makes it 14 months; it is actually five months. We discussed with industry; there was a lot of interest, but we had to get it right otherwise the industry would be completely ruined. The board we put in place, the member for Greatorex quite rightly says, why should he have one board in Darwin; why you don’t have a board in Alice Springs and Katherine? That taxi board is not to be a Darwin taxi board. It is going to be a Northern Territory board with representation from other areas. I agree with the member for Greatorex, we should not be parochial. We should be looking for the whole Territory and that is exactly what we are doing.
With regards to the training that every driver who starts training after 16 October has to have completed the new 78 hours training. The reason for making it after 16 October, we now see what is going to happen from March 2003. It was very easy for somebody to jump in now and do the 24-hour training and then claim he is a qualified driver. No, we want drivers who will be fully qualified in order to include a service to the clientele. Everybody who wants to be a driver as from yesterday has to complete the new 78 hours. Let’s not forget in the past few months we have seen some complaints about taxi drivers. I believe one in particular was from the daughter of a councillor from Alice Springs whom the member for Greatorex knows very well. I do not want women to be abused or assaulted by taxi drivers. I do not want clients to be abused verbally or otherwise. I want a quality industry to provide quality service to the clientele.
The training provided to taxi drivers would be provided by accredited trainers whilst in the smaller centres it will be the responsibility of the base operator. But even the base operator has to provide an accredited course and I do not think any operator would be qualified to provide this course so he or she has to actually employ the services of a qualified trainer to provide this course to the taxi industry.
As for the requirement to hold a licence for five years, with further representation from the member for Braitling, we have decided that in the smaller centres if there is a need the board will have the ability to use discretion and give the H endorsement licence to people with less than five years driving experience. However, in Darwin with a population of 150 000 and a much busier place than Katherine and Alice Springs, it is absolutely necessary that the person who drives a vehicle that carries four or five passengers, or twelve passengers in a mini bus, is an experienced person who knows very well where he is going and where he drives and how to drive.
I recall recently I got off the aeroplane at the Darwin Airport, got in a car and I told him to drive home to Nightcliff. The person spoke to me in broken English and said: ‘You show me; I drive’. We do not want these kind of people. We do not want people who came to Australia as migrants or otherwise and because they think taxi is an easy job, they jump in a taxi and drive around and they have only had a driving licence for six months or eight months or a year.
Some other issues that the member for Greatorex was worried about a bit were about the limousines and the special function cars. The limousine is a limousine in the same way limousines operate down south. A special function car is a vintage car like a Rolls Royce from the 1950s and 1960s that you usually get to transport a bride to the church. They are not a limousine. If you want to take a vintage car, you can hire a vintage car. If you want to get a limousine to the church, get a limousine to the church. If you want to get a taxi, get a taxi. But a vintage car is not going to be on the road every day transporting people from the airport or from the port to their destination. It is used only in special circumstances and we recognised that hence the reduced fees.
His comments about the opening of the market and the number of taxis which came to the industry and people took risks, yes, I agree with you. The market was opened. As a result we saw a significant increase in taxis, unfortunately resulting in the destruction of the industry with people moving out of the industry. What we now want to do is bring back the driver/owner because the driver/owner has a special interest not only in his taxi but also his clientele because he does not want to lose his clients. I know people who actually own taxis or drive taxis and I would much rather use these people than people because they do not have another job, and they don’t it is an easy job.
But as I said before, I would be prepared to give a briefing to any member of this House. I believe the member for Greatorex has a briefing with my officers tomorrow morning since I will be away in Alice Springs opening the Hugh Bridge. I do not apologise for the time we took with the industry. We listened to the industry. The comments we have received are very good. One comment that was made today was that there are too many taxis, 140 taxis. I want to advise the House that in Darwin there are not 140 taxis, there are 120 taxis and that falls within the formula of one taxi per 900 head of population.
Apart from that, the comments we have received are very good, very positive. The industry now will settle down, despite the fact that we are removing the cap and we will see the industry returning back to normal, providing quality service to its clientele not only in Darwin, but in other places such as Alice Springs, Katherine and Nhulunbuy.
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Madam Speaker, I rise to talk about my attendance at the Annual General Meeting of the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory on Friday, 6 September. It was a very well attended AGM and it was heartening to see such a representative group of our society. There were people from many diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds. I congratulate the outgoing President, Beryl Mulder, for her tireless efforts to raise the profile of the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory and to participate in public debate on issues that are relevant to people from a culturally and linguistically diverse background.
I also take the opportunity this evening to congratulate the elected Executive Committee for 2002-03. I sincerely welcome back to the role of President, Yogan Sathianathan. Yogan has been, as many people here know in the Territory, president before. He is a very distinguished and hardworking member of our community, and I am sure that he will continue to promote the racial harmony that we enjoy in the Territory. So, Yogan, congratulations on your elevation to president, and I look forward to working closely with you.
The Senior Vice-President is Isabelle Harrison. Isabelle is also no stranger to the people in the Territory. She has put in many years of hard work for the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory and her community. Beryl Mulder steps down to the Vice-Presidential position, very much a key and active position within the committee.
The Secretary is Madhu Dasgupta, someone who is held in very high esteem and regard by those who have worked with her and know her. She will have a specific portfolio of Seniors, working closely with Maria Koukouvas on the Board.
Prath is, by no surprise to many, the Treasurer of the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory, with a special focus on education, training, research and immigration.
Thyra Ou, a Cambodian member of my community, continues on as a committee member. Her focus will Centrelink and working women’s health. Thyra is a dynamic representative of the Cambodian community. She is an exceptionally hard worker and was recognised as such with a special award presentation by the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory this year.
Katherine Yuen is a highly regarded member of the Chinese community here in the Northern Territory. I congratulate Katherine on her election to the committee. She will be focussing specifically on children’s services.
Asad Mohsin, as we all know, is a respected member of the Muslim community, the leader of his community who was again elected to the committee, and he will be focussing on education, training and research.
Another committee member is Umi Rashmi. Umi is an absolutely delightful person. I have had the good fortune to meet her a number of times now. She will be focussing on women’s affairs.
Also on the committee is Jaya Srinivas. Jaya will be focussing on children’s’ services and representing the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory on the Police Ethnic Advisory Group, a very important linkage there.
Finally, a committee member is Emma Sullivan. Emma is a wonderful member of our Samoan community and, quite appropriately, she is focussing on arts and culture.
Two coopted executives onto the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory are Dawn Lawrie, who will be the reconciliation link person, and Micheline Lee, disability advisor. We all know that Micheline is a fantastic advocate for people with disabilities.
I wish the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory a very successful 2002-03 year. What an incredibly dynamic, capable, intelligent and harmonious committee they have elected themselves.
I make the point that, at the AGM, people were presented with a report, the Northern Territory News Watch Report. It was reporting on indigenous, multicultural and minority group issues. The report was compiled by Gail Dawson for the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory. I recommend it as reading to every member of the Assembly. It makes an interesting, analytical analysis of the Northern Territory news and broader media reporting. I have to say that there are some very concerning issues that this report indeed raises. It is worth reading. Get a hold of a copy of it. It is available from the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory, and I recommend it to every member of the Assembly.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, I would like to report on the Chinese Moon Festival, which was held in Darwin on 21 September. It was a very well attended festival, the fourth we have had in the last five years. It is one of the two Chinese festivals in Darwin that has all the Chinese members of the community coming together to share with the rest of Darwin what a significant Chinese festival is like.
The Moon Festival is a tradition that is steeped in history. We have many stories told about how it began. It is celebrated on 15th day of the eighth month of the Lunar Calendar. On that particular day, we have a full moon and Chinese people celebrate the moon, or mid-autumn or harvest festival. The round shape of the moon to the Chinese means unity, and hence it is also a time for family reunion.
The Moon Festival is a holiday and family members get together whenever it is possible. The reunion includes the sharing of special cakes, and these are called moon cakes. In remembrance of the legend of Chang E, moon cakes are very special sweet cakes made in the shape of the moon, containing lotus seeds paste, or even sometimes red bean paste.
The legend of the Moon Festival, the story that I told this year dated back around 2170 BC. The story goes like this. The earth once had 10 suns circling over it. Each took its turn to illuminate the earth. Legend says that during Emperor Yao’s rule, by some calamity all 10 suns appeared in the sky at the same time, thus scorching the earth with their heat. Because the heat from these suns endangered crops and vegetation, wildlife and the very existence of people, Emperor Yao asked a very famous archer to shoot down nine of the 10 suns. After shooting the extra suns down, the archer Houyi asked, as a reward for his heroic deed, for the hand of the emperor’s beautiful daughter Chang E. Houyi took care of Chang E, but she remained indifferent to him, always considering herself the most beautiful woman in the world, and Houyi not worthy of her.
Meanwhile, the emperor was worried that the extra suns would reappear and cause a new disaster, so he thought he should keep Houyi alive forever to make sure that the great archer would be around to repeat his magical effort. The emperor gave Houyi the elixir of life that was said to ensure immortality, but Chang E learned of the elixir of life and decided that she could make better use of it herself. She was the most beautiful woman in the world, or so she thought, and she wanted to live forever. So Chang E swallowed the magic potion but, alas, she immediately started floating into the air. She soon reached the moon, where she remains today, transformed into the scars on the moon as punishment, and leaving poor Houyi to see only the shadow of his vain wife, and only when the moon is full.
As I say, this celebration on 21 September was the fourth occasion that the Chinese in Darwin have celebrated this festival. Some 450 people turned up, each family bringing their own food, and sharing it with the rest of the gathering. There was more food than you could possibly consume that night. In spite of the rather chaotic start to dinner, everybody had their fill of various types of Chinese food cooked in different styles. This was one occasion where you could actually sample just about every different type of Chinese cooking that is available in Darwin.
We had many sponsors for the function. Most important of all was the Department of Ethnic Affairs, which provided us with seed funding to get the function going. Other sponsors were Alfred’s, through Stanley and Frank Chin who are always very supportive of the efforts of the Chinese community, Jape Homemaker Village also provided, through Connie Jape, two items as door prizes for our raffle. Leeon Chinatown Consortium, through Jason Lee, provided us with support also. Happy Gardens Restaurant, through the outlets at Nightcliff, Parap, Casuarina and the city, provided us with fried rice to feed some 100 people. The Chinese Emporium, through Kivi Lay, provided us with a hamper of assorted goods and also two pots. The Noodle House gave us a voucher, generously donated by its owner, Nelson Jong. Kathy Ling from Goldmark gave us a gift which was also raffled that night. Sabine Foodstores was the Happy Store that provided us with some 30 tins, altogether, of moon cakes which were sold that night at a special price to those that attended the function.
Moon cakes are traditionally very expensive. Apart from the paste that it contains, usually they add eight egg yolks into the paste and the more egg yolks there are, the more expensive it becomes. Some moon cakes can sell - to the discovery of the member for Port Darwin – for up to about $10 each! So, they are quite expensive articles. As usual, Lo Castro Foods have supported us every year we have held the Moon Festival, and they came through with the free ice cream to provide ice creams for every person who came to the function that night - that was very generous of them.
The function was attended by His Honour the Administrator, and Mrs Jeanette Anictomatis as well. They have been very supportive of our function. Throughout the night, we had cultural performances; we had children singing songs in Chinese - that is one way of teaching the language. I thought they did very well, and I could understand the Mandarin that they used to sing the songs, as well. I will not go into Chinese for you, because nobody will understand it anyway.
Louise and Winnie Wong performed two Cantonese opera songs translated into ‘Taming of the Shrew’, a light comedy drama describing the fight between a newly married couple: the difficult princess and her impulsive husband. They were sung very well. The other song that they sang was ‘Thundering Golden Drums versus Barbarian Horns’, a romantic but tragic story depicting the moment when two lovers are forced to separate for the sake of the survival of the mother country. The story took place during the Seven Waring States period in Ancient China, about 2300 years ago.
Then we had a very great rendition by a young women called Andrea Ngai, on her lute. It is a string instrument that you play holding it vertically. It is a strumming instrument, just like a guitar, but held upright. Haunting Chinese music floated right through the compound of the Chung Wah Society. While she played, the children came around with a lantern parade. There must have been 150 children carrying individual lanterns, some they had made themselves during a lantern workshop that we held earlier that afternoon with parents coming into help, making the frames with wire then gluing cellophane paper over the wire frame. I can remember when I was a kid that playing around with the lanterns during the Moon Festival was one of the highlights. Unfortunately, as a child too, you are not to careful and the lanterns end up burning because the candle inside the lantern tends to fall over in its bracket and of course the whole thing can go up in flames.
But that night with 150 kids walking around with the lanterns, it was a terrific sight. Some of them were standing on the stage while others remained on the ground, and in the dark of the night with all the lights turned out and only the candle-lit lanterns shining and the lute playing in the background it was really terrific. And then Andrea Ngai was accompanied in a solo Mandarin song sung by Madam Wang Ning. The song, translated, described a woman’s feelings in her heart that they are like the moon, meaning that they change from time to time or perhaps regularly - I am not quite sure!
Then the Chunlien Dance Group, that is a group normally of 12 young women from the Chung Wah Society, performed on stage. Unfortunately, six of them were not able to attend that night so we only had one group of six young women dancing the Feather Dance. The cultural performance was concluded with three items. One was the Kung Fu demonstration by Vernon Lowe and his troupe and to top it off we had the Dragon Dance performance. The Lion Dance had been performed earlier in the evening to open the festival following the arrival of His Honour the Administrator. At the end of the night we had the Dragon Dance. The Chung Wah Dragon Dance troupe had been training all week following the visit of a group from Penang which came to Darwin to train them. This cultural exchange was facilitated through the Office of Ethnic Affairs and brought five people across. They were led by the head of the Seow Hay San Association, Mr Gooi Teong Hup; accompanying him was Linda Tay Gaik Sim who came as the interpreter; Perry Tan Hin Hoe, who had been here previously some four years ago teaching the Lion Dance; Ong Kean Hin, a drummer who was particularly good at training the Chung Wah Society with the drumming, using the cymbals and the gongs; and Kenny Hew Yuen Hoay who is a very good performer in the Dragon Dance. The five of them together were able to transfer the skills to the Chung Wah Society Lion and Dragon dance troupes.
David Tollner was there to present the Australian flags to the presidents of each of the five Chinese associations that were represented at the Moon Festival. They were Bill Van der Veen, Po Chow, Adam Lowe, Jason Lee and Stephen Au.
The Moon Festival would not have been successful had it not been for the very dedicated and regular meetings and work put in by many of the people from all the organisations. I would like to list the names of the people. They were Daryl Chin; Po Chow, Jong Pah Fong, John Lopez, Jason Lee, Val Van der Veen, Horace Yau, Daniel Chow, Sam Chow, Chaplin Hsiong, Adam Lowe, Bill Van der Veen, Henry Yap, and Stephanie Zhang. They are the people who came to meetings regularly and rolled their sleeves up when help was required and helped put up the stage, pull down the stage, picked up the stage from the Marrara stadium and took it back there again.
In all, it was a very good function that night and I recognise the presence of the Minister for Ethnic Affairs and also the Minister for Asian Relations and Trade who were there for parts of the night. I understand that other members were also there including the members for Port Darwin and Drysdale and, yes, for a short while I noticed the presence of the member for Johnston. I did not see the member for Sanderson. Maybe he was just a little bit small for me to see. Anyway, it was a good night.
In closing, just a quick point for the minister to consider. When you borrow money to buy taxi licence plates or CVLs, you still own the asset, just like you mortgage or borrow money to buy a house. You might owe the money to a bank, but you still own the house so you still have property. If you want to get rid of the debt, you sell your house and you will be able to get rid of your debt.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I want to place on record tonight some of the very exciting events that have been happening in my electorate of Braitling. The Australian Open Garden Scheme, as you know, each year awards prizes throughout the Territory. This year I am pleased to say that two prizes were awarded to community groups in the Braitling electorate.
The Grant Road residents under the leadership of Mien and Fred Blom have worked tirelessly over some time to establish a lovely little park area. It is interesting that our town council has in fact announced that they will sell off some of their parks, but this little group of residents was so determined that that would not happen to their little space of land that they have worked tirelessly to establish what I call a basic park, but a very useable park. It is all sand. It has one piece of play equipment, it has a basketball hoop, it has a bicycle track, a cement track, and it fulfills the needs of many of the youngsters in the area. They received their $1000 grant from the Open Garden Scheme. Sarah Amies came down to Alice Springs for the occasion. They intend to spend that money on some seating and some shade. As I say, it is a basic park but it is just what a small community needs and all the residents in the little cul-de-sac are to be commended for getting together and working on their park. I know they were quite delighted to be recognised in this way.
The other award went to the Larapinta Primary School where I am very pleased to say that the children are establishing what they call a mini-desert park. It is a duplication of the big Desert Park in Alice Springs where they are establishing different areas. There are woodland, sand dune, riverina and mulga habitats. Their $1000 will go toward helping to establish more of these habitats to actually reflect what is at the Desert Park. Their teacher Mel Phillips was there with Geoff Myers and the Mayor Fran Kilgariff, and I am very pleased to say that this will become a community asset for the Larapinta residents. They deserve congratulations for being able to achieve this award which was quite unique.
I also had visit me in my offices – I am sure the member for Araluen did, too – the Anzac Hill High School Z Club members. These are young students who, in 1997 at Anzac Hill High School, formed a Z Club which is a young group of the Zonta Service Club. They were taking part in a five kilometre walk for women in Afghanistan, fund raising as they went. That particular morning they walked to the National Women’s Pioneer Hall of Fame, the town council lawns, the Olive Pink Botanic Gardens and to my office. Since the formation of this club not so long ago, their members have helped in a number of ways in the local community. They have helped the local Red Cross with their doorknock, they have assisted the Women’s Hall of Fame with fundraising, they compiled a goods box for the women’s shelter. They have also prepared boxes for Papua New Guinea and Timor. They have assisted at the Alice Springs Show, and have exhibited in the annual Alice Springs Quilting Exhibition. It is a great way to start young people doing things for their community to have this club established in a junior high school and see these young girls respond in such a way.
While I am talking about quilting, I am very pleased to say that I will be opening on 27 October this year’s Alice Springs Quilting Exhibition. The Alice Springs Quilting Club has been very active over the years. The exhibition theme this year is: The Quilts are Out Back, and it is a, theme, obviously linked to the Year of the Outback. They have 80 members at the moment, some who live interstate and some overseas, so it is quite a big club. The response has been very good; a total of 175 articles have been entered this year. There are 11 categories in this exhibition, with only two of them judged by the Alice Springs Quilting Club members. There will be other prizes given as well.
The Quilting Club began in 1981, and they have met at various places as they have been established, but this is the first year they have actually not been able to exhibit in the Araluen Centre Gallery. They are exhibiting in Witchettey’s, which I think is a bit of a shame because there is always a bit of prestige about the fact that they could be in one of the galleries at Araluen. I hope next year they will be able to go back so they are acknowledged in that way. But certainly, the work they produce is of an extremely high standard.
I also want to make mention of the fact that Teppa Hill Preschool, which is in my electorate, has celebrated their 30th birthday. The Northern Territory has been far ahead of the rest of Australia in that the preschools have been under the Education Department for so long, and this preschool would have been perhaps the third preschool established in Alice Springs. It was a great evening with many parents there and some former students. I was very pleased to be able to commemorate the birthday by unveiling a plaque which was made of sandstone and really is quite a feature of the school now. Mr Newland did it and incorporated the Teppa Hill design with the teddy bears on it, so it is really a great little memento for Teppa Hill Preschool and I commend the teachers, Heather Parkinson and her staff for what they have done.
I was very pleased to open the new Cancer Council office in Alice Springs, which is just down the corridor from my office in the building I am in. They have moved from where they were in Todd Mall to the office where they are now. They were really concerned about privacy of people going into the Cancer Council for counselling or what have you, and it seems to have been a good move. It is a bigger office. They now have additional staff, which is great. They have a counsellor, a coordinator, a fundraiser and an administrator. I was very pleased that Brian McCarthy, the Northern Territory president, came down for the occasion. It is very important that we all support very much the work of the Cancer Council.
So, therefore, I urge all members tomorrow morning to attend the Mini Field of Women in the Great Hall. I am very pleased to say that the member for Port Darwin will be MC-ing the event, the Chief Minister, the wife of the Administrator, and I will be leading the walk. We will have the choir from Darwin and Palmerston High Schools, led by Nora Lewis. It is going to be a great occasion. At the walk we will plant our silhouettes in memory of all those women who have either survived or not survived from cancer. The silhouettes we will be planting will be sent to Sydney to be incorporated in the Main Field of Women that will be held on Sunday, 27 October, but in 2004 it will be the Northern Territory’s turn to host the Main Field, so it is a very special occasion for it.
I guess we can all tell stories of how we have been touched with cancer in some ways. I certainly will be relaying one of those stories to the group tomorrow morning. But we should be proud of the way the Cancer Council supports women with breast cancer. I am aware of the inaugural Dragons Abreast Regatta on 25 August this year, which was the first national dragon boat regatta, where officers of my department started developing their muscles after training for the Chamber Rats team, and the money raised from this event went towards buying recliner chairs for the chemo lounge.
There are a large number of women diagnosed with breast cancer each year in Australia, and it seems to be in the Northern Territory. We all seem to come across someone we know who is touched by this unfortunate disease. We need to say that the height of awareness is increasing year by year. Tomorrow will feature the very young girls from the high schools to the very mature women such as me; and the message is right across all women to be aware and make sure that you do what you should do.
All members should come to this event tomorrow, and you could show your support by sponsoring a silhouette, or buying a raffle ticket, or purchasing something from the wide range that will be there because, obviously, those funds will go towards breast cancer research. It is a very important day, and I wish them all the success. Congratulations to the people who have been involved; particularly Katie Tchia, my secretary, who has been very busy with all this; and also Michelle Hanton and Susan Tully from the Northern Territory Cancer Voice, who also have been very involved. Of course, Pat Hancock, a member of the staff, will be down there to lead us, as well.
Mr KIELY (Sanderson): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I talk about all the events that have been happening in the Chinese community over the last month or so; events that I have had the pleasure of attending and participating in. I met quite a number of my parliamentary colleagues there.
Early in September was the Moon Festival. As a prelude to Moon Festival festivities at the Chung Wah Society, there was a special function held here in Parliament House hosted by the Minister for Ethnic Affairs, in consultation with the Chief Minister, where approximately 500 people of the Chinese community attended. This was a great night; a fantastic night. There was lion dancers. In fact, quite a number of local Chinese community members who attended said: ‘Well, this is fantastic. This is the first time we have really had such a crowd. Last year we had the Moon Festival in here, but this year everyone has got on board, and it is great’. I was speaking to a really nice bloke, a man I have had business dealings with, Mr Adam Lowe, who is president of the Chung Wah Society. He and I were talking and he was really happy about it. It was good to talk to Adam about how good it was to have all these people in the people’s hall out here - because this belongs to all of the Darwin, Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and all the people of the Territory, no matter what race, what religion. That is what this place is all about.
We are all out there having a good time. The lion dance was just fantastic. It is the hallmark of the Chung Wah Society, as far as I can see. They just get around everywhere, out at Hibiscus Shopping Centre; I have seen them going through town. I love it. I love how they do that lettuce thing; it is just fantastic.
Anyway, I was moving through the crowd talking to people. I had a bit of a chat to Mr Sung Ki Lee and Mr Toi Ki Lee. They are just local people from around the area. There was just so many people there that I was just chatting, and they were chatting back. There was Mr Teng Ki Mu, Mr Martin Lai, and John Lai who I have had quite a number of dealings with over our way. He is a great worker for the Chinese community. Mr John Lai just about epitomises the spirit of the Chinese community in this town; he gets in there and he works hard. I heard the member for Greatorex mention his donations to the Chung Wah Society for the Moon Festival and how he contributed there. That just about sums up a lot of people like him who just cannot do enough for their community, and that is a commendable spirit.
I also attended the Moon Festival the following night at the Chung Wah Society at the Chinese Temple. That was fantastic. I used to live behind there and listen to a lot of festivals. I enjoyed going there. As a matter of fact, when I was a young fellow growing up in Melbourne, I used to go out to Bendigo to the Easter Fair and they have a great time there. We used to love it.
I tell you something else that the House might not know, but I actually have Chinese relatives. I have cousins, two of my aunties have husbands, partners, who are of Chinese extraction. One lives on the Gold Coast. I have another couple of cousins in Melbourne. I do have some affiliations with the Chinese community.
Anyway, we were over at the Moon Festival. The member for Johnston, the Minister for Ethnic Affairs, the minister for industries and …
Dr Burns: The member for Port Darwin?
Mr KIELY: The member for Port Darwin and her husband, John, were there. They were having a good time. The Administrator was there. There was the member for Solomon. Look, that is the spirit of this place: all the politicians either side, all got in there and had a really good time with the community. I noticed in the crowd that it was not only strictly Chinese members of the community. It was open to everyone and everyone went, and you had to bring along food, and if you did not bring along food there was a $10 entry fee, and that was great.
The member for Greatorex, I think he is the patron of the Chung Wah Society, was up there MC-ing, and he did a wonderful job. He told this great joke. He is talking about the Moon Festival, and I have heard different versions of it and the version he actually told, I went home and told my kids because I thought that was a great story. But he told this tale, he is talking about the moon and he is pointing up to it, and he said: ‘The moon over here when it rises’. And everyone cracked up, and he is going: ‘That’s it, that’s the moon over there’, and then the joke was it rising behind him and every one is pointing. It carried the bar, it carried the night, it set the tone, got everyone going. Everyone had a really good laugh. I was glad. I thought this guy has such a funny streak that I have never seen before, but that was wonderful, that was just simply marvellous.
Following on from that event, we had here a very special occasion in the Hall on 11 October - a visiting delegation from China. The Chief Minister was happy to welcome a delegation of 13 senior Chinese officials and I would like to read their names into the Parliamentary Record. They were: Mr Guo Fucheng, the head of the delegation, Deputy General of the Standing Committee of Baotou Municipal People’s Congress, Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region; Mr Shi Peide, Director General of Shangqui Municipal People’s Congress of Henan Province; Mr Pang Lipang, Secretary General of Hunan Provincial People’s Friendship Association; Mr Wang Chongming, Deputy Secretary General of Baotou Municipal Government, Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region; Ms Ma Hairong, Secretary General of the Chinese delegation, Director of the Division for Oceanian and Canadian Affairs of the Chinese People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries; Mr Shi Jianmin, Director General of the Committee on Science, Education, Culture and Public Health, Shangqiu Municipal People’s Congress, Henan Province; Mr Chu Qingfu, Honorary President, Nanyang People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries, Henan Province; Mr Li Jinwang, Director General, Nanyang Municipal Planning Bureau, Henan Province; Mr Sun Jianhua, Deputy Director General of the Construction Committee, Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region; Mr Wang Xudong, Deputy Director of the Gardening Division, Baotou City, Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region; Mr Wang Jianjun, Deputy Director General of the Standing Committee of Dongcheng District People’s Congress, Beijing; Ms Jia Feng, Deputy Director, Miyun County Foreign Affairs Office, Beijing and Ms Wang Lidan, Interpreter, the Division of Oceanian and Canadian Affairs, Chinese People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries.
I had the honour and great privilege of walking these people into the Hall, lead by Mr Guo Fucheng, Deputy Director General of the Standing Committee of Baotou. It was truly an honour. All the local people felt very honoured that this delegation from China should come and visit us here in the Territory. The Chief Minister gave a beautiful welcome speech and so did Mr Guo Fucheng. He presented the Chief Minister with a wonderful tapestry of pandas that she could actually rotate and there was two panels to this. Our government, our Chief Minister, reciprocated with a beautiful bark painting. I am sure that will be greatly treasured by the recipient.
I was also pleased to see the shadow minister for Ethnic Affairs there. He was mingling in the crowd. I am also pleased that our Minister for Ethnic Affairs presented a cheque to the Australian China Friendship Society to assist in the functions that were planned as they were hosting the delegation. The delegation is a very business-focussed delegation. It is a good thing for the community that these people are visiting our districts and having a look at opportunities. They were very busy. They were welcomed of course, they were met by Ms Song Wei, Secretary of the Australia-China Friendship Society and Mr Pedro Yap, who is a great believer in the friendship between Australian and China and the advantages that it has to offer both of our societies, and Dr Chaplin Hsiong who is the Deputy of the Australia-China Friendship Society. The event in the hall was wonderful. They then went to a dinner hosted by the Minister for Ethnic Affairs which I heard was absolutely fabulous. Everyone had a really good time.
The next day the delegation was out and about. They have been over to Gow’s Reptile Farm, they travelled to the Wharf Precinct to have a look at what was happening down there, they went to Crocodylus Park, they were all up and down the place. They were over at The Esplanade and at the Cruise Ship Passenger Terminal.
They were looking at the things that Darwin had to offer because in future years, this is a great destination for tourists from their country. There are a lot of people coming from China now on tourist visas and having a look around the place, and this delegation will go back with good reports about Darwin. They were even presented with some local produce – some local mangoes –which I am sure they would have enjoyed.
On the Saturday, I had the pleasure of being invited to lunch, with the Australia-China Friendship Society. Sitting at my table was Mr Pang Liping and Mr Shi Peide from the delegation along with Dr Chaplin Hsiong. It was really good to be able to sit down in a relaxed atmosphere. We were talking about how good Darwin was, what a great place, what an opportunity. We were also talking about the Chinese community and the contributions they have made. You can see it in this town, you can see it all around the place. The community here is a very proud community and it is proud because it has contributed so much to the way we are today. I thank them for all the work they have put in here.
There are a couple of great stories that I could tell which really strike home the longevity of the Chinese connection in this town. When I first arrived, I was at a display at the Botanic Gardens and I heard two older women talking about Darwin in the old days, in the 1930s, and they were talking in a great north Australian accent. I turned around because the stories were so interesting, and here they were, two old Chinese ladies in national dress for the day, and I thought: ‘Well, that’s pretty well it, isn’t it? Look at this’.
I also have a friend and work colleague, Narelle Hee, whom I have worked with for many, many years and I have travelled away on work trips with. We were in Katherine. We were work colleagues and we were having a beer in the bar there and this chap comes up and decides he would introduce himself. He said to Narelle: ‘Where are you from?’ because she is Chinese. She said: ‘I am from Darwin.’ He says, ‘No, no, no. Where are your parents from?’ And she said: ‘Darwin.’ And he said, ‘No, no, no, no. Your grandparents?’ ‘Well, they’re from Darwin too.’ He goes: ‘Yeah, but you’re Chinese.’ She goes: ‘No, no. I am from Darwin. I’m a Territorian’. That just about sums up how long these people have been contributing, how long the Chinese have been coming to this country, and I think it is wonderful that after all that time, over 100 years or more, they are still maintaining their cultural links which speaks a lot of the diversity, the tolerance and the greatness of the multiculturalism of the Territory and of this town and of the contribution of the Chinese community 100 years ago.
I am sure that 100 years in the future, they will still be the great contributing factor to this proud community of ours.
Ms CARTER (Port Darwin): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I rise tonight to reflect on Saturday’s activity which I know Madam Acting Deputy Speaker participated in and, no doubt, enjoyed.
On Saturday, a group of women members of parliament and women from councils and from the federal arena got together to help the Women’s Advisory Council’s Women and Politics group deliver what was called the Don’t Get Mad, Get Elected seminar held here in Parliament House. Over 100 local women attended this free event which was hosted by the Chief Minister, and I will explain later on some of the comments of evaluation from the day, but it was definitely a rip-roaring success.
The day commenced with the Chief Minister making the opening address, and that was followed by a panel consisting of women who are in local government. Those women were Anne Shepherd from Katherine Town Council, Annette Burke, the mayor of Palmerston, Jo Sangster from the Darwin City Council, and Mary Walshe from the Litchfield Shire Council. What came out of their delivery was, to some extent, a feeling of exasperation that people working at that level of government are seen as the third, ergo the lowest, tier of government. These women expressed quite soundly their frustration with that problem and the way that society in some ways reacts to that.
The reality, as I know all of us are aware here in this legislature, is that local councils provide a vital and essential role to us and to our constituents. I am sure you will all agree with me that a significant proportion of the complaints that we get from constituents, we have to hand ball to the local councils, because it is really there that they belong, and it is the local councils which are providing, for constituents, a very real and important service. The women involved in the panel spoke about their experiences on council, and how the debate in councils can be extremely vigorous, and how they are all, I got the impression, enjoying their experience as councillors.
The next session was with the media, called Under The Spotlight. The media panel consisted of Julia Christiensen, Cam Smith and Barbara McCarthy. That was a very interesting session. Essentially, what happened during it, was that the media were forced to justify the way they behave towards politicians across the board. Quite a few members of parliament and councillors raised issues with the media of some of the experiences they have had. The media, I felt, were pretty blunt in how they described their approach to the job, which essentially is that, if you are in politics, at whatever level, you are a public person. Whatever happens to you is fair game for the media and they are there to ask the questions.
What came out of the audience, I felt, was a significant concern about that approach, and certainly for the women there, it was one of the main things which turns them off getting interested in becoming public figures and involved in politics. I do not know whether or not the media are aware of the impact that they have on the community in deterring people from becoming involved in politics. Certainly, the floor put very strongly to this media panel their feelings of concern about how politicians are treated from time to time, and the media panel certainly spoke strongly and stuck to their guns that that is their job.
Barbara McCarthy made an interesting point, however, and I do not think it is one that many of us take up, or our supporters, and our supporters of course are often our families. Barbara’s comment was that, if you are ever upset by the way that the media are handling an issue for you, you have every right, and your supporters also have every right, to contact the media and express your concerns about that. The inference was that the management of that media agency would take those concerns into consideration if you believe you are being unfairly targetted.
After lunch which, of course, was an excellent experience, we had the panel of MLAs. The member for Karama, the member for Arafura, the member for Araluen, and I were on the panel. The program that we were asked to present was essentially the continuum between when you get that thought of becoming a member of parliament, through to working as a member of parliament. The member for Karama spoke on making yourself known, and that, of course, was the process by which you get involved with your community, people become aware of who you are, your values and your concerns become public knowledge and, I guess, to some degree, you have an idea that, ‘I might be interested in becoming a member of parliament and so I need to get out there and get active in the community’.
The member for Arafura spoke on pre-selection, and her session was particularly interesting for those of us in the CLP because I certainly did not know much about how the Labor Party pre-selects, but what I can say is it is very similar in the instance that she reported to us, as to how we go about doing it. The member for Arafura described how difficult it was to get pre-selected, and all the hoops that you have to jump through and, as we all know, it is often said that the most difficult thing about getting into parliament is actually getting through pre-selection.
The member for Araluen spoke on after you have gained pre-selection and the election campaign. I am sure all the members here are well aware the excitement that that generates. The member for Araluen gave a gripping account of her experience and, particularly, her love of dogs and cats in her electorate, and the things that she will do to get a vote. You had to be there to hear it, and I am not going to share it with you.
I spoke on the experience of being a member of the parliament after the election. I will not go into the details there as you are all very well aware of what that is like.
After each of the sessions, members of the public were able to ask us questions, and we had some great questions asked. The panels then were more or less finished and we had a session then from the federal member for …
Ms Carney: The Northern Territory
Ms CARTER: … the Northern Territory …
Ms Lawrie: Senator.
Ms CARTER: Senator, the Senator for the Northern Territory, a female one …
Mr Henderson: And a very fine Senator she is, as well.
Ms CARTER: Indeed she is. She gave an excellent account of her experiences in parliament. She elaborated on her experience and her interpretation of recent media hysteria over several members of federal parliament whom, in the past had an affair. That was riveting information for a group of over 100 women, I can assure you.
The day concluded with our Honourable Speaker, who spoke on her experiences as a person who is now an Independent member of parliament. I know that her session was very well received.
I would like to thank, therefore, I hope on behalf of my colleagues here in the Chamber, the women who are with the Women and Politics group. It was chaired by Gail Humble. Other members were Mary Cunningham, Jenny Scullion, Leigh Hillman, Margaret Bowen, Danella Cross and Teri Robson who really put on a fantastic one-day program.
Just to confirm my thoughts here, I have been provided with a collation of the evaluations from the day. I will read a few of the comments out from the women who put in evaluations. The question was: ‘Did today’s conference change your perspective on politics; and if yes, how did it change it?’ The responses included: ‘It inspired me. It showed me CLP politicians are human too’ - I note the member for Araluen is chuckling with delight - ‘It is nice to know that elected members did not know a lot at the start either’; ‘The conference reduced the preconception that being a woman in politics is not totally overwhelming and barely attainable’; ‘Powerful insight into the mechanics of party politics’; ‘An honest perspective on the role of women in politics’; ‘More empathy for politicians’. And to conclude with this comment from one of the women who put in an evaluation: ‘It appears that humour is the key ingredient to surviving in politics’.
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonnell): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I take up the cudgels of an organisation – as I have done on a couple of occasions in the past. This organisation is Anglicare and the Anglican Lodge in Alice Springs. The last couple of occasions where I have taken this issue to government, I have actually taken the issue to the former CLP government which saw fit, on those occasions, to extend the hand of financial friendship to the organisation so that it could continue doing its good work in the Alice Springs community.
However, once again, the Anglican Lodge finds itself in the situation where it may well have to close its doors. That is of great concern to me because it does provide an important service, and up until very recently, provided the only service of its kind in the Alice Springs community. I know that the representatives from the Anglican Lodge have written to the government; the last occasion on 3 June. The matter has received some exposure on ABC Radio. However since that time, the issue seems to have gone quiet. I am concerned that in terms of government, it is falling on deaf ears. It is unfortunate that the current state of play is that the ground floor of the lodge was closed approximately a month ago. This took 13 beds out of crisis accommodation in Alice Springs, and bearing in mind that the recent opening of the Red Shield Hostel only put ten of those beds back into circulation, it is a shortfall of three for the Alice Springs community but it is actually a shortfall of 13 for the Anglican Lodge.
I believe that the current government’s approach to homelessness in Alice Springs is inadequate. I say that because in former times, the former government was keen to keep these sorts of institutions running. Of course, one of the policies that was started by the former government, and is still continued by this government, as I understand it, is that beds are purchased for the night. The approach certainly might take people off the street but it does little to help people in their situation. It is also difficult for Anglicare because the cost of running one of those beds every night is some $30 and unfortunately, the payment that they receive from government or the person paying the bill is $17. You do not have to be a genius to realise that if you spend $30 and only get $17 in, sooner or later your funding arrangements are going to be in some sort of trouble.
I understand that the application before government is arguing for about $160 000 a year for recurrent funding. That application takes in alone the $80 000 of bad debt that the lodge basically has from the last financial year. When you consider that other services such as the women’s shelter and youth spending in Alice Springs is in the order of some $700 000 plus, it places the amount expended into perspective. I am concerned that not enough is being done to be able to make that sort of crisis accommodation available. As I understand it at the moment, there is some $65 000 with the Salvation Army for supporting people with dual diagnosis, that is mental health and drug problems, and some $85 000 was also expended in the Bill Braitling flats which supports both males and females who are in transition.
In the case of Anglicare, this government, and indeed the former government, had always taken the approach that the lodge was a commercial venture. Clearly from what I have just said, the lodge is not a commercial venture at all. It is in essence a charitable institution and as far as I am concerned, it should be treated as such. From July last year, the lodge was the only crisis accommodation in town for men and women other than those women who were escaping domestic violence. The lodge took a great burden from the community and was the only form, as I said earlier, of crisis accommodation in the town. At the opening of the Red Shield Hostel, the minister acknowledged the support of Anglicare and indicated that people from her department would be talking to representatives from Anglicare in the near future.
It appears that the only thing that the minister had in mind was talks of developing future options but what those talks mean, or where those talks were going to go, or whether it coalesces into any real expenditure for the Anglican Lodge is something that is not clear at all. The problem is that in the meantime the Anglican Lodge waits and is dangling in limbo. It cannot afford to do so for long. And it is that limbo that concerns me because eventually the Anglican Lodge will have to close its doors. What the government did in establishing the Red Shield Hostel and its functions will be for naught simply because the Red Shield Hostel is going to take over where the Anglican Lodge can no longer operate.
It is not a good result for the people of Alice Springs; it is not a good result for crisis care in Alice Springs. I am deeply concerned that this is not something that the Anglican Lodge can do nor should it do. Anglicare is a charitable organisation which cares for the less privileged of us in society, but it can not continue to pour huge amounts of money into a single institution such as this without expecting some sort of support from government.
The lodge has for many years provided an important service to the community of Alice Springs and I fear that without support, the future of the lodge is very limited. I would urge the government to heed this message - in fact, all members in this Chamber - and know that what they are going to ultimately lose is a good service provider which has provided a good service to the community of Alice Springs for the past many years. To abandon this service now would be to the detriment not only of the community of Alice Springs, but ultimately to the detriment of government because the expenditure that will be required in other areas to fill up or pick up the shortfall is going to be greater than proper support for the lodge.
Mr HENDERSON (Wanguri): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I would like to talk about a constituent who passed away who was a dearly loved friend of mine and a strong supporter of the Labor Party. Mr Jimmy Clarke, who was born on 16 April 1929, died on 6 July 2002. He was a much loved member of the community. I first came to know him when I was door knocking in the by-election for Wanguri, at his home in Martinis Street in Wanguri. We sat down and had a long chat and we have been friends ever since. He was a staunch supporter of the ALP not only helping me in Wanguri, but over the years helping the Labor Party scrutineer in remote communities.
Like many at the time, Jimmy was involved in the rebuilding of Darwin after Cyclone Tracy in 1974-75. Jimmy’s son, Barry, tells a story which captures Jimmy’s selflessness, some of the essence of why people loved him so much. During the cyclone, it was Jimmy’s actions that perhaps saved the lives of at least three other families. He ventured out during the eye of the storm, collected and relocated these families to his home, where they all sat in one single room, sheltering against the elements.
Wanguri Primary School was close to Jimmy’s heart, and he spent many hours there helping staff and students, particularly on the ASPA program. All of his children went to the school and he was involved with the school from day one, which was for 25 years. It will be my pleasure to dedicate a garden at Wanguri Primary to Jimmy’s memory, the Jim Clarke Memorial Bush Walk. The bush walk was one of Jimmy’s ambitions for the school. Jimmy initiated the garden - it was his idea - which will be commemorated to his memory. It was he who planted the first cuttings and seedlings and they will live on for Jimmy. Jimmy was also an active participant in the Wanguri School Homework Centre.
He was a life member of the Wanderer’s footy club and the Miscellaneous Workers Union. He was a founding member of the Top End Country Music Association. Jimmy gave much to our community and country, not the least of which was a tour of duty in Korea. He had a distinguished service career. I know the tour of duty was hard for Jimmy and we as a community are always grateful to our veterans.
Jimmy left behind too many relatives to count; a large and extended family, and I cannot put all of their names on the record because we will probably miss some of them and get into trouble. However, my thoughts do go out particularly to his beautiful wife, Maria. Jimmy, you were a great man, you were well loved, and your memory will live on, particularly within the bush walk at Wanguri School.
I would like to talk now about the Casuarina Junior Soccer Club and the Casuarina Soccer Club. I recently attended the Juniors’ Trophy Presentation at Lake Alexander as Club Patron; that was on Sunday. It was a fantastic day, pretty hot and it was great to see such a great club thrive in Darwin. Casuarina Soccer Club celebrates its 25th anniversary this year, and I take this opportunity to talk about the history of the club and some of the important players and contributors to the club.
In 1975, the occupation of East Timor by Indonesia led to large groups of refugees fleeing to Darwin. These people were a mix of Timorese and Portuguese, and after a time to settle, they played socially in the community in 1976. In 1977, a committee made up of several families, both who came in 1975 and several who had migrated earlier, was formed and formally established the Casuarina Soccer Club within the local Darwin Soccer Association competition. It was initially made up of three teams, consisting of A, B and the Colts, under 17’s. The junior soccer club was formed some time after this.
Other clubs, Alawa, now Olympic, and Moil, now Hellenic, already existed at this time, and the club use to train at Jingili oval. The name Casuarina was adopted. The original coach was Manuel Da Cruz. The club’s founding members and families were a driving force in the establishment and growth of the club. Some of these included the Tinoco, Godhinho, Casimiro, Ingles, Goncalves, Sabino, Bentes, Santos, Gil, Almeida, Ferreira, Bernardino, Rodrigues, De Araujo, Monteiro, De Castro, Morato, Cameirao and many others. Being a community club, these people also had strong ties in the formation of the Portuguese and Timorese Social Club, and Casuarina soccer played under them for many years.
Most founding members of the PTSC were the same people involved in setting up the soccer team. Many of these names and families are still around today, and their children and grandchildren still play for the club. Around 1984-85, the PTSC was set up at its current location in Batten Road, Marrara and soccer moved there and trained on a small oval and used several demountables as the club.
In 1988, through government grants assistance, a larger oval was built to be utilised by the entire club, with soccer being the driving force behind its creation and completion. The club grew from strength to strength in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and had a developing relationship with players from both the Anula Junior Soccer Club and the Casuarina Junior Soccer Club. Phil Piper was a tireless worker who has developed the Anula club in the Junior Association, and wants to give players direction after they were too old for the juniors, and hence the relationship between Anula and Casuarina was born.
In 1995, the Casuarina Soccer Club, Anula Junior Soccer Club and the Casuarina Junior Soccer Club formally amalgamated to form a major club within the Darwin area, which catered for all age groups from Under 6’s all the way through to Senior A Grade team. The senior men’s team was invited by the sporting minister of the interim government to travel to East Timor in 2000 after winning the competition as a goodwill trip. With a high percentage of the country still in ruin from the 1999 problems, the visit was a complete success. Several games were played in Dili Stadium and Baucau Stadium. The lack of grass on the ovals was evident, but the smiles all the players received from both the local players and spectators, numbered up to several thousand, was well worth it.
In early 2001, the club was incorporated in its own right and has its own constitution, logo and committee of hard workers whose love of soccer has allowed the club continue to grow and develop even more. The club now has two committees, one for each of the junior and senior divisions, which number about 10 to 15 strong, and have worked together to establish the club as one which is continuing to foster and develop soccer in Darwin communities today.
The current senior president, Tim Byfield, has been with the club since his playing days in the Under 8’s. Shaun Hall is the current junior president who has come on board this year and been a real driving force in fundraising. He managed to get a signed letter from Alex Ferguson, Manager of Manchester United, to auction. At present day, there are 207 junior players in 10 age groups - Under 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16 and 18. Sixty senior players in Casuarina have started a women’s team this year.
I would like to highlight some of the successful players that have come through the club:
Luis Casimiro, a National Soccer League player in the early to mid 1980s with Adelaide City;
Hamilton Thorpe, Australia Side Selections - Schoolboys, played professionally in England for
Portsmouth, played in the National Soccer League for Perth Glory and Parramatta Power, and is
currently playing for National Soccer League Club, Eastern Pride;
Scott Piper, Australian Side Selection - Schoolboys, State League in South Australia for White City;
Alberto Serra, Australian Side Selection - Schoolboys;
Hercules Lopes, Australian Side Selection - Schoolboys;
Simon Bernardino, Australian Side Selection - Schoolboys, currently playing State League in
South Australia for White City; and
Thomas Willis, currently in the Under 19 Australian Side, Under 23 Olyroos, and playing for Newcastle
United in the National Soccer League, trialled in Europe with Juventus, Torino and other clubs.
As you can see, Madam Speaker, the Casuarina Soccer Club is a great and proud sporting club of Darwin. It is great to see such a club be successful. I wish them the best of luck for the coming years. My two boys are now playing for them; Alistair in the Under 8s and Liam in the Under 6’s. I am proud to be the patron of the junior soccer club. It is my one treasured refuge from the life of politics and parliament and as minister. I book out Sunday mornings; nothing interferes with Sunday mornings and taking my kids to the soccer which they love so much. So, Casuarina Soccer Club, congratulations on your 25th anniversary, and looking forward to the reception we will be hosting for you in Parliament House in November.
I would like to bring to your attention the contribution made to the pastoral industry of the Northern Territory by Stuart and Meg Maclean of Margaret Downs in the Sturt Plateau area. They have recently sold their property and are touring around Australia at the moment. Because of this, Stuart has resigned as chairman of the Katherine Pastoral Industry Advisory Committee (KPIAC).
Stuart and Meg come from a long-established sheep squatter family property in southern New South Wales by the Murray River near Albury-Wodonga. They bought Margaret River Downs Station on the Sturt Plateau when the old Dry River Station was first subdivided about 1986; at first as a form of investment and diversification, but by about 1989, they came up to live full-time.
Subsequently the sheep property was sold. I believe they sold at the bottom of the slump and they walked away with just about nothing, so their livelihood depended solely on the profits of Margaret Downs. They ran the place and on an unusual basis - they had no staff, just a pair of well-trained kelpies, and got the cattle mustered by gradually closing off waters until they were near enough for a bike and the dogs to run them in. They did the yard work, just the two of them - steady, steady, a few at a time. If all this took a long time and they missed premium markets, they were prepared to put up with that.
It was quite an impressive operation and a couple of times, groups of rural college students visited there. At first, the students were very dismissive about this small scale family operation but, by the time they had listened to Stuart explain everything, they had a great change of mind. Stuart became interested in marketing and Internet technology long before these became commonplace. He also undertook rural leadership training – I do not think it was the same as the one that Alister has recently completed, but it was on a similar scale.
One of the Stuart’s and Meg’s achievements would have been their contribution to the Sturt Plateau Group, notably successfully lobbying the government to build the new road through the Sturt Plateau that has made the whole area a more financially viable proposition. Stuart joined KPIAC as a member in late 1997 and took over as chairman in 1998. I would say his attributes were as follows: he was great at chairing meetings - firm, but allowing everybody to have their say; under his leadership KPIAC was never a rubberstamp - every plan submitted to them underwent serious examination; once a plan was approved, KPIAC backed it to the hilt in a very active manner; in particular, Stuart would lobby at North Australian Beef Research Advisory Committee for projects that KPIAC had approved; Stuart would always deal with things at length out of session and consult widely with members of his committee when issues came up between meetings; under his leadership, KPIAC became proactive in terms of asking the department for work to be done, lobbying ministers and promoting the pastoral industry to the general public with displays and leaflets; and Stuart always came to every public occasion and meeting asked of him, and carried whatever role allocated. He was one of the drivers behind the Meat Profit Day in Katherine two years ago.
Stuart and Meg may have sold their property, but not their cattle. They are now agisted on a neighbouring property and the Macleans will maintain their contact with the Territory through them.
I did not know Stuart and Meg for as long, as the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries but, when I first met with Stuart – I am trying to think where it was now; I think it was in Katherine - he made an immediate impression on me as a man who was absolutely committed to the developments of the pastoral industry here in the Northern Territory. I met his wife as well at the Kidman Springs open day just recently, and spent an hour or so chatting with them. They obviously have made a huge contribution to the Northern Territory pastoral industry, particularly in the Sturt Plateau area. I know that they will be very much missed by many of their friends and colleagues in the industry. I wish them both well for the future.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, it is fortunate that the last question at Question Time was asked, and the question answered, because I was going to give a report on the Relay for Life event. Now I have a little more to say.
This is the second year that this Relay for Life organised by the Cancer Council has been run. It surprised everybody in the first year - I gave a report this time last year on the event - it surprised everybody at the actual success of the event. It is an event that has been run in other places and for the very first time, the committee was a bit nervous last year and it really was a great success. I do not have the details or do not recall the details of last year, but it was very successful.
This year their goal was to raise $60 000. I am pleased to announce they exceeded that with $67 000 already accounted for and with small amounts still to be received. This year there were more teams than last year. There were 47 teams with 715 participants. The issue that was alluded to, really I think what fuelled the question that was asked as the last question at Question Time was borne out of this angst that has been felt by the Cancer Council with the short notice of having to relocate from the agreed venue to a new venue, which has actually increased their costs this year. I am aware that they will be, or probably already have, placed a request for some compensation for the relocation at very short notice. I wholeheartedly support that no matter which side I represent. It really was not a very good situation to have a magnificent group of volunteers supported by 715 Territorians being mucked around with very little time to adjust to a new location. I believe that it could have been handled a lot better. The request for compensation or assistance from the Territory government, I think is well justified.
Second, this important group, in their second year, do receive a dollar for dollar grant from the AMP Foundation and also request assistance from the Territory government in a like manner so that they know that they actually do have the support of the Northern Territory government. I am not being cute but it was noticeable that there was no actual support on the day. It was said to me, I mean maybe I am in politics and people say these things, but the greatest concern was being mucked around with a very little window of opportunity to adjust to the relocation.
That leads me to what I learnt from Question Time. Obviously the minister is sensitive about this. It could have been handled a heck of a lot better and to mask this as though there were budget deliberations going on and we were not able to communicate this information to the Cancer Council, I think is a bit cute. Budget was announced on 20 August and the minister was able to put out on 9 August, a very substantial press release with a smiling face talking about this great announcement of $800 000 to upgrade the athletics track. Now, 9 August would have probably been a good time to let the Cancer Council know. But when you read the press release, it indicates quite clearly that there had been a fair amount of work already going on. There had been consultation with Athletics Australia NT as well as Athletics Australia nationally. You cannot just put a press release out on 9 August and have no third party endorsement until that day unless you have already gone through extensive community consultation with the Athletics Foundation. The evidence is there that really if the eye was on the ball, then the information could have passed most directly and far more fortuitously to the Cancer Council. With that being said, I support this fine group and I am more than happy to continue to offer that support because it is a tremendous event that really does build community.
I now move to another matter. This one is the solving of a great mystery that I am sure has kept members on the 5th floor awake at night wondering about this great catastrophe or apparent misappropriation of funds that has occurred which they have hunted down, without bothering to ascertain the real nature of the amount or the issue at hand rather than to create some mischief. It is in regards to Palmerston & Beyond last week. There was an extensive list of recipients of the Community Benefit Fund that had been directed from The Hub to community sporting and cultural groups. Right in the middle of that list of groups was the Palmerston Branch of the CLP.
I would have to tell you quite honestly that caught me and my colleagues in Palmerston by surprise. There are two of us here who are members of the Palmerston branch, the Leader of the Opposition and me. To see that there – really, we had no idea what it was about, completely an issue of The Hub. I immediately phoned The Hub and said: ‘Tell us what that is about because we have no recollection or understanding of any kind of support being offered’. There was $60 000-odd which was spread amongst a number of groups. Now, it did not look good, I admit, but I certainly wanted to know because I knew jolly well that we had not received anything as a political group.
Nonetheless, it did not stop those who were intent on mischief going around and speaking to all the groups and to rattle the possum and say: ‘Isn’t this terrible? They are receiving this amount of money, and what do you think?’ Of course it is terrible – well, the way it was presented. I was a bit puzzled, too, when I was asked by the NT News. I said: ‘I really do not know what this about’. Not to just rest on that, I had to find out what it was about.
I have to tell you that the Palmerston branch of the CLP was listed as a beneficiary; no reference was made to the amount or the nature of the benefit. Here are the facts: the Palmerston branch of the CLP did not benefit from the Community Benefit Fund. The amount in question concerns a $25 meal voucher. This voucher was offered as a door prize at a morning tea. This morning tea was a meeting between Defence families and the federal Minister for Defence support, Danna Vale. The only connection to the Palmerston branch of the CLP is that the branch booked the room and the local members advertised the event as a service and support to the Federal minister for local Defence families. I am pleased to inform the House that it was a local Defence family who benefited from the $25 meal voucher. I can understand how those with other agendas would like to make a bit of fuss and mischief of that, and I regret that, but the facts speak quite clearly.
I put on the record, supported by my colleagues, the member for Brennan and the member for Drysdale, that we wholeheartedly support The Hub. It has caused them a little trouble, too, trying to get to the bottom of this because it was an honest listing of different recipients and, of course, they wanted to list as many recipients as possible which is fitting because they do benefit so many of our groups in Palmerston. We offer our support to the board of The Hub and thank them for their great support to community groups.
In concluding, I would like to make reference to a member of NT Athletics who has resigned and is moving on to another position. Cherry Harvey has resigned her position effective from 11 October and will be taking a position at the NT University Sports Association. The Board and those who are involved in athletics appreciate the contribution that she has made, and I offer my support as well. She took up the new role as NTA’s development officer in November 1999 and has established a foundation for the development of athletics and set standards of excellence and professionalism in all areas. She has become the first full-time employed athletics coach in the Northern Territory and there has been continual improvement during her tenure in coach education and athletic performance highlighted by the extremely successful venture to compete in the North Queensland Championships recently.
She has established, managed and implemented a thorough development program for athletics and built partnerships with affiliated bodies, members, the Office of Sport and Recreation, Australian Track and Field, Coaches Association, Athletics Australia and more. So for my part as the Shadow Minister for Sport and Recreation, I offer my support and appreciation for what she has contributed and what she will continue to contribute in the NT University Sports Association.
Mr STIRLING (Nhulunbuy): Thank you, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, for recognising, as you always would, first risen.
The issue of cannabis use in indigenous communities has been a concern, and a growing concern over the last, I guess, four or five years, and right through remote areas of the Northern Territory. I have information from a recent Medical Journal of Australia I want to quote and put on the Parliamentary Record. Under the heading, ‘Rising cannabis use in indigenous communities’:
- An analysis in the latest issue of the Medical Journal of Australia reveals a higher prevalence of cannabis use
in remote indigenous communities. The research team, led by Mr Allan Clough, Senior Research Officer from
the Menzies School of Health Research, and colleagues working in Arnhem Land, analysed the rates of men and
women using cannabis in remote indigenous communities. Between five and six years ago, 31% of males and 8%
of females over 15 years of age in the region’s communities used cannabis. By 1999, this had increased to 55% of
males and 13% of females in the region.
Mr Clough said:
- Community based studies suggest that this high prevalence of cannabis use was achieved by the rapid
development of trafficking to eastern Arnhem Land communities with enhanced connections to suppliers
outside the region. Data from one community suggests that between 1999 and 2000, men using cannabis
doubled, and cannabis use emerged among women in the community for the first time. Recent data from two
other localities in eastern Arnhem Land showed the prevalence of cannabis use is now very high, with from
62% to 76% of males and 9% to 35% of females aged 13 to 36, having used cannabis within the past year.
Most of these had used it within the past month - 94%.
These rates are higher, especially in males, than for similar age groups in the whole of the Northern Territory,
where 34% to 41% of males and 33% of females used cannabis within the last year.
The rapid expansion of cannabis use has compounded existing patterns of other substance use. A majority of
cannabis users use alcohol, 65%; and tobacco, 92%, and around half have a history of sniffing petrol, 52%.
Mr Clough said:
- There is also isolated evidence for amphetamine abuse in low numbers of individuals, all of whom are cannabis
users. Health and social consequences include a likely increased risk of drug and alcohol psychoses in users;
family violence and community disruption; self harm and suicide; and the economic impacts of the novel illicit
drug trade. Preliminary research suggests that 44% of users exhibited dose related cannabis dependency;
41% cannabis induced anxiety disorders; and 19% exhibited mood disorders, including suicidal ideation.
In concluding, Mr Clough said:
- The research group has prepared an educational intervention about the effects of cannabis use for these
communities. This will be implemented and evaluated over the next one to two years.
- Early intervention treatments for cannabis abusers are urgently required but are beyond the scope of the
research. Interventions designed to reduce demand and to minimise harms to communities and the individual
are required to complement increased efforts in the Northern Territory to control illicit drug supplies.
And the Medical Journal of Australia is a publication of the Australian Medical Association.
I commend the work of Mr Allan Clough -he is a constituent of mine in Nhulunbuy - and the ongoing support from the Menzies School of Health and Research into these issues. Mr Clough has been involved in researching kava over many years. He has strong credentials in this area of researching patterns of substance use and abuse.
These figures are frankly frightening when you consider the comparison of the rates of these people, and I quote: ‘Cannabis use now very high, with from 62% to 76% of males, and 9% to 35% of females, compared to 34% to 41%, and 33% of females in the broader community’. This is simply out of hand. Some people are making lots of money from trafficking these illicit substances into these communities.
The last time I spoke with the health clinic at Galiwinku, Elcho Island, there were at least ten cases of young men being admitted to hospital with psychotic conditions from cannabis use. There are plenty of advocates out there that will tell you, look, it is dope, it is grass, call it what you will, it is harmless. Well, it is not, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker. I do not know what transformation marijuana has undergone in the last 25 years, but there is no doubt that, with sophisticated growing methods, the actual substance, the THC content, is considerably increased under certain growing conditions so that you get these variations of ‘super grass’. This is the strength of the marijuana itself. The level of use in these communities and the outbreaks of psychotic disturbance and psychotic behaviour being exhibited, simply has to be pulled into line because we saw - in some examples with kava out of control and we already have enough problems with alcohol - that this, left to go its own way, will render these communities beyond any functional purpose at all.
I commend Mr Clough and the Menzies School of Health Research. I will be directing this research paper to my colleague, the minister for health so that the Health Department knows what they are up against. I will be directing it to our police so that they know, on the basis of this research, just how far out of hand it is getting. It is not restricted to north-east Arnhem Land. I have had discussions with the member for Daly at different times, and he tells me that the large communities through his and other members’ electorates are the same thing; that this is right across the board. This research has been restricted to eastern Arnhem Land communities but, I dare say, the Menzies School of Health would get considerably consistent findings if they were to go to the western communities and probably the Centre communities as well.
It puts us on notice that we have a growing problem that is already out of hand and getting worse. Those figures - when you compare with the comparison figures five and six years ago - by 1999 it increased to 55% of males from 31% and it is an exponential increase, because it is now getting up around that 62% to 76% of males. That is out of hand.
I thank them and I am serious that it puts the government on notice that a great deal of work has to be done here. I would be interested in Mr Clough’s interventions when they are brought forward - this idea of educational intervention. Simply, every strategy that we can bring to bear on this from policing, down to education, down to health intervention, needs to be right at the forefront of government. I will be doing my best to ensure that an appropriate government response occurs from all of the agencies with the responsibility in this.
I also take the opportunity to provide the House with further information regarding the remote skills intern project. Last week, I advised the House that eight interns have already accepted full-time teaching positions for term 4 this year - eight out of 15 originally. I am pleased to advise the House that the number has now risen to nine, with another intern - a male from the University of Sydney - taking up a position for fourth term as a professional support resource adviser for Alice Springs East groups schools. That now gives us nine out of the 15 original interns. Of those six remaining there are some indications that some of those may return for the school year 2003. We would certainly welcome them on the back of the experience they have had out in the communities.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, this afternoon, I pay credit to a community organisation in my electorate called Holyoake. I had the pleasure of attending that service and meeting with staff some weeks ago. This is a service that I am very proud to say is in my electorate of Araluen. It is a service that offers a broad range of assistance for people experiencing difficulties with drugs and alcohol. It also offers general counselling in a number of areas.
It is a non-government, non-religious organisation that offers counselling, education and awareness to those affected by alcohol and other drugs. These services include assistance in confidential counselling; dealing with things like issues that people experience about not having enough money and having trouble making ends meet; and for people experiencing relationship problems. It also assists people having problems with gambling, domestic violence or work related issues. It assists people who just want someone to talk to about a range of any problems; the service also assists those suffering from stress or abuse or low self-esteem. So as you can see, Holyoake provides a service that is very broad indeed.
In essence, it provides support for anyone who attends with a variety of problems, and as we know, sadly there are many in our community who have trouble navigating their way around some of the problems that life throws up. It provides a number of specific programs such as ‘Skills for Life’, information and awareness program, ‘the Young People’s program’, and ‘Parent Talk’ program, which is for parents and/or guardians who are concerned about the behaviour of children or possible use of alcohol and other drugs by their children. This program, not surprisingly, has a number of participants on a regular basis, and perhaps says something about the difficulty young people experience these days, and the consequent problems that causes for their parents.
I am aware that in various Family Court proceedings in Alice Springs, lawyers often refer children who are the subject of those proceedings to Holyoake for assistance, and assistance in a range of areas, and also for general counselling. Of course children experience these stresses and rigours of being involved in Family Court proceedings, and in fact I have referred children to Holyoake in years gone by.
However, I knew relatively little about the service in any real sense until I went there recently and I can say it was a pleasure to do so. It was very educational for me, and as a local politician, I can now with great confidence refer people to Holyoake for a range of assistance. I am sure that all members of this parliament would like to join with me to offer my thanks to the staff of this invaluable and fantastic service. The staff are doing what can only be described as a hard but rewarding job.
In particular, I would like to thank Holyoake’s manager, Barbara Low, and Janet Sherrah, the program coordinator, and Sharon Harris. I met with these three women and it was very clear from very early on that they were dedicated and passionate about their jobs and Holyoake itself, and having met with them and having them explain what Holyoake does and how it does it, I can well understand their enthusiasm and their commitment. Once again, on behalf of members of this Assembly, I offer my thanks to them. I am sure that they will all keep up the very good work for the betterment of many individuals in Alice Springs.
Dr TOYNE (Stuart): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, it is terrific you have such prescience. I acknowledge tonight a number of public servants who have retired recently from the Department of Corporate and Information Services. In speaking about these four retirees, I am talking about 95 years of cumulative service to the Northern Territory and its people. That is an enormous contribution.
The first is Jeff Wilkinson who retired in July 2002. Jeff was recruited to the Power and Water Authority on 12 June 1985. At the formation of DCIS, he transferred to Budgets and Commercial as a senior commercial officer until his retirement. During his time at DCIS he played an integral role in the development and implementation of control procedures and performance excellence. His contribution to establishing the current procedures for the PAWA bank reconciliation was greatly appreciated. I wish him well in his retirement.
Ms Judy North retired on 12 August 2002 after 28 years in the Northern Territory Public Service. Judy was recruited to the Housing Commission on 1 August 1974. At the formation of DCIS, Judy was transferred to Budgets as a commercial officer. During her time with DCIS, Judy played an important role in the development and implementation of financial reporting and annual report preparations. I wish Judy best wishes in her retirement.
Paul Richards retired on 5 September 2002 after 23 years in the Northern Territory Public Service. Paul commenced employment in 1970 and was a compulsory transferee to the Northern Territory Public Service in July 1978. Paul embarked on his career in the Assets Section of the Health Department and has remained in this area for the length of his service. At the inception of DCIS, Paul transferred from Territory Health Services with the Asset Management Unit. Paul was an instrumental member of the Asset Management team and helped setup the centralised management of assets, and I wish him well.
Pam Kwong retired from the Northern Territory Public Service on 16 August 2002 after 27 years of service. Pam was initially employed with the Commonwealth Department of Health and was a compulsory transferee to the Northern Territory Public Service in July 1979. Pam had worked mainly with the Department of Health and Community Services in its various incarnations and early in 1999 joined DCIS. Pam rose through the ranks to obtain the position of Manager of Recruitment Services at Casuarina Regional Office and provided an excellent service to the Department of Health and Community Services. I wish Pam all the best in her retirement.
We certainly wish all of these public servants the best. I do not think we can adequately acknowledge these very long term commitments by public servants within Northern Territory government agencies.
The second thing that I would like to quickly cover in this adjournment is the opening of the Alice Springs hockey field which coincided with the jubilee, the 50 year celebration of the Central Australian Hockey Association. I was very grateful for the hospitality of Dave and Debbie Moore. It was a fantastic night attended by a large number of past and present hockey players within Central Australia. We even had a delegation of Mount Isa players who were there for some competition with the local hockey players. We opened what has now been dubbed ‘the paddock’ which is the $750 000 worth of the new artificial turf surface, with six big water cannons to flood the surface prior to games. It was fantastic to see that new facility. As it is bedded down over the near future, I am sure it will go on to provide an icon facility for that sport in Alice Springs.
One absolute highlight was to see what we called The Originals which was a group of women players who actually started the hockey code in Alice Springs in 1953, from memory. The Originals turned up and we insisted that we get a photo of them on the new turf surface which was a far cry from the goat paddock on which they started hockey off in Alice Springs where there was absolutely no guarantee which way the ball would go next. We handed out hockey sticks and balls - that was a bad mistake. The next minute we had, dare I say, mature players fanning out all over the new surface belting hockey balls around. It became quite dangerous, so I cleared the area and left them to it. I wish hockey in Central Australia all the best into the future. We have a very strong code down there and we are ready to take on all comers in the Masters Games and I am sure they will have their customary success when taking on teams from all over regional Australia.
The last thing I want to talk about tonight is somewhat sadder. It is the passing of two very dear friends from out in the my home community, as I see it, Yuendumu and nearby Nyirripi. Well, it is about 190 km away but that felt pretty near at the time. Gibson Japanangka Granites, who is brother to my best friend out there, Robin Granites, passed away this week very suddenly, and certainly well before the time he should have departed this earth. My condolences go out to the Granites family, particularly Robin and Rex as his surviving brothers, and to his mother. I will always remember Gibson as one of the steadiest workers around the community, always someone who supported the people around him, a very good family man and a very responsible community member. It is very sad to see someone die so young as Japanangka.
The other friend I want to pay tribute to is an old man, and that is Tiger Japaljarri from Nyrripi. Tiger Japaljarri was a very senior man in the Nyrripi community, and he was always a person who, when I went out to visit Nyrripi, both when I was living at Yuendumu and more recently as the local member, was always so delighted when I arrived, to take me around, make sure I saw people, make sure I heard the issues that I needed to work on for the community, just make sure that I got back together with people I have known and loved for a long time. Japaljarri will be sorely missed in my life. We see the old men, the Pulkas, passing away. Going out there now, you feel like the era that I belong to is gradually receding as these old men whom I spent so much time with go.
One of the tragic things in Yuendumu and Nyrripi at the moment, and it is the other side of the debate we have been having about customary law and how it affects court decisions and all the other things you see at this end of life in the Territory, but at the moment, Nyrripi has just been through a very traumatic time as a community, following the killing of one of the young people from that community. What community of less than 200 people would not be devastated by the loss of a young man, killed absolutely without reason or without warning in Alice Springs? If you go to Yuendumu, you will see exactly the same thing - people, families trying to work their way through very traumatic circumstances, having lost a young person. We have to keep that in mind when we debate these issues, that there is a human cost to this. To see what that human cost is of loss to these families, the grieving of these families, you have to go out bush to see that, and that has so far been pretty invisible in this debate. I just feel for the people in those two communities as they try to resolve what are very traumatic situations.
I would like to pledge, not only myself, but our government, to continue to work to provide at least some clarity, at least some balance in the public debate and in the potential reforms that might be brought forward as a result of our inquiry. In the meantime, there is an absolute need that sensitivity be shown to the situation of these families. I look forward to a time when the world is a little bit better in these situations for the communities of Yuendumu and Nyrripi.
Dr BURNS (Johnston): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to continue my remarks about Moil Primary School. Last night I was talking about the NT Athletics Championships. Isaac Taulelei won gold medals for the 800m and 400m, discus, shotput, long jump and high jump for 10 year old boys. Isaac won silver in the 60m hurdle. Here is an athlete of the present but certainly, hopefully, an athlete of the future for the Northern Territory. Kiana Fiorenza from Moil Primary School made it to the National Tae kwon do Championships to be held in Queensland this month, and I wish her all the best.
Moil Primary School students won a very important award. This year, for the first time, the NT Minerals Council conducted a competition to encourage schools and the students in them to examine closely their environmental practices, and to develop a plan to address concerns which are highlighted in an ‘Envirosmart’ audit. I am proud to tell the House tonight that Moil school won the inaugural primary school award for the Territory. A very impressive presentation was put together by students and presented to delegates who attended the ‘Sustainable Development’ workshop at the Casino on 25 September.
The worthy winners were awarded $1000 - their school was awarded $1000 - by the Minister for Resource Development, Hon Paul Henderson, which will help them realise some of the proposals listed in their plan. Congratulations to Mrs Christine Collins and her Form 4-7 students: Zachary Anderson, Paul Anderson, Oliver Bruckers, Marion Caraher, Millicent Crowe, Emma Fisher, Ayrial Harburn, John Kandiah, Samantha Leung, Erica Miskovits, Ian Moriarty, Leonard Quong, Kyan Standish, Isaac Taulelei - there is Isaac again, certainly doing his bit in the academic and environment world - and Jake Toogood, Rebecca Waddington and Iona Watson.
Congratulations to Rebecca Waddington of Moil Primary School who won the national cartooning competition’s primary school category, the Junior Stanley Award for Media Art. Rebecca’s cartoon entitled Picatso - so there is a fine play on words - depicts a feline version of the great artist Picasso. That sounds very interesting. It was one of the more than 3000 entries by school students of all ages in this year’s competition run by the Australian Cartoonists Association. Rebecca will go to Canberra to be presented with her award on 26 October.
I turn now to Wagaman Primary School. There is a new chairperson on the Wagaman Primary School Council, Jim Hughes, and I wish Jim all the best in that role. Certainly have been some fine chairs of Wagaman School Council, and I am sure Jim is going to do a great job. Wagaman Primary’s entry, ‘Colour Our World with Cultures’, in the Festival of Darwin was incredibly vibrant and wonderfully inclusive. The entry won this year’s Grand Parade Thematic Section. The Wagaman Preschool raised $832 in a Bike-a-thon, with special thanks to Paige Lay, Adam Turner, Kai Kajewski-Zio, Will Nery, Izzy Jarvis and Tristan Cole for raising the highest amount of money.
Congratulations to Eric Moyle who received a gold medal for being a winner in the Northern Cluster cricket team, and was the only representative from Wagaman Primary School.
In the time that remains, I would like to talk a little about drug education in schools, because it is an issue that was raised in the House earlier this week; it is a very important issue. There is also the context of the review of school-based constables and the intention of the government, as foreshadowed by the education minister, to develop a new approach to drug education in schools.
I placed on the record previously that I used my RTD travel recently to investigate best practice regarding drug education in schools, a matter of great importance to all in the Northern Territory community. I refer members to my speech on 14 August 2002.
What seems to have arisen as an issue appears to be who is best placed to deliver drug education in schools, and some members opposite appear to disbelieve my claim that the research evidence clearly shows that well-trained and well-resourced teachers are best placed to deliver drug education.
I would like to quote some of this research evidence. However, I say at the outset that what I have to say is in no way, or could be construed in no way, as a criticism of the fine policemen and women who have delivered the DARE program in the Northern Territory schools for 15 or so years - or probably a bit more. Quite the contrary, I believe that the development of a new drug education curriculum framework provides new opportunities for police to add to their significant skills in this area. In addition, I believe that school-based constables should also play a pivotal role in supporting our schoolchildren to develop life skills which promote resilience to drug taking and other destructive behaviours.
First, in relation to who is the best placed to deliver drug education in schools, there is certainly quite a lot of evidence in this regard. Even in the Commonwealth’s National School Drug Education Strategy, which was released in May 1999 by the Commonwealth government, high up in the principles for drug education in schools I quote, well I quote the first two principles that have been outlined here. The first one is ‘drug education is best taught in the curriculum of the school health curriculum’. So, that is very important. Secondly, ‘drug education in schools should be conducted by the teacher of the health curriculum’. Obviously, the Commonwealth within this agreed framework, the National School Drug Education, has put that up in lights.
When I was in Perth investigating and examining this matter further, I talked with officials of the Education Department, and also researchers in the field. Certainly, Richard Midford, a researcher at the National Drug Research Institute which is part of Curtin University, is recognised not only in Australia but internationally for his work in relation to drug education in schools. I would like firstly to quote from a chapter which he has authored along with Nyanda McBride whom I also met in Perth, who is doing a PhD in this particular area. It is chapter 40 of the International Handbook of Alcohol Dependence and Problems published by John Wiley & Sons in 2001. It is called Alcohol Education in Schools, although the particular chapter goes a lot wider than alcohol education in schools. On page 793, there is a table under the heading of ‘Summary of Critical Elements in Effective School Based Drug Education and Prevention’. Under who is to deliver it, it is says ‘Teachers. Teachers should be trained and supported to conduct drug education’. And then it says the comment there, and this is all based on literature and a review of the literature. The comment is:
- The classroom teacher with specific knowledge of students and the learning context is best placed to provide
contextual drug education. Programs are most successful when teachers receive training and support
particularly in undertaking teaching activities.
- Drug education programs and resources should be selected to complement the role of the classroom teacher.
So it is right up there in lights, that teachers who are adequately trained and resourced are actually the best ones to be delivering drug education in schools. That is the model that has been adopted by the Commonwealth. That is the model that the research shows. I will be tabling these papers so that members opposite who might have queries about what I am saying here might be able to access those particular papers.
In another paper that Richard Midford has written, it is actually a review, Does drug education work?, in the prestigious journal, Drug and Alcohol Review, and it is in the year 2000, volume 19, pages 441 to 446. In this he is talking about drug education and effective drug education in schools. He says in his review, and he has extensively reviewed the literature, some 30-odd publications:
- However, there is a major obstacle to the rational development of better drug education. Effective drug education
programs are not necessarily the ones selected for use in schools.
He then mentions a couple of authors who looked at a selection of drug education programs in American schools and found that while much was known about the components of the more promising drug education curricular, most of the money spent on drug education in that country was not being spent on promising programs. Project DARE, Drug Abuse Resistance Education, which the Northern Territory scheme is modelled on, uses specially trained police officers to provide drug education lectures and has been taken up by approximately 50% of school districts in America and in almost 20 other countries, yet evaluations of this program have indicated repeatedly that it is not only less effective than other programs which emphasise social skills development and interactive teaching techniques, but in some cases it actually has an adverse effect on drug use.
That is pretty plain to me. Here is someone who is a world expert, who has done a lot of work in this area - I think he has done a lot of work for the Commonwealth government, the Western Australian government and the Victorian government - looking at this whole issue of drug education in schools. I would like to commend some of the work that has gone on in Western Australia developing this school based curriculum in the area of drug education. They started it in about 1997 under the Court government and they got together a task force which was very representative of the community. The Catholic Education Office was represented, Alcohol and Drug Coordination Unit of the WA Police Service - and let me say at the outset, in all the models that I saw in other states, the police have a pivotal role in lending their experience and support and the prestige that they bring to drug education.
No one for one instant is saying that police should be excluded from drug education. What I found as I went around was yes, people say that the teacher is the best person placed, particularly in secondary schools, but the police have such an important role along with health professionals. Really, the teacher acts as a coordinator to ask these different groups to come along.
There are others from the education department. There are community groups, people involved in Aboriginal education, people involved in health and physical education, educators, the state school organisation, the researchers from the National Drug Research Institute and Corpus Christi College, the National Heart Foundation, the general practice divisions, and independent schools. There is a whole range of specialist people who are involved in the development of this curriculum framework which is now being implemented in Western Australia. I have quite a lot of the curriculum materials here with me. I am not going to table them because they are the only copies I have, but the framework which they developed in Western Australia is elegantly simple, but effective.
They looked at the curriculum. What are the materials that can support drug education in school? The training of teachers, not only in-service but pre-service. Policy, how to support schools to develop policies and guidelines for a whole school approach from K to Year 12 in drug and health education and management of drug issues for all schools. Most importantly, they are seeking to involve the parent and the community. It is a very important element to get the community and the parents involved to build up resilience amongst our young people and within our community to drug abuse. Then, of course, built in to all of that is evaluation and promotion. These are very important elements.
I am not saying that the Northern Territory should adopt the Western Australian model holus-bolus, however I think they have gone down this path. It took them four years through their task force to develop their curriculum, and I am saying that we could learn quite a lot from them. In terms of development of the framework in the Northern Territory situation, it is very important that we learn from their experience.
In summary, I believe that the evidence clearly shows that the model is classroom based with the teacher as the manager. The teacher has to be properly trained and resourced, but the teacher should be calling on the important resources in our community, and the police force is an important part of that. I was heartened to hear the education minister say that there would be a continuation of the school-based constable program because I know that the school-based constables have so much to offer in terms of teaching life skills, particularly to primary and secondary school students. It is exciting that we are standing on the threshold of developing a new curriculum framework for drug education in schools and I support it wholeheartedly. I hope that members opposite also support it because it is of crucial importance to our community. We are all aware of the threat of drugs and the harms that they do. Let us try and move in there and support our young people and our schools, our parents and families and communities to combat it.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016