2004-08-17
Madam Speaker Braham took the Chair at 10 am.
MESSAGE FROM ADMINISTRATOR
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received message No 24 from His Honour the Administrator, notifying assent to bills passed in the June 2004 sittings.
Ms MARTIN (Fannie Bay): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 347 petitioners praying that the Daly River be protected for the benefit of all Territorians. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders, and is similar to a petition presented to the Assembly in November 2003. I move the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
in the Daly catchment for large-scale irrigated agriculture;
Daly basin; and
strategies for the Daly catchment that do not result in large-scale tree clearing or irrigation;
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members responses to petition Nos 56 and 58 have been received and circulated to honourable members. The text of the responses will be included in the Hansard record.
Petition No 56
Mandorah Boat Ramp
Date presented: 1 April 2004
Presented by: Mr Maley
Date response received: 2 July 2004
Date response presented: 17 August 2004
Response:
Petition No 58
Presented by: Mr Maley
Date response received: 29 June 2004
Date response presented: 17 August 2004
Response:
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to confirm that the Territory’s new Electoral Commissioner, Kerry Heisner, has been granted leave of absence for three months to assist the United Nations with the task of preparing for the Iraqi elections which are scheduled to be held in January next year.
Mr Heisner was due to take up his appointment as the Northern Territory’s Electoral Commissioner on the 3 August. However, in July, the government received a letter from the Under Secretary-General for Political Affairs of the United Nations, who wrote on behalf of the UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, requesting the services of Mr Heisner to undertake an urgent electoral mission to Iraq. The letter stated that the United Nations is putting together a small team of electoral experts to help organise the Iraqi elections early next year. Mr Heisner has worked with the UN on a number of electoral missions in the past. The UN advised that they consider that his contribution will be crucial to the success of the UN involvement in the electoral process for Iraq.
Mr Heisner reiterated his commitment to his appointment as our Electoral Commissioner, which was due to commence, as I said, in August. However, he asked that the NT government consider this request, given the global importance of the Iraqi elections. While we are anxious for Kerry Heisner to commence work as the Electoral Commissioner, clearly, the elections in Iraq are an international priority. The Territory was, therefore, pleased to be able to assist in international efforts by agreeing to release Kerry Heisner to work with the UN on this occasion. He will work with the UN from the beginning of August until 30 October. I emphasise that the release period is for a maximum of three months only, and this is confirmed in a letter from the United Nations. Mr Heisner will be on leave without pay while he is absent from his position of the NT Electoral Commissioner.
Barry Hamilton was scheduled to retire from the position of Electoral Commissioner in early August, but he indicated his willingness to defer his retirement from our public sector and accept appointment as Acting Electoral Commissioner for the three months until Kerry Heisner’s return from leave of absence. Even though Kerry Heisner will not be here immediately, the position is being held in very capable hands.
A request such as this certainly highlights the calibre of our new Electoral Commissioner. It also highlights that the Territory is a place which attracts people who are held in high regard for their expertise in their chosen field. I will provide background information on Mr Heisner, highlighting his suitability for this important position, and why we consider him the best person for this job.
With the commencement of the new Electoral Act in March this year, the Northern Territory Electoral Commission was established and the position of Electoral Commissioner was created. The position was advertised, interviews held, and Kerry Heisner recommended for appointment to the position. The Leader of the Opposition and the two Independent members of the Assembly were consulted regarding his appointment, as is required by the act.
Kerry Heisner has a broad and varied background in the electoral area; both within Australia and overseas. He was previously the national coordinator for Operation Review of the 1990 federal election as divisional returning officer with the Australian Electoral Commission, and in the Queensland Attorney-General’s department. From 1990 to 1999, Kerry Heisner worked in the Territory as the Australian Electoral Officer, where he was responsible for Commonwealth government electoral management and related corporate affairs. Having worked in the Territory for this nine-year period, he has a sound understanding of Territory specific issues, including those affecting remote areas. He has a keen understanding of how electoral practices are applied to indigenous situations and the requirements for appropriate strategies and education programs that aim to ensure indigenous people are given equal opportunity to vote.
Kerry Heisner also has extensive overseas experience in a variety of electoral roles with the United Nations, the International Foundation of Electoral Systems, and the International Organisation for Migration, and he has provided assistance to other international organisations in countries such as Sierra Leone, East Timor, Austria and Tajikistan. He was Chief of Operations electoral component for the United Nations Assistance Commission in Afghanistan, and was responsible for the revision and implementation of electoral practices in Afghanistan.
The Territory government appreciates the critical work of the United Nations in Iraq, and the importance of doing all that is possible to ensure the success of the forthcoming elections in that country. Accordingly, my government was pleased to release Kerry Heisner from his duties as Electoral Commissioner for three months so that he may assist the United Nations with this extremely important project in Iraq.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, members of the opposition acknowledge the extensive experience of Mr Kerry Heisner and his impressive list of achievements. In the Chief Minister informing the House that the Leader of the Opposition and Independent members were consulted, that consultation was conducted in terms of being informed of the decision made by three interviewees. The result of that consultation …
Ms Martin: No, a panel of three senior public servants, not three interviewees.
Mr MILLS: Three senior public servants. In the process of that consultation, the Chief Minister was informed of the concerns of opposition due to issues that had been of grave concern to the CLP in a previous federal election, which was the nature of an inquiry. There were recommendations made as a result of that. Therefore, in being a consultation, it was basically being informed, and it was my responsibility to inform the Chief Minister of the concerns that the CLP has. We want, more than anyone, a fair go when it comes to electoral matters. In the response to that, I was informed that I would have the opportunity to meet Mr Kerry Heisner, so noting his absence for an extended period of time that opportunity is to be withheld for that extended period of time, which is unsatisfactory. It would have been good if we had that opportunity prior to departure, to have these issues that are of concern to opposition to be addressed so that we can move on.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, Kerry Heisner is a man with enormous experience in the Territory; he has enormous experience and respect around the world. Someone of the stature of Kofi Annan, the UN Secretary-General, wants him specifically to be part of putting together elections in Iraq. We Territorians should be enormously proud that our new Electoral Commissioner is Kerry Heisner, and I welcome him into the job when he returns from doing important work in Iraq after October.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, today I inform members of the government’s process for finalising the issues arising from what is known as ‘the Bradley Case’.
The final stage of the long and complex litigation in the matter of NAALAS v Bradley was reached on 17 June 2004 with the High Court rejecting NAALAS’s final appeal points. The case has been running since 2000 and has cost the Territory approximately $2m over the past four years.
With all avenues of appeal now exhausted, government is currently in the process of gathering information, talking to stakeholders, and obtaining advice on options to bring closure to this matter. The government will make a decision when we are confident we have all the relevant information before us. It is no secret that our government has visited this issue several times during its life and, at every stage, we have considered options for settlement and for finalising this very expensive litigation.
As part of the deliberations on this case, a decision was made in 2001 to cease funding an appeal for the member for Brennan against a contempt of court finding. At that time, we also considered whether to exercise our discretion to indemnify the member for costs awarded against him in that matter. After looking at all the circumstances of the case at that stage of the litigation, we decided not to indemnify the member. That decision was the correct decision at that time.
In 2002, with respect of a settlement before the case was appealed to the Full Court of the Federal Court, the government revisited all its previous decisions and explored options for settlement of the case. Those options included consideration of all the cost implications and orders, and whether we should exercise the discretion available to us on those issues. Unfortunately, no settlement was able to be reached before the matter went on appeal to the High Court.
Now that litigation has been exhausted, we will look at it again. The government reserves the right to revisit its decisions, particularly in the context of a court case in which opportunities to settle the matter present themselves as the case moves through the court system.
The government has some discretion regarding enforcement of cost orders and indemnifying parties for costs. We will exercise that discretion, from time to time, according to proper principles. That is the responsible attitude and approach, and we will not be swayed from that approach by false accusations of inconsistency or political game playing.
The issues and interests are many and varied. They include cost orders against NAALAS; the winding up of ATSIC; the role of the federal government; the interests of parties and other players, including Mr Burke; and appropriate legislative responses to prevent such a matter happening again. The biggest contribution that the opposition can make to this process, at this stage, is to back off and let us undertake proper deliberations, and stop posturing for personal interest. We will make this decision based on facts and principles.
I would like to give members the benefit of accurate information concerning the case against the member for Brennan when he was Chief Minister and Attorney-General. The member’s defence to the charge of contempt of court was paid for by the taxpayer to the tune of approximately $40 000. The member was required by the court to personally pay a fine of $10 000. That is not a matter over which we have any discretion. The court also awarded costs against the member, and our government’s decision of 2001 meant that the member was personally required to pay NAALAS’s costs in the contempt proceedings.
In 2002, as part of exploring options to settle this matter, I spoke with the member for Brennan about the possibility of relieving him of the payment of the NAALAS’s costs. There was no secret about that; that was a proper exercise of our discretion.
Madam Speaker, many people have said lots of things through the long history of the various stages of this litigation. In the end, it is my view that people will be judged by history on their actions throughout this matter. This government inherited a crisis in confidence between judiciary and the executive. We have worked hard to heal that rift, and we believe that proper closure on this matter is an important part of correcting that relationship.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, what a fascinating ministerial report. About the only thing I agree with the Attorney-General on is that much has been written and said about, arguably, what is one of the most interesting legal chapters in the Territory’s history. However, apart from that, it seems to me that the statement was full of nothingness.
There was an attempt to recite the history of this interesting proceeding. There was, it seems to me, an indication - faint though it was - that perhaps Cabinet will look at the member for Brennan’s costs, and maybe give him some money back. That would be the decent thing to do, Attorney-General. That is the decent thing to do, especially in light of the fact that government will pick up the tab for the Minister for Community Development’s outrageously incompetent pursuit of proceedings against Warren Anderson. Therefore, what is good for that goose, is good for this gander. You need to give serious consideration to that.
The Labor Party members should all hang their heads in shame, because they did more than just barrack from the sidelines, they pumped up, they geed up, they got everyone in the legal profession - or those Labor-supporting members of the legal profession - incredibly excited about this case. You pumped them up left, right and centre, and now you are in a position of coming up with this statement that means very little indeed, other than, you are essentially giving notice of two bills to be brought on later today that seek to fix something that is not broken.
The member for Brennan’s comments - and the member for Brennan is completely vindicated. What NAALAS did was a stunt; it was a political stunt. It was an enormous waste of taxpayers’ money, and Territorians want to know from you …
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Ms CARNEY: … and you, since you are the one who writes the cheques, whether you are going to pursue NAALAS for their legal costs, because they were awarded against NAALAS. It was a stunt from the beginning, it was always a stunt, and Territorians want their money back. So answer that, Attorney-General.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, despite the outstanding performance by the shadow over there, we will continue to look at this decision in the cold light of day, according to the facts and according to principles of fairness and respect for the history of this matter. I again counsel the opposition: back off, let us make this decision according to the facts.
Mr VATSKALIS (Ethnic Affairs): Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I report on the outcome of the inaugural Multicultural Awards. I am pleased to advise honourable members that the inaugural Multicultural Awards were a great success, and this initiative has shown that our multicultural community continues to thrive.
I officially launched the Multicultural Awards at the government’s 18 March Harmony Day celebrations held in Parliament House. Thirty nominations were received for the four awards across three categories. The Individual and Organisational categories aimed to recognise individuals and organisations that provided: leadership in developing and implementing initiatives that advance our multicultural and harmonious society; consistently countered racism and discrimination and protected human rights; brought together the community; increased cultural awareness in the community and promoted tolerance of other cultures and religions; advanced the rights of all people regardless of cultural or linguistic background; contributed towards capacity building in the community to counter racism and advance multiculturalism; and provided and continuously improved services and working relationships with culturally and linguistically diverse communities.
The Project Initiatives category had similar aims, whilst recognising particular projects rather than individuals or organisations.
I would like to congratulate all those nominated for an award. Being nominated is a great achievement and reflects the significant recognition shown by the community towards people and groups promoting multiculturalism in our society.
To judge the awards, I appointed a panel of six prominent Territorians of diverse backgrounds. They were: John Anictomatis AO, Raymond Chin OAM, Mohammad Nurul Huq OAM, Jenny Medwell OAM, Joan Mullins and Maria Scaturchio. The panel took on the difficult task of assessing the nominations against the department’s criteria, and I wish to take this opportunity to, once again, thank the panel members for their dedication and effort.
On 21 June, I hosted a function to present the awards to the winners. In the category of Young Person Aged Under 25, the winner was Mr Deng Mador Koch. Deng came to Australia on a Humanitarian Visa in 2001 and, since that time, has demonstrated a strong commitment to multiculturalism and counteracting racism, providing support and leadership to newly arrived refugees, and sharing his experiences with the wider community.
In the category of A Person Aged Over 25, it was Ms Marguerite Baptiste-Rooke from Alice Springs. Marguerite arrived from the Seychelles in the mid-1980s and began volunteering in the Migrant Resource Centre in Central Australia in 1988. Since then, she has used her skills to support newcomers and increase harmony and self-reliance amongst the migrants and refugee community.
The Organisation category was won by the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory. The Multicultural Council is the peak body dedicated to advocacy and representing the interests, concerns and aspirations of people from culturally diverse backgrounds in the Northern Territory.
In the Initiative/Project category, Sanderson High School won. The school’s project revolved around 2004 Harmony Days celebrations, and gave students the opportunity to participate in activities that promote cultural understanding, respect, goodwill, appreciation of multiculturalism, and work towards the elimination of racial discrimination. Unfortunately, Sanderson High School was not present at the awards function. However, their award was presented to them on the 12 August in their assembly by the member of Sanderson on my behalf.
I encourage honourable members to actively promote the 2005 awards. A call for nominations will be made in early 2005. I also encourage honourable members to think and provide a name for the awards – a name of a prominent Territorian who helped to counter racism and promote multiculturalism.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for his report. We are always glad to be hear that our multicultural community is well supported by governments of both persuasions. I hasten to add that, with all the money that has been spent - and I look forward to more being dedicated to the multicultural community in the Territory - the minister should ensure that whatever money he spends is not about self-promotion, but actually providing money for the ethnic communities in the Territory.
I join the minister in congratulating the members of the panel; they are well worthy of the position and will make good decisions to support the various applications as they come through. In particular, I would also like to draw attention to Marguerite Baptiste-Rooke, who is now an alderman of the Alice Springs Town Council, and her contribution to Central Australian community, which is greatly appreciated also.
Madam Speaker, it is good to hear the government continues to support multicultural communities in the Territory, and I look forward to continued support. Again, I remind the minister: spend the money on the people, not on yourself.
Mr VATSKALIS (Ethnic Affairs): Madam Speaker, this government is committed to promote multiculturalism and to support the ethnic communities. After all, this government has increased significantly the grants provided to the ethnic communities to $750 000 a year. On top of that, $150 000 is provided for linguistic and cultural awards and, in the last budget, we announced $0.5m a year for the next three years for infrastructure. This money is going without strings attached. It is not to promote anybody’s image; it is money for the multicultural communities.
Of course, the member for Greatorex cannot help himself in always finding something to criticise - whatever good work this government is doing. As for the self-promotion, I would like to ask him to go and look at the newspaper today and see, again, the message of this government congratulating the Indonesian community on the Indonesian National Day today. Of course, it has my photograph, in accordance with the guidelines drafted by the previous government for this kind of publication. So, we are not promoting our image, we actually comply with the guidelines that the previous government put in place.
Mr HENDERSON (Defence Support): Madam Speaker, today I inform the House about an issue of importance to our small businesses, and the work of the Northern Territory government in the area of Defence contracts. It is an issue that I have been engaged with for over a year, and it is a situation where the Commonwealth government is yet to respond.
In December last year, the Commonwealth government signed the contract with a company called TenixToll Defence Logistics for the provision of Defence’s national warehousing and distribution services, including maintenance support of selected LAN material and electronic equipment. This significant contract is known as the Defence Integrated Distribution System or DIDS, and is valued up to $920m dollars nationally over 10 years.
In the Territory, an estimated 243 businesses currently provide services under the DIDS profile. Defence-related work has grown significantly over the past years to the situation that we enjoy today where, for instance, Robertson Barracks alone reportedly spends on average $7.4m per year on repairs and has, at any point in time, between 85 and 100 pieces of major equipment in Darwin or Palmerston repair facilities. The Territory’s Defence support industry has significantly grown its capabilities, capacity and response. Many business people have invested heavily in facilities, equipment and in their people in order to provide the necessary support to the growing defence presence in the Territory. Businesses have undertaken accreditation programs and quality assurance systems in order to meet the high expectations Defence has of its contractors.
As we all know, the Defence support industry provides a significant level of local employment and is a key contributor to the Territory’s economy. Following the announcement that TenixToll had been selected as the preferred tenderer in October 2003, I wrote to Tenix and invited them to the Territory to meet industry representatives and provide a briefing on TenixToll and DIDS at the earliest opportunity. The Defence Support Division of my Department of Business, Industry and Resource Development held discussions with TenixToll in February of this year in Darwin, and later in May in Melbourne. It has also held discussions with Defence locally and with the project office for the DIDS contract in Victoria Barracks.
A considerable effort has been made to seek from Defence and TenixToll a briefing for our business people on DIDS, for them to acquire an understanding of what the effects might be on their business and make alternative arrangements. Unfortunately, these discussions have yet to occur and many businesses are now on month-to-month contracts and facing a very uncertain future.
Additionally, I have been consulting with the Northern Territory branch of AIDN, the Australian Industry and Defence Network. AIDN is the representative industry association for Defence industry SMEs, which has also sought information from TenixToll as to how the contracts will be administered here in the Territory and what the likely impact on industry might be, but without success.
The Commonwealth government has policies to grow regional capability for repairs and maintenance for Defence vehicles and infrastructure, and improve opportunities for small to medium enterprises which, in turn, will meet the current and future needs of Defence. These are articulated in the Commonwealth’s own 2000 Defence White Paper and also a 1998 Defence and Industry Strategic Policy Statement that defines those aspirations for growth of industry capability in Australia.
At the local level, AIDN and the NT government have risen to the challenge and are working together to build our Defence support sectors. Immediate steps need to be taken to protect Northern Territory business from any adverse effects of DIDS. The opposite to capability building could happen here in the Territory where businesses could close and jobs could be lost, resulting in disastrous economic and social impacts for the individuals concerned and the community as a whole. The application of the DIDS contract in the Northern Territory certainly has potential to severely reduce the breadth of our Defence industry capability and eliminate opportunities for many local SMEs. Industry and the Territory government are working hard together to increase our Defence support capability in the Territory and the number of businesses that make up this industry.
The government is now calling upon the Commonwealth government to annexe the Top End and the Kimberley region from the Defence contract with TenixToll for two years to allow genuine consultation with Territory businesses which are potentially adversely effected by this contract to take place, and to ensure robust subcontracting arrangements are put in place to ensure that, as far as possible, Territory businesses are not adversely affected by this decision. I move the Assembly take note of this report.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Madam Speaker, as the minister would be aware, there has been an enormous amount of effort by the member for Solomon, Mr David Tollner, to raise this issue at the highest levels of Defence. I attended a meeting that the member for Solomon organised with Defence Minister, Robert Hill, on Saturday morning. In fact, I thought the minister might have been there at that meeting because there were representatives of the AIDN network there along with the Defence Minister, who I applaud for getting up to Darwin so quickly to address this issue.
The issue the minister raised was this: ‘Minister Henderson writes to me on a number of issues on many occasions. He is yet to raise with me once the issue of the TenixToll contracts in the Northern Territory and their effect on business’ - word verbatim from the Defence Minister. When you are there sitting with the Defence Minister, surrounded by the AIDN representatives, and you are trying to emphasise the case that the minister has put forward in his statement this morning, that there are real uncertainties for Territory businesses with regards to how this TenixToll contract would unfold, one of the questions I asked of AIDN was: ‘What is the Northern Territory government doing in this whole process? It has an Office of Defence Support. Surely the Northern Territory government is engaged with the minister’s office to outline the concerns that these businesses have’. Do you know what the minister said? Zip, nothing! Nothing from the minister - no representations. What we see, through this statement today, I believe, is an effort by the minister to highlight uncertainties that may or may not be there.
I can tell the minister this: Dallas Mills, who is the General Manager Operations for TenixToll, will be in Darwin in the next two weeks. He will be meeting with AIDN. That has been organised by Senator Hill, not by your government. Also, Senator Hill has spoken to Mr Salteri, the CEO and senior partner in TenixToll, to outline the issues of being a good corporate citizen in the Northern Territory and how they will unfold this contract. That has all been done by the member for Solomon, not by this Northern Territory government, which has been missing in action during the whole process.
Mr HENDERSON (Defence Support): Madam Speaker, it is obvious that the member for Brennan did not listen to the report at all. We have been actively engaged with TenixToll at ministerial and departmental level since October last year when this contract was awarded. In good faith, we have been in discussions with TenixToll about how appropriate subcontracting arrangements will be put in place here in the Northern Territory, and have worked through that process with TenixToll.
The issue is that businesses in the Territory are now moving to month-by-month contracts. They have no certainty at all in the future of this arrangement, and the only clear way forward to provide certainty for those businesses in the Northern Territory, is for a 10-year moratorium or annexation of the Northern Territory from this contract.
I would have thought we would have had support from the opposition here today for that particular call. It provides a way forward on this debate as opposed to grandstanding. The member for Solomon has been missing in action on this whole issue for the entire term.
Reports noted pursuant to Sessional Order.
Continued from 25 June 2004.
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I seek to propose an expeditious process for the way forward on this debate. By way of background, following agreements reached by the bipartisan committee at the last sittings, this motion was tabled.
The chair of the committee, the member for Barkly, spoke in its favour, as did the member for Macdonnell. The member for Brennan spoke in the debate, raising concerns that he needed further time to consider his position and to consult with his constituents.
In the spirit of seeking to maximise the opportunity for 100% support for the move to statehood and the process that has been agreed to by the bipartisan committee, the government deferred debate on this item until today.
I propose that, by leave of the Assembly, the Assembly permits the member for Brennan to speak again on this motion and advise if his concerns have now been addressed. As it is understood that the terms are supported by the government, the bipartisan committee, the member for Macdonnell, the Opposition Leader and the Speaker, once we have heard from the member for Brennan, we may be in a position to move this matter to rest quite quickly.
By leave, I ask the Assembly to approve the member for Brennan to speak again on this motion and, from then, the debate proceed as per standing orders. Madam Speaker, I seek advice from you that the adjournment that was proposed has now lapsed and debate should now proceed on the motion.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Brennan, before you start, the amendment proposed by the member for Drysdale has lapsed because we have had time to discuss this in consultation, and the matter has been brought on now. It is my ruling that the proposed amendment now be deleted. I am sure the member for Drysdale, by the nodding of his head, agrees.
Mr BURKE (Brennan)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I intend to be brief. At the outset, I was surprised and gratified when I was alerted last evening that the government had decided to allow me to speak briefly on this matter in order to progress and approve of this motion passing through the parliament.
I would like to thank the Leader of Government Business, but that would be wrong because, if one looks at the Parliamentary Record, in the debate at last sittings it was the Leader of Government Business who was going to, at all costs, drive this motion through and use the numbers of the parliament.
I thank the Deputy Chief Minister for his wisdom and who, at the appropriate time, entered the Chamber and exerted experience and wisdom in this process. I thank him for that.
It was not from a position of churlishness that I said I would not support the motion at the last sittings. I am very concerned that the process of achieving statehood for the Northern Territory goes ahead, as we would all wish, in a bipartisan way. It is too cute, frankly, to suggest that, because the parliamentary wing of either side of this House have an agreement on the sort of process that, somehow, that will carry everyone forward. Certainly, from our experience in the CLP, it did not carry everyone forward in the parliamentary wing at all. As members would remember, Mr Hatton was a member of the parliamentary wing. He was not happy with the process and actually was instrumental in forming the Territorians for Democratic Statehood at the last effort that we had in achieving statehood.
Therefore, from my point of view, it was very important that not only was the parliamentary wing, as a whole, agreed and understood the process that we were moving forward to, but also, from my point of view, it was important that we did consult with the CLP as a whole. That was the aim in delaying that particular motion.
The CLP has, as one of its central tenets in its platform, of achieving statehood for the Northern Territory. We went very close to achieving it. Everyone has their own version as to why statehood failed in the past, and I do not intend to revisit that because I do not think it is productive. However, as one member of this Assembly, I can stand up and say that I did everything possible, personally, to achieve statehood and to undertake my responsibilities as best I could. Some might disagree with that, but I can hold myself honestly to that particular position.
It was clear that, even though there were claims at the time that the Constitutional Convention was stacked by the CLP, the reality is, no government can control that particular convention - stacked or unstacked as it might be. It is very important that the process that we go forward on, from this point onwards, is one that we all agree is going to be one that is successful at the end of the day. That was my concern: it was very important that the parliamentary wing of the CLP understood exactly what this steering committee would do; what its responsibilities were; what its relationship to the standing committee was; and also, that we had the opportunity not only to consider that ourselves but, where possible, to consult with our party.
I can report that the Central Council of the CLP met recently. The council has been advised of and agrees with the process, and wants the parliamentary wing to progress and support the government in its actions. I said in the last debate that I have every confidence that the member for Barkly will fulfil his role admirably. I believe that, with a concerted and cooperative approach from everyone, statehood will succeed on this occasion. I certainly give my personal guarantee that I will do everything I can to support statehood moving forward. In that regard, I support the tabled paper passing through the House in this sittings.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Madam Speaker, as a member of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee I contribute positively to the debate on the terms of reference of the NT Statehood Steering Committee.
As many members will know, the Chief Minister referred the issue of statehood to the committee on 18 June 2003. The guidelines or principles that the Territory government undertook were based on the need for transparency, inclusiveness and a structural, democratic process. Fundamental to these needs were the following principles: the process will be community-based and not imposed on the people; and the central principle will be respectful and the proper recognition of indigenous people of the Northern Territory.
In the words of the member for Barkly, the chairman:
Through this process, members of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee have generally worked hard to commit to these principles, including also the need and recognition for flexibility and transparency; the need to be inclusive in all our discussions about different ideas and views from different people from different walks of life and backgrounds; the need to assist and educate all stakeholders in the process; and, most importantly, the realisation from all Territorians that if we are to achieve our ultimate dream of statehood, bipartisan political support is needed for the process to be successful. The need for the community to have ownership of the process and its outcomes also became very apparent. The community has to feel they own the whole process for it to be a success.
It is vital that the motion to accept the terms of reference be supported by all members. The Statehood Steering Committee model, and their partnership with the Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, is a positive opportunity for all Territorians to obtain statehood.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank all members of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee - both government and opposition - for the many months and weeks of positive and vigorous debate. I am honestly able to say that every member had the ability to articulate their arguments and concerns, and they were all considered by every member. Finally, thanks must go for all the hard work by the Clerk of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly, Mr Ian McNeill and Rick Gray, who I know for a fact has put in many hours of hard work above the call of duty. Our thanks also go to Mrs Joanne Carbone, whose contribution has been vital to the success of the process.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I seek leave to continue my comments.
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, speaking to the point, in progressing this debate, and in deference to the Leader of the Opposition’s position, we are prepared to approve leave for the Leader of the Opposition to put firmly on the record the CLP comments. However, we do not want to open it up for everybody who has spoken previously on this to speak again. I am prepared to grant that to the Leader of the Opposition and then we can move the debate forward.
Leave granted.
Mr MILLS (by leave): Madam Speaker, I understand that was being extended to all ...
Ms Martin: No.
Madam SPEAKER: The intent of those remarks was for the member for Brennan, but you have now been given leave.
Mr MILLS: I appreciate it. As the member for Brennan correctly stated, a central tenet of the Territory party, the CLP, is the acquisition of statehood for Territorians. The case for statehood is a clear case that is a desire and a will of Territorians right across the Northern Territory to have equal status in the sight of our colleagues in other states. The willingness of Territorians to see this succeed is clear. When the previous exercise was post-mortemed, it was clear that one positive and strong message was given by Territorians: we want statehood.
When the terms of reference had been discussed, it was really the willingness to see this succeed that caused it to be delayed, so that we can make sure that this willingness will translate into placing a trophy on the mantelpiece of the Northern Territory - not a trophy on the mantelpiece of any person who is in the position of facilitating it, being involved in this process.
To know that 29 people have expressed a desire to be involved in this historic event is testament to how important this process is. For Territorians to know that their say, their vote, has the same value as any Australian, is fundamental. It may well be fair, perhaps, that legislation that is conducted and passed in this Chamber can be overturned on constitutional grounds, but if it can be overturned at the decision of a parliamentarian in another parliament, that is offensive and must be corrected. That is why this process is critically important; that it proceeds with the goodwill and the good intention of every Territorian: so that we can advance and prosper the true welfare of every Territorian.
What is at stake is the sovereignty of this very Assembly. This Assembly represents the people of the Northern Territory. That is what is at stake. This is a high order issue, and that is why we must, in good faith, use this process that has been developed by the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee to advance this issue.
There are many models that could be considered and, indeed, they were. There are other alternative means to achieve this. We could talk at legal and constitutional or CPA-type functions and conventions about other ways of doing this; and we could conduct the next five years as an investigation in different models. We have chosen a model, and this model can work with the goodwill of members in this Chamber and members who will occupy this Chamber in time to come.
It is important to bear in mind that, in 1985, a select committee was formed. That is almost 20 years ago. It is important to take a wider view on the progress of this issue in the Northern Territory so that we can see in almost 20 years the progress of this issue as we move through. That is why it is important to make sure that we look back and learn from the past; not in an attempt to look at the past and endeavour to create a little space for yourself and a little moment in the spotlight so that we - the Chief Minister in this case - can very subtly, but not so subtly, clearly convey that, ‘We are going to get it right and they got it wrong’. We must elevate ourselves above such matters and make sure that we keep our eyes clearly focussed on what this is actually about: it is acquiring this status for Territorians so that we can stand equally in the face of our colleagues in other states.
I commend the fine work that has occurred over an extended period of time to lead us to this particular point. If anyone were to assess the path that other jurisdictions in other countries have taken, you will see that it has been a similar path. The only time that we end in difficulty is when we turn our attention more to our own personal achievement and political gain, rather than turn our attention and focus it securely upon progressing this issue in the best interest of the people of the Northern Territory.
That is the commitment of the Leader of the Opposition, and of the CLP. It is also the means by which any debate and discussion has been conducted within the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee. I, in like manner to the member for Brennan, will do all I can to ensure that we keep our eyes fixed securely upon the goal. To this end, I commend the member for Barkly for the way that he has conducted this debate and in leading the committee to this point.
It is important to note, too, that there has been already a significant concession made by the Chief Minister in this regard; being the position of the executive officer. It was of genuine concern that that position of an executive officer would be located within the Chief Minister’s Department. It is my and members of the committee’s belief, that that position must always remain within the Assembly. To that end, it is good to see that that concession has been made. Once again, we have this issue remaining as an issue within this Chamber and this Assembly on behalf of all people of the Northern Territory; rather than the temptation to succumb to endeavour to gain additional control over this agenda so that, almost subtly, some political kudos can be gained. The moment we enter that arena, Territorians lose.
Once again, I acknowledge the work of members of this bipartisan committee. I also acknowledge the work of Ian McNeill, and make particular note of Rick Gray and others who have worked behind the scenes for many years and, particularly in recent times, to bring us to this point.
Ms CARTER (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I support the motion. It is vitally important for Territorians that one day we become a state. It is my hope that we all live to see that day in the not-too-distant future.
Several years ago, we saw the shameful situation of the federal government overturning our voluntary euthanasia legislation, a move that I am quite sure has led to the unnecessary suffering of Territorians and others who would have come to the Northern Territory to avail themselves of this excellent legislation. I hope to see the day when we again are able to pass, as a state, something as compassionate as that legislation was.
Therefore, I am delighted to support this motion. I, of course, am a member of the Country Liberal Party and that we move the Territory toward statehood is an absolute platform tenet of ours. The success of our move to statehood will come from an education program that brings all Territorians together in an understanding of what statehood is, what it will mean to us, and what it will not do to us.
The last time round, we had far too many strange stories going around the community about how we will suffer when we become a state because, apparently, the federal government was not going to fund us as well as they used to. All of these were furphies and unnecessary, clouded people’s judgment, and we ended up with the very disappointing close loss of our move towards statehood.
It will also succeed with a bipartisan effort and what is occurring here today, and occurred at the last Assembly, is an illustration of an excellent bipartisan method and effort by this parliament to get it right this time round. I commend the committee and its chair, and wish you all the very best for the future.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, I make a few comments about this matter of statehood for the Northern Territory. I arrived in this country in 1963 as a young teenager coming to high school and lived in Brisbane, Queensland for 10 years, and then South Australia for another eight years before coming to the Territory in 1981.
It was when I arrived here that I found that the political system was quite different from the states that I was used to. It was a statehood issue that was quite significantly different. When I delved into the history of the Territory and found out where it came from, I suddenly realised, in fact, as a Territorian, many of our rights as citizens of Australia were missing once we moved across the border. Obviously, I support statehood for the Northern Territory and I look forward to this parliament, in a non-partisan way, seeking statehood for Territorians.
I report, as the member for Brennan did, that the CLP Central Council unanimously approved that members of the opposition will support this process and ensure, in a non-partisan way, that parliament facilitates all the processes possible to ensure that we achieve statehood. I hope that, within the foreseeable future, I am alive to see it happen.
Many people criticise the Territory for seeking statehood. They say that it is going to cost us a lot of money and that every Territorian is going to be worse off once we get statehood. People need to understand that, in fact, the Territory has been treated as if it were a state for nearly 15 years. The myth has been promoted by those who stand against our attempt to be a state.
Say 50 years ago, when federal governments of the day were spending huge sums of taxpayers’ funds to provide infrastructure for all the states and the other territory, the Northern Territory was sadly neglected. The money that would have been spent on the Northern Territory was being spent interstate.
Now, if we get more money from the federal parliament, it is because it is time that the money came back to the Territory to ensure that we have the wherewithal to create the facilities and the infrastructure that we desperately need here.
On behalf of my colleagues and myself, I say that this is the way to go. Let us make it a non-partisan thing. I believe this issue of statehood is too big for the political parties to try and claim ownership of. It is something that all Territorians want to have and, as members of parliament on both sides of the House, we should work together and use this parliament to facilitate the whole process.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I will be brief. I do not think there is any argument in this House about whether the Territory should be a state. I really do not think there was any argument previously, before 1998; it really was about process.
It is very important that our debates about statehood, from this point on, reflect lessons learnt from the past. We have had reports, if members need to refresh themselves about what happened in the past, because it was not a glorious past. Statehood is not about one party or another, it is about this Territory. This process, as I articulated a year ago - and I am sure that I am joined by every member in this House - is about an inclusive process, a process that is not driven by politicians but, very importantly and as reflected by these terms of reference, working inclusively with and in partnership with our community.
Statehood, as very clearly demonstrated by the referendum in 1998, is not about politicians, and that needs to be clearly reflected in how this House goes forward. It is not a trophy on a shelf for the Territory, in the words of the Opposition Leader. This is something that is about the Territory’s constitutional development; it is about an inclusive process. However, if it is seen as a trophy on the shelf, like some kind of Olympic medal, I believe the Opposition Leader should think again about what statehood is, and what statehood is for the Northern Territory and the way we need to move forward …
Dr Dunham: Here is the state of the bipartisan process; that is fairly evident, isn’t it?
Ms MARTIN: Because those are the words ...
Dr Lim: There you again, see.
Ms MARTIN: Those are the words used by the Opposition Leader. I did not intend to be critical today, but I have heard four contributions by members of the opposition that referred, a number of times, to ‘CLP’ - party political references. Two of those members referred to ‘directions from the CLP Central Committee’. Then they say this has to be bipartisan and it is about Territorians. Yet, they have come in here and made direct party political references, trying to own the process from the CLP as a party …
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: I did not make this up. I sat here quietly and listened as four members of the opposition very clearly said ‘this is about the CLP’s commitment’. It is our commitment as a parliament. It is not - and I say again, very reasonably and rationally - this is about parliamentarians, about politicians not doing what was done last time - not doing what was shamelessly done last time, and owning that process. I am concerned to hear the tenor of the comments in here today that are trying to claim that space, by saying, ‘Strut stuff, this is a trophy on a shelf. This is the CLP’s commitment’. You are revisiting the past and demonstrating that you have not learnt from the past.
This committee will work in partnership with our community and it is not to be owned or dominated by politicians.
Mr Mills: Hear, hear!
Ms MARTIN: It is not about a political agenda …
Mr Mills: Hear, hear!
Ms MARTIN: ... and yet, even though the Opposition Leader is going ‘hear, hear’, a political agenda came clearly through the statements from the other side - clearly.
Mr Mills: Sensitive ears, sensitive ears.
Ms MARTIN: The Opposition Leader can say to me, ‘You have sensitive ears’ ...
Mr Mills: You have.
Ms MARTIN: ... but I was in this parliament, as opposed to the member for Blain, who was not in this parliament when the sorry chapter of statehood - which should have been a unanimous vote for every Territorian - went down. It was a very sad time for Territorians. I am just putting on the record very clearly that it would be a disgrace to have that happen again - an absolute disgrace.
Therefore, when I set out what we should be trying to do with statehood, I did not set a time frame on it. I said maybe five years, maybe it will take longer. It is not about the member for Fannie Bay’s political agenda. It is not about a trophy on a shelf. This is about an inclusive and important process for Territorians - about our rights. It is not about political agendas. I make that point very clearly, and I hope that we can properly learn from the past. I hope that, when the next time does happen, we have shown that we have all got it right.
Mr McADAM (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I am going to be very brief in my comments. First of all, I thank very much all the speakers for their contribution to this very important issue. Most certainly, the Statehood Steering Committee, along with the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee, will have a very important role in driving the statehood process. As has always been made very clear in this House, there will be an inclusive approach, which will involve all community members, regardless of what their positions may be - that is very important - and it will not be imposed.
The other point that I want to make very quickly is that I do not resile from the fact that it will not be a easy task. It will be a task that will stretch us as individuals and as members of this House. However, bearing that in mind, the most important thing is to ensure that we are acting in a mature and responsible manner, in which we will have the capacity in the long term to deliver statehood to the Territory.
I want to endorse the comments made by the Chief Minister. It very important to understand that it will be a process that will be open; that will not be imposed. However, most importantly, there is no prize for any political party regarding the outcome. It will be something which will be arrived at by the people of the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, I thank all speakers on both sides of the House for their support of the motion. I would very much indeed like to thank Mr Ian McNeill, Mr Rick Gray, Ms Joanne Carbone, and Mr David Horton for their support. Equally, I would also like to extend my appreciation to the members of Blain, Macdonnell, Millner and to you, Madam Speaker, member for Braitling. Let us get on with it in a very mature way and deliver a process which will allow a very inclusive approach on the part of the people of the Northern Territory in achieving statehood.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I urge you as Territorians to support this motion.
Motion agreed to.
Continued from 25 June 2004.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, to some extent, this will be a repeat of my reply to the Attorney-General’s ministerial report this morning. I, again, say that this has been an interesting chapter of the Territory’s legal history. I, again, say that much has already been written and said and, I suspect, much more will be. If you take the politics out, which is extremely difficult in this case, of course - but if you did - as a lawyer, I say that it certainly has been a case of great interest and has occupied the dinner parties of lawyers - no doubt, from Darwin to Alice Springs for some years – he tables of which I have been a member.
As we know, this case came about as a result of the failed attempt of NAALAS to invalidate the appointment of Chief Magistrate Hugh Bradley. It was always a political exercise and a waste of taxpayers’ money. Certainly, at the dinner tables I have sat at when this matter has been discussed, the fact that it was a political exercise was a common theme. I might say that friends of mine on both sides of politics, certainly took that view. The case involved two former Chief Ministers, one of whom was fined and financially and otherwise penalised for saying that the case was a political stunt and a waste of money. Well, the member for Brennan’s views have been vindicated. His views were, I think, questioned only by some people at NAALAS, and only by members of the Northern Territory Branch of the Australian Labor Party. The member for Brennan has been vindicated. The decision of the former Chief Minister, Shane Stone, was not wrong, as claimed by NAALAS. The member for Brennan was vilified by members of the Australian Labor Party, as was Shane Stone. The member for Brennan, of course, has the unfortunate distinction of having to carry the burden of expressing those views by having to fork out money himself. It is terribly unfortunate when one looks at the history of this matter, and we now see that the High Court has said there was nothing wrong with what the former Chief Minister, Shane Stone, did.
Therefore, several years later, after vast sums of money have been expended, the exercise was and is shown, to be nothing more than a stunt. It is noteworthy and it should be revisited, that members of the Labor Party in opposition certainly barracked from the sidelines. It is the case that a great deal of time in this parliament was spent by Labor in opposition getting stuck into the CLP and claiming that what was done was wrong. Well, they should be embarrassed today because the High Court found some months ago that nothing could be further from the case.
Put simply, the system in place regarding the appointment of magistrates is not broken, and yet the Labor Party want to fix something that clearly, as evidenced by the High Court’s decision a few months ago, is not broken. However, the Labor Party does not like it and they want to change it. That is their right; they are in government, they have the numbers and, no doubt, they want to persuade their supporters at NAALAS and elsewhere that they have done something about this system - this system which is clearly not broken since NAALAS lost the case in the High Court.
It appears to me that, for the average punter, there is one issue, and one issue alone; that is, how much money was spent on the pursuit of this case and, under the umbrella of financial expenditure, is government going to pursue NAALAS for the costs awarded against it? It appears to me - and with great respect, it was highlighted this morning in the Attorney-General’s ministerial report - that the government to date has been very coy on this issue: ‘In the fullness of time, we will have another look at it’, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Well, the average punter does want to know whether government is going to pursue NAALAS for those costs. Those costs would be considerable and, we must not forget that it was taxpayers’ money that was expended in this political exercise. I ask that the Attorney-General give an assurance in his reply that the government will chase costs from NAALAS. It has, certainly, an obligation to do so; it is legally entitled to do so. To do anything less would be an abrogation of the government’s responsibility.
Labor does not like the current system, even though the High Court said that nothing was wrong with it. It produces these bills. We will not oppose them. What we do ask is for the government to tell us, if not now, then how about in two weeks or at the most a month? We do not understand why there would be such a delay. There has been a delay to date and the Attorney-General has indicated today, I think, that there will be a further delay.
We do not know what further information he needs. There is an obligation to pursue costs. Will the Attorney-General say: ‘Let us give them a timeline of a month’? Will the Attorney-General, within a month, tell us whether he is going to pursue those costs from NAALAS? Might the Attorney-General, within a month, tell us whether he is going to pay Denis Burke $50 000 for his costs incurred as a result of the NAALAS case? That is a particularly relevant point in light of - and I repeat what I said earlier - the outrageously incompetent prosecution that the Minister for Community Development commenced against Warren Anderson.
The government has agreed to pick up the tab for the Minister for Community Development and, yet, it did not pick up the tab for the former Chief Minister’s role in this case. It is all well and good for the Chief Minister, as she said earlier today in the context of the statehood debate: ‘Let us not be political. Let us all just get on with it …
Dr TOYNE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! We are seven minutes into the debate and there is yet to be a mention of the legislation in front of us. I have allowed the member a fair bit of latitude on this, but I would really like her to address the legislation.
Ms CARNEY: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker, the Attorney-General is quite wrong. I have I referred to the bills three times.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order, minister.
Ms CARNEY: We had the Chief Minister talking about not being political. The government is being political. They say on the one hand that they will not pay the member for Brennan’s costs in response to his involvement in the proceeding when he was the Chief Minister and, yet, at the same time, they say: ‘We will pay our bloke’s costs’. If that is not political, I do not know what is.
I look forward to the Attorney-General’s reply. I do not have high expectations in relation to the specific issues I have raised, but I urge him, in the strongest possible terms, to come out and let Territorians know whether the government will pursue the costs from NAALAS. We look forward to - what I understood him as saying this morning - the slim possibility that government may reconsider its position in relation to the member for Brennan’s legal costs. If the government reconsiders that matter, then I will be the first to commend them.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Madam Speaker, this is more of a question than anything else: reading the second reading speech and the amendments to the act, it would appear that, notwithstanding a decision of the High Court, the government has decided to proceed by amendment with the opinion of one judge in the High Court which, in itself, is curious, I would have thought.
However, given the history of this matter having progressed through a number of courts and, on its way, various allegations having been made against the Chief Magistrate and the former Chief Minister, Shane Stone - which basically fall away because they lacked substance - the essence of the case was, essentially, whether or not the current Remuneration Tribunal procedures in the Northern Territory were consistent and sound enough for the actions taken with regards to Chief Magistrate Bradley to be considered appropriate. The High Court, in examining all of these matters, decided that it was appropriate.
In fact, the High Court, as stated in the second reading speech, said that under the current section 6 of the Magistrates Act it – and I emphasise the High Court’s words:
The High Court also found that section 6:
Against the decision of the High Court, which states very clearly that the Magistrates Act is sound and anything that has been put to the High Court is of no substance, and that the interests of judicial independence and impartiality are preserved, the government is going to proceed by amendment to put in place what they consider to be a better system. I am not convinced by that. However, we are not going to stand on that in terms of opposing the bill.
My question really is one of explanation and clarification: can the minister advise the House whether or not there is any other procedure, by way of act or tribunal determination, which removes the Governor or Administrator from the process, or do we now have a situation in the Northern Territory whereby the Remuneration Tribunal, acting alone, and supported by the government without reference to the most senior executive in the Northern Territory - namely the Administrator - can pass legislation relating to salary and allowances for magistrates in toto in this parliament, using the weight of numbers of the parliament?
I say it in this context: if the allegations were that the previous act was deficient to create the situation whereby, by allegation, the Chief Minister could do some deal with a magistrate to get certain salary and allowances provided for that magistrate, how then has this been improved, where the Chief Minister and the government picks the chairman of the Remuneration Tribunal? Surely you could nobble the chairman of the Remuneration Tribunal using that logic. If you use that logic, you could influence the chairman of the Remuneration Tribunal to provide a remuneration which allowed you to secure a particular individual for the Northern Territory. That individual, by way of this amendment to the act, is protected because there is no other check mechanism except in this parliament - of which the government has weight - and there is no review by the Administrator.
I would have thought - and I am unconvinced - that the amendments that you are proposing are any more secure, in fact, than the procedures of the parliament that have occurred in the past. I seek to be informed and clarified on this particular issue.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank members for their contribution to this debate. To deal with them one at a time, the member for Araluen is continuing to pursue the government’s position on the resolution of the Bradley matter. I simply restate that the government is considering its decisions about those matters that she outlined. While I find her opinions about it of some interest, we will make our decision and make that public when we have done so. I am certainly not going to be bound to a time frame. It involves negotiations, amongst other things, with the federal government, over which we do not have full control of the time. I can assure members that all of the matters, including the member for Brennan’s situation, will be part of that discussion and decision.
Regarding the matters raised by the member for Brennan, there are many theories about what brought on the Bradley case, and you can take whatever position you like about the actions taken by NAALAS. It has now been fully tested, as he states, through the justice system, and resolved as far as the technicalities of the law are concerned. However, what brought us to the amendments before us today is that I believe there was an element of perception, no matter how big or small, in the decision by NAALAS to take the actions. There was a perception - and a strong perception in my understanding - that there was something untoward about the negotiations that happened between the then Attorney-General, Shane Stone, and Hugh Bradley on his appointment as Chief Magistrate.
The courts have tested the technicalities of what transpired. They have certainly found that the actions and the arrangements that were put in place in no way compromised the independence of the magistracy. The member for Brennan is quite right in quoting – I will quote the slightly longer section of the transcript from the High Court decision of 17 June 2004, in North Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid Service Inc v Bradley which upheld the construction of the current section 6 of the Magistrates Act stating that:
And that:
It has, nevertheless, been decided to strengthen the appearance of impartiality for magistrates by strengthening the security of remuneration. That is what is underpinning our action in taking these amendments to the House. We want to deal with the perception problem - not the technical issue of independence, but the perception of independence.
Chief Justice Gleeson, in Bradley, described a regular review of judicial remuneration by Remuneration Tribunals as a common procedure, consistent with a requirement of fairness, transparency and accountability, and also with judicial independence.
The member asked whether this is a unique arrangement. Looking at the other jurisdictions in Australia, a similar tribunal determines magistrates’ remuneration in all other jurisdictions except in Tasmania, where it is tied to that of the judges and, in Victoria, where it was recently changed to that set by the Judicial Salaries Act 2004 in Victoria.
We are not proposing anything new or radical here, we are simply dealing with the element of perception that actually did lead, in part, to a $2m history of litigation in the Northern Territory. It is important that we take every step that we can to not only have independence for our magistrates and judges, but to make it absolutely apparent to the public that that independence exists. The best way to do that is to have an independent Remuneration Tribunal. If you are dealing with perception, at least there are two steps to the actual negotiation of the magistrates and the tribunal. It is not directly with the minister and the magistrates to set those conditions. That is certainly a great separation from the decision-making, activities or objectives of a minister or the government, than the current situation.
I believe that this is a prudent thing to do. We are simply adopting arrangements that have proven to be effective in other states around Australia. It is part of washing through, I guess, the final effects of the Bradley case on the justice system in the Northern Territory. Therefore, I propose now that we proceed to finalise this legislation through the House.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr BURKE (Brennan)(by leave): Madam Speaker, just a question to the Attorney-General. He did not answer my last question. I understand what you are doing, but you have not answered my last question: will you state categorically in this House that there is a procedure in any other state or territory in Australia which removes the Governor or Administrator from the process?
It seems to me that this particular legislation now does not require assent by the Administrator. Is that the purpose? Is that clear, because it is stated in the second reading speech that the Administrator is removed from the process.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I have made if fairly clear that the process that is set up under these amendments is simply that the Remuneration Tribunal makes a determination once a year regarding the magistrates’ pay and conditions. That determination is presented and tabled in the parliament and, unless disallowed by a decision of this House, will go forward on an annual basis. It is exactly the same procedure as we have for the pay and conditions of members here and many other statutory positions within our government system.
So, yes, what it does remove from process is the direct intervention of the minister regarding the details of the pay and conditions of the magistrates. We feel that the perception of bias within that process was what led, in part at least, to the Bradley case, and this new procedure removes that.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, you now need to seek leave to move that the bills be read a third time.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bills be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bills read a third time.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I present the Auditor-General’s August 2004 report to the Legislative Assembly
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I move that the report be printed.
Motion agreed to.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the report and seek leave to continue my remarks at a later hour.
Motion agreed to.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, today I speak to Territorians about my government’s agenda to broaden the economic base of the Territory through our strategic approach to gas projects in the Timor Sea.
Let me start by assuring Territorians that this government has a bold vision for the Timor Sea and the development of its oil and gas reserves. Today, we have all come to understand that it is a long-term gain; one that requires a clear vision and a steady hand. It is an important time in the history of the Timor Sea, with a considerable degree of comment by politicians and senior industry leaders on Sunrise, in particular. I would anticipate some uncertainty and legitimate questioning by Territorians as a result. My statement today is, in part, a response to that uncertainty but, more, it is also a timely opportunity to reinforce to Territorians that this government will continue to use every lever at our disposal to bring the wealth trapped under the Timor Sea onshore.
What will always remain in the very apex of our policy stance on Timor Sea gas is three key deliverables. The first will be to broaden the economic base of the Territory economy so that we are less susceptible to the volatility experienced by smaller regional economies; something that we have all felt in recent times. Our existing industries remain crucial to our success: mining, tourism, Defence, construction and pastoral. However, new industries such as downstream gas manufacturing will add further momentum to our economy.
Our next deliverable is high quality and diverse jobs providing new and exciting employment opportunities for today’s Territorians and for our children to come. Jobs in the technology sector, new trades and professions, all increase the employment opportunities for Territorians. I will acknowledge that we will always need to attract new Territorians from interstate and overseas to supplement the existing Territory work force to construct these projects. This mobility occurs throughout the world in these types of projects. What we do want to do is to encourage these people to settle and stay in the Territory after completion of the project. We also want to capture those key jobs that transfer from construction to operations, as well as those key operational jobs that can provide exciting career opportunity for Territorians.
Our final deliverable is to position the Territory in world-class industries that will attract a steady stream of new investments directly in gas industries and indirectly in all those supply and service industries so necessary if we are going to capture the full length of the value chain.
This is very much a pro-development agenda and one that this government is distinctly proud of. However, it is not a one dimensional strategy. All development in the Territory must and will occur within the context of an equal consideration for the environmental and social consequences of any development. New gas projects must be world standard in intent and represent best in class environmental management and practice. We will not, and should not, accept anything less. Equally, each project must go through the full process of public examination. In doing so, it provides Territorians with the opportunity to comment and to fully express there views about any proposal.
A further demonstration of the government’s commitment is the practices established that oversee the relationship between our task forces and the Office of the Environment and Heritage. The practices help ensure the Office of Environment and Heritage undertakes its assessment of all projects completely separately from the activities of the various task forces. This process means that the environmental and developmental elements of any project are given equivalent weight. It is important that we do this to ensure that the benefits of developments, such as jobs and business opportunities, do not come at the price of a poorer or diminished lifestyle for Territorians. This government will never allow that to happen. Territorians can be assured that this government will work with industry, key interest groups and the wider community to deliver sustainable economic development under the banner of environmentally responsible management.
At the last Assembly sittings, I provided this House with my first assessment of the Prime Minister’s White Paper on Energy. At that time, I made the point that it lacked ambition. It also aimed too low, preferring to suggest modifications to the status quo rather than offering a national-building ethos, one setting a 21st century agenda for developing this great country.
I commented at the time that the White Paper is constructed principally to restate the current situation. It is focussed on coal as an energy resource, and on energy needs in the south-east corner of Australia, disregarding the crucial role gas can play in the nation’s energy future, particularly in regional Australia. It sees no role for government in reconstructing the project development environment in Australia to encourage new investments, while at the same time increasing the pressure on companies that may simply be seeking to warehouse their prospects. It offers no taxation reform to reflect the very different cash flow streams between oil, which is front-end loaded, and gas, which pays back over a much longer period of time. It forgets that Australia is a large country with a small population, necessitating a strong national government role in the development of primary infrastructure such as gas pipelines. It does not fully understand that energy is the key output for secure economic performance, and governments at all levels must focus on energy security and competitively priced energy independence if they wish to steer the future directions of the economy.
I can report to the House that these criticisms stand. I am writing to the Prime Minister to encourage him to elevate his vision on this important national issue, and I would assume that the Opposition Leader will do likewise.
All Territorians would recall the momentous decision of 15 June 2003, just over 12 months ago, when the Bayu-Undan joint venturers committed to proceed with the $1.6bn Darwin LNG project and the $750m Bayu-Undan pipeline. It heralded the Territory’s entry into the world energy market and signalled to the world that the Territory was going to be a new name in the roll call of major energy centres.
As ConocoPhillips indicated at the time, the Wickham Point LNG plant will be the greenest LNG, with significantly lower emissions than other comparable plants currently in operation. Territorians also have a major investment in the success of this facility via a $19m commitment in roads and services to the Wickham Point site.
Some 12 months or more since construction commenced, it is now timely to reflect on what has happened. I would once again like to put on the public record our congratulations to the Bayu-Undan joint venture, our industry partners who played such a pivotal role in Team NT, of course, the member for Brennan, and the large number of public servants who played such a significant role in this project and other campaigns.
Today, a world-class 3 000 000 tonnes per annum LNG project is coming together with more than 1000 workers striving to deliver this great engineering project. It is a wonderful example of what can be achieved in the Territory. Right now, construction of the Darwin LNG plant is approximately 20% complete. There remains only two wall pours to go to complete the outer concrete wall of the tank; the piling for the marine jetty is under way; and the foundations and structural steel for the main process elements are almost complete.
ConocoPhillips have informed me that it has completed 1.1 million man hours on site, some 400 work days, without a single lost-time injury. There are almost 800 tradespeople on site and, while it will always vary according to the timetable for the project, 50% of those are Territorians. This is exemplified by the count at the Palmerston construction camp. It is my advice that there are approximately 337 people in the camp, representing just 42% of its 800-person capacity.
Territory businesses also benefited from this great project. Some 2450 purchase orders have been raised on more than 240 Territory businesses, with a combined value of $231m. The income from these contracts, along with a substantial wages bill from the project, all circulate in the Territory economy to the benefit of all businesses, large and small.
We can expect the project to move into its mechanical phase next, with a variety of equipment arriving across East Arm Port - equipment such as refrigeration compressors, turbine drivers and heat exchangers.
The SEMAC pipe-laying barge has already laid out the first length of pipe, and is now on its way, slowly but surely, moving 500 km to the west towards the Bayu-Undan field. Once clear of Darwin Harbour, the SEMAC will lay pipe at a rate of three to four kilometres a day. The pipe within Darwin Harbour will shortly be covered by armour rock. Another vessel is expected into Darwin for this task, and it will place various sized rock, currently stockpiled at East Arm Port, to protect the pipeline from harbour activity, including tides and storms.
The word ‘Sunrise’ has become synonymous with defending what is right and what is in the Territory’s and Australia’s interests. The Sunrise campaign of 2002-03 left some bruises along the way, but it was a necessary campaign to stake out our position in the Timor Sea. Members would remember the very significant effort the Territory put into the Sunrise campaign to ensure that the benefits of bringing gas onshore over the then mooted floating LNG facility were clearly understood.
Sometimes, it is hard to feel positive about what was essentially a negative campaign, but we should. In my view, the concept of a floating platform just had to be rejected. It would have seen LNG tankers sailing past Darwin across the northern Timor Sea, collecting LNG from a processing facility and barge, then sailing past once again on its way to deliver LNG to the US market and, in the process, exporting jobs, wealth creation and new business opportunities for Territorians.
The Sunrise campaign also changed the political dynamic in the Territory. Members will recall the great sense of commitment embodied in Team NT, when political leaders from both sides of this House, local and national business leaders, and unions all sat together to work to protect the future economic development of the Territory. While time always moves on, I am hopeful we can draw on the same sense of community and common purpose in the future, whenever the situation calls for it.
Time has indeed moved on, but the intensity of the issues surrounding the Sunrise project remain as acute as ever. Today, the challenge is one of navigating on two fronts: first, to achieve agreement between Australia and East Timor governments and, second, to provide sufficient certainty to allow customers to sign up and the joint venture partners to commit a considerable amount of money to bring this $6bn project on.
At our own SEAAOC this year, I called for the de-linking of the Sunrise projects from the discussions about the Australia/East Timor maritime boundary, and my rationale was clear. The maritime boundary dispute is a cloud obscuring what really must be done and can be done; that is, a one-off, separate agreement on Sunrise delivering a revised revenue split that protects Australia’s interests and allows East Timor to build on its own economic independence.
To reinforce the Territory’s position on Sunrise, we also wrote to the four joint venture partners - Woodside, ConocoPhillips, Shell and Osaka Gas - requesting a briefing on their project development plans. I expect to talk to them about this in the near future.
My government remains supremely optimistic about Sunrise, but it will require strong leadership from everyone with a key role to play. That is why I was so pleased to see the foreign ministers of both East Timor and Australia, Jose Ramos Horta and Alexander Downer, meet last week to see what they could do to change this situation around. By all reports, there is a strong sense of common purpose between Australia and East Timor now, and a deal allowing the development of Sunrise is indeed possible. I would like to place on the public record at this time my personal congratulations to the Prime Ministers of both countries for their statesman-like approach to the matter.
The Timor Sea offers a diversity of offshore gas fields, each with different resource characteristics, which will open up a wide spread of opportunities over time. Sure, each has its challenges, but all resource projects do. Many gas veterans have reminded me, more than once, that it usually takes 10 years to get a gas project up, unless it is fortunate enough to have significant oil reserves as well.
However, the inescapable certainty is that energy is the key commodity of the 21st century, and we sit alongside a considerable amount of it. As each retention lease comes up for renewal, my government is making it very clear to proponents that our interest is in field commercialisation. We are saying to them that commercialisation must figure highly in their development strategy and plans.
The Blacktip project in the Bonaparte Gulf is most likely to be our second onshore gas project. As Territorians would all know, the gas is currently slated for the Alcan refinery in Gove and, with a few important decisions still to come, could see gas piped from Wadeye via Katherine to Gove by 2007. In the next month or so, the Blacktip joint venture will drill for further gas reserves in the Polkadot field, approximately 30 km north of Blacktip. This work could see an expansion of known reserves and additional gas for Territory industry. Don Voelte and David Maxwell of Woodside have both committed the company to establishing a gas hub for the Bonaparte Gulf region, using Blacktip, and I certainly encourage that strategy. Blacktip is one of three projects being coordinated by this government’s Alcan task force, and I can report considerable progress is made in facilitating this development.
Santos also has significant reserves in the Bonaparte Gulf in the form of Petrel and Tern. It is also ideally suited to domestic gas in similar fashion to Blacktip. I would also encourage both Woodside and Santos to sensibly work together to bring this vision of a Bonaparte Gulf gas hub to a reality and, in the process, creating a competitive market for domestic gas along the way.
In recent weeks, ConocoPhillips has also farmed into Permit NT/P61, east of Evans Shoals, which contains the Caldita prospect. Santos is also the other partner in Caldita, and I am led to believe that both companies plan a drilling program to search for further oil and gas in the next 12 months. Another prospect in the north Timor Sea is Abadi. It is in Indonesian waters but, once again, reaffirms the huge potential of our region to supply energy in one form or another for many years to come.
The Timor Seas is a significant resource with enormous potential. It has the prospect of at least six gas projects, exploiting 21 trillion cubic feet of gas in coming years. The offshore development of the 3.4 tcf Bayu-Undan project is complete, and it is producing condensate now for world markets. The downstream gas project is well under way in the form of the LNG plant and gas pipeline.
Sunrise, after being a cloud for some time, has re-emerged as a genuine new project. A deal between Australia and East Timor in the 7.7 tcf project may not be too far away, as I said; perhaps a matter of months. I am looking forward to the briefing on commercial matters from the joint venture.
Strong progress is being made in the development of the 1.1 tcf Blacktip project. An additional drilling in Polkadot will occur next month. We anticipate a final investment decision in the first quarter of 2005.
We are talking to Santos about how they may commercialise the 1.4 tcf Petrel and Tern, and 6.6 tcf Evans Shoals project. ConocoPhillips and Santos are to drill the Caldita prospect, formerly Melville, next Dry Season. We also believe that further work is planned at Abadi. This demonstrates that we are progressing on each prospect and field with the principle aim of getting more gas onshore in Darwin and, in doing so, establishing Darwin as Australia’s second international gas hub, and Australia’s first integrated gas manufacturing centre.
Whenever my government contemplates gas matters, it is within the framework of four key economic opportunities: first, LNG for export underpinned by the significant volumes of gas in the Timor Sea; second, power generation for Power and Water, and development of major resource projects; third, gas-based manufacturing in the Darwin region; and finally, potential for gas for the national grid. Taken together, these four opportunities represent the lynchpins for broadening the NT economy, and each field in the Timor Sea offers a different potential mix. This is why it is so important to pursue the development of all projects with the same energy and vigour.
That mix of opportunities will shift, over time, as individual field assessments improve and markets shift. It could see Sunrise developed for LNG, power generation and some gas-based manufacturing; Blacktip developed for power generation and possibly some LNG if a real hub were to eventuate in the Bonaparte Gulf; Petrel/Tern for power generation and some LNG; Evans Shoals developed for methanol and then gas-based manufacturing - synthetic fuels, chemicals and other products; and Caldita developed for LNG and possibly downstream manufacturing, similar to Evans Shoals.
Earlier on, I mentioned the work that this government is doing to take up its responsibilities in the development of the Timor Sea gas. In previous reports and statements to this House, I have covered many of these activities, but it is important today to recap on a few, and to also inform this House of recent events.
Gas is the fuel of the future - clean and in ever-increasing demand - and LNG is how it gets to world markets. LNG will be produced at Wickham Point in 2006. This LNG - three million tonnes - each year has been sold to both Tokyo Electric Power Company and Tokyo Gas. In place right now are approvals to expand this project with another LNG trade; most likely Sunrise, but also potentially Caldita. My government has been part of Australian delegations seeking to promote Australian LNG to the United States and Korea, as well as independently to Japan. These are strong markets for LNG. The critical supply/demand balance has been upset in the US and it must now seek gas from other parts of the world, such as the Timor Sea. Our location and Australia’s track record offer significant advantages over LNG producers in other regions. In addition, both Japanese and Korean demand continues to increase and the close geographic proximity of both markets to Darwin provides a real supply opportunity, as already evidences with Wickham Point contracts.
Minister Henderson also joined with our political and industry leaders in promoting Australian LNG to US Energy Secretary Abraham earlier this year in Melbourne. He also met with key LNG customers during his trip to Japan in November last year, and we will follow up on those meetings once again this year.
The LNG market has gone through dramatic shifts in the past two years, and demand continues to increase for this resource. Australia has an enviable record in this market and we expect Darwin LNG to add to that reputation. LNG is becoming a high margin product, the result necessary to get high-cost offshore products, such as the Timor Sea, across the line.
Secure supplies of domestic gas at nationally competitive prices is essential for the long-term economic development in the Territory. It is important to everyone who lives here and, equally so, for our industry. It is likely that our largest exporter, ALCAN, will have secured gas so as to generate steam and power to its expanded refinery by years end. The refinery in Gove, in expanded form, will export almost $1bn per year of alumina making it the masthead of the very significant worldwide ALCAN family.
Likewise, Power and Water will need to secure contracts for gas in the coming years, most likely for supply commencing between 2009 and 2011. Options include gas for renewed Sunrise project or a Bonaparte Gulf gas hub, maybe at Blacktip; a development of Petrel/Tern; or even an extension of contracts from the Amadeus Basin; or perhaps a cocktail of gas from all these options. My government fully understands the pivotal role power plays in the lifestyle enjoyed by Territorians and, just as importantly, in holding onto and securing new investment in our industry. I have made it clear to the owners of all Timor Sea prospects and fields that domestic gas for power generation in the Territory must be part of their development together.
The Board of Power and Water and this government are at one in putting our energy into the right gas deal to carry Power and Water through 2030 and beyond. The next deal must deliver lower electricity tariffs to Territory business and consumers. Success in this ambition will build our business competitiveness, new investment and new jobs, all contributing to expanding the population base of the Territory.
Several weeks ago, I travelled to Thailand and Singapore to visit two key industrial parks, Map Ta Phut in Thailand and Jurong Island in Singapore. I wanted to see first-hand just what vision and commitment could deliver in way of downstream gas-based manufacturing. I must tell you, I was really impressed with what both countries have achieved in investment, jobs and balancing industry and the environment. It was such a contrast to speak to people in both countries and listen to those who have the runs on the board, and then to reflect on the limited vision for downstream projects in the federal government’s National Energy Policy.
These industrial centres capture the full extent of the value chain, cracking the petroleum products such as gas, and manufacturing a range of intermediate and final products for world markets. The whole principle underpinning the centres is to hold onto the wealth and jobs embodied in the primary resource, whether that is oil or gas or both. Philosophically, these governments who have provided the vision for these industrial parks are at the opposite end of the continuum to Australia, which still languishes in the ‘dig it up and ship it off’ approach to economic development.
Map Ta Phut is a modern industrial complex approximately 200 km from Bangkok. It currently has 58 large industrial plants owned and operated by the who’s who of the world’s petrochemical companies. The plants there employ almost 14 000 people.
While in Map Ta Phut, I had the opportunity to view a number of plants and to meet with representatives from Siam Cement, Dow Chemicals Petrochemical Group’s Styrene Monomer, polyethylene, polystyrene, poly-urethane and latex plant; Rayong Olefins Company’s Naptha cracker; PTT’s gas separation plant; and the Industrial Estates Authority of Thailand. It is interesting that gas for this complex comes from a fragmented gas field some 520 km offshore in the Gulf of Thailand. It is really not too dissimilar from some of the issues we find here in the Timor Sea.
Another important feature of this complex, and one reinforced at Jurong Island two days later, was the prominent signage at each plant reflecting their commitment to ISO14 000 environmental accreditation and their success in managing work place safety. It was a genuine commitment demonstrated by all management and staff, in the cleanliness of the plants and the management of issues such as stormwater run-off, noise and air quality. With 58 plants in close proximity, really, there was not an industrial smell anywhere.
When I returned to Bangkok, I also met with senior management of PTT, Thailand’s state-owned petroleum company; Unocal, a major investor in the Gulf of Thailand; and Siam Cement, the large conglomerate and owner of Cementhai Chemicals, one of the largest producers of chemicals in Thailand.
In Singapore, I met with Australian High Commissioner, Gary Quinlan, and the Singapore Economic Development Board and visited the Jurong Industrial Park. It is an astonishing facility that has developed in a relatively short period on the back of gas- and oil-based manufacturing, with a wide diversity of plants, each value adding in some form to primary and intermediate products. The key to success in both centres was the vision and direction or guidance from government.
Glyde Point will not be Map Ta Phut or Jurong because its development must reflect the characteristics of our offshore fields, the situation in world markets in 2004 and beyond, and the level of infrastructure available. However, it can provide the catalyst to add value and to create jobs. It will require a shared vision, one that the federal government must also take up. The planning process is now under way to establish the benchmarks for the development of Glyde Point. We are also working on developing an understanding of the likely development scenario and the economics underpinning such projects, and we have been working with major chemical companies to development an understanding of what they require in gas and infrastructure to make the very significant investments that are modern industrial chemical facilities.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank Andrew Liveris, Chief Operating Officer of Dow Chemicals Worldwide - and a Darwin High School boy to boot - for the tremendous assistance his people provided in guiding us around Thailand. It is industry and government partnerships such as this that will deliver results for Territorians. Andrew and I have also agreed to work cooperatively by jointly sponsoring a series of studies designed to position Timor Sea gas and Darwin as an attractive location for new technology-based gas manufacturing.
Gas is important for the Territory, but it is also important for Australia. It is a clean resource. The rest of the world is moving this way. We have significant reserves, but they are in remote areas of the Territory and Western Australia. Recently, my government participated in a multi-client study undertaken by well-known resources consultants Wood Mackenzie. This study looked at the potential of pipelines from the NT and Western Australia to supply south-eastern Australia to secure long-term gas supplies. The Western Australian government also supported this consultancy. The report by Wood Mackenzie indicated that there is great potential to elevate Australia’s approach to energy through strategic investment in new pipelines.
It is vital for our future that we apply as much effort as possible to the challenge of steering the development of Timor Sea gas projects and the economic benefits that will flow from success. That is why today I am pleased to advise that a few weeks ago, I established a new small task force targeted at these important issues. To be known as the Onshore Gas Developments Task Force, it has already met a number of times to review our current efforts and to elevate our commitment in this area.
As a reflection of this importance, I have nominated the Chief Executives of the Department of Chief Minister, Treasury and Business, Industry and Resource Development, along with the Chief Executive of Power and Water and the Executive Director of the Office of Territory Development to this task force, along with the Chairman of the Power and Water Corporation, Neil Philip. Paul Tyrrell will chair this group and it will, importantly, also draw on the combined expertise of the Territory public service, as well as key private sector specialists with particular industry and market knowledge. The first of these specialists is already on board and more are to follow, building on the work done with a range of specialists over the past three years.
We are particularly keen to receive quality advice on matters such as offshore gas field development, project commercialisation, onshore gas-based manufacturing, emerging market opportunities, strategies for creating a competitive onshore gas market, and key industry intelligence. The budget this year for the work is estimated to be $400 000.
The task force has a number of objectives, but the two key ones are to secure competitively priced gas for power generation, and to guide the development of a downstream gas-based manufacturing industry onshore in the Darwin region. The task force will work with all relevant industry players and the Commonwealth government, as necessary, to achieve the objectives we have set. I have asked the task force and its specialist advisors to be ambitious in their efforts, and I have every confidence that they will do so.
In parallel with the work of this task force, the Office of Territory Development, in partnership with other agencies including Charles Darwin University, is working on a long-term project aimed at attracting new investment into the technology layer within the Territory economy. As part of this work, they will look into the synergies between offshore production, onshore process control, and the new Defence platforms such as the Tiger helicopter, Armadale patrol boat and Abrams tank. These synergies build a critical mass of demands so essential for the establishment of further technology businesses in the Northern Territory. Our vision is to lead Territory businesses into these new business opportunities so that Territory business grows into the international energy service and supply sector.
We are now 12 months on since our first gas project got under way across Darwin Harbour at Wickham Point. It was a momentous occasion at the time, and it remains so today. We now have every expectation that a second project will get under way in 2005 as the Blacktip project prepares to supply gas to the Alcan refinery in Gove.
My government’s vision for gas onshore goes well beyond the 1970s approach of ‘dig it up and ship it out’. We are committed to ensuring that the gas resources of the Timor Sea provide competitively priced energy for power generation and the establishment of an integrated gas manufacturing centre in Darwin.
Our vision is centred around the principle of sustainable, economic development. All gas projects will meet the very highest of environmental standards and community aspirations, delivering 21st century environmental and technological performance. It is this government’s intention to stake out and pursue what is best for the Territory. However, this is a tough business and this is the leadership role of government. Territorians can be certain that every ounce of commitment and energy will be applied to fulfilling my government’s vision of a broader Territory economy; one that delivers jobs, new business opportunities and investment dollars.
Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of this statement.
Debate suspended.
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I take this opportunity to comment on the statement that the Chief Minister delivered this morning.
If one were to read this statement as an essay competition, one would think that there have been some wondrous achievements. However, on closer analysis you can see that there are some areas of grave concern on two specific fronts. As the Northern Territory, over many years, has looked towards our north and the potential of bringing gas onshore as a progressive work that we must focus on and bring to resolution, inherent in the issue are matters of foreign policy and ensuring that we have gas onshore so that we can build an industrial capacity in the Northern Territory. You can go back many years and see the same language with regards to the need to broaden the base of our economic capacity.
On reading the statement, on two counts this Chief Minister has demonstrated clear failure. I would go one step further and say she has brought an embarrassment upon the people of the Northern Territory and fair-minded Australians who wonder what side of the fence this Chief Minister stands on.
I stand, yes, as a Territorian and as an Australian. I would ensure that, in any negotiation that involved another country, I knew clearly where I stood. For a Chief Minister to enter into a domain with ideas that are considered probably suitable for a university discussion group and to put them on the national stage - and, hopefully, look up at the gallery that might gather around such an action, such as the suggestion to de-link the Sunrise issue from the maritime boundary discussion, and see that we would have a round of applause from those who would gather about, saying: ‘Oh, what a clever Chief Minister we have, coming up with innovative ideas’. However, this is serious business, and it is misguided from the beginning to the end. The Chief Minister has sent out the clear message to those involved in this negotiation, which causes confusion and uncertainty and alters the very parameters of that discussion. I noticed, too, that Mark Latham entered into this arena and made a statement which he quickly withdrew. He, obviously, was a little smarter than our Chief Minister, who stood up at SEAAOC here to inject some considerations for those seated around the table who were encountering very high level negotiation, and wondered what on earth they were dealing with. It sends out messages that require a significant amount of management behind the scenes, and we are dealing with nation to nation.
I know which side of the border I stand upon, and I would make sure that we are going to work in partnership with negotiations to do with Australian sovereignty and that which involves our close neighbour. It is no small matter and it has caught many observers’ attention. Whilst I was in Canberra on the Friday, it was quite noticeable that it was Ramos Horta. It was on the Friday, and this is evidence of how proactive Senator Hill is in regards to responding to an issue of concern in the Northern Territory. On the Friday, after lunch, in the company of Nigel Scullion, the member for Solomon I brought this to his attention, raising this issue. Senator Hill said: ‘I will arrive in the Northern Territory early and I will ensure that I personally meet those who have concern with this matter of Defence industry support’. I pay credit to the lobbying capacity of the member for Solomon and the Senator for the Northern Territory, Mr Nigel Scullion, to persuade and to have Senator Hill respond so promptly and directly to a need here in the Northern Territory; something over which we have only had words and hand-wringing over here after the event. We have had action and response in a very short period of time.
Whilst in Canberra, it was remarked upon that it took the actions of Ramos Horta and Alexander Downer to come to an agreement. The issue that was placed upon the table was placed there by East Timor. It was an issue that had nothing whatsoever to do with the scheme that the Chief Minister dreamt up of de-linking. It is noticeable there is no activity, no mention, no involvement of the Chief Minister at the point of brokering a deal. Therefore, it leaves me, and many observers, with the view that this Chief Minister is more interested in making a statement to appeal to a gallery, and to receive that short-term effect, but has no real interest or intent of actually achieving a real outcome; that is, to ensure that that gas comes here onshore and we actually build our economy - that it flows into our grid and that we have real progress. That is clear evidence of the capacity for an effect to say something outrageous, something apparently interesting, something well considered - perhaps, as I said earlier, in the realms of a university discussion group, or in some newsletter of dubious origin to the left of politics.
However, it is not befitting a Chief Minister of the Northern Territory to be playing games on both sides of the fence, bordering on treachery, to be involved in discussions of this nature, at this level, with such an intent and such naivety. To then go on the record and say: ‘I have written to the Prime Minister …
Ms MARTIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I need your advice on the Opposition Leader just calling my actions as ‘bordering on treachery’. Is that the basis of a substantive motion? It is fairly offensive.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes. You should withdraw that. That is most unparliamentary language.
Mr MILLS: I will withdraw it, Madam Speaker. I got a bit carried away there …
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you.
Mr MILLS: … with that word. Then to have the Chief Minister make a grand statement for all to hear - once again, to pander to a gallery packed with those who are breathlessly waiting for words from this Chief Minister to demonstrate her proactivity in this area: ‘I have written to the Prime Minister. I have written to him and he has not responded to me. I am thinking of even writing a second letter, but why bother because I have not received a response to the first one’. Well, I wonder why? I wonder why the Prime Minister did not respond promptly to the Chief Minister’s wonderful idea of how we can progress this negotiation between Australia and East Timor …
Ms Martin: He subsequently responded. The letter came a few days later; it was great.
Mr MILLS: I wonder why? I believe, first of all, the Prime Minister had a look at this letter and thought: ‘Is this person for real? Is this a Chief Minister of the Northern Territory? Is this the head of government of one of our states or territories?’ He gave it due consideration and considered it fairly seriously, hoping that it was, in fact, a real suggestion. Then, in fact, he did respond and said that, if Ramos Horta and the Foreign Minister of Australia can broker a deal which has nothing to do with de-linking or challenging the positioning of maritime boundaries, then the Chief Minister’s suggestion is irrelevant; it is just speculation. Once again, it was demonstrating: ‘I have a good idea. I will put it out there and create the impression that I am in there fighting for the Territory’.
Well, objectives 1, 2 and 3 are in there just to create an impression, a sense of activity, a sense of having a handle on these things and making some real progress for the Territory. It looks good in glossy brochures, standing with a hard hat on out there on the wharf, gazing over the horizon and pointing at something that might be in the harbour here and saying: ‘There you go, there is evidence’. There is evidence of little activity, evidence of things just happening, with or without this Chief Minister. She will see if she can get in front of some media stunt that will draw attention to her and create the impression that she actually has something to do with this. Well, evidenced by recent activities, nothing could be further from the case. When you have no immediate response from the Prime Minister, it is clear evidence that it was not taken seriously and, in substance, it was irrelevant to propose such a suggestion.
Whether the Chief Minister has a sycophantic crew around her who breathe words of encouragement and adoring advice and say: ‘We think you are wonderful, Chief Minister, and the comments that you made at SEAAOC were so good. They are so caring, and you are showing a whole new face to politics’. Well, you might have had those voices around you but, in the wider scene, those who would not be speaking directly, right across this country, and particularly in the Northern Territory, had expressed grave concerns about the irresponsible utterings of this Chief Minister with regards to negotiating the maritime boundary between East Timor and Australia.
The fact that now, close to the arrival of gas on our shores, we have no gas pledged into our system, when gas will be flowing, I am sure, close to Channel Island, was why those who attended the AGM meeting of the Palmerston Regional Business Association the other evening were absolutely stunned to learn that 40 petajoules of gas were set aside for use in the domestic market to produce electricity through the Channel Island power plant, so it could be used at the plant at Wickham Point. It was reserved, it was set aside, so that power could be generated at Channel Island for use at the LNG plant.
Negotiations occurred and there was no outcome of any satisfaction to any Territorians. You would think that you could get that gas into our own system to produce electricity for a very significant customer. Not possible; it was not achieved. The Chief Minister is pretty defensive when it comes to the allegations that we have a hands-off approach. Well, I would have expected a hands-on approach in this matter to ensure that, in the best interest of Territorians, you could have found a way to solve that issue - that that gas coming on to our shore could have gone into our power generation capacity at Channel Island to produce at least power for a significant customer. But no - no such resolution. I count that as a disappointment and a failure - not achievement.
Well, why not then, perhaps, if we fall short on that goal and grow weary in endeavouring to get that solved, that we go to point two? This company is now going to set up its own power generation capacity to supply its own need with its own gas that is coming onshore. Could some of the power generation go into the Northern Territory grid? Has that been achieved? Or do we have a ‘hands off, I hope it works out’ approach? Apparently we do; not even that has been achieved. We have gas coming onshore into a private power plant producing power for the LNG plant. The Chief Minister and ministers who have offices on this side, can stand up there on the balcony and look out there and say: ‘Look what we have done’. It is a disappointing outcome when there was clearly the will from Power and Water and Bechtel to achieve this, and it was not possible. We have the worst possible outcome. We have a separate power generation capacity; a private operation which has no benefit at all to Territorians.
On those two fronts, I am particularly disappointed when we have the involvement of this Chief Minister in foreign policy at a level that has brought an embarrassment upon the Northern Territory, the reputation of the Territory, and the reputation to this government’s seriousness in actually working hard to achieve an outcome rather than to achieve an effect and, secondly, the lack of gas actually being brought onshore to produce power, not only for Territorians but for the LNG plant. No gas delivered onshore of any benefit to Territorians is a failure.
Mr Henderson: A $5.5bn investment is a failure?
Mr MILLS: Into power generation, minister.
The Chief Minister made a fair amount of space available within her statement to criticise the Prime Minister with regards to the energy policy. The Chief Minister’s statement demonstrates a lack of real understanding of this energy policy, and takes the opportunity to try to carve out a little space for her federal master, Mr Latham.
In fact, I would ask the Chief Minister to direct her attention to Mr Latham and ask him if there will be an axing of Invest Australia, because Mark Latham has made an assertion that he will axe Invest Australia. This is our own national inward investment agency, set up in 1997 by the Howard government to attract production and foreign investment and support sustainable industry growth. Mr Latham, the federal Opposition Leader, has made a commitment to axe Invest Australia. I ask the Chief Minister if she will side with Mr Latham on this issue or will she oppose that decision of federal Labor? Invest Australia has been the cornerstone of encouraging new investment into Australia and the facilitation of whole-of-government approval processes. So what plans does the Chief Minister have to maintain this momentum and level of investment services in response to the announced policy by Mark Latham and federal Labor? After all the big talk, will the Chief Minister lobby her federal Labor boss to change his decision?
That is where the activity needs to take place. That is where the real effort needs to be made, rather than taking the opportunity to score points on an ill-informed commentary on the energy policy. The Chief Minister should focus her attention more on details of the Northern Territory economy and, flowing from the economy, addressing in real terms the building of capacity in the Northern Territory economy.
The statement makes easy reference to ‘we are going to do all we can to keep those people who are working on the gas plant here in the Territory, to stay on’. That is nice to say, but this is an incredibly serious issue and we need a bit more substance. Discussions with Woodside - and I have had a number of meetings with them - reveal a very concerning aspect to the profile of the skill shortage not only nationally but, specifically, in the Northern Territory. This is of a magnitude that I would expect that this government would go further than talking about a jobs strategy, the one they promised upon being elected. They said they already had one and, after two or so years, still it is being wheeled out. We need a real jobs strategy because we do have a real issue here. In discussions with Woodside, they could ask what a Territory government could do to strengthen the case for the bringing of gas onshore in the Northern Territory. What could a Territory government practically do? Rather than grandstand and create impressions, what work could they focus on that would strengthen the appeal to bring gas onshore? We thought about it for some time and was the answer was more glossy brochures? No. The answer was this: it is the skills shortage in our nation and, specifically, in the Northern Territory that is a negative factor to bringing gas onshore.
Yes, so off we go, we are going to have a look backwards in the rear vision mirror and say: ‘Oh, you remember the past?’. I am not interested in the past; this is an issue in front of us now. I would expect this Chief Minister to pay more than lip service to such an important issue. You arrived in government with a grand announcement that you have such a strategy and, after two years, we have had faint reference to it. In fact, it did not even exist. Then you contact someone in Adelaide to construct this strategy that you told Territorians that you had.
The issue is in front of us; it is our young trainees and apprentices. They need a concerted focus of government now. I would feel far more satisfied knowing that that has been properly attended to, rather than the provision of lip service and the production of glossy brochures that are designed to make this government look good.
We want to get serious about bringing oil and gas onshore and having sustainable development in the Northern Territory. We must build our capacity locally. We must focus on it directly and get on with the real work instead of posturing on the international stage and putting out schoolgirl ideas of how we can solve this international problem. Get on with the real job. Build our skills base. Put a proper focus on our training. Use the GST revenue to stimulate and grow the domestic economy. Get the action happening. Get the oil and gas onshore and get it into our grid so that we can have cheaper power. On those two counts, you have failed. There has been an increase in unemployment, whatever that gobbledegook meant during Question Time. I could not make head or tail of it, but ...
Mr Stirling: Go for it. Come for a briefing and I will explain it to you.
Mr MILLS: I will try and read Hansard, but it is going to be a very difficult argument to follow through and be convinced at the end of it. The fact is, the assertion has been made, in April 2003: ‘Look ahead, it is going to get better’. At that time, the unemployment rate was lower than it is now. ‘Look ahead, have faith in the future’, said the Chief Minister. ‘It is all going to work, 2011. It is going to work in the future. We have everything lined up. It is going come to pass in the fullness of time’. Well, in the fullness of time, predicted the Treasurer in 2003: ‘You just wait until it all starts out there at Wickham Point, and you just wait until we see the Dry Season’. We have had the great stories about how tourism figures have picked up and everybody has come to town. ‘Just you wait and see. The Dry Season will come; it will all be activity out at Wickham Point’. Lo and behold, we have increased unemployment. We have arrived at the point of prediction. The prophecy that was given by the Treasurer has failed to come to pass. We have had, in fact, an increase in unemployment.
The Chief Minister stood up and said: ‘Oh, you know, I am very sensitive about this. How dare you say that we have got a hands-off approach?’ Well, I cannot see many fingerprints on the tiller of this show. It is all just happening. Stuff seems to arrive out there in the harbour, and it is: ‘Oh, give us all a round of applause. We will crack a bottle of champagne and toast whatever it is out there. There are pipes going to be laid soon. Let us have another glass of chardonnay and say what jolly good fellows we are; look what we have done. We are a marvellous bunch of people ...
Ms Lawrie: Some of us do not drink.
Mr MILLS: Sorry? You do not drink chardonnay?
The fact is, on two very clear fronts, we have had a failure. We have had unemployment increase; we have less in the labour force; we have Territorians leaving. We have no cheaper power and we have none of our power generation which is being produced by gas being brought onshore. There is nothing sadder to see. All this activity going on there; a bit of fuss and bother and a few people getting jobs; that is great. But that will pass. We are well into this project, and we have electricity being produced out there which will benefit Territorians zip.
We have unemployment increasing and confusion and an embarrassment with regards to the involvement of this Chief Minister in international affairs. I really think, if you wash this statement clean of all the hype and rhetoric and have a look at it under a microscope, you will find it is not too good. It is just a lot of talk. Once again, it has achieved the objective of looking and sounding reasonably good; close analysis - no good at all.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I urge the Leader of the Opposition to take a little trip out to Wickham Point, and have a little count for himself. They must be fictitious. There are about 1000 employees out there at the moment that were not there 12 months ago.
With tourism the way it is, the hospitality/tourism industry are having the best season since September 2001 and the collapse of Ansett in the latter part of 2001. With the number of jobs that that creates, it beggars belief for ABS to say that we are losing jobs; that our participation rate is declining and that our unemployed rate is climbing. It beggars belief. Go out and have a look. Count up how many workers you can find. You will find about 1000 out there and the tourism, hospitality and retail industries are the same.
I am pleased to support the initiatives and actions outlined by our Chief Minister to broaden the economic base to the Territory through the development of the opportunities of bringing gas onshore. The existing industries that we have will remain crucial to our growing economic success. They are mining, tourism, Defence, retail, construction and pastoral. However, it is the new industries such as the opportunities coming out of downstream gas manufacturing, that will add further momentum to our economy and provide new and exciting employment opportunities and increased career choices for Territorians of today and tomorrow, with real quality jobs.
Behind every industry, of course - existing of new - is a strong skilled work force. We have taken major steps to ensure that we have the people with the skills to fill high-quality and diverse jobs. Through the first-ever blueprint for maximising job and training opportunities for Territorians, Jobs Plan NT, Building the Northern Territory Workforce, we now have a tool that provides us with a capacity to better plan for recruiting, training and building the Territory work force to meet the needs of the merging industries such as oil and gas.
The $160m three-year Jobs Plan, developed in consultation with industry, unions, businesses and the community, is building a skilled and flexible work force. This is the piece of work criticised by the Leader of the Opposition. For 10 years in opposition, I came in at every budget and said: ‘Where is your jobs plan? What are you doing about jobs? What are you doing about training Territorians for the future?’ Absolutely no response in 10 years! He has the hide - has the gall - to come in here and criticise this government for its efforts in producing our Jobs Plan NT, Building the Northern Territory Workforce.
We are providing training, skills development to Territorians, as well as financial incentives for employers taking on apprentices and trainees. Apprenticeships and traineeships have been boosted in record numbers. In the three years 1998 to 2000, 5602 apprentices and trainees commenced training in the Territory. Between 2000 and 2003, that number rose by 958 to 6560, a 17% increase. Currently, over 2700 Territorians are in training, representing record levels of participation. In just three years, we will have supported more than 7000 apprentices and trainees, working to ensure the future viability of our work force.
Training for oil and gas industry is focussed on up-skilling of existing trade skills, as well as growing the skilled work force through new apprentices. DEET has been working closely with the oil and gas industry to meet the current needs and short-term requirements, as well as critical and strategic planning for medium- and long-term changing skill requirements. Much of that work has to be done at an operational level. We have a strong commitment to training. We will continue to work with industry and business to see where we will need to build and train for skills for the future.
In 2003, 25 local tradespersons were up-skilled in welding, and a further 23 trainees completed Certificate II in General Construction, targeted at industry shortfalls, at a cost of approximately $400 000. We also provided $390 000 in 2003 to upgrade the welding facilities at Charles Darwin University to maximise the forthcoming training and employment opportunities identified by the local manufacturing council and associated industries. DEET is currently working with the Welding Training Institute of Australia, the Territory Construction Association, and local businesses to address medium- to long-term skill development for this and other major projects. In 2004, the government allocated over $400 000 to up-skill indigenous Territorians for skill shortage industries associated with welding, construction and hospitality. Fifty-one people graduated from those programs and have gained, or are well placed to take up, employment opportunities in skill shortage areas.
Bechtel has commenced negotiations with the new Apprenticeship Centre for the employment of third and fourth year indigenous apprentices on the LNG site, and DEET is assisting with those negotiations. Following provision in June 2004 of its projected skilled work force for the next two years, DEET is working with Bechtel and training providers to develop training programs to ensure that Territorians applying for jobs on this and other projects have the best possible chance of securing employment. DEET has also commenced consultation with the Western Australian government regarding information sharing from a study that it has conducted into skill shortages and training needs of the oil and gas industry.
Under the jobs plan, Building the Northern Territory Workforce, employment and training in the Northern Territory has a real focus and a bright future. It is promising to see so much activity in place and the returns Territorians are already experiencing through this initiative.
When this government contemplates a gas issue, as the Chief Minister said, it is with the framework of four key opportunities: LNG, power generation, gas-based manufacturing and domestic gas for the national grid. That mix of opportunities will shift over time as individual field assessments improve and markets shift, and so will the jobs and skills required to service the industry. Whatever those outcomes, we have to be prepared to make the best of the employment opportunities that these major projects will bring with them.
The strategies and training initiatives that this government has in place will ensure that we are ready to meet the challenges through our employment and training initiatives. The Territory work force and all Territorian will be well positioned to reap the long-term benefits of the sustainable oil and gas industry on our shores.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Madam Speaker, the statement by the Chief Minister is interesting in that it gives us an update on what is happening with gas projects and potential gas projects in the Timor Sea and waters surrounding the Northern Territory. It also suggests that, somehow, the Chief Minister is influencing the nation in how we should deal with energy strategies for Australia in the future. The second issue I could put aside because that has been pretty well comprehensively dealt with by the federal government and also her own federal colleagues in the way that there has been a resounding silence with regards to any of her proposals. She does not seem to have in perspective what the greater issues are that are involved: the resources that are available in Australia that, with the correct environmental controls, need to be produced to benefit not only other states and territories in Australia but the nation as a whole.
Regarding this particular statement though, if one goes back in the Parliamentary Record over many years, one would see similar statements with regards to the potential for gas onshore for Territorians, the potential benefits in skills upgrading, jobs, etcetera.
I see all of those stickers are gone now, but I remember when Bayu-Undan was finally about to commence construction there was these ‘gas for jobs’ sticker across all of the government members’ computers - of those who used them in the Chamber. That seems to have disappeared. The reality is that the long-term jobs that will be created by the Bayu-Undan project have simply not eventuated. No one doubts for a moment the benefit that the construction project has created for Territorians. In my own electorate, it is clear to see the construction camp, the number of people involved in the camp, and the flow-on benefit for Territorians, in general, from that construction phase. However, equally, I do not believe that anyone would doubt that there was an expectation that gas onshore from Bayu-Undan would give to Territorians greater benefit than it has.
Quite frankly, I do not believe people generally understand what all this gas is about. They are more concerned with day-to-day problems with keeping their own business solvent, or with job for themselves or their children. Gas is something that is out there in the future, potentially of benefit to Territorians. However, unless they actually feel that benefit themselves it has little relevance.
Therefore, it is in that context that, when the Chief Minister alluded to the future for gas and the benefits of gas to Territorians and the efforts of her government, I believe that she fails two very simple tests. One is that a test is already being produced, and that is the test on what has been the result of Bayu-Undan. If one looks at that particular test, it is very difficult to find anything constructive that the Northern Territory government and Clare Martin, as Chief Minister, has achieved.
I would have thought that any provincial government in Australia would, at the outset, argue in the national interest. I know that, in the past, CLP governments have been accused of being outspoken. In fact, Clare Martin herself, as Opposition Leader, criticised my government on a number of occasions for comments that we made with regards to negotiations in East Timor. One thing we did do was speak with the same voice as the federal government. We did not speak as the de facto representative of the government of Timor Leste. I find it particularly disappointing that, when it came to adhering to a strategy that is in the national interest, a provincial Chief Minister would act so irresponsibly - and frankly, so childishly - in trying to promote and interfere with the negotiations that were taking place.
Anyone who has been involved in this gas business for any amount of time knows that, particularly in the case of East Timor, they play really hard ball. They have, in the person of Mr Galbraith, a very tough negotiator, someone who, notwithstanding my criticisms of the man personally and the way he acts, if one were in East Timor and he was representing your interests, you would have to be very comfortable and confident in the approach that Mr Galbraith has made in his negotiations with the Australian negotiators, including the foreign minister.
All the more reason, therefore, that I would expect a Chief Minister of the Northern Territory to either stay out of it or speak with one voice with our own foreign minister. I understand there was a sucking in of breath at SEAAOC. I understand it was not even on the Chief Minister’s notes. If it was, it was irresponsible of those who put them there. For the Chief Minister to somehow suggest that there would be, in the heat of negotiations at a time when Mr Galbraith himself was threatening that these things had to be finalised in a number of months, where there were threats to Australia for not putting this in the hands of the International Court to deal with maritime boundaries, when the Chief Minister of East Timor was calling the federal government in Australia a ‘bullying nation’ that, in itself, I would have thought, would have had most fair-minded Australians’ hackles up - Australians who have put their lives on the line in East Timor over a number of years in helping that country achieve nationhood. Soldiers are still there in a very difficult environment helping the East Timorese people and government mature as a nation.
Therefore, in this environment, the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory decided to side with East Timor. She decided that, not only do they have their own parliament and negotiators, she might just give them a bit of a helping hand. She made a statement suggesting that the Prime Minister of Australia and the foreign minister should come up with a new strategy; that is, to de-link the issue of maritime boundaries and come up with some special one-off deal that is more generous than had been the holding point in negotiations by our foreign minister and his negotiators at that time. She, somehow, thinks this is mature and responsible.
My understanding is, certainly in circles in Canberra, that it was seen as unforgivable. Also, we now have some understanding as to the way the Labor Party operates, because her own federal leader has also proposed a similar suggestion; that is, that upon gaining government, a federal Labor government would deal far more generously with East Timor on these issues. Most Australians would find that appalling in terms of efforts to undermine the discussions, negotiations and position of the current Australian government elected democratically by its people.
Therefore, when it comes to the national interest, Clare Martin’s interest in Australia is really weighted in favour of East Timor. This parliament, under her leadership and the leadership of the Labor government of the Northern Territory, may as well have Timor Leste flags on your tables, because you are more interested, as a government, in the aspirations and benefits of the East Timorese people than you are in Territorians and Australians. That is your negotiating position. No wonder Mr Galbraith sits back and says: ‘Well, it is only a matter of time. We can just hold off because we have already seen the cracks appearing’. No wonder that minister Downer himself takes a very tough position. The issue of maritime boundaries are very firmly set off the agenda, otherwise there will be no concessions. It is also interesting to see that the suggestion of the Chief Minister has been thrown comprehensively out the window, because any deal that will be done with East Timor will certainly not include any renegotiation of our maritime boundaries or those maritime boundaries being taken off the agenda.
The Chief Minister speaks highly of ConocoPhillips. In fact, she even goes so far as to say not only have ConocoPhillips done so well, but approvals are already in place for further trains to be added to the Wickham Point gas plant. That is news to me. I knew that there were environmental impact studies that allowed for a 10 million tonne gas plant, but I certainly did not know that there were further approvals that had already been agreed to. If the Chief Minister is only speaking about environmental impact statements that give approvals for the possible expansion of that plant, that is fine; we are aware of that. However, if further approvals have been given to ConocoPhillips to expand their operations, given the uncertainty that is currently there with regards to other fields in the Timor Sea, and also because of the actions of ConocoPhillips, I would like to know what those details are.
I would also like to know, when the Chief Minister speaks so highly of ConocoPhillips and says that, on her task force includes the CEO of Power and Water, it would be interesting to refer to the Estimates Committee hearing where Mr Phillips, the Chairman of Power and Water, made a couple of points, and so did Mr Wood. He said, at one stage, when he talked about the fact that no gas will be coming onshore from Bayu-Undan for domestic use by Territorians:
There was a certain irony at SEAAOC, I thought, when one of the speakers talked about Kim Wood, who described all of the gas being exported offshore and none available for domestic consumption as ‘un-Australian’.’ That is Kim Wood, the Chairman of Power and Water who, I would suggest here, has more gumption than the Chief Minister. He can stand in front of an Estimates Committee and say, without a blink of the eye, that it is un-Australian the way ConocoPhillips have acted in the way that none of that gas is being reserved for Territorians.
He also went on to say that, in negotiations over a period of over the last 18 months - your period in government, I might add - in negotiations with ConocoPhillips and the Sunrise joint venture, we were running those discussions over a period of 12 months in tandem. We had got down to price, terms, almost to the commercial terms agreed between the two potential suppliers, and we were paying a lot of attention. In fact, of the two, you could not put a hair between the two contracts. This is how close the negotiation was with ConocoPhillips to get gas reserved for Territorians. This is from the CEO of Power and Water: you could not put a hair between the two contracts at the time. Then, effectively, ConocoPhillips walked through the door and said: ‘We have sold all our gas to the Japanese for LNG’. Then Sunrise went on the backburner. We asked the question: ‘How long had you known about it?’ In answer to that they said: ‘Within the last month we were told’. Within the last month.
Therefore, when the Chief Minister comes in here and says: ‘We are talking about 2009, 2011’, painting the picture that somehow we never had an expectation of getting Bayu-Undan gas onshore, and ‘Just you wait, there will be all these other gas projects in the future, and by the by, in time, Territorians will get some gas either cheaper or for domestic use’, it just does not wash. It is typical of the Chief Minister. She has a capacity to reinvent history, and she also has the luxury of not being interrogated sufficiently on some of the statements in history that she has made.
The Chief Minister of the Northern Territory was given, essentially, a project that was all but sealed. All the efforts of the Northern Territory government had been done; all of the monies were committed. The Labor government can say: ‘We put so much money into the roads, all those capital works programs have all been approved. We did so much for ConocoPhillips’. You did nothing! You had one job to achieve; that is, make sure ConocoPhillips pay the tiller-man. It was time for ConocoPhillips to give something back to Territorians - something back in terms of a chair at Charles Darwin University, in helping the skill development for Territorians over that Bayu-Undan plant, and to also deliver on the expectations that they have raised with Territorians and, certainly, with previous CLP governments. That is critical to getting Bayu-Undan gas onshore - critical. In fact, it used to amaze us that, somehow, the small amount of gas that was to be bought by Power and Water was so critical in these whole negotiations. It was at the forefront of every discussion: ‘We have to get the contract with Power and Water’. The one thing this Labor government had to achieve was to get some gas at a cheap price so that Territorians could see some real relief in the gas that was generated, in either capacity and/or capacity and price. You delivered zip – nothing! In fact, as the Leader of the Opposition said today, the reality Territorians need to know about that whole Bayu-Undan gas project is that, apart from the construction phase, they have not even got enough gas for domestic use to work their own cigarette lighter. That is a scandalous outcome.
Worse than that, ConocoPhillips themselves, at a briefing at the Palmerston Regional Business Association, said they did not even want to build a power plant. They did not even want to build a power plant, but they are building a 12 MW power plant. They are using gas that is coming in at about one-eighth of the cost of gas that Power and Water are paying for their own plant, and they are going to generate power for their large 10 MW requirement at Wickham Point. None of that gas is going into the power grid, and we are supposed to sit here and cop it all sweat and say: ‘Oh, well, that is a reasonable sort of a deal’. ‘Not only is it a reasonable sort of deal, by the way, we have given you approval for another two trains; do what you like’. What do they do? Walk in and screw us all over again. It is disgraceful ...
Mr Henderson: ConocoPhillips are going to enjoy reading this.
Mr BURKE: Well, you can tell them. You can go running to ConocoPhillips and give them everything. I will give them the transcript, if you like. ConocoPhillips know exactly where this side of the House stands.
Mr Henderson: Very irresponsible.
Mr BURKE: When it comes to negotiating on behalf of the national interest, a former CLP government has done everything – what are you shaking your head for?
Mr Henderson: I am up next; I will tell you.
Mr BURKE: When it comes to negotiating with ConocoPhillips on behalf of the national interest, they know how much the former CLP government did - not only to get them over the line in terms of the unitisation and the taxation arrangements with East Timor. They know what was done, and all they had to do was give something back to Territorians in reserving some of that gas. All of it is going offshore. I will stand here - and I will say it in front of Blair Murphy or Jim Mulva or anyone else who comes along - and say: under a CLP government there would not be one additional train put on Wickham Point unless there were guarantees provided for gas being reserved for domestic use for Territorians - full stop; end of story.
What we have here from the Chief Minister is to say that approvals have already been given for further trains to be put on Wickham Point. Well, approvals which give us what? Which give back to Territorians what? Where are Territorians going to benefit from the massive industrialisation of Wickham Point? I can see where ConocoPhillips are benefiting. I can see where two large Japanese users are benefiting. I can see where the shareholders overseas are benefiting. I certainly can see the short-term benefits that have come to some Territory companies through the construction phase of the project. However, we wanted a lot more than that.
If we are going to accept this under a Labor government, as the way the Northern Territory does business in the future, no wonder they think we are a pushover. We have a Chief Minister and a government that cannot argue in the national interest; it is more interested in the national interest of East Timor than it is in the interests of the Northern Territory or the national interest of Australia. It is a government that has been democratically voted in by the same people who voted in the Howard federal government, and it will side with East Timor on national issues rather than its own federal government. That is the situation that we currently have at the moment. And you stand proudly and say that you are looking after Territorians energy requirements in the future?
Well, no wonder one has to treat this statement with a fair amount of contempt. However, more than that, it underscores what many people are saying: that this is a government that is full of gloss, full of PR, and knows how to promote itself. It has spent about $3m more on ministerial staff than the previous CLP government, it has a bunch of ministers that are hands-off and, when it comes to negotiations that have some real clout for them, you get nothing at the end of the day except the public relations effort and a large multinational which has taken generously from Territorians. They have taken generously from Territorians at great risk to successive governments. We believe that the long-term benefits of gas will benefit Territorians, but it will not happen with a government that is focussed on the interests of another national government, or a government that is so incompetent that it has no influence on this particular multinational which can walk through the door and say, ‘Sorry, any contractual agreements and negotiations that we have with regards to reserving gas for Territorians is now off the table because we are selling the lot to Japan. Sorry, go away, see you later. Thanks very much for the road, for all the buses, for all the native title effort you did, for the negotiations with the Commonwealth, but we are more interested in our interests and our shareholders’.
That is the report card that the Chief Minister has given to this House today. That is the report card that, if anyone has to have any sense of confidence in the future negotiation and achievement of gas onshore, particularly with Sunrise, we would want to see a lot better effort in real benefit to Territorians in the future.
Mr HENDERSON (Business and Industry): Madam Speaker, I obviously support the Chief Minister’s statement. However, the member for Brennan has a very selective memory in regards to his time as Chief Minister of the Northern Territory and the role that he played single-handedly – not in the national interest or the Territory’s interest – but single-handedly in jeopardising very sensitive negotiations that were going on at the time.
I have not been prepared. I do not have the press clippings, the radio transcripts and the direct quotes because I was going to speak in very generous support of this statement - an inspirational statement that I thought all members of this House could have supported. The member for Brennan talked about the Chief Minister’s capacity to reinvent history and failure in negotiations. Let us go back and look at a bit of the history, to the time when the member for Brennan was Chief Minister in the Northern Territory, in the last 12 months leading up to the election in August 2001, and the very sensitive and delicate negotiations that were going on at the time between ConocoPhillips, the Commonwealth of Australia and, as yet to be declared the new nation of East Timor - an interim government and the United Nation ruling authority. They were very sensitive negotiations at the time. We had the then Chief Minister, virtually every day on ABC radio, tipping a bucket on the aspirations that East Timor were putting in those negotiations, and creating great offence.
I have spoken to people in East Timor and the government of East Timor about this. He single-handedly jeopardised those entire negotiations. I have also spoken to the members of the Bayu-Undan joint venture who are certainly less than impressed with the then Chief Minister’s bull-at-a-gate, blundering approach, trying to grandstand himself in front of Territorians with ‘We know best, if only the member for Brennan …’, the then Chief Minister for the Northern Territory, ‘… could have carriage of these negotiations we would deliver this project overnight’.
If you recall, again, a great genius play by the member for Brennan when he organised – or the government of the day organised - a delegation of Timorese business people to be brought to Darwin at the then government’s expense. Those influential Timorese business people were essentially harangued by the then government and other officials in government, by pointing out very starkly to the East Timorese people that, if the Timorese government was to stick with its current negotiating position, then they would lose the project and revenues, and it would destroy the aspirations of East Timor.
What an outlandish and outrageous blundering interference by, as the member for Brennan said, a relatively small power that we, as a state or the territory, had in these negotiations. He blundered in and outrageously tried to subvert the Timorese government in waiting, and the positions that they were negotiating. The Timorese took extraordinary offence at that, and why wouldn’t they? It was not the government of the day’s role to try to subvert those aspirations so blatantly. There was extraordinarily hostile reaction from the Timorese and, as a result of that, there were front pages in the newspaper. When the deal was finally signed, the Chief Minister of the day, the member for Brennan, was very patently and pointedly not invited to those signing celebrations. It is certainly something that is still spoken about, not only in East Timor but among the corporate entities that make up the Bayu-Undan joint venture.
The member for Brennan said: ‘We, as the government of the day, had the wisdom of Solomon. We could have delivered this, that and the other’. What they delivered was an announcement from ConocoPhillips in the lead-up to the election that the investment decision for the pipeline was deferred indefinitely. That is what they put on the table. Negotiations had broken down. The then Prime Minister in waiting of East Timor had slammed the door in the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory’s face and refused to meet him. If this is an example of great diplomacy and negotiating abilities of the member for Brennan and the CLP, I will go he. This was a very selective interpretation of history by the member for Brennan.
I just wish I had those press clippings and interviews from the time because, when we came to government, negotiations had virtually broken down. The government in waiting in East Timor were refusing to have anything to do with the Northern Territory government at all. We, very much from day one, took a position that we would try and facilitate bringing the parties back to the negotiating table and we very successfully did that over time. For the member for Brennan to say: ‘The deal was done; all you had to do was to deliver gas onshore’ is a total misrepresentation of history. I am sure that anyone who studies that period will back up my version and recollection of events over the member for Brennan’s any day.
In many ways, the member for Brennan is probably one of the more competent commentators on the other side and, possibly, still has aspirations to go back to the top job. However, in his contribution here tonight regarding the appalling period of history of his stewardship of the Northern Territory on this particular issue, history does not stand him in very good light at all.
Moving on to more positive versions of what is happening today: developing the Timor gas fields offers the opportunity to lock the Northern Territory into higher long-term economic growth, creating many high-skilled, high-wage jobs for Territorians and attracting millions of dollars in investment and new business opportunities. The government is working hard to maximise benefits for Northern Territory business.
This is not just about construction of an LNG plant. ConocoPhillips have been required by government to deliver a local industry participation plan outlining how they will maximise the use of local business in the construction, installation and operation of their Bayu-Undan gas condensate production facilities, Darwin LNG plant and the Bayu-Undan to Darwin gas pipeline.
The scale of the project to develop the Timor Sea gas fields is huge - so huge that it could be out of reach for the average Territorian running a small business. However, the opportunities for Territorians and Territory business to benefit from bringing gas onshore are there, and some of these opportunities are already being realised. Territory-based businesses have supported the development of the Bayu-Undan project from the start of exploration, and continue to do so following the start of production in February 2004. Territory businesses are involved in the project across a broad gamut of sectors. Among the services provided locally are logistic support, food, drilling supplies, industrial gases, safety equipment, welding equipment, chemicals, fuel, water, communications equipment and support, engineering and maintenance services, and waste management.
Several companies invested in new or expanded facilities to support the offshore development including, for example, Toll Energy supporting the ConocoPhillips supply base; Baker Hughes INTEQ for drilling mud plant, while Upstream Petroleum and the RAMS consortium assembled the 320 m long product transfer hose at Lee Point. The operations base at the Bayu-Undan facility and the construction and operation of the Bayu-Undan to Darwin pipeline and Darwin LNG plant create additional opportunities for local business for the life of the project. The government estimates the annual operational expenditure for the offshore operations to be worth up to $100m per year, with up to 80% of that, or $80m per year, a realistic local content target. That is $80m being spent each year here with Territory business - expenditure that will cycle through our economy to many other Territory businesses.
For the opposition to be so ignorant to say: ‘Well, this is okay, we have the construction phase but there is absolutely nothing coming afterwards. This is a great opportunity missed’, we are talking about $80m a year in supporting the offshore production facilities, let alone the ongoing operational expenditure at the Darwin LNG plant. It just goes to show the extraordinary incompetence of the opposition to fail to understand that this is the start of an industrial age for the Northern Territory. It is not just money during the construction phase, this money will be ongoing. If they dared to take their heads out of the bunkers and the flags that they wrap themselves up in and travel the rest of Australia and the world, and look to see the type of developments that these types of facilities can bring, they would see that they are not static, that they are ongoing and those opportunities do develop over the life of the project. There is extraordinary ignorance in comments from the members opposite.
The laying of the pipeline from Bayu-Undan to Darwin by the SEMAC barge commenced early in August, and will take approximately four months to complete. There are more opportunities here for Territory business. NT-based business can realistically target $40m of the pipeline construction work, including surveying, rock supply, barge crewing, catering, diving, pipe hauling, pipeline pegging, hydrostatic testing, supply of both fuel and personnel transport – all businesses in the Northern Territory who are very happy with this $5.5bn investment in the Northern Territory. The only people who are unhappy about it are those members opposite with their blinkers on. Not only is it a boost to those industries - I am sure the fisheries minister will agree – but a great tourism benefit because, with that rock armour wall up through Darwin Harbour, it is going to be a great artificial fishing reef, as I so memorably advised the AFANT meeting a couple of years ago at the Aero Club.
Kim Heng Marine and Oilfield, the owner of Darwin Offshore Logistics Base, is providing three vessels to support the pipeline project. I have met with Kim Heng on a number of occasions. He is a Singaporean businessman who, on the back of this project and opportunities in the Timor Sea, has invested heavily in the Northern Territory. I understand he is about to become an Australian citizen. Again, these are benefits of this project, in a small way, but direct investment and confidence that people in Singapore have in the Territory’s economy, unlike those members opposite.
Rock to protect the pipeline from storm, anchor and fishing net damage is being stockpiled at East Arm from the Mt Bundy quarry. Boskalis, which has the contract to bury the pipe, is established in Darwin, leading to yet more jobs - jobs that those opposite fail to see.
Construction of the Darwin LNG plant at Wickham Point is over 20% complete and is running to schedule. The LNG tank can be clearly seen from the city. Over 1 130 000 man hours have been worked without a single lost-time accident, and on an industrial project of that scale that is absolutely fantastic. Congratulations to all involved. Major client equipment is arriving on site, including the large carbon dioxide stripping tower, which was transported to site by road from the East Arm Port. Piles for the LNG load-out jetty are being stockpiled at Perkins Shipping and pile driving has commenced at Wickham Point. The LNG storage tank outer concrete walls have been placed to the full height of nine levels for two of the four quadrants, with only two wall pours remaining. Concrete foundations and structural steel for the main process are nearing completion.
Eighteen major subcontracts have been awarded to Territory companies, or companies with significant local presence, including Thiess, Sunbuild, ATCO, Fleetwood Portables, Patricks, EC&E, Auslec, Universal Engineering and Onesteel. These and further contracts worth an expected $20m to $30m will be awarded for asphalt paving, permanent buildings, non-destructive testing, heavy lift transport, chemical cleaning, cryogenic insulation and fireproofing. Bechtel’s Darwin office has so far issued around 2500 field purchase orders worth around $7m to almost 300 local businesses. These are businesses the opposition would have you believe are not benefiting a cracker from this work. This is serious money going into those businesses, which they will be able to reinvest in those businesses. And this is the result of the failure that the Leader of the Opposition has spoken about? He really does need to get out more often, and start speaking to people and stop just listening to Shane Stone, who seems to be his main advisor at the moment. These cover a wide range of goods and services including printing, signage, plumbing supplies, hardware fabrication, safety equipment, office supplies and furniture. Bechtel offers prompt payment by credit card on purchases of up to $10 000. Suppliers include Coleman’s Printing, Aussie Signs, Auslec, the electrical supplier, Reece plumbing suppliers, Darwin Plumbing Supplies, Blackwoods engineering supplies and hardware, Geminex safety suppliers and Corporate Express office suppliers. Again, Territory companies are benefiting very well out of this project. It does not look like failure to me.
The approximate total value of business that will be accrued to Territory companies - this is the failure that the Opposition Leader was talking about - is $231m, coming directly into this economy, which will continue to be realised over the life of the project, and then around at least $80m per year thereafter. It is a pretty fantastic failure that the Leader of the Opposition is talking about.
In addition to the business contracts, the wages paid to workers associated with the Wickham Point LNG plant will also be injected into the Territory economy. About six weeks ago, there was a very small, but very significant example. A constituent of mine walked into my electorate office and shook me by the hand and said: ‘This is absolutely fantastic’. He is a boilermaker by trade. It was bad news for the company at Howard Springs which was employing him, but great news for him and his family in Leanyer. He is earning $600 a week more for the next two-and-a-half years he will be working on this project. That is an enormous amount of money going into that family - going into their mortgage, paying for their kids’ education - and it is money that will stay in the Territory economy and go around the Territory economy.
Darwin LNG plant operational expenditure is projected to be around $50m per annum. Darwin business should be able to win a substantial share of that. With $80m on the offshore, $50m at the LNG plant - $130m ongoing a year into this economy – it is a magnificent failure that the Leader of the Opposition talks about. I am absolutely astounded at their contribution here tonight.
Northern Territory business is not winning all the work, but at least some of the successful interstate and overseas companies are setting up permanently in the Territory, helping to build Darwin’s capabilities. Those capabilities and the ambition and aspirations of this government is for Darwin to become a service and supply hub for the offshore oil and gas industry, not only in the Timor Sea, but also elsewhere in Asia. There are companies looking at basing themselves here in the Territory.
ConocoPhillips and Bechtel are providing local industry with full and fair opportunity to win work through the use of the NT Industry Capability Network to identify potential contractors, participation in seminars advising Darwin business on project opportunities and contracting procedures, and the issuing of a vendor assistance kit.
The current work force at the Wickham Point site is about 1000 people, and will increase over the next few months to peak at between 1100 and 1200. Territorians comprise about 57% of that manual labour, so that is over 500 of those jobs. The extra $600 a week that my boilermaker constituent was talking about is staying here in the Northern Territory. Non-manual labour is 31%, and 48% of the subcontractors are on site. In total, there are 774 tradespeople on site. It was great to hear the work the Department of Employment, Education and Training are doing to ensure that our apprentices and our young people get the opportunities, not only on the site, but ongoing on the plant.
In addition to the current Bechtel work force, ConocoPhillips is also yet to finalise the number of their staff to be based here in Darwin. About 20 ConocoPhillips staff are currently based in Darwin for project management of the LNG plant construction and to manage the transition to operations. They are currently recruiting nationwide, and have already bought eight houses for staff and will purchase more in due course. Of course, we would love to see them base their national headquarters and move that from Perth to Darwin. There are ongoing discussions and prodding for ConocoPhillips to do that. They have their own corporate reasons as to why they think they are better off in Perth, but we certainly remind them on a regular basis.
However, they are doing their bit, and the insulting comments made by the member for Brennan to ConocoPhillips really just does not stand the opposition in any good stead at all. You have to be able to work constructively with multinationals, particularly multinationals that are investing billions of dollars here in the Northern Territory. To come in here and parade a tirade of insults is not constructive, and just goes to show that the member for Brennan has not learnt anything of humility and the ability to sit down and negotiate with people rather than harangue them.
It is a fantastic project. I have a lot more here in my statement about other projects, but this is an inspirational statement. It is about the industrial growth and the diversification of the NT economy. I agree with the member for Brennan; there have been many such similar statements in here in the past. However, unlike statements in the past, we actually have a project now. We have a $5.5bn project appearing on Wickham Point in conjunction with the pipeline and the offshore. We have a project that is a world scale project, the largest single investment of private sector capital ever seen in the Northern Territory’s economy.
The only people who are not excited about the opportunities that will flow from this are those members opposite. It really is a very sad contribution from their side of the parliament tonight. Haranguing multinationals and throwing insults at them is not the way to achieve better outcomes, and the member for Brennan stands condemned by his statement here in parliament this evening.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the Chief Minister for her statement. It gives a good summary of where we are today with gas development in our region.
As the price of oil continues to reach record highs, it is more important than ever for Australia to be looking for more sources of energy. As we are in a shaky world where the supply of energy can become dependent on the stability of supplier nations, it is important for Australia to develop its own resources. I note the Chief Minister has said that her government’s vision goes beyond the approach of ‘dig it up and ship it out’. Whilst I hope that this is the case, with our first big gas development in the form of the LNG plant at Wickham Point this has not exactly happened. I take on what the minister for DBIRD has said. Certainly the LNG plant has brought great benefits in the construction phase; there is no doubt about that at all. If you have a look at the number of trucks travelling through the rural area from Mt Bundy with material to cover the pipeline, you will realise how much effort is being put in just to cover the pipeline, let alone all the other work required in the form of concrete, steel and materials into the LNG plant.
However, we must look at it holistically. We are not going to get any gas from that project and, when the construction stage is finished, we will only have 80 people working there. Eighty jobs are important, of course, but once the benefits that we have from construction have gone, we will have 80 people working but we will have no gas. I wonder whether the Chief Minister, perhaps like me, who supports the LNG plant, looked at all the glossy side of this development and forgot what benefits we would get out of this project. When you consider that East Timor and Australia also split the royalties 90:10, you have to wonder, when everything is finished will we only have the Territory’s biggest tank to look at - which might raise some money from the tourism industry? Will be have much else?
The reason I say that is not knocking the project. I believe the project is certainly a project that is presently bringing great benefits to the Territory. However, there is talk about Sunrise coming onshore at Wickham Point as well. I have to ask what the government is doing – and I believe that this government on its own cannot do that - about lobbying Canberra to make sure that a percentage of our gas - regardless of the argument about whether it is East Timorese gas or Australian gas, but presuming some of that gas is ours - stays onshore, and we use our gas for our industry. That is really what we should be looking at here so that we will not have to buy gas from a foreign company to keep our industries operating. If the Chief Minister really believes that we do not want to go down the old path of ‘dig it up and ship it out’, then she should be working with Canberra and convincing them that some of our gas should stay onshore.
The Chief Minister also mentioned a government vision. However, the question is: how real is that vision? The first part of the vision is ‘LNG for export’. That is fine, but we should really have a proviso over that, that our export vision be based on Australia first and export second. The Chief Minister also talked about power generation and, as we know, that has not worked with ConocoPhillips. Is it a reality? What could the Territory government do if a company decided to bring gas onshore that said: ‘No thanks, we want to export it all to companies overseas’? Do we have the power to say: ‘No, you will not export 25% of our gas’? I do not know. Again, we might say this is what is going to happen but, surely, the federal government is the one that will control the ownership of gas or have a say as to whether we can ask companies to retain some of that gas onshore.
The Chief Minister also talked about gas-based manufacturing in the Darwin region. I have to ask if she is referring to Glyde Point, or the gravel scraped landscape of Middle Arm Peninsula, which I have renamed ‘A Levelled Peninsula’ with the acronym ALP. After seeing how the government has allowed this part of our harbour to be slowly destroyed for industry that could be sighted elsewhere, is the government really putting jobs before the environment? What is going to happen at Glyde Point - the same thing?
I support job creation, but I wonder if our planning for industry is more about producing glossy, feel-good brochures than actually looking on site and seeing what we are going to develop. I support gas coming onshore, but I would like to know that our planners have removed themselves from square-line planning, which continually ignores the environment which we are hoping to develop. If the key catch-cry is ‘sustainable development’ - that is, development that will not only create jobs now, but will not cost a fortune to repair the damage done by the development in the future - we have to be careful where we develop onshore gas industries.
I raise that point because the minister, in her statement, heaped praises on the work of developers in the Map Ta Phut and Jurong Island area in Thailand and Singapore, and said how wonderful the development had been in relation to the environment. Therefore, I am hoping that, if she can heap praise on those areas for their industrial estates, when we develop something similar, we will be able to do the same.
I know that gas is always a key focus of this government and I note that the Chief Minister mentioned our Prime Minister’ White Paper on Energy. However, what about efforts outside the gas arena when we are discussing energy sources? Why isn’t there more interest placed on using the sun that shines on household rooves to either help power our homes or put it back into the grid? I know we can get household roofing panels - not just your solar panels, but you can get corrugated panels that produce electricity. In fact, your whole roof can be a solar bank for electrical production. I gather there are rebates for those. It is fairly expensive but, again, it is those sorts of things that also create jobs.
I could always raise my favourite old topic of hot rock technology. I hear very little about it, yet I notice that since GeoDynamics, the company that is building hot rock technology in South Australia, has commenced, its shares have doubled since it first floated its shares. The federal government now putting money into that project in Innamincka. I have to ask where all our experimental work gone on tidal energy? We did work at Bathurst and Melville Islands on wind energy. We researched solar energy in Tennant Creek. And saltwater - there are the solar ponds in Alice Springs. What has happened to some of that experimentation work?
Madam Speaker frowns a bit, but I am of the understanding that, in Alice Springs a few years ago, there was quite a bit of work done on developing electricity from solar ponds. You can find quite a bit of that information on the net. All I am saying is that we are looking at gas, gas, gas, and that is fair enough because it is very important. However, we should be looking at other forms of energy in the Territory.
If I were to say that we could even look at nuclear, well, people would fall over and die. No one says: ‘We are killing our planet with brown coal’. I do not hear the same outcry for that. I wonder whether we have a very balanced debate, or are we just too scared about the flak we would take rather than look at things from a practical point of view? We have heard a number of environmentalists in England saying the way we are going now with greenhouse, it is nearly getting the point that we may not be able to return from the damage that we are doing. We have to be careful that we do not bury our heads in the sand and avoid all forms of alternative energy that may have potential for Australia.
I ask the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries what happened to the electric car. Do we still have an electric car? Has the government decided to buy electric cars for its local public servants, the ones who just ride around town? There was a big fuss. I think Honda released an electric car and the minister hopped in it and waved to the crowd. What has happened to that?
Mr Vatskalis: Still there.
Mr WOOD: He is still there. Well, I would be interested to know why we have not put more effort into, say, purchasing that type of vehicle, especially when …
Mr Elferink: It is too expensive to charge the battery, but we could give it one-eighth of the power cost.
Mr WOOD: Well, fuel at the moment is 107.9 at Howard Springs and I would hate to know what it is at Erldunda or out at Yulara. It would be pretty …
Mr Elferink: Nyirripi over $1.50 a litre, I recall.
Mr WOOD: Right. We should certainly be looking at alternatives at the moment.
Why have we continued to allow developers to build subdivisions and houses which are conducive to using high amounts of energy in a hot tropical climate? Houses are 1.5 m apart.
Mr Dunham: Bring back the verandah.
Mr WOOD: That is right, and bring back decent sized subdivisions. I might raise that point in another debate regarding a certain development in the Lee Point area.
It is nice of the Chief Minister to tell us the wonders of gas but, surely, how much energy we as consumers are using must come into the equation if we are to look at energy not in isolation. As the Chief Minister mentioned the Energy White Paper, it would be nice to see a Territory White Paper on each goal for energy independence because, at the moment, we just seem to be full of gas.
While there is no doubt that gas will bring benefit to the Territory - great benefits, especially in the construction stage - we cannot and should not put all our gas in one basket. Our reliance on just one source of energy without looking at other options - especially cleaner options - needs to be questioned. I welcome the Chief Minister’s statement, but I hope the statement presented to this parliament looks wider than just gas and looks seriously at all options for energy.
Madam SPEAKER: Sorry, member for Drysdale, I just make the comment that there were many of us who live in Central Australia who were quite appalled to see all the gas from Central Australia go to Darwin without a lot of benefit for the people living in Central Australia. I am sure the member for Macdonnell will agree with me.
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Thank you, Madam Speaker. It is a wide-ranging debate because the statement is a bit of a patchwork quilt. It talks about gas offshore and about some vague policy notions of government, is full of the usual platitudes, has a little slap at the federal government’s energy policy, where I went on my holidays by the Chief Minister, and a variety of other things here that is intended to give us a warm glow and a confidence that we have these vast resources offshore and the lights will not go off.
The Chief Minister has to learn to be a bit more specific about this stuff. There are even some significant errors in here that I was a bit surprised at. However, I think it is because it probably had several authors, and somebody up on the fifth floor cobbled the whole lot together and, therefore, we have this disjointed thing at the end that says: ‘We love gas, we are good people, it is clean and green, everyone will benefit and we will all live happily ever after’.
The fact is the Chief Minister does not know about contemporary issues, and that is a pretty big concern. The Chief Minister was unable to answer a question I put to her this morning about whether she knew that Bechtel, on behalf of ConocoPhillips, was building a power station at 12 Mg or thereabouts, adjacent to our power station, that will be using the gas from Bayu-Undan, which is not available for domestic use for other people in the Territory whom we call Territorians.
The Chief Minister has missed out on a few things here. She talked about how it is ‘all in the melting pot, we will look at everything’ and, yet, when we go and look at the options that are available, we see that, critically, Bayu-Undan has now slipped off. Bayu-Undan no longer exists as one of these options for energy for the Power and Water Corporation. Even though the statement says we must deal next with lower electricity tariffs to Territory businesses and consumers, her horizon of 2009 is way too far out.
We had to look at opportunities that exist with this gas coming onshore. I know it was on the table because, as the minister for Power and Water, it was on our agenda every time we spoke to the big companies; that is, both Sunrise and Bayu-Undan. Neither of these companies are particularly keen to be power generators. Both of them wanted to be suppliers to our relatively small demand here in the Northern Territory, and they wanted that because they wanted us to be foundational customers. They wanted us to be customers that got in on day one, had the strength of will to commit to a project, had the strength of will to say: ‘Not only do we think this is good but we are going to buy it’. They saw that as a very good sign of goodwill and bonding between certain parties.
We now have a circumstance where, next door to Wickham Point where we generate power, that power is not good enough for a major customer - a customer that would generate tens of millions in revenue for the Northern Territory. Power and Water, if they were able to provide power to the site at Wickham Point, would generate millions and millions of dollars of revenue over the period of this. They have decided not to buy it. That deserves further interrogation. I hope the Chief Minister takes up whether she gets a brief on this.
However, the second issue is that the cheap gas that is available to produce power is only producing power within a precinct for one customer, and that is the customer that owns the gas. Therefore, we have a problem here. The problem is that we now have a precinct; there seems to be a diminution of goodwill between the parties; there seems to be that the capacity that was there for trading of cheap energy to a generator, and generated power to a massive customer, has now broken down. We know it only broke down in a matter of the last month or so. We have on the Parliamentary Record that this is a very recent issue. The issue of not providing any gas to Channel Island is recent. The issue of modifications to the design at Wickham Point so that a power station could be built is a very recent issue. The Chief Minister has to tell us why there is a problem because, if it is a problem with patsies in the negotiations, it does not augur well for the future negotiations she talked so confidently about in this statement. If it is an issue of a deficiency in the service we provide in terms of power, we should address that. However, I would have thought that with the ten sets - or nine sets at Channel Island now - and the provision of a couple of others and some guarantees about continuity of supply, you could have made a very good bid on some cheap energy as a contra to pay for that. I am surprised that the negotiation of that type is not on the table and has not been solved.
I was interested that Mrs Abala was quoted in the paper yesterday applauding the Labor government. She is going to vote for them next time. One of the reasons is what they did with Bayu-Undan. I thought it does go to show you that, for the Chief Minister to get up and keep talking about ‘gas, gas, gas; we are concerned; it is a dream; it is a black hole but we will fix it up for you’ is actually getting through. In the article, Mrs Abala claimed that she was a hairdresser. Most hairdressers will get very little from Bayu-Undan unless they actually do a few haircuts for those 300 or so workers on site when it starts to run. The sad fact is that it will not be of major benefit to this community, and that is an opportunity wasted.
I can recall going to the Discovery nightclub and hearing a presentation from Bechtel. In the crowd was a wide range of people from the business community; the person standing next to me was a picture framer. Essentially, the question on everyone’s lips was: ‘What do I get out of this?’. The spin that was put out by this government was that, once gas comes onshore, we will all live happily ever after. However, that has not happened. The Chief Minister, in her economic blueprint, said that she would bring Sunrise onshore by 2007. That cannot happen - could not have happened when she wrote it - and it goes to her entire credibility about this whole issue. She throws issues out there; the people become confident that it is a saviour for them – a single purpose saviour – and, at the end of the day, there is massive disappointment. It should not be so, because any opportunity that can be harvested should have been harvested. Whether that was cheap gas, jobs, training, upgrade of arterials, upgrade of roads, new fishing habitats on the armour rock for the pipe - who cares? - so long as every time we sit at that table we try and make sure there is a winner for us. That has not happened here.
The Chief Minister had a bold vision, and she told us what it was early in the piece: the deliverables on gas. Cheap energy is not in there. The biggest deliverable for most people in the Territory is that they want their power bill to go down, be static or whatever. When she talked about broadening the economic base that is, essentially, to do with cheap power. We have water here, we have land here, we are well positioned geographically - we have all of those factors, but power is a problem. One of the ways of breaking that is to make sure we can get good, cheap power onshore. Apart from making some references to it, this statement does not make any guarantees about it.
I was interested about a couple of things, and one is that we only want the big guys. At page 3 of the statement, the minister said and I quote: ‘New gas projects must be world standard in intent’. I do not know what that means, but I would have thought that if there is a gas field that can be commercially exploited, let us exploit it. Whether it is of world standard or not, we should exploit it. Certainly, there are some minor fields - one of them I can think of is Dingo in Central Australia - that are very small field, very marginal. However, there is the potential to exploit those fields and that should be always analysed.
The minister also said that Blacktip is most likely to be our second onshore gas project. Well, she should really go and see Mereenie in Palm Valley because they are both onshore, they are both significant finds of gas, they both provide our power station and our energy needs here, and they both have a horizon. So, we have onshore gas and this statement does not talk about the potential for finding more gas onshore. We are highly prospective with gas. Therefore, do not stand up here and say: ‘Oh look, one of your ministers came and had all these ELs and we have progressed all these ELs’. How many have been approved? How many for oil and gas? How many look prospective? Are we helping them out? Gas is not just out there in the middle of the ocean. They are not just issues of boundaries; they are issues of onshore gas. We have had a considerable heritage in this area of searching for onshore gas going back nearly 50 years. Therefore, this idea of just looking at the big guys and it has to be offshore, is a little strange.
The second train that has been approved for Wickham Point is a bit of a concern because the Chief Minister said that one of her ambitions is to have a province of the type she saw in Thailand or Singapore associated with that downstream gas. That has to be spelled out here because the province was always Glyde Point, and Glyde Point has to be seen as the place it will be. It has to be fully understood that it is all very well saying we do not want to diminish people’s lifestyles, but we need to discuss those issues out in the community. I believe pretty much everyone in this House has signed off on the discussions concerning Wickham Point; Glyde Point likewise. However, you have to have the discussion.
I am attracted to some of the research and intellect that the member for Nelson has put into this. I believe that nothing is carved in stone. You cannot say we cannot have these corridors going here or there, or you cannot change the zoning here, or because that is coloured purple it cannot be coloured green. That is just a bulldozer approach and we should be looking at a wide range of options and making every post a winner. We should be careful we know what we trade-off, and we can quantify what it is.
I was disappointed that the Chief Minister has attempted to put a spin on her bizarre call at SEAAOC for the boundaries to be untangled from the negotiation in a way that mirrored what Prime Minister Alkatiri was saying. This is a very strange notion. It is strange on several counts. However, first it is an unusual thing for a state politician to be talking about international boundaries in such a way. It had the potential to scuttle significant negotiations - and Woodside almost said as much. She is now trying to say it meant something different. What it meant was she was agreeing with Prime Minister Alkatiri. If you look at his three points, one was to establish a deadline for negotiations for sea boundaries between the two countries. Well, that deadline is established; it is not negotiable. It is not a negotiable thing, so that has been fixed. The second was to stop issuing exploration licenses in the disputed areas of the sea. Well, it is not disputed because that has certainly been established for some decades. If I recall, it even went as far as the International Court at one stage. The third was to accept that the boundaries cannot be negotiated within three to five years - somebody else will come in and tell us.
If the Chief Minister wants to sign off on those parameters, she will find most Australians do not. She will find on point one they do not think the boundaries are in dispute and, if they do, there is a very significant argument for people sitting in small timber boats out there in our harbour at the moment who have been caught in these very boundaries that the Chief Minister – one would believe – would think are in dispute. Those people have been fishing out pretty close to that international boundary too. Some of their forefathers did it for many hundreds of years before them. Therefore, before you want to run a case that the boundaries are in dispute, look downstream. Look at what it means to illegal fishing, our industry, and to the significant international boundary between Australia and Indonesia which is some thousands of kilometres longer than this boundary that we are talking about. If it is an issue of money, let us address it as money. However do not introduce issues that are not negotiable and have the potential to not only stall but abort the negotiations that are on foot.
I will not name him, but I can recall a minister talking to some of his counterparts in East Timor and they said that what they were trying to establish was the line between generosity and greed. That has to be an easy enough line to find. No one can say that Australia has not been generous. No matter how you look at this debate, you cannot say that Australia had some sort of a parsimonious attitude to the fledgling nation of East Timor. That is just a nonsense. I do not think we should ever be cowed by the allegation of going over there and bullying the small nation, of us being very affluent while they are poor and we should give more money. By all means, give them more money. However, please do not run the case that our boundaries are up for negotiation when they are not. The changing of those boundaries by whatever kilometres to the south-west have massive ramifications for the boundary between Australia and Indonesia. The Chief Minister should realise these things.
The matter of the power station should be something that this House should hear about pretty quickly, because the horizon of the 2009 is too far away. I hope in the rejoinder that the Chief Minister can tell us how that happened. She can tell us how it happened not by some comment in here, or some statement or media release. I found out, basically, through contacts that the design had been amended and they are now building a power house. That is something that should be in a statement of this type.
I also ask the Chief Minister to look to the issues relating to continuity of cheap power supply with the Power and Water Corporation. I would like her to look to issues relating to their market position if they have a competitor come onto the market that can obtain energy - which they cannot - at a much cheaper price. Not only may they have lost a significant customer, they may have seen the birth of a significant competitor that will blow them out of the water, which might be good for consumers but not so good for Power and Water. Not only that, it would seem to indicate that there are problems with Power and Water’s supply side, to get to the high standards required of a facility like that at Wickham Point. So please come back in the rejoinder to this statement about those issues. Maybe she can put some of those issues to bed.
I also ask that, because this statement is so far-ranging and we are starting to talk about energy issues, that the minister disentangle that and come back to this parliament and address some of the issues that you spoke about, Mr Deputy Speaker, including the energy policy of the federal Labor opposition. With an election coming up, it is important that we have a look at some of the notions of the Labor opposition. They have certainly been as infatuated with the cheap power provided by brown coal as any other south-eastern government before them, and I can see why. It is easy enough to forgo and compromise various other issues if you are addicted to cheap power. However, if she says that Latham has said that the people in the south-eastern corner of Australia will pay double for their power as a premium for greenhouse and Kyoto - which was also not mentioned in her statement – and that would then render this gas commercially viable, it would be a very brave move. It would certainly benefit Territorians and the environment, and we would see the whites of the eyes of Mr Latham. To come out just short of a federal election campaign, canvass the issues in one party’s policy and not canvass the others - particularly when you are so close to them - is a little sneaky.
Come back in the rejoinder and tell us what the commercial probabilities are of getting Territory gas into the grid, particularly if the cheap southern brown coal has to pay a premium for the destruction that they cause to the environment. Tell us that Labor has signed off on that because it will be received with raucous applause in this part of the world with our two or three seats. However, it might not be so popular in other places in Australia, and that is the issue. The issue is that the Northern Territory’s party, the CLP, only cares about what happens here and we want to make the place up here a winner.
This bleak little attack on the federal government, pretending that you are hiding behind the best interests of Territorians, should be seen for what it is. The Chief Minister should juxtapose those policies with those of the alternative government and, if she really believes that what happened in Thailand is so good and replicates so closely what we are doing here, let us see the photos – she could not smell any industrial smell, everything was tickety-boo, there was total harmony and everybody was really pleased, and they are going to drop one of these at Wickham Point. I would like to see the photos. I believe it is a little tricky to talk about what is happening downstream and then not describe it in greater totality.
I want downstream gas manufacturing, and I want all the stuff that goes with it – the plastics, the fertilisers, the chemicals - all that stuff, it is great. However, I have been to some of these places also, and they do not look real flash and they do not smell real flash. Therefore, it is really important, once you start talking about downstream industries, that you describe where they will be. For the Chief Minister to give such a glowing round of applause, I would think that she has been to facilities that I have not been to, because they are, certainly to the eye, fairly offensive. The products that they store are often dangerous, noxious and offensive. While it is something we hanker for and we seek - and I am quite happy to put that on the Parliamentary Record - I would like her to be able to tell us categorically where the buffers and whatever around it will be. I would like her categorically to tell us that it will be at Glyde Point, which is the area that has been set aside.
With those few questions for the Chief Minister, I will cease, and I hope to hear some answers in response.
Mr VATSKALIS (Mines and Energy): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on gas, and also to express my dismay about the performance of the opposition members, who seem to be determined to rewrite history. I am not going to go into details because my colleague, the member for Wanguri, stated and outlined some of these untruths, or twisting of the truth and rewriting of history.
I was also dismayed because this is a statement about gas. This is a statement about gas in the Timor Sea. It is not a statement about whether there is not enough gas for Power and Water, where this gas is coming from, or if there are going to be problems with power, if the power is going to be cheap. We are talking about the big picture; about the gas to the north of the Northern Territory.
The reality is that oil in Australia is not abundant; it gets scarcer all the time. The harsh reality also is that oil has reached about $US50 a barrel, and it seems that it is going to be more expensive. Therefore, the reality for Australia is that we have to, and will rely, more and more upon gas, and the vast gas resources are either in the north-west of Western Australia, or in between us and Indonesia and East Timor in the Timor Sea. These gas fields are of immense interest to Australia, and also to the Northern Territory. Quite rightly, the Chief Minister outlined that the Northern Territory government, our government, is focussing in three key elements.
The first one, of course, is to broaden the economic base of the Territory economy. The second is to deliver high-quality and diverse jobs, and the third one is to attract investment. We see how this can happen because, just take, for example, the expansion of Alcan and their reliance upon the Blacktip gas. Here we have a $1.5bn expansion, we are going to have up to 1700 people working in Nhulunbuy, and we are a significantly attractive investment by foreign and Australian companies in the far corner of the Territory – and that is what we will not do with the gas. We are not talking only about Bayu-Undan. Bayu-Undan was significant because it was the very first of the gas projects to come to the Territory. I was amazed to listen to the member for Brennan, ex-chief minister, that he is not going to accept anything less from any company but that they have to bring gas to the Territory and have to have gas for domestic use, otherwise he would rather have this gas in the ground than bring it out.
That was amazing, considering the fact that it was the CLP government that had vision years before to explore for gas and find gas in Central Australia, and to pay a significant price for that gas to power the power station in Darwin and in other regions in the Territory like Tenant Creek and Alice Springs. Sometimes, you have to make the first move before you start talking about downstreaming and having further development in the gas industry. There were people like those pioneers and people with vision like Tuxworth - who decided to convert the power station from a coal-fired power station to a gas-fired power station - who was prepared to pay the expensive price per unit of gas, which translated into more expensive power to the Northern Territory. However, it brought gas to the Territory, to the north of Australia, fired the power station in Central Australia, and also benefited the environment and people in the Territory because it created jobs at a time of the construction of the pipeline and the power station.
The same thing happened in Western Australia. It was the Western Australian government that had the vision to bring gas from Karratha to Perth and as far down as the south-western corner of Western Australia, to fire power stations, aluminium smelters and other industries - paying an extraordinary price for that gas and committing themselves to consuming a certain volume of gas per year and, if they did not, they had to pay for the whole volume as a grid. These people did not make any conditions. What these people wanted and wanted first, was the establishment of the first industries in their region and, from there on, the benefit would start flowing.
We have here across the harbour the LNG plant. I am very pleased and proud that I was part of the team that was instrumental in establishing that LNG plant in that area. I know there was controversy at the time, but the reality is that LNG plant has contributed and will contribute significantly to the Territory economy. At this stage, it is through the contractual stage and the number of workers who work, live, make money and spend money here. In the future, through the export and royalties obtained and other money that will be spent in the Territory, it will continue to contribute to the Territory economy for the next 27 or 30 years. However, what is more important is that we have here a first train to the LNG plant and, very easily, we can actually put another two trains, especially if gas comes from other gas fields in the Timor Sea.
We are not talking only about Bayu-Undan; we are talking about Sunrise. I am very well aware that my colleagues and the Chief Minister worked very hard to bring Sunrise gas onshore. I recall very well the disappointment we felt some days when news came that Sunrise gas would not come onshore because they were looking at a floating platform, and the joy when the floating platform did not seem to work. Then, a few months later, we were again dismayed because the floating platform was floating again - all this defeat, and all the ups and downs.
We believe that gas is very important to the Territory; it is the future of the Territory. We hope that gas will bring the benefits that we have not seen yet in the Territory. One thing we would like in the Territory is a manufacturing industry. We rely upon tourism and the service industry but, if we are going to become a self-reliant state or territory we need a decent manufacturing industry to provide jobs for people and to provide the attraction for people to come from down south or from overseas, so that our population will grow, our economic base will broaden, and we will become one of the new and rising territories in Australia with the gas industry.
We are also talking about Blacktip. We believe Blacktip will supply gas to Alcan. The reality is that, at the moment at Blacktip, when they drilled they found out that it will provide up to 1 tcf. In discussions I had with Woodside, they have told me that this is a very conservative estimate because they are not prepared to announce that they have more gas until they do the exploratory drilling and they hit the gas fields and can confirm there is more gas there.
Of course, north of Blacktip is Petrel and Tern. Petrel and Tern will become isolated gas fields when Blacktip is developed and provides gas to Alcan. Certainly, Santos, which owns Petrel and Tern, have to make a decision regarding what they are going to do with these gas fields. Petrel and Tern are of sufficient size to be connected with Blacktip and, in turn, can provide gas to Darwin and to Power and Water. So, there is not a lack of gas in the seas around the Territory; the question is when it will be coming onshore. Of course, we have a window of opportunity because we will have enough gas from Central Australia until 2009 to 2011 - bearing in mind that the company that owns that gas fields in Central Australia is doing exploratory drilling to hit more gas pockets and, hopefully, they will find more gas.
Another, of course, is the Evans Shoals. The Evans Shoals has some limitation because of its high content of carbon dioxide. However, I was very amazed the other day during ministerial counsel to hear my counterpart from Western Australia argue very strongly about Gorgon, an enormous gas field that has enormous difficulty. It has about 30% carbon dioxide and, of course, when the Gorgon gas comes out they have to burn the carbon dioxide. They are very afraid that the federal government will penalise them because of the significant increase of greenhouse gases.
There are gas fields there - the Petrel and Tern, Evan Shoals, and Caldita – and, recently, ConocoPhillips has an agreement with Santos to start exploratory drilling in the area, and there are very good signs. Of course, just over the border with Indonesia is Abadi, an enormous gas field. We know that the only thing that the Indonesians do not want this to be is gas for LNG because they do not want somebody to compete with their own market. This gas is about 350 km to 400 km north of Darwin, very close to the Territory. There will be a lot of interest for this gas to be developed, bearing in mind that as the price of oil is going up, then the gas becomes more and more attractive.
I was also very dismayed to hear the comment of the member for Drysdale about what the Chief Minister said at SEAAOC. I was there and I do not recall the Chief Minister arguing about renegotiating the sea boundaries. On the contrary, what she said is to disassociate the Sunrise with the sea boundary dispute. She called for the federal government to actually have a look again how we divide the royalties and, if necessary, give some more money to the Timorese as an emerging nation because they need it. After all, Australia is getting the lion’s share. If we provide more royalties to the Timorese that would benefit the state of Timor Leste and it would certainly provide goodwill towards Australia.
What was surprising was that, at a recent ministerial council in Alice Springs, all of my colleagues from all the other states, apart from Queensland - the minister was absent at the time - agreed with that position, especially when I stood up and explained to them the reasons why the Chief Minister called for that proposal to be adopted by the federal government. The reality is Timor Leste is an emerging state; it is still not stable state. We have seen many demonstrations; until a few months ago there were demonstrations. If we are not supportive, we either have to provide foreign aid which will come again from Australia or, if things go really, badly wrong, we might see refugees arriving in our port, as we have seen many times in the past coming from Timor or as far as Vietnam. It was a reasonable proposal and I am very pleased to hear that, after that the stand-off between the Timor Leste government and our government, our Foreign Affairs Minister and the minister for Timor Leste found common ground to continue discussions in order to resolve this impasse.
Sunrise is very important for the Territory, but you can imagine how important it is for East Timor when they have no other industry, no other income, and they rely heavily upon the income from the royalties from the gas fields? Nobody argued about the renegotiation of the sea boundaries. That is not our position. We cannot argue about it; it is a federal matter, not a Territory matter. However, we can actually put a proposal on the table for the federal government to consider, and that is exactly what the Chief Minister did. Therefore, all the other suggestions that the Chief Minister urged the federal government to renegotiate or to look again at sea boundaries is not true; it is false.
Going again to the gas, this is very important to us Territorians. We recognise there are difficulties, there are problems and we have called on the federal government to have a look at the development of the gas fields to the north of our state. The Chief Minister also stated clearly that she prefers a position of ‘use it or lose it’. It is not in our interest for foreign companies controlled by multinational interests to come to Australia, to waters off the Northern Territory, strike a big gas field or a find, and lock it that way for the next 10 or 20 years because they prefer to develop other gas fields they have found in other parts of the world, because they are cheaper to develop or they can get a better return for their investments. At the same time, in this 20 years, everybody else is locked out of this particular area and nobody is developing that resource that, after all, belongs to the Australian people and to Territorians.
We prefer to have a system in which people have a specified period of time to do the exploration and, when they find the resource, to use it. If they cannot use the resource within the specified period of time, let somebody else to come along and use it to the benefit of Australians and Territorians.
We have written to the federal government and have asked them to encourage investment in Australian oil and gas exploration; to recognise the requirements for major gas projects to achieve critical market mass; to improve the environment for green field gas pipeline development; to support the strategic investment that will enhance Australia’s energy supplies, security and promote self-sufficiency; and to encourage the increased utilisation of less carbon intensive fuel, including natural gas, for power generation.
As you stated before, Mr Deputy Speaker, greenhouse gases are an enormous detriment to the environment and the utilisation of coal, which is a cheap energy source, will create more and more problems. Of course, gas is a hydrocarbon and it will produce greenhouse gases, but not the same volume or the same kind of gases that burning coal will generate. Gas is greener and it is cleaner, so you can use gas in high density population cities and you will not see the same effect that you will see in cities that rely upon diesel or coal. There are benefits to the environment, and certainly both long-term and short-term benefits.
We asked the federal government to facilitate the exploration of new gas fields by providing tax incentives, by improving access to land, and by improving the benefits to people who are prepared to do the exploration. We brought that to the attention of the federal minister, Mr Macfarlane, at the recent ministerial council in Alice Springs, and we had the support of all the states. States like Western Australia and South Australia argued strongly for tax incentives in the same way that other countries provide to mining companies and explorers. We want to see that happening as soon as possible.
We also urged the development of Sunrise and how the federal government should facilitate this development of the Sunrise gas field as soon as possible because the south-east corner of Australia relies heavily on gas. In the past five years, we have seen incidents of explosions in gas plants, for example, the gas supply in South Australia was cut and, earlier, the explosion at the ESSO plant in Victoria cut supply to Victoria. Because there was inter-connected gas lines from other states in Australia, they managed to provide gas to South Australia and to Victoria.
I proposed that the development of Sunrise gas field would not only provide benefits to the Territory because of downstreaming, but it would provide benefits to Australia. After all, we have the pipeline that goes from Darwin to Alice Springs. There is a corridor that is already cleared and surveyed and would be able to provide for the establishment and construction of another pipeline. From Alice Springs to Moomba is about 300 km, which is not a technically difficult task to complete.
I support the Chief Minister’s statement because I can see that gas is the future for the Territory. We have other minerals in the Territory. The mining sector provides about 23% of the gross state product and gas will be one of these emerging industries. What is important about gas is not only the power generation and the export of gas, but also the downstreaming - the downstreaming that occurs in other countries in the world where gas is utilised for the production of urea, fertilisers, plastics and other materials we use in our everyday life.
Yes, I understand that some of these industries are dirty, but let us not forget they can be as dirty as we allow them to be. Australia is a developed country. Australia has in place control mechanisms and processes that strictly control these type of industries. After all, we have refineries and we do not have the same level of pollution that we see in third world countries. Our industry is strictly regulated, inspected and investigated, and we would not allow the industry to produce the gases or the offensive waste we see in other areas. The argument about the gas coming here and that we do not like this kind of industry here because we have seen it is very dirty, I do not think can be valid. It is up to us what we are going to make of this industry.
Again, as I said before, gas means broadening our economic base, giving the opportunity for the Territory to develop as a strong economy, broadening our trades and skills base and attracting investment. At the moment, as was mentioned before, we lack the skills for the gas industry, not only on a Territory level but on a national level. I support the gas industry. I will work very closely with my colleagues and the Chief Minister to make sure that gas from the Timor Sea, Sunrise and other gas fields in the area will come onshore, because I believe in the future of the Territory. After all, I have a vested interest. As a father of two young sons, I would like these boys to stay here in the Territory, have a bright future, have jobs in the Territory and, being selfish, have them stay with me rather than lose them to Sydney, Melbourne or Adelaide. I strongly support the Chief Minister’s statement on the gas and, as I said before, I am prepared to work very hard with my colleagues in the government to bring gas onshore.
Dr BURNS (Essential Services): Mr Deputy Speaker, as we have heard during this statement, the gas projects in the Northern Territory are already taking the Territory to a new threshold of development, and the extent of that development is palpable now. The benefits to Territorians of the Bayu-Undan development are also being felt. The minister for business earlier today spoke about the massive investments, high rates of local employment, and demonstrated capacity of local industry.
Our government is set to deliver high-quality infrastructure and services to this high-technology sector. The Territory is increasingly recognised on the national investment map as an emerging gas hub, and this is attracting interest in other flow-on investment and opportunities. It has become evident that there is quite a lot of cargo coming through the port in relation to the development out at ConocoPhillips, and it is providing quite a lot of work at the port as well. There are many flow-on effects and opportunities associated with these developments.
The scale, as has been outlined previously, of the current and projected investments is truly enormous. One of the investments that really stands out, of course, is the expansion of the Alcan facility at Gove. Alcan is currently nearing the completion of its 15-month feasibility study and environmental report in regards to the expansion of refinery production from two million tonnes per annum to three-and-a-half million tonnes per annum. The feasibility study itself has a cost of $40m, and this shows the scale and the seriousness of these investments, and the serious money that is involved. Alcan is a very serious company. It is a global company, but it has strong links with the Territory and it is set to invest even more within the Territory.
As part of that investment, the company is exploring opportunities to source gas for this planned expansion, so they are putting a dual case for the expansion. One is based on their current fuel source, which is apparently sulphurous fuel oil, and the other one is, of course, to use gas, which would be a lot cleaner and, I believe, cheaper. This is a strategy that Alcan is looking at. As part of that strategy, they are looking at the trans-Territory gas pipeline, which is a mammoth project in itself, and that is the link-up with the Blacktip gas deposit, which may provide the preferred energy source.
Gas, as most people would know, would come onshore somewhere in the Port Keats region, go to Mataranka, and then right across the Territory over to Gove. Just the logistics and the negotiations involved in that are truly huge. During the two-and-a-half to three year construction phase, the expansion project would generate a peak of 1200 jobs and a further 120 jobs in the long-term operational phase. Work has commenced on the $8.5m Gove Airport expansion and upgrade, with the new runway already completed and now awaiting commissioning. Once again, the company is putting some serious investment into Gove, Gove Airport and the Gove region, and they are here for the longer haul. It shows by the investments and the plans that they are foreshadowing. The gas supplied to the Alcan project from the Blacktip deposit would require an investment of $500m in the Blacktip field, and a further $550m in the trans-Territory pipeline. Construction on the expansion project is planned to commence before the end of the year. Alcan are still to make their final decisions in relation to this matter, but all the signs are there that they are extremely serious about this project, and they see immense benefits for the company. They are also foreshadowing immense benefits for the Territory, both economically and socially.
It was my pleasure, during Community Cabinet that we had at Gove and Nhulunbuy recently, to have an extended tour of the plant. I found it extremely interesting to get a detailed overview of the processes that are used, although some of them are very secret. That is what gives the company the edge on other aluminium and bauxite producers. However, it is a massive outfit there at present and it will be even larger once they expand. I also had discussions with senior company executives about the expansion. The government will be supporting the company and their developments as much as we can, because we believe that it is incredibly beneficial to the Territory.
Amongst some of the things in Alcan’s plans are the use of the public wharf during the construction phase for the movement of project material. That will be an incredibly complex logistic task in itself, and there has been a lot of planning go into that. I took the opportunity while I was in Nhulunbuy to take a tour of the wharf, and I got that briefing as well as other aspects of the proposals. Alcan plan to phase out bauxite exports in 2006. I was fortunate to get the briefing on the wharf, and to take a helicopter flight to have a look at the extent and pattern of their red mud holding ponds there - a very important part of their operations – and the rehabilitation that they are undertaking. They take the rehabilitation of the area extremely seriously. I got an idea about some of the leases that might be required for the expansion of the Gove operation. As I said previously, as a government, we will be supporting that particular project as much as we possibly can.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Glyde Point is something that you mention quite a lot, and you mentioned tonight in your role as member for Nelson. We have had a few discussions about Glyde Point. It is a very important strategic part of further development of gas coming onshore, and having industry associated with gas coming onshore. The Land Development Division of the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment has lodged a notice of intent with the Office of Environment and Heritage, and with the Commonwealth Department of Environment and Heritage, for a major industrial estate and associated infrastructure development at Glyde Point on the Gunn Point Peninsula.
The development would involve the clearing and reclamation of a significant area of land; provision of services including water, power, gas and roads; port facilities comprising an access channel, turning basin and berths; workers accommodation facilities at Murrumujuk as a precursor for the development of a rural township catering for an eventual population of up to 16 000; and roads and service corridors linking Glyde Point with the Middle Arm and East Arm Peninsulas.
The Minister for Environment and Heritage has determined the project will be assessed at the level of environmental impact assessment and has stipulated guidelines for the conduct of that assessment. The Commonwealth minister has determined that the project is a controlled action pursuant to the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. I lay on the record that, as a minister and as a government, we are completely committed to preserving and conserving biodiversity and the environment in that area, and also with that development. I have had representations from the Environment Centre of the Northern Territory about their concerns about development there, and I have undertaken to go there with them on-site and hear their concerns first-hand. As a government, we are listening to the concerns of those who are worried about the environment and the environmental impact of such a development. However, I wanted to assure this House that, as a government, we will take those concerns on board and we are very keen to preserve that particular area.
I am going sideways a little here, Mr Deputy Speaker, but the Commonwealth Minister for Environment and Heritage who was - I am sorry; I have lost the train of thought. I might come back to it later.
A range of engineering investigations in environmental studies have been completed in relation to the Glyde Point project. The following baseline environmental studies are under way: fresh water ecology, aquatic ecology, surface water hydrology and ecology, and heritage. These studies follow previous work in the areas of flora and fauna, marine habitat surveys, collation of metocean data, and a gap analysis of the available data. All available science will be focussed on these environmental aspects and concerns. The environmental assessment is strategic in nature, and focusses on the port and land aspects of an industrial estate. Future industry proponents will be required to undergo an assessment tailored to the nature of that industry.
The Glyde Point area is zoned Development DV to facilitate the development of major strategic industries including gas-based, road, rail or port related industries. The zone provides land for major industrial development that is of strategic importance to the future economic development of the Territory. Developments will be assessed having regard to, amongst other things, their environmental impact and their effect on surrounding developments.
Much has been said about power generation, and members of the opposition have raised the very important issue of securing gas supplies for our power generation, both domestic and industrial/commercial, within the Territory in the coming years. As the Chief Minister pointed out, gas supplies are secured from Central Australia from 2009 onwards for another two years, so there is still a window of opportunity. However, I want to assure this House as others have, that we are taking this issue very seriously. We are in constant negotiation with a number of players in this particular area, and the task force that the Chief Minister foreshadowed before is working very hard on this particular issue. I will touch on these issues a bit later.
Based on current electricity demands, the Power and Water Corporation has sufficient gas contracted to satisfy forecast demands to around about 2009. Power and Water has also recently undertaken a strategic review of its future gas needs, together with an assessment of potential sources of longer-term gas supply, and the means by which it expects to secure such supply on the best possible commercial terms. This is the key: there is quite a bit of gas out there but it is securing it on the best commercial terms. I am sure members opposite realise that; it is not just about securing the supplies - that is comparatively easy – it is securing it at the right price for Territorians, and that is what we are committed to.
All supply options for feedstock fuel are being considered and arrangements to secure gas after 2009 are progressing. Potential sources of gas to meet Power and Water’s forecast requirements beyond 2009 include the Tern and Petrel fields in the Joseph Bonaparte Gulf. The Blacktip discoveries, also in the Bonaparte Gulf, or a combination of some Amadeus Basin gas to supplement the major portions of Power and Water’s gas supplied from either of the sources identified above. I would not rule out, in the gas going over there and the trans-Territory pipeline and the supply of gas to Alcan, whether there could be further gas proved up from gas deposit. I have had discussions with Alcan about whether there would be room for the Territory to jointly access that gas.
I want to assure members opposite and the House that the government is taking this very seriously, and we are taking every opportunity to talk to the major players, keep our options open, but have as our major goal securing gas at the right price for Territorians.
The Sunrise field in the Timor Sea is also a potential source of gas for the corporation. Appraisal drilling at Blacktip to confirm sufficient reserves to supply Alcan at the rate of 40 PJ per annum for 20 years will allow Power and Water to gain a better understanding of potential gas supply from this source. Woodside has stated that it intends to undertake further drilling in adjoining prospects - that is Penguin and Polkadot - to locate additional gas reserves.
As outlined in the Chief Minister’s statement, the Onshore Gas Developments Task Force has been established, with one of its two major objectives being to secure competitively priced gas for power generation. The task force consists of the chief executives of the Department of the Chief Minister, the Northern Territory Treasury, the Department of Business, Industry and Resource Development, the Power and Water Corporation and the Executive Director of the Office of Territory Development. The task force will also draw on key private sector specialists in assisting it to meet its objectives.
We are at the threshold of great development. The Alcan expansion is a further development that is welcomed by this government. I have given assurances to this House in terms of preserving environmental values that this is something that the government takes very seriously.
What I was struggling for earlier when I mentioned the Commonwealth minister: I wanted to put on the public record my commendation of David Kemp who was the Commonwealth’s Environment Minister. I always found him to be a very reasonable person to deal with. He was someone who showed a lot of courage. He had some difficult decisions and issues to deal with in relation to Kakadu and Uluru. I felt that he always wanted to give the Territory a fair go and he was particularly interested in supporting indigenous people. I wrote to him when I heard that he would not be continuing on in that role or in parliament, and commended him for the cooperative way that he has worked with us. I know other ministers share that view. I wish David Kemp all the best in retirement. Someone with his experience, expertise and attitude will be much in demand and he still has a great contribution to make.
Mr Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, I commend the Chief Minister’s statement. It is a great era for the Territory. This is a government that is keen on economic development, but balancing that with our environmental and lifestyle issues.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Environment and Heritage): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement. The Chief Minister has highlighted some exciting opportunities in gas and allied industries. They are opportunities that will move the Territory ahead in job creation and economic growth.
This government is equally committed to ensuring that these opportunities do not come at the expense of the environment and our great Territory lifestyle. As environment minister, I am very aware that sustainable development does not come easily; it is the product of hard work and commitment on the part of government, industry and the community. It means taking a good look at the environmental and social issues as well as the financial bottom line.
Increasingly, forward thinking industries are making significant strides in understanding what sustainable development really means. These industries understand that they have to earn community acceptance; it does not just come from a licence. Forward thinking industries are forming partnerships with the community by, for example, voluntarily disclosing environmental performance and even allowing community representatives to participate in environmental audit teams.
Industries that are seriously grappling with environmental sustainability are not just focussed on regulatory compliance. They realise that compliance is merely the starting point and that, to position their industry for a sustainable future, they need to get ahead of the game. They need to go beyond mere compliance with the law. All of this would have been unthinkable 10 years ago. Of course, it would be overly optimistic to think that all industries operate this way.
Nevertheless, if we are to meet the challenges of sustainable development, it is this type of thinking we need to foster as the Territory’s industrial base expands. An important way to ensure sustainable development is through rigorous environmental assessments of new projects. Environmental assessments enable an up-front examination of environmental issues associated with a project, and the development of safeguards to avoid and minimise impacts on the environment. These safeguards can then be factored into approvals.
In her statement, the Chief Minister mentioned a number of gas-related developments, and I want to highlight these again, and others, which include the Bayu-Undan/Darwin pipeline, the ConocoPhillips LNG plant, the expansion of the Alcan alumina refinery at Gove, the trans-Territory pipeline, the Blacktip gas pipeline and processing plant, McArthur River Mine expansion, and the Glyde Point industrial estate. All of these developments have required environmental assessments at the highest level – an environmental impact statement. This is a measure of importance that this government places on sustainable development. Assessment of these and other projects means that my Office of Environment and Heritage is very busy dealing with an unprecedented number of EISs.
The Chief Minister highlighted the Alcan expansion in her statement. The EIS for this project was recently completed. The draft EIS was publicly exhibited for over seven weeks and received nine public submissions, all of which were assessed by the independent Office of Environment and Heritage. The office concluded that the environmental issues associated with the Alcan expansion have been adequately identified, and that the expansion can be managed in a way that avoids unacceptable environmental impacts. I subsequently accepted this assessment, which will see stringent requirements placed on Alcan - some 29 recommendations in all - including a requirement for Alcan to prepare a social impact study in anticipation of the creation of up to 1700 jobs. As set out in the assessment report, the strict conditions that Alcan will have to meet surround the issues of:
the ongoing management of potential social impacts on nearby populated areas;
owners of the region;
construction;
I expect the recommendations from the assessment to be taken up in the mining management plan, which needs to be approved before the expansion can proceed.
Once a project has been approved then the hard work of monitoring starts. The Office of Environment and Heritage has a team dedicated to monitoring the ongoing compliance of development once approval has been granted. For example, the Chief Minister highlighted the very important construction activity occurring at Wickham Point to build the ConocoPhillips LNG plant. My office is currently monitoring the construction at this site and provides a weekly inspection report. Work on the LNG plant is proceeding in accordance with the environmental management plan and approvals. Construction of the LNG tank, process plant, the loading jetty, office buildings and the pipeline are checked twice a week. Dredging for the pipeline has now been completed. Water monitoring and aerial surveillance indicate that sediment plumes due to the dredging activities have not impacted on the Channel Island coral community or weed reef.
This level of scrutiny is only possible because of the additional resources this government has provided to the Office of Environment and Heritage. To cope with this unprecedented activity, we have put on five new positions, with two positions dedicated to monitoring compliance as development progresses.
With this unprecedented level of investment and development it is, indeed, very fortunate that the Northern Territory now has much more rigorous environment protection and assessment processes in place. It is only since the Martin government came to power and we strengthened these processes, that the Commonwealth has accredited our environmental assessment procedures as meeting national best practice standards. It is clear that Canberra understands that environment protection and assessment is now taken seriously by the Northern Territory government. It is incredible to think that, only a few years ago, this sort of development was being talked about while, at the same time, our environment assessment procedures were not recognised or accredited by the Commonwealth.
In grasping the opportunities provided by gas-based industries, it is very important that the greenhouse implications are managed responsibly. In the next five years, the ConocoPhillips LNG plant and the Alcan expansion are likely to increase Northern Territory’s total greenhouse emissions by around 13%. While this is an increase of the Northern Territory’s emissions, the additional emissions are coming off a very low base. The Territory currently contributes less than 2% of Australia’s greenhouse emissions. Therefore, in the Australian context, the additional greenhouse emissions from the Territory result in a 0.3% increase to Australia’s total greenhouse gas emissions.
That said, there is no reason for complacency. The Martin Labor government is working hard to offset these increases which will come as we diversify our economic base. One very effective way for the Territory to reduce its emissions is to reduce the greenhouse gases coming from savannah fires, which release about 50% of the Territory’s greenhouse gas emissions. Government has committed over $200 000 to the operations in the Arnhem Land bushfire region, which will have a direct impact on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Government is also working with industry to establish other ways that they can effectively contribute to other climate change initiatives and offset industry emissions.
Gas is a clean fuel compared to coal and oil. It is important that we do look at using gas when we can meet the nation’s energy needs. Earlier this year, we saw the Howard government outline their energy plan which, basically, amounted to not much more than subsidies to companies in the petroleum industries. In contrast to the Howard government having no real plan to deal without reliance on imported oil, the federal Labor Party has outlined a real alternative based around gas. A federal Labor government will give the task of bringing more of our offshore gas reserves onshore and establishing a gas to liquids industry with priority it requires and deserves. This is great news for the Territory and for the environment. Add this to the long list of compelling reasons why a federal Labor government will be such a bonus for the Northern Territory.
Mr Deputy Speaker, this government is moving the Territory forward with jobs and economic growth, and it is my job to ensure that we achieve environmentally sustainable development for all Territorians. I commend the Chief Minister’s statement.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank all members who contributed to this very important statement in the House today. Importantly, from the government side, we heard from the Employment and Training minister. Any talk about gas strategies for our future has to look specifically and realistically at how we can get jobs happening for Territorians, and it was outlined by the minister responsible for that area.
We had a business contribution, a mines and energy contribution, a central services contribution and, lastly, we just heard from the Minister for Environment and Heritage - all part of that cross-government approach that we have taken to a gas strategy for gas onshore, and the opportunities there are for Territorians.
I would also like to thank my hard-working experts in the Office of Territory Development for the input that they made to this statement, which was considerable and certainly reflects their expertise in this area. A big thank you to them.
I have to express disappointment about the contribution of the opposition. I was keen to hear the different elements of contribution to what is a comprehensive gas strategy and what we are targeting for Territorians and for Australia, with talk of the national grid and gas of the national grid. To summarise the response that we had from the opposition, including the member for Blain, the Opposition Leader, and the members for Brennan and Drysdale, essentially, it was irrational, inaccurate, and also ill-informed and illogical. It is very sad that, when we have such a major statement to the House about such a critical issue for the Territory’s future, you have such a poorly prepared response that seems to demonstrate that there was no interest from the opposition about this important issue for the Territory, and certainly no comprehensive or even part-sensible response to the four elements of the gas strategy that I outlined in my statement. I was going to apologise that the statement was quite long, but it was comprehensive. However, the responses that we had simply fitted the categories of illogical and ill-informed and certainly, in many cases, inaccurate.
Mr Dunham: Well, you correct it then – correct it now.
Ms MARTIN: It is very disappointing, and the member for Drysdale can make the interjections now, but it is a bit late. The opportunity to put forward …
Mr Dunham: Correct it now; you have 20 minutes.
Ms MARTIN: If you do not like the government’s vision, if you are critical of elements of it, it was not demonstrated apart from an ad hoc approach. If you have a different vision, I did not hear that. All we heard was griping and negativity and much of it ill-informed. It does sadden me in terms of where the Territory is going in the future. Getting gas onshore for downstream gas manufacturing developments is critical; also getting gas for our local gas supplier – critical, for our local energy suppliers. Yet, all we hear is griping and negativity from the opposition.
I will go specifically to an issue that was raised by the Opposition Leader. He began his contribution to the debate by accusing me of interfering in international issues, of being an abject failure, of embarrassing the Territory, and even - until he had to withdraw it - of almost treachery. He did not actually described why. He just went on with a lot of rhetoric, but did not say why. Yet, fundamentally, he has totally missed the point of what do you do - and this is in referring to my statements to SEAAOC, and subsequently - about an impasse for the important gas fields in the Timor Sea that was going nowhere. The implications from Opposition Leader seemed to be that we should just shut up and be quiet. That was the implications from the Opposition Leader. He told me that I should not be interfering in matters between Australia and East Timor. I should not be suggesting to the federal government ways through this. He said: ‘You just shut up and sit down and do not be an embarrassment’ ...
Mr Dunham: No, you were not listening again, were you?
Ms MARTIN: He did not suggest alternatives. That is exactly what – I am paraphrasing it but it galls me to repeat the rhetoric that we heard - it was rubbish. However, to criticise the Leader of the Territory for offering solutions to an issue that had an impasse, I would have thought a valid criticisms was if we did not propose …
Members interjecting.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms MARTIN: That would be very valid; to come in here if we had done nothing and say: ‘What has the Territory done? This is a field that can be developed it has potential for onshore of the Territory. What are you doing? What are you doing to propose a solution?’ Instead, the Opposition Leader came in here and, in his worst flowery rhetoric, criticised me for offering a solution. He went as far as to say that I am somehow treacherous. It was really the most illogical and absurd argument I had heard in here for a long time, and made me think that he simply has not had a briefing on this issue and does not understand one element of it, because that is what he displays.
On the Sunrise and the maritime boundary issues between Australia and East Timor we should watch this space. There have been productive discussions and I am very pleased to say that what we know publicly of those discussions is certainly responding well to the suggestion I made. That is terrific. There is no doubt it, maritime boundaries between Australia and East Timor is a very important issue and must be negotiated. As Prime Minister Alkatiri said, there are no maritime boundaries between Australia and East Timor because East Timor is a brand new country. However, they will take five years at least, and that is in the Prime Minister’s words.
The revenue sharing about Sunrise has become part of that, so what do you do? Do you sit there and say nothing can happen; the opportunity to develop a field like Sunrise, a very large field of gas, will just slip away because there is not a solution to this other problem? Quite logically, you say: ‘What can happen?’ De-linking the two issues and addressing some of the concerns being raised by East Timor is a perfectly proper non-rocket science solution. Yet, the Opposition Leader accused me of being at the level of some kind of university student debate - which is insulting to university students - in which it was implied that I was doing the bidding of East Timor. What a load of rubbish! Ill-informed rubbish and highly offensive.
Standing up for the Territory, finding solutions to problems, is what this government is all about. If that means proposing a solution to a difficult problem to the federal government, I have my hand up and I am proud of it. I am not embarrassed by doing it. I do not think it is a sense of failure that I have done it, and I certainly do not think it is treacherous, but they were the words that were used by the Opposition Leader.
I find the extraordinary hypocrisy of a statement like that, compared with what happened between the Territory and East Timor under the previous government - as outlined quite clearly by the Minister for Business, Industry and Resource Development - should certainly demonstrate to the opposition that they are on very dangerous ground when they head into this area, because the way that the previous government dealt with the East Timorese issue was a disgrace.
Mr Dunham: Rubbish!
Ms MARTIN: It came to a halt.
Mr Dunham: Didn’t you ever go to the Kalymnian Brotherhood?
Ms MARTIN: Negotiations came to a halt because of the rude ...
Mr Dunham: Didn’t you see us feed them? Didn’t you see us provide humanitarian sustenance?
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, member for Drysdale!
Ms MARTIN: … aggressive and political use being made of what was a difficult issue between Australia and East Timor. The opposition can try to rewrite that, but that is the truth of it - that is the absolute truth of it.
On the issue of where the domestic gas from Bayu-Undan is, it is interesting because there was a media release from the then Opposition Leader in 2002 - despite the member for Brennan’s words in here tonight - welcoming the deal done for all the gas from Bayu-Undan to go into LNG to Japan - welcoming it! There is a slippage here. On one hand, the opposition welcomed the Bayu-Undan agreement, the entire field of Bayu-Undan LNG at Wickham Point to Japan. Now we have the opposition coming in here and saying: ‘Where is the domestic gas component?’
These are complex issues and to say that the only opportunity for domestic gas for the Territory - and I am not saying it is not a possibility from Bayu-Undan. Anyone who understands gas fields knows that you make an assessment, you have a proven resource but, sometimes, there is more resource. I am one who always has a sense of optimism about these kinds of things, faced with reality. There are a number of fields, as the statement said, where we can possibly source gas.
It is not a matter that we are short of gas. There is a lot of gas in the Timor Sea, as so clearly spelt out by the Minister for Essential Services. The issue is getting that gas at a competitive price. That is what Power and Water is focussed on. That is what the Onshore Gas Developments Task Force is focussed on. It is cute to say: ‘We can get gas. Why aren’t you getting gas?’ Key to this is the price. We must have competitively priced gas. Anyone will sell you gas at a high price. It does not take the most skilled negotiator in the world to get some gas. That is easy. It is getting gas at a competitive price. As government, we have made it very clear, and the task force is making it very clear, to all involved in the gas fields in the Timor Sea that part of what we are looking for is domestic gas. We have made no bones about that.
It would be a lot easier, for those opposite who, when the Prime Minister says jump, say how high?, to be arguing and joining us in saying that the White Paper on Energy did not do enough. The hands-off approach to our future energy needs and simply saying: ‘What we have is what we will work with’, will not serve the Territory’s and Australia’s interests, and that is the problem we have. We have significant resources in gas, and yet it is going to take a much more hands-on involvement from the federal government to really see Australia benefit, as we can, from gas. To simply say: ‘Leave it the commercial sector, leave it to those who have the leases, who can exploit the fields, let them decide according to commercial priorities what they are going to do’, I say is not good enough. Those resources are owned by Australians, and they should be used for the maximum benefit for Australia. Other countries do that; they are much more prescriptive than our national government is. It is about time, when you look at the infrastructure costs associated with gas development and the benefits of having gas on a national grid, that the federal government needs to be much more involved in setting the framework for how and when gas gets developed. Otherwise we will be at the mercies of the international market and companies who say: ‘Well, developing something in Australian waters or developing something in the Timor Sea – not on our agenda now, we will put it down the bottom of our list’. That does not serve Australia’s interests.
Therefore, while we are pursuing vigorously the companies who have interests in the Timor Sea for domestic gas for the Territory, and for opportunities for Territorians, it would be greatly assisted if the federal government simply stopped its hands-off approach and got much more seriously engaged in the issue of what we do about gas reserves, what our priorities are, and how we support that.
I am confident we will get the best deal that we can for Territorians for the future past 2009 to 2011 for gas supplies …
Mr Dunham: Yes, what about the past, you have done a great deal there. That is how we are judging it.
Ms MARTIN: It would be interesting to hear what the opposition thinks is an alternative pathway. None of that. That is why I said this contribution was very poor from the opposition. There were no, ‘we do not like what you are doing’ that was implicit in the statement, but no alternative. No alternative, just bagging. It is very easy to whinge and whine and bag, instead of coming up with an alternative. The proposal and the strategy that I outlined is sound; it will bring benefits to Territorians. However, I am saying if the opposition had a better one, let us hear it.
Mr Dunham: Get some gas from Bayu-Undan, what about that?
Ms MARTIN: Let us hear it.
Mr Dunham: There you go, you heard it.
Ms MARTIN: Silence, Mr Deputy Speaker.
Mr Dunham: No, get some gas from Bayu-Undan.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr Dunham: She has encouraged me to respond, Mr Deputy Speaker, by saying there is silence, you are obviously ignoring the interjection. Get some gas from Bayu-Undan.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, member for Drysdale!
Ms MARTIN: It is interesting, with the member for Drysdale’s insistence on repeating his mantra, that what Power and Water is doing commercially should not be discussed in a public place like this, because it reduces the options of Power and Water to be able to negotiate the best deal. For a man who was previously the minister for Essential Services, he should understand that. He understands the nature of government owned corporations, he also should understand the commercial sensitivities involved in these kind of negotiations.
Mr Dunham: They told us, it is on the Parliamentary Record.
Ms MARTIN: We are keeping our options open. We are pursuing all the available options for Territorians, and no matter how much the member for Drysdale whinges and carps, it does not really make any difference; he is just hot air happening in one small corner.
The government has a vision for the Timor Sea gas, and has in place strategies to fulfil it. It is based around jobs, business opportunities and, importantly, the lifestyle for Territorians. That strategy is based on LNG development, gas for power generation, downstream gas manufacturing, and gas for our national grid.
The resource development on the scale of the Timor Sea is a major undertaking. It is complex and is ever-evolving. There are many interested parties, not the least the multinational corporations which, as I have indicated, shift their capital round the world, have priorities that are global and, for the Territory, not always focussed on the Timor Sea.
I caution the opposition not to come out with ill-informed statements and opinions in this House, and to seek the briefings that are necessary. We have considerable expertise in the public sector about these issues - considerable expertise - and all you have to do is ask for a briefing. What I say to you is: get informed, understand the issues, understand the complexities of the issues and, then, if you have valid criticisms of the strategies presented by government in this House, we will listen. However, as I said, what you presented was simply ill-informed, illogical and, very sadly, it did not make a contribution to the debate.
This is a great gas strategy; it will serve Territorians well. We are absolutely determined to pursue gas onshore for the Territory, and every single opportunity that can be gained by Territorians from having such a substantial gas resource on our doorstep. We will do it, not only focussing on jobs and business opportunities, but focussed on the social and environmental balance that we need to find. That is very important.
It is a great vision, a great strategy, and I am certainly very proud, as Chief Minister, to have carriage of pursuing that together with my government. I thank again those who have worked so hard to contribute to this debate, and the members of the Onshore Gas Development Task Force in the Office of Territory Development who have contributed to this because it will make a significant difference to where the Territory is going.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Tonight, I tell members of a recent visit I made to the 2004 Women’s Land Management Conference at Nimirrli conference camp site on the Blyth River near Ramingining. The Women’s Land Management Conference is an annual event that brings together women from across the Territory who are involved in caring for country.
This is the fourth year the conference has been held. Each year it is hosted by a different ranger group and this year it was the turn of the Djelk women rangers from Maningrida.
Ms Scrymgour: Hear, hear!
Ms MARTIN: Yes, your electorate.
The Women’s Land Management Conferences are facilitated through the Caring for Country Unit in the Northern Land Council. They provide an important opportunity for women to discuss their various ranger activities, and to share their ideas and approaches to environmental issues. For the most part, the groups of women community rangers volunteer their time and resources to look after their country and increase their skills in environmental management.
Minister Scrymgour and I attended the final day of the conference, which was held in the beautiful setting at Nimirrli camp site on the Blyth River. We were welcomed to country by Sophia Bryan, who told us about the brolga, clap stick and parrot dreamings associated with her country. Then the Djelk rangers performed the possum dance and presented both of us with dilly bags and spectacular orange conference T-shirts.
It was wonderful to hear from women who had travelled from all over the Territory to attend the conference. About 150 women and 15 children travelled from Wadeye, Timber Creek, Katherine, Minyerri, Borroloola, Ngukurr, Bulman, Weemol, Maningrida, Jabiru, Pine Creek, Kakadu National Park, Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park, Alice Springs and Tennant Creek.
We were privileged to hear of some of the things that women rangers are doing in their country; how they are working to protect the environment through participating in the management of their lands and waters. Many of the ranger groups are linking their communities in with national projects such as quarantine surveillance, and weed, fire and feral animal management. I was particularly interested to hear how women are incorporating their own traditional ecological knowledge and experiences with western scientific knowledge.
Some groundbreaking economic initiatives are emerging from this blending of traditional and modern techniques. Among these are the harvesting and marketing of bush tucker samples by the Malak Malak people, and the medicinal soap making by the Wagiman women. We also heard about the junior ranger program being run in conjunction with Territory Parks and Wildlife, involving young people in environmental education and land management activities. The junior ranger program is an important step in raising young people’s awareness of both traditional and western environmental practices and in supporting their continued participation in land management practice.
I also acknowledge the role of the Northern Land Council in the organisation of the conference. It would be remiss of me if I did not mention the volunteers from the NLC who staffed the kitchen for the conference. They prepared delicious meals and morning and afternoon teas for everyone for three days, and I can certainly vouch for the excellent buffalo stew we had for lunch.
I was greatly honoured to receive the invitation from the Djelk women rangers to attend the conference. The work that the women rangers are doing in and with their communities is often unnoticed and unrecognised. However, they are making a very important contribution to the maintenance of Australia’s biodiversity. My government is examining ways in which we can further support the work of these women.
I hope that everyone was able to attend the 2004 Tropical Garden Spectacular held at the George Brown Darwin Botanic Gardens on the weekend of 7 and 8 August. I suppose it actually depends on where you live in the Territory. If you are based in Tennant Creek, it might have been a bit tricky. It was wonderful to have visitors such as Peter Cundall and Isabell Shipherd to provide gardening stories, tips and information. I just missed the Landscape Olympics, but there was a packed program: Tim West on how to choose which plants we use; Harry Frakking from the Bromeliad Society, Tunis Mekar from the Balinese Cultural Collective and others. Also appearing were Chantal the Fairy, Leanyer School Folk Dancers, Darwin Callisthenics, Jabaru and Greek Mediterranean Cultural Dancers. Denise Goodfellow was on hand to tell us about attracting birds to our garden. Also playing were the Darwin Brass Band and the visiting Danbury Brass Band from the USA. There was also – and I do not think I am going to do this pronunciation very well - the Nga Whanau a Aotearoa Dancers – I think they are Kiwis!
My government provided $25 000 this year to support the Tropical Garden Spectacular. The community also provided a great deal of support: Mix FM 104.9 - and Lisa did a great job; Darwin City Council; Top End Sounds; 7 Darwin; and ABC FM 105.7. Thanks to everyone who contributed including Dave Griffiths and his team at the Botanic Gardens, who were on hand to drive trains, move plants, and generally see that everyone had a fantastic time. My congratulations to Simon Smith, president of Nursery and Gardeners Industry NT and the patron, Nerys Evans for another fantastic event.
Darwin is not a large capital city by Australian standards, but the month of August reminds me that we are disproportionately blessed with the contribution of our artists. On last Sunday, 15 August, I was fortunate enough to attend the closing of the Sculpture in the Park on the last day of the Darwin Fringe Festival. Sculpture in the Park is a fantastic initiative that has been going on in its present form for the last two years, and which began as Sculpture by the Sea four years ago. This is another event my government is proud to support. It is easy to see that this event is popular and well supported by the community and many Darwin businesses. Sponsors include Browns Mart Trustees, 24 Hour Art, Browns Mart Community Arts, Darwin City Council, Darwin Festival, Darwin City, Darwin Fringe Festival, Waterhole Restaurant and Bar, Northern Air Charter, Chubb, Salvatore’s, Peter Brown Auto Electrics, Jackson’s Drawing Supplies, Delaney’s Country and Western Store, Michael Rees, Cavenagh Medical Centre, Carlton United Breweries, Atomic Clothing, Roma Bar, Bridgestone, Brian Johns, Peter Adamson, McDonalds at Casuarina, Ludmilla and Darwin, 69 Mitchell, Rivers, Territory Colours, Raintree Gallery, Palm Photographics, Shenannigan’s Irish Pub, Vintage Cellars Darwin, Betts, Darwin Newsagency in the Mall, Paspaley, Business and Community Developments and Adhara. That is not a bad list of sponsors for one event of the Fringe Festival. This is a fine example of the business and community supporting innovation in the arts and the community is to be congratulated for getting behind the venture.
The art works were terrific. Project Coordinator Julie Milton took me around and showed me all the works on site at the mall, the UN lawns, Town Hall Ruins, Civic Park and then on to the Brown’s Mart courtyard for the closing. In the courtyard, we also saw the work of last year’s People’s Choice winner Paul Miller, showing the enduring benefits to all of us of this project.
There were some problems with display of works in public spaces and some artists had to remove their pieces before the closing. This is disappointing, but Julie said that all involved will meet to talk about how their works to be safeguarded in the future. Not all responses from the public were destructive, by the way. Some were humorous and whimsical, but displays of art in public places can have difficulties. The artists and their works were as follow: Barra Rage by Paul Hill; Glimpse by Tobias Richardson, which won the Main Award, Non-Acquisitive; The Art of Buoyance by Victoria Katoni, which won a Commendation Award; Seated Figure by Janice McEwan; and Three Chairs for Clare by John Hazeldine. I was sorry that the chairs were vandalised over the week and John, who put a lot of work into them, in the end took them home, which is really sad. However, thank you, John, for thinking of me in Three Chairs for Clare. There was Untitled by Martin Selwood. Martin is usually a canvas person who does a lot of spray work, and this was a welded metal work that was really quite stunning. I certainly hope Martin does some more sculpture in whatever form he chooses because he is very talented. The Good Ship Society Dashed on the Rocks of Enlightenment was an installation by Mark V Maguire. There was The Offering by Adrienne Kneebone; Spirit of the Wind by Gabriel Alves; and Kinetic Didjes by Year 9 at Dripstone High School that won the schools award, which was stunning. It was didgeridoos made of piping, all painted and hung from a structure and they just look stunning. It was very creative from Year 9 at Dripstone High. There was Head Job by Darwin High School, which was literally a lot of different heads put in a tree and was also very creative; Spring Chickens by Alison Dowell; and Human Nature by Aly de Groot that one won the Innovative Use of Materials Award. Her sculpture was made of rice paper and tree sap. There was Proposed Development 2 by Winsome Jobling; Insect Figure by Geoff Sharples; Forest by Cath Bowdler, which won the Commendation Award; You Don’t Speak for Me by Jen Taylor that won the Main Encouragement Award; The Wall of Kindness by Chris Kuhl; The Flock by Bridget Higgins; Industrial Totems by Paul Miller, who was last year’s People’s Choice winner, won the Site Specific Award; Tao by Freedom Summers; Remnants of Presence by Hayley West; Raw is Nothing Less than Pure Love by i3; Dancing Drops by Ro; Mandala by Lia Ngaree Gill; Once There Was Wisdom in These Woods by Saul Dalton; and High Tide by Yannee P Notmac.
There were 27 entries. As you can see from the list of those who contributed to the Sculpture in the Park, some extremely well-known artists took part. The whole effect was magical, walking from installation to installation, at times amazed, moved and inspired. I really do not know how anyone could judge winners of categories because they were all quite amazing pieces of work. Ken Conway was the MC for the closing ceremony, and I was able to announce the People’s Choice winner, which went to Bridget Higgins for The Flock, a witty piece featuring flying thongs.
I also met a 10-year-old boy who asked me to look at his piece of work. He was entry No 28 and a surprise last entry. His name was Asher, who was 10 years old and said that, after coming on Saturday to see the exhibition, he believed that he could do a piece as well, and presented on Sunday with The Log that Turned into a Dog. It certainly was a very creative piece and it was good to see a 10-year-old being inspired by all the other entries.
Arts certainly enriches our lives immeasurably and brings us great pleasure. In my own case, I must say that Spring Chickens, which would appeal to anyone over about 45, was a delightful work by Alison Dowell. To look at a stuffed chook on a spring, and all the other bits and pieces she had to go with it, really made most people smile.
Congratulations to all those artists who submitted pieces for Sculpture in the Park. Thank you for another year of it. Congratulations to Jane Tonkin and her team of helpers and volunteers. Well done to the Fringe Festival.
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonnell): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I make comment on an answer that was given during Question Time from the Minister for Ethnic Affairs in his capacity as the Minister for Ethnic Affairs. He used the quote - in fact, I will quote him. He said:
Looking around today and seeing the flags, I recall very well some European politician said, in the years between the wars, that nationalism is the last refuge of scoundrels. They are clinging to the flag of the Territory, trying to claim it for their own, just to prove that they are true Territorians.
I wish to place on the record my irritation at the minister for trying to make that imputation. The beginning of my criticism starts with the very fact that he is the Minister for Ethnic Affairs and, in the very same answer, he identified any number of nations. He identified indigenous Australians, Torres Strait Islanders, Maori, Irish, Indian, Scottish, Bosnian, Cypriots, Pacific Islanders, Samoans, Brazilians, Indonesians and Balinese - people who form parts of nations and people who form nations themselves. Out of that list that I have just read out, many flags fly, and these people all come together in a celebration under their flags and they celebrate their nationalities.
If I recall correctly, the minister himself stood up in this House and told us how proud he is of his Greek heritage. Indeed, I noticed that the minister himself was one of the people to celebrate when Greece won the European Soccer Cup recently. The minister made a great point out of the celebrations of Greece as well. And guess what? The Greek community also has a flag which flies over them. I wonder if the minister has considered, by his very statement today, that he has identified all of these groups as scoundrels because of their nationalism.
I get irritated, because flags are merely a symbol, and as we so often hear about the importance of symbolism from members opposite, they would have to understand that symbolism is just that: it is representative of something else. The flag that sits on my desk and the desk of every member of the CLP here at the moment, and on so many of our collars that we proudly wear, is symbolic of something. What is it symbolic of? Well, it is symbolic of a democratic part of the nation of Australia. In fact, when I claim this flag as my own, I claim it for all people who live in the Northern Territory. What is the Northern Territory? It is an administrative area which comes under the administrative control of this parliament and the government of the Northern Territory, duly elected in accordance with the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act, and ultimately established under the rights and powers granted by the federal government, under the constitution of this country, to govern territories as they see fit. This flag is also symbolic of the fact that everybody who actually lives in the Northern Territory is, politically, a second-class citizen.
I take great pride in this flag because I have seen this flag fly over the first government and every subsequent government of the Northern Territory, and because it is symbolic of the great achievements that Territorians have been able to bring together. I think it was Graham Richardson who actually said that if we obtained statehood, we would have the best flag in the country, and I agree. However, at the end of the day, it is only symbolism. But symbolism is also very important to so many people, for all sorts of reasons.
In fact, it was the flag of the Rising Sun that my mother had to look at for every year of the four years she spent in a concentration camp under the Japanese, and it was the Nazi swastika that my father had to look at for six years. Those flags are also symbolic of something that is a whole lot more offensive.
The minister can either take one position or another. He can say that he supports, as the Minister for Ethnic Affairs, the different and diverse groups in our community, or he can step outside nationalism and say, like Socrates before: ‘I am not an Athenian or a Greek, but a citizen of the world’ - in which case, he should stand down from his role as the Minister for Ethnic Affairs because he does not believe in what he stands for. The minister’s use of that quote in an effort to be cute, in actual fact stands as an indictment of the way that he sees his own position. However, as usual his mouth was running off before his brain was engaged.
To demonstrate how clearly his mouth was running off, he said that it was a politician between the war years in Europe. Well, that rang a bell with me so I went a checked it and made sure I was correct. That actual quote, by the way, is not ‘nationalism’, it is ‘patriotism’: ‘Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel’. The quote can be attributed to one Samuel Johnson, who lived between 1709 and 1784 - so he was only out by 200 years. I point out another little quote from Samuel Johnson to the minister before he decides to open his trap again, in relation to making quotes of that nature. The other quote from Samuel Johnson is this: ‘Almost all absurdity of conduct arises from the imitation of those whom we cannot resemble’.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, this month celebrates a milestone in the service of the Red Cross to our community, and tonight I tell members a story about a very quiet contributor who has been a blood donor since 1960. I refer to a friend called Dennis Blaiklock. Unfortunately, records are not terribly accurate on how much blood Dennis has donated, because he started in South Australia and then moved to the Territory. However, when you make 25 donations you get a badge. When you make 50 donations, you get a gold pen. Dennis actually has 3 badges and a gold pen. Therefore, he has probably donated over seven or eight times the amount of body blood that he has. I do not know if I have said that very well, but you know what I mean.
He tells a very interesting story of when he was a very young man marching out in his national service uniform, he decided that he would become a blood donor. He swaggered, he said, in his uniform down to the Pirie Street Red Cross Blood Bank in Adelaide to achieve that first aim of his youth. He had wanted to be a blood donor for many years, he said, since hearing about the need for donors during a health lesson at a Broken Hill High School many years before. It is interesting that the students of that year, 1954, are having a 50th reunion this year in October, which I am sure he will be attending. I am sure he will also tell them the story, because what impressed him most was an address given by the Athletic, Health and PE teacher who was new to the school. Obviously, with a little tongue in check, Dennis said: ‘I heard the important part of her presentation but what I remember most clearly was her PE uniform’. As a teenager, they had not met such a quite athletic female PE teacher, and she was the one who inspired him to become a blood donor.
Dennis started donating in Adelaide, moved to the Territory in 1963, and registered at the old Alice Springs Hospital. Back in those days, I have to admit, the amenities and the hospital were not quite as flash or upmarket as they are today. As he said, they were not often called upon, but he remembered the deed was done once in a small room on what he thought was a book trolley:
He also, from 1967 to 1977, moved to the Top End of the Territory, and occasionally made donations at the Katherine and Darwin Hospitals. He has this history of, wherever he was, always donating blood; something that many of us never think about but, certainly, that I have had the need of at certain times.
He then came back to Alice Springs and he said the Alice Springs Red Cross gave him one of the most exciting times because he popped his vein twice over two years. He said at that stage the cover was not quite as firm as it is today and both episodes created quite a stir. He did feel something warm but he was not really aware that it was the blood flowing freely. He said: ‘A new nurse grabbed me to stop the bleeding, ripped my shirt and singlet off, tossed them in a bowl of water and then started on my trousers. All were spotted with blood’. It was at this stage that Beth Cardona - and I am sure you might remember Beth, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker - appeared rather concerned, raced out and came back with a white coverall to avoid any further revelations when the nurse took his trousers off. They both then proceeded to wipe away any evidence of blood. The young nurse seemed proud of what she had done while Beth Cardona retired in a bit of a flurry. He said, ‘I was eventually able to close my sagging mouth over a biscuit and a cup of tea, but it is not often that one gets attacked in such a way when you are going to do a good deed such as giving blood’. He said he never saw that particular nurse again but he certainly remembers Beth Cardona and she might remember what happened to him. But the revamped environment has certainly improved the draining of the blood over the years and it certainly is in a much calmer environment than it was then.
What we would say to someone like Dennis Blaiklock, who is such a quiet contributor, is to thank him for those many years of service to this community. He is on call and is one of only three universal blood donors in the Northern Territory. That means anyone can accept his blood, and I suppose that is unique in the fact that we only have three in the Northern Territory. He can be called upon every 12 weeks. I have to admit his arm has quite a number of pinpricks. People have never questioned him on how he actually got them but, in today’s world, it might be considered the he got them for all the wrong reasons. However, that is not so; he certainly got them for the right reasons.
I want to congratulate the Red Cross Blood Bank on the fabulous job they do for our community, the many lives that they have saved and, in particular, I acknowledge Dennis Blaiklock’s contribution. I guess without people such as him we would all be in a much sadder state. We should really reward and acknowledge these people as best we can.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, today I would like to congratulate members of the Indonesian community in the Northern Territory on the occasion of the Indonesian National Day.
On 17 August 1945, in Jakarta in front of his house at Pegangsaan Oost 56 at 10 am, Indonesia’s late founder, President Soekarno, confirmed the independence of the largest Muslim nation in the world – Indonesia. At a simple ceremony, President Soekarno read the proclamation of independence. Captain Latief, one of the few people in uniform, fastened the white and red flag that is officially known as Sang Saka - which had been made by Mrs Soekarno - on to a flimsy rope and attached it to a bamboo pole stuck in the ground. That was the first time that the Indonesian flag had flown in 350 years. There was no music, no dance, just a few people singing Indonesia Raya.
However, the formal transfer of power from the Dutch, who had ruled Indonesia for more than 350 years, was effected only in 1949, four years later - four years of armed struggle. Indonesia’s current borders are principally those of the former Dutch East Indies. Indonesia has had five presidents since independence. The post-independence political landscape has been dominated by long-serving Presidents Soekarno (from 1949 to 1966) and Soeharto.
Indonesia is the world’s largest archipelago and has a diverse and multicultural population exceeding 238 million people. The ethnic groups in modern Indonesia include Javanese 45%, Sundanese 14%, Madurese 7.5%, coastal Malays 7.5% and other ethnic groups 26%. The language that is spoken in Indonesia is Bahasa Indonesia, a modified form of Malay. They also speak English, Dutch, and local dialects, the most widely spoken of which is Javanese.
There are a number of issues that Indonesia faces today. One of them, of course, is political stability. After the fall of President Soeharto and the election and power of Megawati, after the elections coming up in September they will decide who is going to be the next president of Indonesia.
Indonesia is very important to Australia. It is our closest northern neighbour. It is one of the largest nations in the region. It is the largest Muslim nation in the world and in the region. Indonesia is also very important to the Territory. It is our closest neighbour. A significant number of people of Indonesian descent live in Darwin. There is a continuous cultural and trade exchange with Indonesian, which bought a significant number of live cattle and has developed close working relations and cooperation, especially after the signing of the memorandum of understanding in 1992.
Once again, today is the Indonesian National Day and I take the opportunity to congratulate the people of Indonesian descent in Darwin - our fellow Territorians who come from Indonesia - and wish them happy and prosperous years to come and, of course, political stability and economic progress to their country of origin.
I would also like to speak today about a significant exchange between the Dripstone High School in Casuarina and the Kibi Cho Junior High School in the Wakayama Prefecture of Japan. The two schools have developed a very close relationship and, every year, about 20 students – 10 girls and 10 boys - and two staff come to Australia to visit Dripstone High School. The students are billeted in pairs with students and staff families for the entire stay, and they generally stay in Darwin for 10 to 11 days.
This year, I billeted two Japanese girls who were 14-years-old and who did not speak a word of English so, as you would understand, it was a very interesting situation at home. However, the surprising thing is that neither the girls nor my boys had any problem communicating, going out, playing basketball in the yard, or sitting and watching television. It is amazing that young people can find a way to communicate even if they do not speak each other’s language.
In 2000, the Dripstone school sent 15 students and staff to Japan and, this year, they hope to repeat the experience by sending another group of interested students and teachers to Kibi Cho. In 2003, the Kibi Cho local government and the city of Darwin signed a formal agreement in recognition of the cultural exchange between the two schools.
This year, we had 20 students and two staff coming to Darwin. With them was the Superintendent of Education for the Kibi Cho Town Council, Mr Shigeru Kusuku and Kibi Cho Town Council representative, Mr Osamu Misumi. They were billeted with families in Darwin and they had to go to school every day. They were paired with Australian students and they had to attend English, SOCE, Science, Maths and Physical Education classes, working in groups with Dripstone students.
Also, the students went on excursions that were organised by the school. They came to Parliament House and I hosted a small morning tea in my office and welcomed the students from Japan, their teachers, the superintendent, and the president of the town council. They were very impressed by the building and also by the different areas of the building, including the Chamber.
The students then went to an overnight camp at Litchfield and, for some of them, it was the first time ever that they had slept under a tent because, in the place where they live, from the photographs I have seen, there are not many open spaces where they can camp overnight. They also visited the Territory Wildlife Park, Batchelor Outdoor Education Centre and went for a cruise on the Adelaide River Queen Jumping Crocodile Tour.
I would like personally to thank all the families that billeted the students from Kibi Cho. I also thank Mr Martin Trouw and Mr Raymond Dixon, the organising coordinators from Dripstone High School, Ms Lyn Elphinstone, the Principal of Dripstone High, Mr Peter Stretton, Ms Meredith Vovoli, and Mr Phil Blooberg, International Services, and all staff at Dripstone High School. I will be sending some gifts from the Territory with the Dripstone High School children when they visit Japan later this year.
This month, we are celebrating Seniors Month. On 5 August, the Chief Minister hosted a morning tea for a large number of seniors in the Main Hall of Parliament House. Many seniors attended the morning tea and it was typical of Darwin. You saw people from different backgrounds, some of them dressed in their traditional costumes. The Filipino Senior Citizens Association performed, dancing and singing some traditional Filipino songs, entertaining all the senior citizens. I was very pleased to be able to host this function with the Chief Minister and, with my colleagues, to serve morning tea to some of the seniors.
Some of the seniors were from Tambling Terrace in my electorate and the Tiwi Gardens Retirement Village, and I was very pleased to see them here. I intend to invite some of the seniors from my electorate to my office for morning tea as a sign of respect for our senior citizens. In my culture, senior citizens are always respected. They are not just a retired person, or people who have done what they could when they were young, and now they sit in a corner. They actually provide experience and are a valuable asset to the family, because a lot of seniors look after the children. It is the best baby-sitting service, because they not only care for and love the children, but they pass a lot of the cultural information, religion, to the young generation. The Greek families rely upon their seniors to help out when the need arises.
It was a very enjoyable morning and I am looking forward to host seniors from my electorate in my office. If any of my colleagues wish to bring some of the seniors to my balcony, which has a good view - member for Sanderson, I would be very happy to welcome people from your electorate.
Mr Kiely: Thank you, on behalf of the seniors of Sanderson!
Mr VATSKALIS: It is significant we acknowledge the contribution by our senior citizens and help out wherever we can. I am pretty sure members from both sides are prepared to help our senior citizens and provide information and service whenever it is necessary.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I advise members of the Assembly of the second women’s golf day - Golf for Breast Cancer Day - that was organised in Alice Springs last week on 13 August. I am proud to say that I am one of five organisers; the others being Dee Davies, Karen Jones, Deb Pepper and Renee Manuel. Members may recall that, last year, we commenced this golf day. I spoke in parliament at the time, in October last year, and said that the support from the business community and women generally in Alice Springs was outstanding, and that there was some pressure on us to have the golf day again. Well, true enough, we did decide to organise it again and, not to put too fine a point on it, we have created a monster. I say that with a slightly tongue-in-cheek attitude, because the response to the golf day was simply incredible.
We had support from 60 businesses or thereabouts in Alice Springs. I will not name all of them, although shortly I will name a couple. To get 60 businesses for anything these days is incredible. To get 60 in a relatively small place like Alice Springs is simply outstanding …
Ms Carter: Hear, hear!
Ms CARNEY: The member for Port Darwin was in Alice Springs for some other business, as I understand it. She came along to the golf day …
Ms Carter: And played badly.
Ms CARNEY: And played badly, like myself. It was not a political exercise, not at all, and that is demonstrated by the fact that an advisor from the Minister for Central Australia’s office came along.
We set a number of records, and I understand the Centralian Advocate will be writing an article on it, perhaps this Friday. We had the largest number of women at a charity golf day in Alice Springs, and perhaps the Territory. We had 163 women registered for teams, and we had 38 teams in particular. I have played in a few golf days, and I know other members of this Assembly have as well. The average number of teams per golf day, it seems to me, is about 15 to 20. The fact that we had 38 was, again, quite incredible.
The aim of the day was to raise money for breast cancer research and, with the assistance of the Cancer Council, monies will be provided to them in due course. I understand that those monies will be forwarded to researchers interstate. That is why there were so many women who gave up their Friday afternoon to come along. Apart from the networking involved, and what was variously described as a very fun day, the fact is that all women - and, of course, all men because of the relationships they have with women - will be either directly or indirectly affected by breast cancer at some stage of their life. It is a serious problem.
I pay tribute to the 163 women who participated, and to the 60 businesses which provided goods and services. All participants received a bag of goodies and we also had a number of prizes - I think close to 30 or 40 in all. Some were team prizes, some were individual prizes. I make special mention of two businesses. One was the hairdressing salon Headlines in Alice Springs. I am sure members of the Chamber will join with me in thanking Peter Tiller from Headlines for his very generous contribution to the golf day. Headlines co-sponsored with Moving Pictures a hole for the day. Headlines also provided L’Oreal packs which were full of a number of products and information that all women gratefully received. Importantly, his most significant contribution was a prize in conjunction with Moving Pictures which was raffled at the end of the day. It was a special makeover to the value of $450, and it included a photographic shoot compliments of Moving Pictures. It is with some regret that Mr Tiller did not receive the acknowledgement he deserved on the day, and it is appropriate in this Chamber that I, on behalf of the other organisers, publicly thank him.
I mentioned Moving Pictures, and members will be aware that I have spoken about Moving Pictures in the parliament before. The proprietors of Moving Pictures, April and Matt Pyle, very generously took a photo of the 163 women on the golf course all together. It is a marvellous photo. They sold it for $10, and $5 of each sale was donated to our fundraiser. Again, I thank them.
We also had a promise last year of the donation of a perpetual trophy. Air Services Australia - in particular Bluey, and he will know who he is - through Bluey’s efforts, managed to donate a trophy. I understand it was valued in the range of $500. It was made by a professional wood-turner in Alice Springs, and is the perpetual trophy for the women’s golf day. Off the top of my head, I cannot remember the name of the team that won the trophy. The trophy is significant, not only because of the generosity with which it was given, but it does signify that we will have golf days every year for as long as all of us can manage it.
I do not know what the final figure is of how much money we have raised but, at this stage, it looks to be in the vicinity of $6000 to $7000. That is a great effort. I thank all of those involved, and I would like to table a copy of the program of the day with members’ consent. I am sure this program with a list of prizes and sponsors will be of great interest to members.
Leave granted.
Mr KIELY (Sanderson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I commemorate a significant event in the Defence Force calendar. Tomorrow, 18 August, is the commemoration of Long Tan day. I will recap for the information of members of the House - I am sure they and the broader public know - about what happened at Long Tan on this day, or commencing around about this time 38 years ago. I pulled this information down off the Internet, so I am pretty sure it is accurate:
On the afternoon of 18 August 1966, the battle of Long Tan was fought between D Company of 6th Battalion Royal Australian Regiment (6RAR) and elements of the 5th Viet Cong Division and other branches of the North Vietnamese Army. The Australian contingent was about 108 strong. The enemy numbered around 2000. This battle was the biggest and longest daylight action the Australians had in Vietnam.
Total Australian casualties for the Long Tan battle were 18 killed and 24 wounded in action. Also, out of an estimated force, as I said, of between 2000 and 2500 Vietnamese, 245 Vietnamese bodies were found in the battle area.
Truly, it was the most appalling of struggles for both sides. That so many should die in a conflict is a tragedy, there is no holding back from that. There are many books written on Long Tan; some with conflicting views. There are some which say there was an ambush strategy by the Vietnamese; there are others that say that this was not right. As you can imagine, in the heat of battle for people on the battlefield, there are all sorts of different perspectives. I have even read one account where one soldier did not even know he was participating in a battle; he was fighting his own private little war.
It is quite a significant day on the Australian Defence Force calendar and, more so I suggest, for the Royal Australian Regiments, one of which we have at Robertson Barracks, and the armoured personnel carrier or motorised infantry squadrons that are also at Robertson Barracks because, to this day, we still using APCs - although they are upgraded a little - as were present on the battlefield 38 years ago. It speaks volumes for the machinery that they used in that particular theatre of war.
I am also pleased to announce that the Australian Labor Party, should it be elected to the federal sphere of influence, will initiate an inquiry into the process of awarding bravery medals for the battle of Long Tan. It seems that the medals that were first recommended for officers serving in the field were downgraded because of part of an Imperial Bravery Awards recommendation system. The Labor Party and the Defence Minister in the Labor government will have a look at the way that these recommendations for recognition were downgraded and, should the review find that the recommendations stand, then these members will be awarded proper recognition by this country.
This brings me onto another point that I would like to raise in this House about the awarding of Australian Defence medals, or proposed awarding of Australian Defence medals, by the current government. I have a media release here from the Howard government which states:
I am one of those people who are eligible. I happen to have served six years and two weeks in the Australian Defence Force. I will also receive one of these other medals the Howard government has struck for my service in Malaysia some 30-odd years ago. I was very happy and quite chuffed to receive the recognition from 30 years ago, but I have problems with the Australian Defence Medal which I probably will be receiving.
There is a campaign going on at the moment which is being managed and coordinated by Gary McRae, who is the President of the Aldgate RSL in South Australia in regard to this medal. It appears that the federal government, in its wisdom, has said: ‘Okay, we have awarded the National Service Medal to servicemen who were called up for National Service and served in the Army’. That is, in the main, about two years for anyone who was called up for National Service. However, there was no medal ever considered for Defence service volunteers. I believe Bob Buick said that, by recognising the ordinary peace time service of national servicemen with the anniversary National Service Medal, it should justly follow that comparable ordinary peace time service of volunteer servicemen and women ought to be recognised by way of a similar award. This notion that you have to do six years voluntary service before you are eligible for a Defence Service Medal is so unjust and unfair to those many ex-servicemen and women who did not complete six years service but, nevertheless, volunteered for service within their country.
On the Aldgate RSL Sub-Branch web site, there is an site where people can write in with their thoughts of the proposed awarding of the Australian Defence Service Medal for six years service. I would like to go through these; there are over 100 letters. The web site address, by the way, is ww.defencemedal.defenceinternet.com.au. I direct members to go there if they are interested. The people running this web site have removed the names of the authors for privacy reasons, but I will give you some of them:
It goes on and on and on in this vein. The ex-servicemen and women are utterly disgusted with the position that the federal government has taken in some vote-grabbing effort to try and award medals because of the injustice of just awarding it for the national servicemen earlier on – and rightly so.
As the patron of the North Darwin RSL, I will be arguing the case that we adopt the RSL resolution of two years service in order to obtain the Australian Defence Medal. I believe that is a fair and just position. I note that the Labor position is after three years, and I will be taking that up with my federal colleagues on this matter, and seeing what we can do during the review that I mentioned of the awarding of medals for Long Tan and, while this review is being done, that we revisit the question and Labor’s position is changed to two years, along with the RSL’s national convention decision.
I must say that, in all of this, with Robertson Barracks being down the road, with the large number of ex-servicemen and women that we have in the Northern Territory, I am appalled that the federal member for Solomon has not gone off to the barracks to see what he could do. We do not have conscription any more. At Robertson Barracks, they are all volunteer soldiers. A lot of these soldiers will never see six years service, and there were a lot of soldiers before them - and sailors, and airmen, and airwomen, and women in the armed services all over the place - who have not completed six years service, but will be discriminated against. It is a terrible thing to happen.
I would remind our federal members, as the Howard government was quick to say, there are 900 000 people being awarded medals. That is a sizeable block. If they want to curry votes, well, get out there and do it right, and make sure there is some equity in this system. I, for one, will not be wearing my Australian Defence Medal until it is changed to where it is more equitable, and those with two years or three years service - and that includes the vast majority of women who served in their country’s call - are awarded this medal. I call on all my RSL and ex-service members to likewise stand by their mates. Do not wear this medal until we see justice and equity through the whole system.
I also congratulate Gary at the Aldgate sub-branch, and I want him and all serving and past serving members of Defence services to know that I am behind them 100% in this campaign.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I am very happy tonight to talk about the success of the 2004 Croc Festival, which was held in Katherine the first week in August. This Croc Fest was the biggest one that has ever been held, which confirms the faith that the Croc Festival executive committee had for the event in Katherine. Despite the lack of financial support from the Martin Labor government, and the adverse remarks by several government ministers as to the valuable outcomes of previous Croc Festivals held in Nhulunbuy and Tennant Creek, the people of Katherine showed total commitment to the success of the festival, as did the executive committee.
Forty-three schools from throughout the Territory, in addition to Kununurra and Rockhampton, took part in the festival, with over 2000 students participating. The schools were: Alpurrurulam Community School, Amanbidji School, Barramundi School, Batchelor Area School, Borroloola Community Education Centre, Bulla School, Bulman School, Casuarina Street Primary School, Clyde Fenton Primary School, Dundee Beach Primary School, Jabiru Area School, Jilkminggan School, Kalano Community Youth Group, Katherine High School, Katherine South Primary School, Kununurra District High School, Lajamanu Community Education Centre, MacFarlane Primary School, Maningrida Community Education Centre, Mataranka Primary School, Minyerri School, Neutral Junction School, Newcastle Waters School, Ngukurr Community Education Centre, Ntaria Primary School, Numbulwar Community Education Centre, Nyirripi School, Oolgoolgarri Remote Community School, Our Lady of the Sacred Heart School Wadeye, Palmerston High School, Pigeon Hole School, Pine Creek Primary School, Ramingining Community Education Centre, Rockhampton Downs School, St Joseph’s Catholic Primary School Katherine, St Joseph’s School Kununurra, Stirling College, Timber Creek School, Urapunga School, Woolaning Homeland Christian College, Wugularr School, Xavier Community Education Centre, and Yarralin School.
From the time the festival road trains arrived in Katherine and set up at the sports grounds area until the time they left Katherine, there was an atmosphere of enormous excitement in the community. The community concerts that were so professionally presented on the magnificent festival stage highlighted the talents of the 2000 students who entertained huge crowds on consecutive nights with a fabulous variety of well-rehearsed performances.
I congratulate the teachers who spent so much time assisting their students with their performances. I congratulate the Katherine Croc Festival organising committee who have worked tirelessly for the last 12 months and committed to the festival being successful, and the whole Katherine community for their support of the first festival. That is what made it so successful.
The economic benefit, with the influx of so many additional people to the town, was certainly well received by local businesses. The ongoing benefits to the students who participated in the Croc Fest, whose theme is ‘Respect yourself, respect your culture’ will, without a doubt, be recognised. I have seen the difference already with some of the Katherine students.
I congratulate the Croc Festival executive committee on having faith in Katherine to go ahead with the festival this year and, certainly, will be welcoming them back again, as I know the whole of the Katherine community will.
Following on from the Croc Festival, Katherine continued its cultural experience with the annual Flying Fox Festival, which is always full of exciting events to attend and participate in. One of those events was the St Paul’s Anglican Church Art and Food Festival, which adopted the art theme of ‘clear water’. Local and Territory identities were invited to contribute their artistic impression of clear water on a six by eight size of art. Some 30 varied pieces were entered in this exhibition, and it was very interesting to view each entrant’s contribution. I had my artistic talents truly tested for the first time in many years and surprised myself with the end result of my effort, as did our new mayor, Anne Shepherd. I would also like to thank the Chief Minister for her contribution to the exhibition, which was very well received by the organisers. It was a very interesting and enjoyable evening for the Katherine people.
Tonight, I would also like to recognise and pay tribute to a very gracious Katherine lady for whom I have great affection and admiration. I am talking about Bonnie Stephens, who is a very talented artist and has a wonderful outlook on life and, at the age of 84 years, still does not have enough hours in each day to accomplish all that she would like to.
Bonnie was born in Glen Innes, New South Wales, in 1919. She studied at East Sydney Technical College with Raynor Hoff, Lyndon Dadswell and Douglas Dundas, and at the National Art School for two years with renowned portrait painter, Graeme Inson. Bonnie has attended seminars with Bill Peascod, Tom Cleghorn, Fred Cress and Fred Bates. Pre-war she was a freelance fashion artist for David Jones, Farmers and Wyns.
Bonnie received her first award at Inverell Shire in 1988, followed by 21 additional awards throughout Australia, up to the Katherine Acquisition Art Prize 2000. Bonnie has exhibited in Sydney, Inverell, Tamworth, Newcastle, Young Masters Gallery Brisbane, Corbould Galleries, Brisbane Regional Gallery, Ipswich, and Framed Gallery Darwin and Katherine. She has also represented in private and public collections in Australia, UK, USA and Canada, and is listed in Max Germaine’s Artists and Galleries of Australia.
Bonnie has been living in the Northern Territory for 14 years now, since deciding to move closer to her daughter, Frances Anderson, and has painted some magnificent work in that time. While I have only had the pleasure of her presence and wonderful work since that time, she has been painting since 16 years of age. Bonnie, a keen impressionist, used to paint mainly flowers but, since coming to the Territory, she has been inspired to paint landscapes and, inevitably, our very skilled stockmen and Brahman cattle, which are such magnificent animals.
I am very fortunate to own two of Bonnie’s works that highlight aspects of the stockmen and cattle industry, and am eagerly in line with several others to acquire more of her much sought after pieces. Bonnie’s talent is being recognised at this moment with the honour of a retrospective in a Queensland art gallery. She will have 45 of her works featured in the Global Arts Link Gallery in Ipswich from early August to October this year. The exhibition is entitled Bonnie Stevens – A Painter’s Life and will include work gathered from the Northern Territory including the two pieces that I am fortunate to own, and pieces from Queensland and New South Wales. Bonnie is delighted and honoured that Ipswich have asked to hold the retrospective, as she was instrumental in the development of their gallery when she lived there years ago.
Bonnie has a great relationship with Peter and Cathy Farnden who own Gallop-Thru-Time Gallery and Framing in Katherine. Peter’s great talent with framing always enhances an already fabulous piece of artwork, and we are very fortunate to have such a talented and creative business as Gallop-Thru-Time in Katherine which also has a lot of business from Darwin.
Bonnie has travelled to Ipswich for the entire exhibition of her retrospective, and this will follow on with a commercial exhibition in Brisbane with renowned Australian artists Bill Odd and Chris Huber. While Bonnie is away, my secretary, Lorna Hart, and I are going to miss her weekly visits to have coffee and a chat. I know Bonnie will delight the interstate audiences and be very well received and rewarded. It is a great honour to be asked to hold a retrospective, and I wish Bonnie every success in Ipswich and the commercial exhibitions following. I will be absolutely delighted when she finally comes home to Katherine exhausted at the end of the year.
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, this evening I congratulate Karama Neighbourhood Watch for yet another fantastic fun day held on Sunday, 15 August, just this weekend gone by, at the Karama School. I acknowledge the hard work done by the Karama Neighbourhood Watch committee which consists of residents. We started the fun day last year as an initiative to bring the community together and to celebrate the diversity of Karama. It was a huge success last year, with some 600 people moving through the school grounds in the afternoon, enjoying each other’s company and local performances. I am pleased and delighted to say that it was another big success again this year, with crowd estimates at least on a par with last year, if not a bit more.
I acknowledge the enthusiasm of the Karama Neighbourhood Watch chair Ted Dunstan. He put a lot of effort into working with me to organise the event. Ted went around and got donations from local shopkeepers at Karama Shopping Centre. I thank Lyndall’s Hair Care, Panda Food and the Karama chemist for their donations. Ampol Karama donated gas for the barbecues. Importantly, Coles Karama donated all the food. We had somewhere in the vicinity of 500 sausages, 100 steaks or chops, 100 sartees, 50 loaves of bread, sauce and onions. All of that was donated by Karama Coles and they did a great job in feeding our community.
Volunteers from Karama Neighbourhood Watch worked the barbecues through the afternoon. I want to make particular mention and offer thanks to Joe and Helene Clark. They were there working the barbecues last year and they were back there again this year. They are a great example of very community-minded residents in the Karama area. They are a lovely couple. They have had long-term commitment to the Territory. Joe is a classic Territorian. They are terrific people and it is an honour to work for them and with them.
I also thank Louise Murray who, again, said she was going to do an hour’s stint on the barbecue but ended up being there all afternoon working really hard and putting in a huge effort. She is a mother of young kids, yet she took the time to get stuck in and assist in that effort with Neighbourhood Watch.
Sue Pattiselano is a great worker from Karama Neighbourhood Watch. She got stuck in to helping out on the drinks van with my mother, Dawn Lawrie. I acknowledge that Dawn was in the drinks van all afternoon handing out drinks which we sold for $1 a soft drink, and bottled water was free. All the local community really enjoyed the fact that the food was free and the drinks were affordable. It made it a really fun, affordable day for families. The drinks were arranged by me through Parmalat. I acknowledge Parmalat. They provided us with a drinks van. They also provided us with free donated bottled water, and they also donated their barbecue bullet which assisted greatly with our barbecue efforts.
Karama Shopping Centre is owned by the La Pira family. I acknowledge the donation of La Pira family, Joondana Investments, in providing the cover of the cost of the soft drinks. A very big effort from them to fork out close to $400 to cover the cost of the soft drinks, so I thank them very much as well.
It was a day of community activity. We started off with the Manunda Terrace Rope Ragers from the local school. They put on a beautiful performance to kick the day off with their very talented young team of skipping rope experts, who are fundraising again for another trip to Sydney for the nationals.
We had some sack races, which the kids loved. We did some tug-o-war, we had some wheelbarrow races, and there was great excitement for the kids getting stuck into the fun activities.
The sign choir performed. Rachel Kroes does a really good job with the Sing-Song Sign Choir. Many of the girls in the choir live in the Karama electorate and they are a great bunch of kids who have been learning sign language on Saturday mornings for about three years now. They are becoming regular and popular performers at various events around Darwin.
We also had a beautiful dance performance by children from the Holy Family School. They had created the performance for the Northern Territory Catholic Schools Performing Arts Festival and brought it back to stage for us on the weekend. It was just magnificent. Thank you to the girls there.
Karama Primary School performed the Wakakirri Dance performance that they had created for the recent Wakakirri competition - a very colourful performance by those young students at Karama Primary School. It was great to see both boys and girls getting involved in those dance performances.
I want to thank Lisa Greenslade, a hard-working member of Karama Neighbourhood Watch, who had her granddaughters perform a very beautiful Filipino traditional dance for us on the day. It was a delight. The crowd was enraptured by the costume and the grace of the dancing. A big thank you to Lisa for her huge efforts in organising the day with Ted Dunstan and I.
I want to acknowledge John Lear from Anula Neighbourhood Watch. He is a member of the Neighbourhood Watch Board and he is quite enthusiastic in dipping in and helping out other Neighbourhood Watch groups. He certainly put in a good effort with helping us out in both organising and assisting as a volunteer on the day.
I acknowledge the African community who came along. There was a group of about 20 boys ranging in ages from what appeared to be about age five up to early high school age, and they were fantastic dancers. It was great to see so many boys up on stage really showing their dancing ability. It inspired the crowd.
Congratulations to everyone who took the time to go there and participate in this community event. It really is a lovely way of bringing the community together. The theme of the day is to have fun, and everyone I was speaking to on the day indicated they were having a fun time. That was in no small part due to the fact that the fire brigade turned up towards the end of the day, when call-outs permitted, and they put on the foam machine for the kids. I have to say the squeals of delight spoke volumes for what a great role the firies play in ensuring kids have a good time with that foam machine.
I want to thank Chandra and Hemali Senevratne, Sandy Oldroyd, and Kevin and Rita Cluley. They volunteer whenever it is required and it is really and truly appreciated. Leigh and Barbra Kariko from Malak Neighbourhood Watch came over to see how the fun day operated, to get some ideas about Malak Neighbourhood Watch in order to do something similar. They were there all afternoon, volunteering right from set-up stage to pack-up stage. They are a tremendous couple. I know they have young kids, yet they put in a huge effort on the day to help our Karama Neighbourhood Watch.
I congratulate everyone involved. I thank the chair of Neighbourhood Watch, Ken Mildred, who was very handy in identifying any assistance Neighbourhood Watch could provide. They paid for jumping castles and a kids activity centre, which was great.
I thank St John Ambulance for coming down with an ambulance. There were plenty of kids walking around heavily bandaged. The good news is they were not injured; they were just having fun being bandaged up by the St John Ambulance volunteers.
I also acknowledge the efforts of Paul Wyatt. He is on the Neighbourhood Watch Board. I believe he is up to about 15 000 sausages that he has managed to cook over the years in his community activities. Paul, thank you for adding to your tally of sausages by helping out on the barbecue for Karama Neighbourhood Watch.
It really is an entire community effort. A lot of people put their efforts into helping out, and it is great to see. There were other Neighbourhood Watch board members there whose names I do not know, but I will be finding out in due course and writing to them and thanking them. It is just great to see so many people getting stuck into to helping out.
The police were tremendous yet again. I have to acknowledge especially the work of Acting Sergeant Geoff Pickering, who is working out at Community Policing Unit and working with Neighbourhood Watch groups throughout the northern suburbs. I did joke to Geoff, early in the morning when we were setting up, that he could not be envied because, while we were shifting vans and setting up some heavy equipment, he had the able assistance of myself and Ted, who is confined to a wheelchair. A fairly heavily pregnant woman and a guy in a wheelchair were not tremendous physical assistance to Geoff, but he took it all with good humour and got stuck in and did a lot of the heavy shifting, carrying and moving of equipment.
It just goes to show that we all have things to contribute in our community. If you have the desire to bring a community together to enhance a community, it really does work. Hundreds of kids had a huge time there on Sunday. A lot of parents stood around, and you could see smiles on people’s faces. There really was a sense of enjoyment with a community that was incredibly harmonious, and it was a real delight to participate. I certainly look forward to the event being held again next year.
I want to acknowledge the NT Catholic Schools Performing Arts Festival that I attended on Friday, 6 August, at the Darwin Entertainment Centre. The theme was Celebrating Catholic Education. I congratulate the choir, led by Lourdes Valles, with the artistic arrangement by Cassandra Mahony. It is a very lovely Catholic combined school choir, which really only had one particular afternoon of rehearsing as a combined choir, but they did a magnificent job. Kirsty McCallum, yet again, was just fantastic with her orchestra and her work on the piano. She is an inspiration to many talented musical children who I know are getting great benefit from her at O’Loughlin Catholic College.
I acknowledge the work of the schools involved: Holy Spirit School, St Paul’s, St Mary’s, Sacred Heart at Palmerston, Holy Family in my electorate of Karama, St Francis of Assisi at Humpty Doo and St Joseph’s College, Katherine. They all participated in the Catholic schools combined choir, and the combined orchestra had O’Loughlin College, St John’s College, St Mary’s School and the Holy Family School.
There were terrific performances. With the choir and the orchestra, they put on some beautiful music and some lovely singing. There was also a dance performance by St Paul’s. I was impressed with the screening of videos that included Our Lady of the Sacred Heart College in Alice Springs, and a projection slide from our Indigenous Schools Music Program. It was just a very impressive evening of dance, song and celebration, and a real showcase of the music and artistic talent that you see in our Catholic schools.
I congratulate the Catholic Education Office and the diocese of Darwin for putting this together. They try and provide a holistic approach to education. I know that they are very nurturing in their educational approach, and I know my own children get great benefit out of the very nurturing approach taken at Holy Family School. I know Jacqui Thompson, the acting Principal at Holy Family School, is doing a terrific job there while the Principal, Marg Hughes, is on leave. It is a small school in the electorate that is growing in popularity, especially since Rainbows was created, which takes in the early learning aspects of the centre.
Whilst I am an absolute avid supporter of our public school system, having been a product of the Territory’s public school system myself and working very closely with Malak, Manunda Terrace and Karama Primary schools in my electorate, and also Sanderson High, I understand there is a role for Catholic education. I really support the work being done by the Catholic Education Office here in the Territory. Our Catholic schools in the Territory have a very Territory flavour to them. They are not as strict as one would anticipate, and they really do focus on community and nurturing. I know they extend themselves to make sure that they have good indigenous programs running through the core of much of their curriculum. They celebrate Reconciliation Day every year; we participate in a whole range of activities.
I congratulate the Catholic schools for what was a really very lovely evening at the Darwin Entertainment Centre on Friday, 6 August. I was delighted to be one of the sponsors of that in my capacity as the member for Karama.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I would like to talk about the redistribution and give an explanation to the House as to why I put objections into the redistribution of my electorate. I will also explain or detail some of the happenings since that has occurred, from a political aspect.
My objections to the changes in the Nelson electorate are based on a number of reasons. There were three electorates in the Darwin region that had roughly the same population - they were Casuarina, Fannie Bay and Nelson. Of those three, only Nelson had a boundary change. As well as that, of those three electorates, Nelson had the only population change of a positive kind since the last redistribution. Nelson’s elector population increased by 1.65% since the last redistribution, Fannie Bay went down by minus-2.38% and Casuarina went down by minus-2.65%. For some unknown reason, Nelson had a boundary change. As well as that, the Redistribution Committee decided that there would be no changes to Fannie Bay and Casuarina because of perceived growth in either the Lee Point area or the Port Darwin area. It took no account, not only of perceived growth, but actual growth in the Nelson electorate and, therefore, decided to change the boundaries of the Nelson electorate. Once again, that was an unfair redistribution.
I will make a comment on the redistribution being based on what future growth is. I do not believe that the Redistribution Committee can look at future growth. It should look at the population as of a certain date. You could look at Lee Point, for instance, in Casuarina and say: ‘Yes there will be 1000 blocks of land’. However, only 15 of them might be turned off next year. Therefore, there is no guarantee that the population is going to go whump all of a sudden. Therefore, for the sake of consistency, the redistribution of all boundaries should be based purely on the population at a certain date. After that, if the population increases, when it comes the time for redistribution, boundaries are adjusted accordingly.
The other area, of course, that the Redistribution Committee is required to look at is community of interest. In fact, it says in the book that one of the objectives of electoral redistribution as set out in section 139 of the Electoral Act is to look at identifiable communities, and they should be included in only one division if practicable.
As people know, Robertson Barracks has been proposed to be put into the Nelson electorate, and there is very good reason, from the Redistribution Committee’s point of view, to do that. It is because the electorate of Brennan was 19% over the quota and, to reduce that, they naturally had to do something with the boundaries of Brennan. So, they just plonked the barracks into the Nelson electorate. From a community of interest point of view, which is a requirement of this redistribution, there is not a community of interest between an Army barracks and rural land, made up primarily of people living on five acre blocks.
I believe that the redistribution should have put Robertson Barracks into the electorate of Drysdale, which already has existing Defence land in the form of ex-Coonawarra land, and also has quite a number of people from the Defence Forces living in areas like Fairway Waters. Drysdale’s boundary could have been purely adjusted by taking out Woolner and placing it into Fannie Bay, therefore giving Fannie Bay a boost in population - because it was below the quota like Nelson - and putting Knuckey Lagoon, which is a rural area just like the Howard Springs/Humpty Doo area, into Nelson. You would then have had a Defence community of interest in one electorate and a rural community of interest in another electorate. I believe that makes sense. It has nothing to do with politics; it has to do with a fair redistribution of boundaries.
I placed those arguments which I believe are logical before the augmented Redistribution Committee. It is, I presume, their job now to make judgment on whether or not my arguments are strong enough to have a change of boundaries or not.
The one disappointing thing that I have found in this whole process is that this is being used - that is, my objections to the barracks being in Nelson - by some parts of the CLP to say that I am anti-Army. I find that downright disgusting, actually. I have spent a lot of time, both as president of the council and as the member for Nelson, working hard to try to foster a good relationship with the Army, especially through our Anzac Day cricket match which was designed, primarily, to recognise the importance of the Army in the Litchfield Shire, and to raise money for Army families through Legacy. I will continue to do that. Yet, just recently at the Knuckey Lagoon flea market on Sunday, a particular candidate from the CLP happened to be talking to two people who are very good friends of mine. One of them even has a very high award in the Territory for services to the Territory. Before I tell you what that person said, I double checked with each person that what I am saying today is accurate, otherwise I would not say it. That person said that ‘Gerry Wood is anti-Army, he supported them when he was on the Litchfield council, but he does not want to know them now, and Gerry must have changed his spots since then because he now gets more money’.
I just find that below the belt. I had to put up with this in the last election. I made a statement on the radio, for instance, that I did not support mandatory sentencing, but I do support people going to gaol for breaking into houses. During the election campaign, the first part of that sentence was quoted and the second part left off. That was deliberately done to try to tell people that I said something that I did not say. It was just done to trick people into believing I had said that I was soft on crime. Here is another case of the same thing happening.
I looked at the redistribution according to the act. I put my argument about the redistribution based only on that. I do not have any fear of the barracks; I support the barracks. In fact, I have had an election as president of the council with the barracks included, and I won that election. Therefore, why should I have anything to fear about the barracks? As I have gone around my electorate, I have found many people saying: ‘Why are they putting the barracks in our electorate?’ We deal with issues like how many horses on a block of land, what can you do on five acres - all those rural issues. They are not issues of Defence. I do not mind dealing with Defence issues, but if you look at the redistribution requirements, you would certainly try to put Defence areas in the one electorate. That makes sense. However, to have people make statements - and obviously the person did not realise that one of those was my sister and the other person was, as I said, a person who has received one of the highest awards in the Northern Territory - can give people …
Dr Burns: Sounds like the bloke we are talking about, anyway. No names, no pack drill.
Mr WOOD: I am not saying. No, it is not, so you are wrong there.
Dr Burns: You said he was a candidate.
Mr WOOD: That is all I am saying. You will have to sort that out for yourselves. I am not interested in the person; I am interested in what is being put out. I had two CLP friends ring me up recently - this was before this occurred - and said: ‘Gerry, you are going to find you are going to be targeted for being anti-Army because you came out and said the barracks should not be within your electorate’. They were dead right.
Tomorrow, I believe that there are a number of people from the CLP who are going to visit the barracks. Two of those are candidates, and they are going to talk to the 1st Brigade. Wouldn’t I like to be a fly on the wall! If I hear that this sort of statement has been made about me again, I will publicise it again and again, because this is what people get sick of. I did not run for politics for this sort of stuff. I came from a council background, which had no party politics.
The thing that people hate is the depth we get to sometimes just to win an election. In other words, there are no holds barred, we break all the rules, you tell all the lies, you drive people’s character into the ground, into the mud, just because you have to win the next election because ‘our party is better than the other side’. People hate that. Politicians have the lowest standing in the community. Look at all the surveys. Why? Because we treat one another like the proverbial ...
Dr Burns: I love you, Gerry.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, member for Johnson. That is what tends to happen: when you get towards election, sure enough, there will be some vigorous debate. Why isn’t it vigorous debate? Why isn’t it saying: ‘I can do this for the community’. Why is it: ‘That person, he sleeps with her’ or ‘We know what that person does’? It is always character assassination. That is bad and why people have a lot of disregard for politics in general.
We have to do our best to improve that. We are not going to encourage people to get into politics if that is the way we carry on. There should be a lot more people putting up their hands for politics. That makes a healthier democracy. However, when you get this sort of attitude, when people know that, if you put your head up, there is someone out there looking for the grubbiest way to pull you down, why bother? I have a lot of people say to me: ‘I would not have your job for quids’. Sometimes I say: ‘I do not blame you’. This is the bad side of politics. I have many good friends in the CLP. This is not a blatant blast at the CLP; there are some sections of the CLP that never learn and have never moved into the 21st century.
What is funny about all this is that I was not the only one who believed the barracks should not be in the Nelson electorate and should be in the Drysdale electorate. The important thing is that the CLP believed exactly the same thing. Either the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing or there is a split, but the CLP wing saw that the logic. I see the logic. I am glad of their support and I appreciate that, but when I see my statements about the barracks being interpreted as anti-Army, I am extremely disappointed. If people say that publicly, I will certainly make sure their words are publicised. I will mount an argument in the strongest possible way and I ask those people to come down to an Anzac Day cricket match that we have held for the last four years and say: ‘Who is anti-Army?’ The Strauss cricket ground is not even in my electorate. There are not many votes on Cox Peninsula Road for me; it is a matter of having some pride in our Defence, preserving our World War II heritage and raising money for Legacy.
I say to those people who issuing those statements: ‘Shut up. Get your facts right, and get a life. If you cannot win without having to stoop to that level, just give it away’.
Dr TOYNE (Stuart): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to speak tonight about an Italian community event that was held in Central Australia. I was delighted to host a function for the Italian community in Alice Springs with the assistance of Fred Marrone, President of the Italian Sports and Social Club in Darwin, who happened to be in Alice at the time.
The Italian community has made a significant contributions to the development of the Centre. Many Italians came over in the days of the mica mining at Harts Range. I was delighted to be able to chat to Mr Guiseppe Antonelli about his days working in the rough, harsh and primitive conditions there. He was there with his wife, Mrs Angela Antonelli, and their children and beautiful granddaughter, Chiara, who stole the show. What a wonderful name! Other early settlers such as Mr Baldissera whose three children came to the function, made journeys largely forgotten today, but surely as difficult as those of the early explorers. He and others walked huge distances from places such as Port Augusta and Oodnadatta to reach the ‘interior’, as he always called it – a place mysterious and unknown in those days. The courage of these early settlers must always be recognised.
I was very pleased to meet Mrs Terese Fadelli the mother of Bruce Fadelli, who has been a long-standing resident in Alice Springs, and is a lovely woman.
Italians have long been involved in the building industry in Alice Springs – the Golottas, the Bonannis and the Donas are just some of the families with a long history in our construction industry. Others were involved in the citrus and horticultural industry and, of course, our restaurant cuisine would not be the same without the enormous influence of the Italians, who ensured a good supply of homemade red wine and superb pasta long before it was trendy in inner Melbourne. Even today, Alice would not be the same without Carmella Giardina’s Casa Nostra.
Fred Marrone addressed the function about the need to keep hold of the Italian heritage that was gathered through the now disbanded Verdi Club. I spoke to both Jimmy Delgiacco and Joe Golotta, both former presidents, about this issue. It is now up to the Italian community to decide if they want to keep hold of this heritage and how, perhaps working with the Italian Sports and Social Club in Darwin, it could be looked after and displayed. There is certainly a lot of interest in the idea, particularly if the Italian heritage could be displayed somewhere in Alice Springs, perhaps with the help of our new Alice Springs archives. Pat Jackson, the archivist who is now working there, is certainly keen to help the Italian community ensure that their heritage items are kept and maintained for future generations.
I could not let this item pass entirely without commenting on some of the fairly ignorant media comment about this event, amongst others, in the context of the Greek celebration of their cup victory. To immediately brand every government event as being some sort of party, or a rampant wastage of taxpayers’ money, is very ill-informed. This event was an important one for the Italian community. It was certainly worth every penny involved in getting a venue and, unless there is some serious suggestion that we pick a tree in the Todd River bed, boil a billy and have a meeting with 70-plus senior members of the Italian families, I am not sure how else you could do the things that we were doing. The proof of the pudding will be in an important new initiative to help our Italian community - a community that is not newcomers or emigrants who have come out long after Alice Springs was founded but, indeed, were part of the founding group that started the town off and has continued to build it right through. They are a core group in our community and they absolutely deserve the recognition that we are trying to help them achieve.
I would like now to talk about a couple of our long-standing health professionals who are retiring from the Department of Health. Mary Dyer retired from service as the Supervising Scientist for the Haematology Laboratory at Royal Darwin Hospital in February 2004. This ended nearly 30 years of distinguished service and association with the department at Royal Darwin Hospital.
Mary arrived in Darwin on 12 July 1973 with just $5 in her pocket, and she immediately found employment cleaning rental cars. On 16 July 1973, Mary was interviewed by Dr Jrgen Rode, who told her that she was overqualified for a job in the laboratory, but that they were desperate for staff and asked if she could start immediately. Mary’s intention was to earn some money so that she could resume her travel holiday. Mary started work on 16 July 1973 in the Microbiology Laboratory as a laboratory assistant.
In August 1974, the desire to travel hit again and Mary resigned to go backpacking. On Christmas day 1974, Mary’s brother woke her with the news that Darwin had been all but destroyed by Cyclone Tracy. Mary contacted the laboratory to ask if she was needed, and arrived back in Darwin in May 1975. Mary was employed as Medical Laboratory Scientist and moved to the Haematology Laboratory where she became Supervising Scientist; a position she then held until February 2004. Mary’s contribution to the Pathology Department has been significant. Many of her junior staff have gained significant skills in haematology. As a result, many patients have benefited from her skills and, without doubt, she has contributed to the saving many Territorian lives.
I am sure Mary Dyer will be greatly missed by staff and friends in the Pathology Department, and I wish her well in her well-earned retirement.
The other person who has departed recently from our agency is Janette Conti, who is a registered nurse. Building a Healthier Community is based on the women and men working within our Health and Community Services system. The Department of Health and Community Services is made up of many dedicated staff such as Janette, who have provided years of dedicated service. On her retirement after almost 40 years of dedicated service, this evening I would like to highlight the contribution that Janette Conti has made.
Janette commenced duties as a registered nurse at the old Darwin Hospital in 1964. During this career, Janette has, no doubt, witnessed many changes to the health system; has provided service through the devastation of Cyclone Tracy; assisted the East Timorese evacuees in 1975; assisted the Vietnamese refugees over the next few years after that; was an evening supervisor at the old Darwin Hospital; was a day nursing supervisor during the transition period from the old Darwin Hospital to the Royal Darwin Hospital; was in community health specialising in immunisation and screening for sexually transmitted infections; and also was in domiciliary care.
Throughout her career, Janette was highly respected by her colleagues and patients, and noted for her excellent interpersonal skills and professional integrity. I thank Janette for her dedicated contribution, and wish her well for her well-earned retirement.
I want to finish this contribution to the adjournment debate by talking about an encounter I had with a nurse at the remote community of Ampilatwatja. I was doing a normal visit around my electorate to this community to the north-east of Alice Springs, and dropped in on the Aherrenge Health Service clinic to talk to the staff there about how things were going. I met Oona, one of the nurses there and, when I asked how things were going, I got a very passionate and general answer, I guess, to the situation remote health is now seeing in our communities, because I do not think Ampilatwatja is out of the ordinary in the health profiles and the work that the service is dealing with there.
Oona was, as I said, very passionate about the difficulties that we are facing. She was saying things like ‘How are we going to be judged in 20 years time when we see kids who are growing up and not being protected by their domestic situation, from early infections such as scabies and kidney infections and other skin infections?’ She was seeing kids two years old who already had significant damage to their kidneys. She was seeing kids five years old, where it is almost certain that they would be on a dialysis machine by the age of 30 or before. She said: ‘How can we continue this way? Who has to take responsibility for the current situation, particularly with child health?’ I could not help but agree.
She was saying that, unless we reach a point where the parents and the community leaders join with us in taking responsibility for these things, it is no longer enough or constructive to go into the future simply pointing to the health system and its health professionals and saying: ‘What have you done about this? Why is this going so badly?’ What she was really saying is that it is not just a case of seeking a partnership with indigenous parents and indigenous community leaders, but it is actually reaching a critical point where, if we do not get that working partnership, we simply are not going to produce the outcomes.
I came away and, I must admit, I have been thinking very heavily about what she had to say, particularly with the depth of her obvious commitment to her profession and to the outcomes she felt had to come from the work that she was doing. I hope there are a lot of Oonas out there. I believe and know that, if we can link up the many indigenous people who do have a heartfelt desire to work for their people and for the outcomes, and to take responsibility with us for the outcomes that have to be achieved then, perhaps, at least in some part in remote health and our health system, we can look to getting a better outcome than the terrible toll of people entering kidney failure and other chronic disease states.
I guess the most sobering thing in what she had to say was that, in many cases, the trajectory towards those chronic diseases has been settled by the age of two to five. If we are going to break out of the current health statistics, we have to do something urgently with that age group to break the cycle between generations.
Dr BURNS (Johnston): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, there was a fantastic night for the 8th India at Mindil Festival on 19 June this year. Government was very proud to sponsor this event which showcases the incredible Indian culture. Many of the locals, as well as others from overseas, came to showcase Indian culture to Darwin. There was not only culture but fantastic cuisine, holiday planning, fashion and entertainment, all brought together by the Indian Cultural Society of the Northern Territory.
I was very pleased to meet Mr Ganapathi, the Indian Consul General from Sydney; Mr Jay Jayaraman, President of the Indian Cultural Society, Mrs Ruma Chakravarti, the hard-working secretary of the society. Also there was Dr Ram Vemuri and his wife, Jyoti, and Priya and Bharat Desai of Moil. Mr Ratan Ghosh and his wife, Kabia, were also there and Kabia played the sitar. She is a very serious sitar player and has had formal instruction many years before coming to Australia. Her music is very beautiful to listen to. Of course, also there was Dr Ganeesh Ramdoss, his mother and sister, who are a great family. They are a very well-known family and have been in the Nightcliff area for many years. I certainly enjoy the company of Ganeesh and his mother and sister.
The Chief Minster was there, along with the Minister for Ethnic Affairs, who was very enthusiastic on the night, and Janicean Price, who is retiring as Director of Ethnic Affairs. She has done a fantastic job over many years.
Jaya and Aditi Srinivas were MC and there was a lot of fun and banter. Ram and Meeta Konesh, Bill Chakravarti and his entire family from Alawa were participants and part of the audience, together with a young tabla player, Deepak Lal from Wagaman, Sumesh Dhir, Vinod Jain, a former president of the society, Helen Fegan, Devjani Ghose, Megha Raut, Sebastian Kampallil, and also the Verma family from Moil.
This was the biggest India at Mindil ever, with over 12 000 people enjoying this unique event. There were so many people, in fact, that some of the stalls ran out of food at the end of the evening. There were over 40 stalls selling not only Indian food but Asian, Vietnamese and Malaysian - you name it, and it was there; very delicious. I would have to say there was Indian beer that was very popular - Kingfisher beer which came in the extra strong variety, about 9% - and a lager. I tried the lighter variety. In fact, as in cricket, there was another case of India giving the Aussies a real run for their money because the organisers still had cartons of VB left long after the Kingfisher had sold out; so a great success there also.
There was also a fashion parade organised by Megha Raut which was great, and also sari demonstrations. Some of the parades showcased traditional Indian wear and costumes which were very beautiful. Some of the younger people modelled them. It is a great way to showcase culture.
The entertainment was fantastic, with a large musical ensemble performing, plus two visiting cultural groups from overseas, from the Singapore-based Apsara Arts and the Kohinoor Bhangra group of performers. Both of them were very spectacular.
I also heard that the visiting Consul General personally contacted all dignitaries on his return to Sydney to thank them for a fantastic night. An Indian tourism pavilion was very popular with the Mindil visitors and catered for all those interested in visiting India. That is something I would like to do some time in the future.
Of course, the government is very proud to support this event, with $20 000 of funding plus another $5000 ancillary to that. We are very proud to support the Indian Cultural Society to showcase their culture. It is a great night out for Darwin people and visitors to Darwin, and it was fantastic.
It is a bit sad to hear that Jay Jayaraman has decided not to stand as president again, after having held the position of president five times. He has done a great job. Along with the support of his committee, he has India at Mindil to where it is today; a lot of the success must go to him. However, there are plenty on that committee I can see who will carry on that great work.
On 4 July, I attended the Shannon’s All Club Car run, which was held at Hidden Valley. I am patron of the Motor Vehicles Enthusiasts Club and I am proud to hold that position. I believe Daryl Manzie held it before me, and I am very pleased to be patron of that club. Gary Turbill, Manager of Shannon’s Ltd, handed over Hidden Valley to the motor vehicle club for the day, and Dave Collins coordinated another highly successful day for car enthusiasts.
Vehicles met at the club hangar at Parap in the early morning and, led by Dave Collins in his Holden ute, convoyed through the Darwin environs ending up in Hidden Valley for a run around the valley. This was a fantastic day, with everyone having a go, doing their three laps, categorised into vintage and style vehicles, before returning to Pit Lane on their ‘run down’ lap.
Lunch on the hill overlooking the valley of the V8s was wonderful. It was a great barbecue, and the whole day went brilliantly. Dave Collins is to be congratulated on a well-organised event attended by over 53 vehicles. Among the vehicles were, of course, Syd Stirling’s Corvette driven by Peter O’Hagan in Syd’s absence. Syd had to be in Nhulunbuy that day, but that was a bit of excitement - a bit of a red flash roaring around the track. Syd is really going to try and be there next year because it is a fantastic day.
There were GT Falcons also there racing each other, a couple of E-TYPE Jaguars belonging to John Hammett and Colin Beaumont who, of course, is in the taxi industry; Ben Munneke’s Model A Ford, John Palamountain and his original HR Holden - I can remember when they were original, and those vehicles are a lot of fun; and Eddie Furlin’s Datsun 2000 Sports. Ian Melville took me around in his 1964 Humber Super Snipe. Ian’s son, Lachie, and my son, David, went through the RAAF together at the Defence Force Academy, and they are great mates. Through other connections, I have come to know Ian and Lorna. Ian is a great enthusiast and, as we went around in the old Humber Super Snipe - I actually owned one of those, second-hand, many years ago; an armchair on wheels. Ian had a look on his face and the wheels were squealing, and we beat a few home on the day. It was a bit of excitement and the old Humber went through its paces.
The MG Club joined the party in force with five vehicles doing their thing. I was talking to Steve Sjoberg, the Principal of Casuarina Senior College and, unfortunately, the electrics on his MG failed and he could not do the laps. However, he is champing at the bit to have a go next year.
Most vehicles managed to stay on the track. However, I believe a Morris Oxford tried to improve his placing by cutting around the field. I also heard the amazing story about Bob McDonald of Kakadu Air, who bought a Chev Camaro when he lived in America, but had to sell it when it left. Fifteen years later, he went back to America and decided to track down his old car. Amazingly, he found it, bought it, shipped it back to Australia, and it was fantastic to see the car at Hidden Valley doing laps.
On 17 July, I attended the Bastille Day Formal Ball celebrations. The French community held a Bastille Day at the Marine Coastal Park on Stokes Hill wharf on 17 July. It is a venue that I have never been to before, but it is a fantastic venue, overlooking the harbour. Everyone commented on what a lovely venue it was with lovely sea breezes. It was a fantastic night, with over 250 people celebrating, including 40 French Air Force officers engaged in the Pitch Black exercise. The French Naval Attach also came up especially for the event from Canberra.
Ms Lea Mussak, the President of the Alliance Francaise de Darwin, and Barbara Baggley, the secretary, must be commended on the wonderful night of food, entertainment, and company which ensured the Bastille Day Ball was the great success it was.
At the ball, I saw Colette and Alain Lecul, who live in the Johnston electorate, and Lydie Marques, also from my electorate, as well as Zoe Marchant, the Honorary French Consul. Also there was Marie-Benedicte Harrison, who has been awarded a Lgion d'Honneur by the French President for services to the French people of Darwin. Congratulations to Marie-Benedicte on a great honour. The highlight of the night was the Can Can dancers from the Ricardo Dance Studio, who absolutely wowed the crowd with their energetic performance. I certainly know that the Air Force officers enjoyed it very much.
On 18 July, I attended the Greek Glenti 2004 ‘Thank You’. That was put on for all those who volunteered to help out at the Greek Glenti in 2004. Along with many members of parliament, I helped out on one of the drink stalls. It was hard work, but raised money for a good cause, particularly for the sporting clubs and juniors - It is fantastic. I had a fantastic time, as I said, behind the bar at the Glenti, and shared a drink with John Nicolakis, who is also my landlord, who is very active in support of the Glenti celebrations. Dominique Lambrinidis and Mary Klonaris were also at the table on the night of the ‘Thank You’ celebration, and we had a great night. Also present was a crew from a Greek tanker that was supplying fuel for Pitch Black, and we had a great time. I had a couple of Ouzos - just as well I was not driving. There was very good fellowship that night.
On 20 July, I was very fortunate to have lunch at the Tuesday Senior Citizens Group at Casuarina, something I am rarely able to do, as Cabinet usually meets on Tuesdays. However, when it does not meet on Tuesdays, I go and fellowship and meet with the senior citizens. Along with my colleague, the member for Nightcliff, Jane Aagaard, I had a great time catching up with old friends such as Doris Ford, who does such a fantastic job ensuring the Tuesday get-together runs smoothly with lots of prizes and activities. Eric Harris was there, filling in at present as the bingo caller, doing a fantastic job while Pat Wright, who is usually the very popular caller, has been incapacitated. We wish Pat all the best and hope that she is back calling bingo soon. Marie Heavey does a great job ensuring everyone is fed and happy. June Daley, who lives in Wagaman, is a great community-minded person, was there, and it was great to fellowship with her. Val McDonald, who is also a part of the Blind Bowling Group which had such success in national competition over the last year, Lillian Hamilton, Tandra Konesh and Olga Pereira were there enjoying the bingo.
Mr Deputy Speaker, it is a real privilege to go along to these particular events, and I value it greatly. I have a lot more to speak of, but I will have to save that for another night.
Mr McADAM (Barkly): Mr Deputy Speaker, tonight I pay tribute to Mr John Lavery who was recently awarded Territorian of the Year for our region of Tennant Creek and Barkly.
John arrived in Tennant Creek in 1975, along with his wife, Kirsty and their eldest daughter Kim. Right from the very start, John became actively involved in community activities and community events and was employed on local projects around town, particularly the building of the new hospital, the high school and other housing projects that were occurring at that time.
In 1979, John was given the opportunity to buy out his employer and start his own plumbing business. John has been in this business for some 25 years and has helped and/or assisted up to eight apprentices during this period. I guess that is indicative of John’s commitment and dedication to young people. Through his business, John has donated time, given immense financial support, and offered his own equipment and machinery to many groups and individuals in Tennant Creek - organisations such as the Tennant Creek Memorial Club, the Tennant Creek Speedway, the Barkly Rodeo, and a whole host of others.
As his family grew up and John and Kirsty had three other daughters, Elizabeth, Karen and Katherine, John’s involvement turned to those activities in which his daughters were involved by providing support to the local preschool committee, to the saddle horse club where his daughters were active participants, and to the marching girls who were also in existence at that time. It has been reported to me that, over the years, it was not unusual to see John working over many a hot barbecue, serving at the bar, or assisting in working bees for many or, indeed, most of the sporting and community groups in and around Tennant Creek.
John is also actively involved with the Barkly football league, now known as the Giants Reef League. In particular, he has a great love and passion for the Magpies Football Club, where John was able to encourage local members and committee members to assist him in handing out up to 700 gifts every year for our Christmas tree event. John and those same people have been doing this now for some 12 years. The actual Christmas tree event has been going for something like 60-odd years.
John has also been involved in the St Patrick’s Day Race Club since its inception round about 20-odd years ago, and much of the success of the Tennant Creek Racing Club, its facilities and the St Pat’s Day race meeting is attributed to John’s ongoing commitment and dedication to racing. John also has an interest in race horses today. I understand he has an interest in a horses called Litigious and Apiary. I know that John is looking forward to seeing those horses perform in the near future.
John has also played a role in respect of the development of the King Ash Bay Fishing Club now known as the King Ash Bay and Borroloola Fishing Club. He was also instrumental in assisting the Tennant Creek fishing club in establishing themselves at King Ash Bay.
I spoke to Kirsty, his wife, just prior to the awards. Essentially, she told me that, whether through his involvement as a committee member or as an individual, John has helped most people directly or indirectly, in one way or another, in the Barkly. He does not look for public thanks in return, and that was very obvious when John received his award as Territorian of the Year for the Barkly region. He was very clearly surprised and very humble. It was an honour to be able to present that award to John on that evening. To John, Kirsty, Kim, Elizabeth, Karen and Katherine, we extend our congratulations to your husband and your Dad for his outstanding contribution to the people in Tennant Creek and throughout the Barkly. We thank him very much and we wish you all the very best for the future.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
MESSAGE FROM ADMINISTRATOR
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received message No 24 from His Honour the Administrator, notifying assent to bills passed in the June 2004 sittings.
PETITION
Protection of Daly River
Protection of Daly River
Ms MARTIN (Fannie Bay): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 347 petitioners praying that the Daly River be protected for the benefit of all Territorians. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders, and is similar to a petition presented to the Assembly in November 2003. I move the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
- To the Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory, we the undersigned respectfully
show that the Daly River is a Northern Territory icon and needs to be protected now for the benefit of all
Territorians. We petitioners, therefore, humbly pray that:
in the Daly catchment for large-scale irrigated agriculture;
Daly basin; and
strategies for the Daly catchment that do not result in large-scale tree clearing or irrigation;
and your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
RESPONSES TO PETITIONS
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members responses to petition Nos 56 and 58 have been received and circulated to honourable members. The text of the responses will be included in the Hansard record.
Petition No 56
Mandorah Boat Ramp
Date presented: 1 April 2004
Presented by: Mr Maley
- Referred to: Minister for Transport and Infrastructure
Date response received: 2 July 2004
Date response presented: 17 August 2004
Response:
Access to waterways is an important part of living in the Territory. For this reason, the government maintains
21 boat ramps located across the Territory, as well as the platforms, wharves, jetties and artificial reefs that
support recreational fishing for the benefit of Territorians and visitors.
I acknowledge that since the Mandorah boat ramp was built in April 2003, there have been issues regarding its
useability due to sand build-up. The site of the ramp was selected for reasons of proximity, reduced degree of
exposure and the stability of the surrounding geological environment.
The Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment has found the most cost-effective method to deal
with the build-up of sand is to arrange mechanical removal, on an as-required basis. Arrangements are in place
with the Cox Peninsula Community Government Council for the regular removal of sand from the ramp. The
situation will continue to be monitored.
As is the case with other boat ramps along the Territory coastline, the Mandorah boat ramp is subject to prevailing
weather conditions and extreme tidal movements. Users need to be aware of adverse conditions and exercise
care when intending to launch or retrieve vessels. It is not considered economically feasible to prevent wave action
on an exposed ramp of this nature.
The government continues to realise the importance of recreational fishing infrastructure and has committed
$41.5m, a not insignificant amount, over three years towards improvements.
Petition No 58
- Dundee and Bynoe Haven – Provision of Fresh Water and Basic Infrastructure Facilities
Presented by: Mr Maley
- Referred to: Minister for Transport and Infrastructure
Date response received: 29 June 2004
Date response presented: 17 August 2004
Response:
- A comprehensive report on the study of the available water resources in the Dundee area was forwarded to the
Dundee Progress Association at the end of March 2004. The report recommended that in the Dundee area, surface
water storage be utilised for public water supply (and irrigation), as sufficient groundwater resources are not
available. Depending on the water requirements, site conditions and location, surface water storages can be either
small dams or off-stream storages.
Arrangements for water supply at Dundee were for the developer to install several community wind-powered supply
points, and for these to be maintained by landowners.
In April 2002, the Northern Territory government made a one-off dollar-for-dollar contribution towards
particular maintenance work on the public windmills at Dundee which was required at that time. It was then
suggested to the Dundee Progress Association that it contact the company which developed the subdivision
to clarify its responsibility with regard to maintenance, as ongoing public funding assistance was not possible.
It was reiterated that the developer needs to confirm its responsibility for the wind-powered supply points, and
it was suggested that the Dundee Progress Association contact it directly.
MINISTERIAL REPORTS
New Electoral Commissioner’s Mission to Iraq
New Electoral Commissioner’s Mission to Iraq
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to confirm that the Territory’s new Electoral Commissioner, Kerry Heisner, has been granted leave of absence for three months to assist the United Nations with the task of preparing for the Iraqi elections which are scheduled to be held in January next year.
Mr Heisner was due to take up his appointment as the Northern Territory’s Electoral Commissioner on the 3 August. However, in July, the government received a letter from the Under Secretary-General for Political Affairs of the United Nations, who wrote on behalf of the UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, requesting the services of Mr Heisner to undertake an urgent electoral mission to Iraq. The letter stated that the United Nations is putting together a small team of electoral experts to help organise the Iraqi elections early next year. Mr Heisner has worked with the UN on a number of electoral missions in the past. The UN advised that they consider that his contribution will be crucial to the success of the UN involvement in the electoral process for Iraq.
Mr Heisner reiterated his commitment to his appointment as our Electoral Commissioner, which was due to commence, as I said, in August. However, he asked that the NT government consider this request, given the global importance of the Iraqi elections. While we are anxious for Kerry Heisner to commence work as the Electoral Commissioner, clearly, the elections in Iraq are an international priority. The Territory was, therefore, pleased to be able to assist in international efforts by agreeing to release Kerry Heisner to work with the UN on this occasion. He will work with the UN from the beginning of August until 30 October. I emphasise that the release period is for a maximum of three months only, and this is confirmed in a letter from the United Nations. Mr Heisner will be on leave without pay while he is absent from his position of the NT Electoral Commissioner.
Barry Hamilton was scheduled to retire from the position of Electoral Commissioner in early August, but he indicated his willingness to defer his retirement from our public sector and accept appointment as Acting Electoral Commissioner for the three months until Kerry Heisner’s return from leave of absence. Even though Kerry Heisner will not be here immediately, the position is being held in very capable hands.
A request such as this certainly highlights the calibre of our new Electoral Commissioner. It also highlights that the Territory is a place which attracts people who are held in high regard for their expertise in their chosen field. I will provide background information on Mr Heisner, highlighting his suitability for this important position, and why we consider him the best person for this job.
With the commencement of the new Electoral Act in March this year, the Northern Territory Electoral Commission was established and the position of Electoral Commissioner was created. The position was advertised, interviews held, and Kerry Heisner recommended for appointment to the position. The Leader of the Opposition and the two Independent members of the Assembly were consulted regarding his appointment, as is required by the act.
Kerry Heisner has a broad and varied background in the electoral area; both within Australia and overseas. He was previously the national coordinator for Operation Review of the 1990 federal election as divisional returning officer with the Australian Electoral Commission, and in the Queensland Attorney-General’s department. From 1990 to 1999, Kerry Heisner worked in the Territory as the Australian Electoral Officer, where he was responsible for Commonwealth government electoral management and related corporate affairs. Having worked in the Territory for this nine-year period, he has a sound understanding of Territory specific issues, including those affecting remote areas. He has a keen understanding of how electoral practices are applied to indigenous situations and the requirements for appropriate strategies and education programs that aim to ensure indigenous people are given equal opportunity to vote.
Kerry Heisner also has extensive overseas experience in a variety of electoral roles with the United Nations, the International Foundation of Electoral Systems, and the International Organisation for Migration, and he has provided assistance to other international organisations in countries such as Sierra Leone, East Timor, Austria and Tajikistan. He was Chief of Operations electoral component for the United Nations Assistance Commission in Afghanistan, and was responsible for the revision and implementation of electoral practices in Afghanistan.
The Territory government appreciates the critical work of the United Nations in Iraq, and the importance of doing all that is possible to ensure the success of the forthcoming elections in that country. Accordingly, my government was pleased to release Kerry Heisner from his duties as Electoral Commissioner for three months so that he may assist the United Nations with this extremely important project in Iraq.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, members of the opposition acknowledge the extensive experience of Mr Kerry Heisner and his impressive list of achievements. In the Chief Minister informing the House that the Leader of the Opposition and Independent members were consulted, that consultation was conducted in terms of being informed of the decision made by three interviewees. The result of that consultation …
Ms Martin: No, a panel of three senior public servants, not three interviewees.
Mr MILLS: Three senior public servants. In the process of that consultation, the Chief Minister was informed of the concerns of opposition due to issues that had been of grave concern to the CLP in a previous federal election, which was the nature of an inquiry. There were recommendations made as a result of that. Therefore, in being a consultation, it was basically being informed, and it was my responsibility to inform the Chief Minister of the concerns that the CLP has. We want, more than anyone, a fair go when it comes to electoral matters. In the response to that, I was informed that I would have the opportunity to meet Mr Kerry Heisner, so noting his absence for an extended period of time that opportunity is to be withheld for that extended period of time, which is unsatisfactory. It would have been good if we had that opportunity prior to departure, to have these issues that are of concern to opposition to be addressed so that we can move on.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, Kerry Heisner is a man with enormous experience in the Territory; he has enormous experience and respect around the world. Someone of the stature of Kofi Annan, the UN Secretary-General, wants him specifically to be part of putting together elections in Iraq. We Territorians should be enormously proud that our new Electoral Commissioner is Kerry Heisner, and I welcome him into the job when he returns from doing important work in Iraq after October.
Bradley Case - Finalisation
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, today I inform members of the government’s process for finalising the issues arising from what is known as ‘the Bradley Case’.
The final stage of the long and complex litigation in the matter of NAALAS v Bradley was reached on 17 June 2004 with the High Court rejecting NAALAS’s final appeal points. The case has been running since 2000 and has cost the Territory approximately $2m over the past four years.
With all avenues of appeal now exhausted, government is currently in the process of gathering information, talking to stakeholders, and obtaining advice on options to bring closure to this matter. The government will make a decision when we are confident we have all the relevant information before us. It is no secret that our government has visited this issue several times during its life and, at every stage, we have considered options for settlement and for finalising this very expensive litigation.
As part of the deliberations on this case, a decision was made in 2001 to cease funding an appeal for the member for Brennan against a contempt of court finding. At that time, we also considered whether to exercise our discretion to indemnify the member for costs awarded against him in that matter. After looking at all the circumstances of the case at that stage of the litigation, we decided not to indemnify the member. That decision was the correct decision at that time.
In 2002, with respect of a settlement before the case was appealed to the Full Court of the Federal Court, the government revisited all its previous decisions and explored options for settlement of the case. Those options included consideration of all the cost implications and orders, and whether we should exercise the discretion available to us on those issues. Unfortunately, no settlement was able to be reached before the matter went on appeal to the High Court.
Now that litigation has been exhausted, we will look at it again. The government reserves the right to revisit its decisions, particularly in the context of a court case in which opportunities to settle the matter present themselves as the case moves through the court system.
The government has some discretion regarding enforcement of cost orders and indemnifying parties for costs. We will exercise that discretion, from time to time, according to proper principles. That is the responsible attitude and approach, and we will not be swayed from that approach by false accusations of inconsistency or political game playing.
The issues and interests are many and varied. They include cost orders against NAALAS; the winding up of ATSIC; the role of the federal government; the interests of parties and other players, including Mr Burke; and appropriate legislative responses to prevent such a matter happening again. The biggest contribution that the opposition can make to this process, at this stage, is to back off and let us undertake proper deliberations, and stop posturing for personal interest. We will make this decision based on facts and principles.
I would like to give members the benefit of accurate information concerning the case against the member for Brennan when he was Chief Minister and Attorney-General. The member’s defence to the charge of contempt of court was paid for by the taxpayer to the tune of approximately $40 000. The member was required by the court to personally pay a fine of $10 000. That is not a matter over which we have any discretion. The court also awarded costs against the member, and our government’s decision of 2001 meant that the member was personally required to pay NAALAS’s costs in the contempt proceedings.
In 2002, as part of exploring options to settle this matter, I spoke with the member for Brennan about the possibility of relieving him of the payment of the NAALAS’s costs. There was no secret about that; that was a proper exercise of our discretion.
Madam Speaker, many people have said lots of things through the long history of the various stages of this litigation. In the end, it is my view that people will be judged by history on their actions throughout this matter. This government inherited a crisis in confidence between judiciary and the executive. We have worked hard to heal that rift, and we believe that proper closure on this matter is an important part of correcting that relationship.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, what a fascinating ministerial report. About the only thing I agree with the Attorney-General on is that much has been written and said about, arguably, what is one of the most interesting legal chapters in the Territory’s history. However, apart from that, it seems to me that the statement was full of nothingness.
There was an attempt to recite the history of this interesting proceeding. There was, it seems to me, an indication - faint though it was - that perhaps Cabinet will look at the member for Brennan’s costs, and maybe give him some money back. That would be the decent thing to do, Attorney-General. That is the decent thing to do, especially in light of the fact that government will pick up the tab for the Minister for Community Development’s outrageously incompetent pursuit of proceedings against Warren Anderson. Therefore, what is good for that goose, is good for this gander. You need to give serious consideration to that.
The Labor Party members should all hang their heads in shame, because they did more than just barrack from the sidelines, they pumped up, they geed up, they got everyone in the legal profession - or those Labor-supporting members of the legal profession - incredibly excited about this case. You pumped them up left, right and centre, and now you are in a position of coming up with this statement that means very little indeed, other than, you are essentially giving notice of two bills to be brought on later today that seek to fix something that is not broken.
The member for Brennan’s comments - and the member for Brennan is completely vindicated. What NAALAS did was a stunt; it was a political stunt. It was an enormous waste of taxpayers’ money, and Territorians want to know from you …
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Ms CARNEY: … and you, since you are the one who writes the cheques, whether you are going to pursue NAALAS for their legal costs, because they were awarded against NAALAS. It was a stunt from the beginning, it was always a stunt, and Territorians want their money back. So answer that, Attorney-General.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, despite the outstanding performance by the shadow over there, we will continue to look at this decision in the cold light of day, according to the facts and according to principles of fairness and respect for the history of this matter. I again counsel the opposition: back off, let us make this decision according to the facts.
Multicultural Awards
Mr VATSKALIS (Ethnic Affairs): Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I report on the outcome of the inaugural Multicultural Awards. I am pleased to advise honourable members that the inaugural Multicultural Awards were a great success, and this initiative has shown that our multicultural community continues to thrive.
I officially launched the Multicultural Awards at the government’s 18 March Harmony Day celebrations held in Parliament House. Thirty nominations were received for the four awards across three categories. The Individual and Organisational categories aimed to recognise individuals and organisations that provided: leadership in developing and implementing initiatives that advance our multicultural and harmonious society; consistently countered racism and discrimination and protected human rights; brought together the community; increased cultural awareness in the community and promoted tolerance of other cultures and religions; advanced the rights of all people regardless of cultural or linguistic background; contributed towards capacity building in the community to counter racism and advance multiculturalism; and provided and continuously improved services and working relationships with culturally and linguistically diverse communities.
The Project Initiatives category had similar aims, whilst recognising particular projects rather than individuals or organisations.
I would like to congratulate all those nominated for an award. Being nominated is a great achievement and reflects the significant recognition shown by the community towards people and groups promoting multiculturalism in our society.
To judge the awards, I appointed a panel of six prominent Territorians of diverse backgrounds. They were: John Anictomatis AO, Raymond Chin OAM, Mohammad Nurul Huq OAM, Jenny Medwell OAM, Joan Mullins and Maria Scaturchio. The panel took on the difficult task of assessing the nominations against the department’s criteria, and I wish to take this opportunity to, once again, thank the panel members for their dedication and effort.
On 21 June, I hosted a function to present the awards to the winners. In the category of Young Person Aged Under 25, the winner was Mr Deng Mador Koch. Deng came to Australia on a Humanitarian Visa in 2001 and, since that time, has demonstrated a strong commitment to multiculturalism and counteracting racism, providing support and leadership to newly arrived refugees, and sharing his experiences with the wider community.
In the category of A Person Aged Over 25, it was Ms Marguerite Baptiste-Rooke from Alice Springs. Marguerite arrived from the Seychelles in the mid-1980s and began volunteering in the Migrant Resource Centre in Central Australia in 1988. Since then, she has used her skills to support newcomers and increase harmony and self-reliance amongst the migrants and refugee community.
The Organisation category was won by the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory. The Multicultural Council is the peak body dedicated to advocacy and representing the interests, concerns and aspirations of people from culturally diverse backgrounds in the Northern Territory.
In the Initiative/Project category, Sanderson High School won. The school’s project revolved around 2004 Harmony Days celebrations, and gave students the opportunity to participate in activities that promote cultural understanding, respect, goodwill, appreciation of multiculturalism, and work towards the elimination of racial discrimination. Unfortunately, Sanderson High School was not present at the awards function. However, their award was presented to them on the 12 August in their assembly by the member of Sanderson on my behalf.
I encourage honourable members to actively promote the 2005 awards. A call for nominations will be made in early 2005. I also encourage honourable members to think and provide a name for the awards – a name of a prominent Territorian who helped to counter racism and promote multiculturalism.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for his report. We are always glad to be hear that our multicultural community is well supported by governments of both persuasions. I hasten to add that, with all the money that has been spent - and I look forward to more being dedicated to the multicultural community in the Territory - the minister should ensure that whatever money he spends is not about self-promotion, but actually providing money for the ethnic communities in the Territory.
I join the minister in congratulating the members of the panel; they are well worthy of the position and will make good decisions to support the various applications as they come through. In particular, I would also like to draw attention to Marguerite Baptiste-Rooke, who is now an alderman of the Alice Springs Town Council, and her contribution to Central Australian community, which is greatly appreciated also.
Madam Speaker, it is good to hear the government continues to support multicultural communities in the Territory, and I look forward to continued support. Again, I remind the minister: spend the money on the people, not on yourself.
Mr VATSKALIS (Ethnic Affairs): Madam Speaker, this government is committed to promote multiculturalism and to support the ethnic communities. After all, this government has increased significantly the grants provided to the ethnic communities to $750 000 a year. On top of that, $150 000 is provided for linguistic and cultural awards and, in the last budget, we announced $0.5m a year for the next three years for infrastructure. This money is going without strings attached. It is not to promote anybody’s image; it is money for the multicultural communities.
Of course, the member for Greatorex cannot help himself in always finding something to criticise - whatever good work this government is doing. As for the self-promotion, I would like to ask him to go and look at the newspaper today and see, again, the message of this government congratulating the Indonesian community on the Indonesian National Day today. Of course, it has my photograph, in accordance with the guidelines drafted by the previous government for this kind of publication. So, we are not promoting our image, we actually comply with the guidelines that the previous government put in place.
Defence Contracts
Mr HENDERSON (Defence Support): Madam Speaker, today I inform the House about an issue of importance to our small businesses, and the work of the Northern Territory government in the area of Defence contracts. It is an issue that I have been engaged with for over a year, and it is a situation where the Commonwealth government is yet to respond.
In December last year, the Commonwealth government signed the contract with a company called TenixToll Defence Logistics for the provision of Defence’s national warehousing and distribution services, including maintenance support of selected LAN material and electronic equipment. This significant contract is known as the Defence Integrated Distribution System or DIDS, and is valued up to $920m dollars nationally over 10 years.
In the Territory, an estimated 243 businesses currently provide services under the DIDS profile. Defence-related work has grown significantly over the past years to the situation that we enjoy today where, for instance, Robertson Barracks alone reportedly spends on average $7.4m per year on repairs and has, at any point in time, between 85 and 100 pieces of major equipment in Darwin or Palmerston repair facilities. The Territory’s Defence support industry has significantly grown its capabilities, capacity and response. Many business people have invested heavily in facilities, equipment and in their people in order to provide the necessary support to the growing defence presence in the Territory. Businesses have undertaken accreditation programs and quality assurance systems in order to meet the high expectations Defence has of its contractors.
As we all know, the Defence support industry provides a significant level of local employment and is a key contributor to the Territory’s economy. Following the announcement that TenixToll had been selected as the preferred tenderer in October 2003, I wrote to Tenix and invited them to the Territory to meet industry representatives and provide a briefing on TenixToll and DIDS at the earliest opportunity. The Defence Support Division of my Department of Business, Industry and Resource Development held discussions with TenixToll in February of this year in Darwin, and later in May in Melbourne. It has also held discussions with Defence locally and with the project office for the DIDS contract in Victoria Barracks.
A considerable effort has been made to seek from Defence and TenixToll a briefing for our business people on DIDS, for them to acquire an understanding of what the effects might be on their business and make alternative arrangements. Unfortunately, these discussions have yet to occur and many businesses are now on month-to-month contracts and facing a very uncertain future.
Additionally, I have been consulting with the Northern Territory branch of AIDN, the Australian Industry and Defence Network. AIDN is the representative industry association for Defence industry SMEs, which has also sought information from TenixToll as to how the contracts will be administered here in the Territory and what the likely impact on industry might be, but without success.
The Commonwealth government has policies to grow regional capability for repairs and maintenance for Defence vehicles and infrastructure, and improve opportunities for small to medium enterprises which, in turn, will meet the current and future needs of Defence. These are articulated in the Commonwealth’s own 2000 Defence White Paper and also a 1998 Defence and Industry Strategic Policy Statement that defines those aspirations for growth of industry capability in Australia.
At the local level, AIDN and the NT government have risen to the challenge and are working together to build our Defence support sectors. Immediate steps need to be taken to protect Northern Territory business from any adverse effects of DIDS. The opposite to capability building could happen here in the Territory where businesses could close and jobs could be lost, resulting in disastrous economic and social impacts for the individuals concerned and the community as a whole. The application of the DIDS contract in the Northern Territory certainly has potential to severely reduce the breadth of our Defence industry capability and eliminate opportunities for many local SMEs. Industry and the Territory government are working hard together to increase our Defence support capability in the Territory and the number of businesses that make up this industry.
The government is now calling upon the Commonwealth government to annexe the Top End and the Kimberley region from the Defence contract with TenixToll for two years to allow genuine consultation with Territory businesses which are potentially adversely effected by this contract to take place, and to ensure robust subcontracting arrangements are put in place to ensure that, as far as possible, Territory businesses are not adversely affected by this decision. I move the Assembly take note of this report.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Madam Speaker, as the minister would be aware, there has been an enormous amount of effort by the member for Solomon, Mr David Tollner, to raise this issue at the highest levels of Defence. I attended a meeting that the member for Solomon organised with Defence Minister, Robert Hill, on Saturday morning. In fact, I thought the minister might have been there at that meeting because there were representatives of the AIDN network there along with the Defence Minister, who I applaud for getting up to Darwin so quickly to address this issue.
The issue the minister raised was this: ‘Minister Henderson writes to me on a number of issues on many occasions. He is yet to raise with me once the issue of the TenixToll contracts in the Northern Territory and their effect on business’ - word verbatim from the Defence Minister. When you are there sitting with the Defence Minister, surrounded by the AIDN representatives, and you are trying to emphasise the case that the minister has put forward in his statement this morning, that there are real uncertainties for Territory businesses with regards to how this TenixToll contract would unfold, one of the questions I asked of AIDN was: ‘What is the Northern Territory government doing in this whole process? It has an Office of Defence Support. Surely the Northern Territory government is engaged with the minister’s office to outline the concerns that these businesses have’. Do you know what the minister said? Zip, nothing! Nothing from the minister - no representations. What we see, through this statement today, I believe, is an effort by the minister to highlight uncertainties that may or may not be there.
I can tell the minister this: Dallas Mills, who is the General Manager Operations for TenixToll, will be in Darwin in the next two weeks. He will be meeting with AIDN. That has been organised by Senator Hill, not by your government. Also, Senator Hill has spoken to Mr Salteri, the CEO and senior partner in TenixToll, to outline the issues of being a good corporate citizen in the Northern Territory and how they will unfold this contract. That has all been done by the member for Solomon, not by this Northern Territory government, which has been missing in action during the whole process.
Mr HENDERSON (Defence Support): Madam Speaker, it is obvious that the member for Brennan did not listen to the report at all. We have been actively engaged with TenixToll at ministerial and departmental level since October last year when this contract was awarded. In good faith, we have been in discussions with TenixToll about how appropriate subcontracting arrangements will be put in place here in the Northern Territory, and have worked through that process with TenixToll.
The issue is that businesses in the Territory are now moving to month-by-month contracts. They have no certainty at all in the future of this arrangement, and the only clear way forward to provide certainty for those businesses in the Northern Territory, is for a 10-year moratorium or annexation of the Northern Territory from this contract.
I would have thought we would have had support from the opposition here today for that particular call. It provides a way forward on this debate as opposed to grandstanding. The member for Solomon has been missing in action on this whole issue for the entire term.
Reports noted pursuant to Sessional Order.
MOTION
Northern Territory Statehood Steering Committee – Adopt Terms of Reference
Northern Territory Statehood Steering Committee – Adopt Terms of Reference
Continued from 25 June 2004.
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I seek to propose an expeditious process for the way forward on this debate. By way of background, following agreements reached by the bipartisan committee at the last sittings, this motion was tabled.
The chair of the committee, the member for Barkly, spoke in its favour, as did the member for Macdonnell. The member for Brennan spoke in the debate, raising concerns that he needed further time to consider his position and to consult with his constituents.
In the spirit of seeking to maximise the opportunity for 100% support for the move to statehood and the process that has been agreed to by the bipartisan committee, the government deferred debate on this item until today.
I propose that, by leave of the Assembly, the Assembly permits the member for Brennan to speak again on this motion and advise if his concerns have now been addressed. As it is understood that the terms are supported by the government, the bipartisan committee, the member for Macdonnell, the Opposition Leader and the Speaker, once we have heard from the member for Brennan, we may be in a position to move this matter to rest quite quickly.
By leave, I ask the Assembly to approve the member for Brennan to speak again on this motion and, from then, the debate proceed as per standing orders. Madam Speaker, I seek advice from you that the adjournment that was proposed has now lapsed and debate should now proceed on the motion.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Brennan, before you start, the amendment proposed by the member for Drysdale has lapsed because we have had time to discuss this in consultation, and the matter has been brought on now. It is my ruling that the proposed amendment now be deleted. I am sure the member for Drysdale, by the nodding of his head, agrees.
Mr BURKE (Brennan)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I intend to be brief. At the outset, I was surprised and gratified when I was alerted last evening that the government had decided to allow me to speak briefly on this matter in order to progress and approve of this motion passing through the parliament.
I would like to thank the Leader of Government Business, but that would be wrong because, if one looks at the Parliamentary Record, in the debate at last sittings it was the Leader of Government Business who was going to, at all costs, drive this motion through and use the numbers of the parliament.
I thank the Deputy Chief Minister for his wisdom and who, at the appropriate time, entered the Chamber and exerted experience and wisdom in this process. I thank him for that.
It was not from a position of churlishness that I said I would not support the motion at the last sittings. I am very concerned that the process of achieving statehood for the Northern Territory goes ahead, as we would all wish, in a bipartisan way. It is too cute, frankly, to suggest that, because the parliamentary wing of either side of this House have an agreement on the sort of process that, somehow, that will carry everyone forward. Certainly, from our experience in the CLP, it did not carry everyone forward in the parliamentary wing at all. As members would remember, Mr Hatton was a member of the parliamentary wing. He was not happy with the process and actually was instrumental in forming the Territorians for Democratic Statehood at the last effort that we had in achieving statehood.
Therefore, from my point of view, it was very important that not only was the parliamentary wing, as a whole, agreed and understood the process that we were moving forward to, but also, from my point of view, it was important that we did consult with the CLP as a whole. That was the aim in delaying that particular motion.
The CLP has, as one of its central tenets in its platform, of achieving statehood for the Northern Territory. We went very close to achieving it. Everyone has their own version as to why statehood failed in the past, and I do not intend to revisit that because I do not think it is productive. However, as one member of this Assembly, I can stand up and say that I did everything possible, personally, to achieve statehood and to undertake my responsibilities as best I could. Some might disagree with that, but I can hold myself honestly to that particular position.
It was clear that, even though there were claims at the time that the Constitutional Convention was stacked by the CLP, the reality is, no government can control that particular convention - stacked or unstacked as it might be. It is very important that the process that we go forward on, from this point onwards, is one that we all agree is going to be one that is successful at the end of the day. That was my concern: it was very important that the parliamentary wing of the CLP understood exactly what this steering committee would do; what its responsibilities were; what its relationship to the standing committee was; and also, that we had the opportunity not only to consider that ourselves but, where possible, to consult with our party.
I can report that the Central Council of the CLP met recently. The council has been advised of and agrees with the process, and wants the parliamentary wing to progress and support the government in its actions. I said in the last debate that I have every confidence that the member for Barkly will fulfil his role admirably. I believe that, with a concerted and cooperative approach from everyone, statehood will succeed on this occasion. I certainly give my personal guarantee that I will do everything I can to support statehood moving forward. In that regard, I support the tabled paper passing through the House in this sittings.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Madam Speaker, as a member of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee I contribute positively to the debate on the terms of reference of the NT Statehood Steering Committee.
As many members will know, the Chief Minister referred the issue of statehood to the committee on 18 June 2003. The guidelines or principles that the Territory government undertook were based on the need for transparency, inclusiveness and a structural, democratic process. Fundamental to these needs were the following principles: the process will be community-based and not imposed on the people; and the central principle will be respectful and the proper recognition of indigenous people of the Northern Territory.
In the words of the member for Barkly, the chairman:
- The government has set a five year timetable, including the drafting of a new constitution, its examination
by an elected Constitutional Convention and an eventual vote by all Territorians.
Through this process, members of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee have generally worked hard to commit to these principles, including also the need and recognition for flexibility and transparency; the need to be inclusive in all our discussions about different ideas and views from different people from different walks of life and backgrounds; the need to assist and educate all stakeholders in the process; and, most importantly, the realisation from all Territorians that if we are to achieve our ultimate dream of statehood, bipartisan political support is needed for the process to be successful. The need for the community to have ownership of the process and its outcomes also became very apparent. The community has to feel they own the whole process for it to be a success.
It is vital that the motion to accept the terms of reference be supported by all members. The Statehood Steering Committee model, and their partnership with the Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, is a positive opportunity for all Territorians to obtain statehood.
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank all members of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee - both government and opposition - for the many months and weeks of positive and vigorous debate. I am honestly able to say that every member had the ability to articulate their arguments and concerns, and they were all considered by every member. Finally, thanks must go for all the hard work by the Clerk of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly, Mr Ian McNeill and Rick Gray, who I know for a fact has put in many hours of hard work above the call of duty. Our thanks also go to Mrs Joanne Carbone, whose contribution has been vital to the success of the process.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I seek leave to continue my comments.
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, speaking to the point, in progressing this debate, and in deference to the Leader of the Opposition’s position, we are prepared to approve leave for the Leader of the Opposition to put firmly on the record the CLP comments. However, we do not want to open it up for everybody who has spoken previously on this to speak again. I am prepared to grant that to the Leader of the Opposition and then we can move the debate forward.
Leave granted.
Mr MILLS (by leave): Madam Speaker, I understand that was being extended to all ...
Ms Martin: No.
Madam SPEAKER: The intent of those remarks was for the member for Brennan, but you have now been given leave.
Mr MILLS: I appreciate it. As the member for Brennan correctly stated, a central tenet of the Territory party, the CLP, is the acquisition of statehood for Territorians. The case for statehood is a clear case that is a desire and a will of Territorians right across the Northern Territory to have equal status in the sight of our colleagues in other states. The willingness of Territorians to see this succeed is clear. When the previous exercise was post-mortemed, it was clear that one positive and strong message was given by Territorians: we want statehood.
When the terms of reference had been discussed, it was really the willingness to see this succeed that caused it to be delayed, so that we can make sure that this willingness will translate into placing a trophy on the mantelpiece of the Northern Territory - not a trophy on the mantelpiece of any person who is in the position of facilitating it, being involved in this process.
To know that 29 people have expressed a desire to be involved in this historic event is testament to how important this process is. For Territorians to know that their say, their vote, has the same value as any Australian, is fundamental. It may well be fair, perhaps, that legislation that is conducted and passed in this Chamber can be overturned on constitutional grounds, but if it can be overturned at the decision of a parliamentarian in another parliament, that is offensive and must be corrected. That is why this process is critically important; that it proceeds with the goodwill and the good intention of every Territorian: so that we can advance and prosper the true welfare of every Territorian.
What is at stake is the sovereignty of this very Assembly. This Assembly represents the people of the Northern Territory. That is what is at stake. This is a high order issue, and that is why we must, in good faith, use this process that has been developed by the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee to advance this issue.
There are many models that could be considered and, indeed, they were. There are other alternative means to achieve this. We could talk at legal and constitutional or CPA-type functions and conventions about other ways of doing this; and we could conduct the next five years as an investigation in different models. We have chosen a model, and this model can work with the goodwill of members in this Chamber and members who will occupy this Chamber in time to come.
It is important to bear in mind that, in 1985, a select committee was formed. That is almost 20 years ago. It is important to take a wider view on the progress of this issue in the Northern Territory so that we can see in almost 20 years the progress of this issue as we move through. That is why it is important to make sure that we look back and learn from the past; not in an attempt to look at the past and endeavour to create a little space for yourself and a little moment in the spotlight so that we - the Chief Minister in this case - can very subtly, but not so subtly, clearly convey that, ‘We are going to get it right and they got it wrong’. We must elevate ourselves above such matters and make sure that we keep our eyes clearly focussed on what this is actually about: it is acquiring this status for Territorians so that we can stand equally in the face of our colleagues in other states.
I commend the fine work that has occurred over an extended period of time to lead us to this particular point. If anyone were to assess the path that other jurisdictions in other countries have taken, you will see that it has been a similar path. The only time that we end in difficulty is when we turn our attention more to our own personal achievement and political gain, rather than turn our attention and focus it securely upon progressing this issue in the best interest of the people of the Northern Territory.
That is the commitment of the Leader of the Opposition, and of the CLP. It is also the means by which any debate and discussion has been conducted within the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee. I, in like manner to the member for Brennan, will do all I can to ensure that we keep our eyes fixed securely upon the goal. To this end, I commend the member for Barkly for the way that he has conducted this debate and in leading the committee to this point.
It is important to note, too, that there has been already a significant concession made by the Chief Minister in this regard; being the position of the executive officer. It was of genuine concern that that position of an executive officer would be located within the Chief Minister’s Department. It is my and members of the committee’s belief, that that position must always remain within the Assembly. To that end, it is good to see that that concession has been made. Once again, we have this issue remaining as an issue within this Chamber and this Assembly on behalf of all people of the Northern Territory; rather than the temptation to succumb to endeavour to gain additional control over this agenda so that, almost subtly, some political kudos can be gained. The moment we enter that arena, Territorians lose.
Once again, I acknowledge the work of members of this bipartisan committee. I also acknowledge the work of Ian McNeill, and make particular note of Rick Gray and others who have worked behind the scenes for many years and, particularly in recent times, to bring us to this point.
Ms CARTER (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I support the motion. It is vitally important for Territorians that one day we become a state. It is my hope that we all live to see that day in the not-too-distant future.
Several years ago, we saw the shameful situation of the federal government overturning our voluntary euthanasia legislation, a move that I am quite sure has led to the unnecessary suffering of Territorians and others who would have come to the Northern Territory to avail themselves of this excellent legislation. I hope to see the day when we again are able to pass, as a state, something as compassionate as that legislation was.
Therefore, I am delighted to support this motion. I, of course, am a member of the Country Liberal Party and that we move the Territory toward statehood is an absolute platform tenet of ours. The success of our move to statehood will come from an education program that brings all Territorians together in an understanding of what statehood is, what it will mean to us, and what it will not do to us.
The last time round, we had far too many strange stories going around the community about how we will suffer when we become a state because, apparently, the federal government was not going to fund us as well as they used to. All of these were furphies and unnecessary, clouded people’s judgment, and we ended up with the very disappointing close loss of our move towards statehood.
It will also succeed with a bipartisan effort and what is occurring here today, and occurred at the last Assembly, is an illustration of an excellent bipartisan method and effort by this parliament to get it right this time round. I commend the committee and its chair, and wish you all the very best for the future.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, I make a few comments about this matter of statehood for the Northern Territory. I arrived in this country in 1963 as a young teenager coming to high school and lived in Brisbane, Queensland for 10 years, and then South Australia for another eight years before coming to the Territory in 1981.
It was when I arrived here that I found that the political system was quite different from the states that I was used to. It was a statehood issue that was quite significantly different. When I delved into the history of the Territory and found out where it came from, I suddenly realised, in fact, as a Territorian, many of our rights as citizens of Australia were missing once we moved across the border. Obviously, I support statehood for the Northern Territory and I look forward to this parliament, in a non-partisan way, seeking statehood for Territorians.
I report, as the member for Brennan did, that the CLP Central Council unanimously approved that members of the opposition will support this process and ensure, in a non-partisan way, that parliament facilitates all the processes possible to ensure that we achieve statehood. I hope that, within the foreseeable future, I am alive to see it happen.
Many people criticise the Territory for seeking statehood. They say that it is going to cost us a lot of money and that every Territorian is going to be worse off once we get statehood. People need to understand that, in fact, the Territory has been treated as if it were a state for nearly 15 years. The myth has been promoted by those who stand against our attempt to be a state.
Say 50 years ago, when federal governments of the day were spending huge sums of taxpayers’ funds to provide infrastructure for all the states and the other territory, the Northern Territory was sadly neglected. The money that would have been spent on the Northern Territory was being spent interstate.
Now, if we get more money from the federal parliament, it is because it is time that the money came back to the Territory to ensure that we have the wherewithal to create the facilities and the infrastructure that we desperately need here.
On behalf of my colleagues and myself, I say that this is the way to go. Let us make it a non-partisan thing. I believe this issue of statehood is too big for the political parties to try and claim ownership of. It is something that all Territorians want to have and, as members of parliament on both sides of the House, we should work together and use this parliament to facilitate the whole process.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I will be brief. I do not think there is any argument in this House about whether the Territory should be a state. I really do not think there was any argument previously, before 1998; it really was about process.
It is very important that our debates about statehood, from this point on, reflect lessons learnt from the past. We have had reports, if members need to refresh themselves about what happened in the past, because it was not a glorious past. Statehood is not about one party or another, it is about this Territory. This process, as I articulated a year ago - and I am sure that I am joined by every member in this House - is about an inclusive process, a process that is not driven by politicians but, very importantly and as reflected by these terms of reference, working inclusively with and in partnership with our community.
Statehood, as very clearly demonstrated by the referendum in 1998, is not about politicians, and that needs to be clearly reflected in how this House goes forward. It is not a trophy on a shelf for the Territory, in the words of the Opposition Leader. This is something that is about the Territory’s constitutional development; it is about an inclusive process. However, if it is seen as a trophy on the shelf, like some kind of Olympic medal, I believe the Opposition Leader should think again about what statehood is, and what statehood is for the Northern Territory and the way we need to move forward …
Dr Dunham: Here is the state of the bipartisan process; that is fairly evident, isn’t it?
Ms MARTIN: Because those are the words ...
Dr Lim: There you again, see.
Ms MARTIN: Those are the words used by the Opposition Leader. I did not intend to be critical today, but I have heard four contributions by members of the opposition that referred, a number of times, to ‘CLP’ - party political references. Two of those members referred to ‘directions from the CLP Central Committee’. Then they say this has to be bipartisan and it is about Territorians. Yet, they have come in here and made direct party political references, trying to own the process from the CLP as a party …
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: I did not make this up. I sat here quietly and listened as four members of the opposition very clearly said ‘this is about the CLP’s commitment’. It is our commitment as a parliament. It is not - and I say again, very reasonably and rationally - this is about parliamentarians, about politicians not doing what was done last time - not doing what was shamelessly done last time, and owning that process. I am concerned to hear the tenor of the comments in here today that are trying to claim that space, by saying, ‘Strut stuff, this is a trophy on a shelf. This is the CLP’s commitment’. You are revisiting the past and demonstrating that you have not learnt from the past.
This committee will work in partnership with our community and it is not to be owned or dominated by politicians.
Mr Mills: Hear, hear!
Ms MARTIN: It is not about a political agenda …
Mr Mills: Hear, hear!
Ms MARTIN: ... and yet, even though the Opposition Leader is going ‘hear, hear’, a political agenda came clearly through the statements from the other side - clearly.
Mr Mills: Sensitive ears, sensitive ears.
Ms MARTIN: The Opposition Leader can say to me, ‘You have sensitive ears’ ...
Mr Mills: You have.
Ms MARTIN: ... but I was in this parliament, as opposed to the member for Blain, who was not in this parliament when the sorry chapter of statehood - which should have been a unanimous vote for every Territorian - went down. It was a very sad time for Territorians. I am just putting on the record very clearly that it would be a disgrace to have that happen again - an absolute disgrace.
Therefore, when I set out what we should be trying to do with statehood, I did not set a time frame on it. I said maybe five years, maybe it will take longer. It is not about the member for Fannie Bay’s political agenda. It is not about a trophy on a shelf. This is about an inclusive and important process for Territorians - about our rights. It is not about political agendas. I make that point very clearly, and I hope that we can properly learn from the past. I hope that, when the next time does happen, we have shown that we have all got it right.
Mr McADAM (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I am going to be very brief in my comments. First of all, I thank very much all the speakers for their contribution to this very important issue. Most certainly, the Statehood Steering Committee, along with the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee, will have a very important role in driving the statehood process. As has always been made very clear in this House, there will be an inclusive approach, which will involve all community members, regardless of what their positions may be - that is very important - and it will not be imposed.
The other point that I want to make very quickly is that I do not resile from the fact that it will not be a easy task. It will be a task that will stretch us as individuals and as members of this House. However, bearing that in mind, the most important thing is to ensure that we are acting in a mature and responsible manner, in which we will have the capacity in the long term to deliver statehood to the Territory.
I want to endorse the comments made by the Chief Minister. It very important to understand that it will be a process that will be open; that will not be imposed. However, most importantly, there is no prize for any political party regarding the outcome. It will be something which will be arrived at by the people of the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, I thank all speakers on both sides of the House for their support of the motion. I would very much indeed like to thank Mr Ian McNeill, Mr Rick Gray, Ms Joanne Carbone, and Mr David Horton for their support. Equally, I would also like to extend my appreciation to the members of Blain, Macdonnell, Millner and to you, Madam Speaker, member for Braitling. Let us get on with it in a very mature way and deliver a process which will allow a very inclusive approach on the part of the people of the Northern Territory in achieving statehood.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I urge you as Territorians to support this motion.
Motion agreed to.
REMUNERATION TRIBUNAL AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 236)
MAGISTRATES AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 237)
(Serial 236)
MAGISTRATES AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 237)
Continued from 25 June 2004.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, to some extent, this will be a repeat of my reply to the Attorney-General’s ministerial report this morning. I, again, say that this has been an interesting chapter of the Territory’s legal history. I, again, say that much has already been written and said and, I suspect, much more will be. If you take the politics out, which is extremely difficult in this case, of course - but if you did - as a lawyer, I say that it certainly has been a case of great interest and has occupied the dinner parties of lawyers - no doubt, from Darwin to Alice Springs for some years – he tables of which I have been a member.
As we know, this case came about as a result of the failed attempt of NAALAS to invalidate the appointment of Chief Magistrate Hugh Bradley. It was always a political exercise and a waste of taxpayers’ money. Certainly, at the dinner tables I have sat at when this matter has been discussed, the fact that it was a political exercise was a common theme. I might say that friends of mine on both sides of politics, certainly took that view. The case involved two former Chief Ministers, one of whom was fined and financially and otherwise penalised for saying that the case was a political stunt and a waste of money. Well, the member for Brennan’s views have been vindicated. His views were, I think, questioned only by some people at NAALAS, and only by members of the Northern Territory Branch of the Australian Labor Party. The member for Brennan has been vindicated. The decision of the former Chief Minister, Shane Stone, was not wrong, as claimed by NAALAS. The member for Brennan was vilified by members of the Australian Labor Party, as was Shane Stone. The member for Brennan, of course, has the unfortunate distinction of having to carry the burden of expressing those views by having to fork out money himself. It is terribly unfortunate when one looks at the history of this matter, and we now see that the High Court has said there was nothing wrong with what the former Chief Minister, Shane Stone, did.
Therefore, several years later, after vast sums of money have been expended, the exercise was and is shown, to be nothing more than a stunt. It is noteworthy and it should be revisited, that members of the Labor Party in opposition certainly barracked from the sidelines. It is the case that a great deal of time in this parliament was spent by Labor in opposition getting stuck into the CLP and claiming that what was done was wrong. Well, they should be embarrassed today because the High Court found some months ago that nothing could be further from the case.
Put simply, the system in place regarding the appointment of magistrates is not broken, and yet the Labor Party want to fix something that clearly, as evidenced by the High Court’s decision a few months ago, is not broken. However, the Labor Party does not like it and they want to change it. That is their right; they are in government, they have the numbers and, no doubt, they want to persuade their supporters at NAALAS and elsewhere that they have done something about this system - this system which is clearly not broken since NAALAS lost the case in the High Court.
It appears to me that, for the average punter, there is one issue, and one issue alone; that is, how much money was spent on the pursuit of this case and, under the umbrella of financial expenditure, is government going to pursue NAALAS for the costs awarded against it? It appears to me - and with great respect, it was highlighted this morning in the Attorney-General’s ministerial report - that the government to date has been very coy on this issue: ‘In the fullness of time, we will have another look at it’, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Well, the average punter does want to know whether government is going to pursue NAALAS for those costs. Those costs would be considerable and, we must not forget that it was taxpayers’ money that was expended in this political exercise. I ask that the Attorney-General give an assurance in his reply that the government will chase costs from NAALAS. It has, certainly, an obligation to do so; it is legally entitled to do so. To do anything less would be an abrogation of the government’s responsibility.
Labor does not like the current system, even though the High Court said that nothing was wrong with it. It produces these bills. We will not oppose them. What we do ask is for the government to tell us, if not now, then how about in two weeks or at the most a month? We do not understand why there would be such a delay. There has been a delay to date and the Attorney-General has indicated today, I think, that there will be a further delay.
We do not know what further information he needs. There is an obligation to pursue costs. Will the Attorney-General say: ‘Let us give them a timeline of a month’? Will the Attorney-General, within a month, tell us whether he is going to pursue those costs from NAALAS? Might the Attorney-General, within a month, tell us whether he is going to pay Denis Burke $50 000 for his costs incurred as a result of the NAALAS case? That is a particularly relevant point in light of - and I repeat what I said earlier - the outrageously incompetent prosecution that the Minister for Community Development commenced against Warren Anderson.
The government has agreed to pick up the tab for the Minister for Community Development and, yet, it did not pick up the tab for the former Chief Minister’s role in this case. It is all well and good for the Chief Minister, as she said earlier today in the context of the statehood debate: ‘Let us not be political. Let us all just get on with it …
Dr TOYNE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! We are seven minutes into the debate and there is yet to be a mention of the legislation in front of us. I have allowed the member a fair bit of latitude on this, but I would really like her to address the legislation.
Ms CARNEY: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker, the Attorney-General is quite wrong. I have I referred to the bills three times.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order, minister.
Ms CARNEY: We had the Chief Minister talking about not being political. The government is being political. They say on the one hand that they will not pay the member for Brennan’s costs in response to his involvement in the proceeding when he was the Chief Minister and, yet, at the same time, they say: ‘We will pay our bloke’s costs’. If that is not political, I do not know what is.
I look forward to the Attorney-General’s reply. I do not have high expectations in relation to the specific issues I have raised, but I urge him, in the strongest possible terms, to come out and let Territorians know whether the government will pursue the costs from NAALAS. We look forward to - what I understood him as saying this morning - the slim possibility that government may reconsider its position in relation to the member for Brennan’s legal costs. If the government reconsiders that matter, then I will be the first to commend them.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Madam Speaker, this is more of a question than anything else: reading the second reading speech and the amendments to the act, it would appear that, notwithstanding a decision of the High Court, the government has decided to proceed by amendment with the opinion of one judge in the High Court which, in itself, is curious, I would have thought.
However, given the history of this matter having progressed through a number of courts and, on its way, various allegations having been made against the Chief Magistrate and the former Chief Minister, Shane Stone - which basically fall away because they lacked substance - the essence of the case was, essentially, whether or not the current Remuneration Tribunal procedures in the Northern Territory were consistent and sound enough for the actions taken with regards to Chief Magistrate Bradley to be considered appropriate. The High Court, in examining all of these matters, decided that it was appropriate.
In fact, the High Court, as stated in the second reading speech, said that under the current section 6 of the Magistrates Act it – and I emphasise the High Court’s words:
- … does not compromise or jeopardise the integrity of the Territory’s magistracy or the judicial system.
The High Court also found that section 6:
- … defends the interests of judicial independence and impartiality which informs the legislation.
Against the decision of the High Court, which states very clearly that the Magistrates Act is sound and anything that has been put to the High Court is of no substance, and that the interests of judicial independence and impartiality are preserved, the government is going to proceed by amendment to put in place what they consider to be a better system. I am not convinced by that. However, we are not going to stand on that in terms of opposing the bill.
My question really is one of explanation and clarification: can the minister advise the House whether or not there is any other procedure, by way of act or tribunal determination, which removes the Governor or Administrator from the process, or do we now have a situation in the Northern Territory whereby the Remuneration Tribunal, acting alone, and supported by the government without reference to the most senior executive in the Northern Territory - namely the Administrator - can pass legislation relating to salary and allowances for magistrates in toto in this parliament, using the weight of numbers of the parliament?
I say it in this context: if the allegations were that the previous act was deficient to create the situation whereby, by allegation, the Chief Minister could do some deal with a magistrate to get certain salary and allowances provided for that magistrate, how then has this been improved, where the Chief Minister and the government picks the chairman of the Remuneration Tribunal? Surely you could nobble the chairman of the Remuneration Tribunal using that logic. If you use that logic, you could influence the chairman of the Remuneration Tribunal to provide a remuneration which allowed you to secure a particular individual for the Northern Territory. That individual, by way of this amendment to the act, is protected because there is no other check mechanism except in this parliament - of which the government has weight - and there is no review by the Administrator.
I would have thought - and I am unconvinced - that the amendments that you are proposing are any more secure, in fact, than the procedures of the parliament that have occurred in the past. I seek to be informed and clarified on this particular issue.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank members for their contribution to this debate. To deal with them one at a time, the member for Araluen is continuing to pursue the government’s position on the resolution of the Bradley matter. I simply restate that the government is considering its decisions about those matters that she outlined. While I find her opinions about it of some interest, we will make our decision and make that public when we have done so. I am certainly not going to be bound to a time frame. It involves negotiations, amongst other things, with the federal government, over which we do not have full control of the time. I can assure members that all of the matters, including the member for Brennan’s situation, will be part of that discussion and decision.
Regarding the matters raised by the member for Brennan, there are many theories about what brought on the Bradley case, and you can take whatever position you like about the actions taken by NAALAS. It has now been fully tested, as he states, through the justice system, and resolved as far as the technicalities of the law are concerned. However, what brought us to the amendments before us today is that I believe there was an element of perception, no matter how big or small, in the decision by NAALAS to take the actions. There was a perception - and a strong perception in my understanding - that there was something untoward about the negotiations that happened between the then Attorney-General, Shane Stone, and Hugh Bradley on his appointment as Chief Magistrate.
The courts have tested the technicalities of what transpired. They have certainly found that the actions and the arrangements that were put in place in no way compromised the independence of the magistracy. The member for Brennan is quite right in quoting – I will quote the slightly longer section of the transcript from the High Court decision of 17 June 2004, in North Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid Service Inc v Bradley which upheld the construction of the current section 6 of the Magistrates Act stating that:
- It does not compromise or jeopardise the integrity of the Territory magistracy or the judicial system.
And that:
- To the contrary … it defends the interests of judicial independence and impartiality which inform the legislation
It has, nevertheless, been decided to strengthen the appearance of impartiality for magistrates by strengthening the security of remuneration. That is what is underpinning our action in taking these amendments to the House. We want to deal with the perception problem - not the technical issue of independence, but the perception of independence.
Chief Justice Gleeson, in Bradley, described a regular review of judicial remuneration by Remuneration Tribunals as a common procedure, consistent with a requirement of fairness, transparency and accountability, and also with judicial independence.
The member asked whether this is a unique arrangement. Looking at the other jurisdictions in Australia, a similar tribunal determines magistrates’ remuneration in all other jurisdictions except in Tasmania, where it is tied to that of the judges and, in Victoria, where it was recently changed to that set by the Judicial Salaries Act 2004 in Victoria.
We are not proposing anything new or radical here, we are simply dealing with the element of perception that actually did lead, in part, to a $2m history of litigation in the Northern Territory. It is important that we take every step that we can to not only have independence for our magistrates and judges, but to make it absolutely apparent to the public that that independence exists. The best way to do that is to have an independent Remuneration Tribunal. If you are dealing with perception, at least there are two steps to the actual negotiation of the magistrates and the tribunal. It is not directly with the minister and the magistrates to set those conditions. That is certainly a great separation from the decision-making, activities or objectives of a minister or the government, than the current situation.
I believe that this is a prudent thing to do. We are simply adopting arrangements that have proven to be effective in other states around Australia. It is part of washing through, I guess, the final effects of the Bradley case on the justice system in the Northern Territory. Therefore, I propose now that we proceed to finalise this legislation through the House.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr BURKE (Brennan)(by leave): Madam Speaker, just a question to the Attorney-General. He did not answer my last question. I understand what you are doing, but you have not answered my last question: will you state categorically in this House that there is a procedure in any other state or territory in Australia which removes the Governor or Administrator from the process?
It seems to me that this particular legislation now does not require assent by the Administrator. Is that the purpose? Is that clear, because it is stated in the second reading speech that the Administrator is removed from the process.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I have made if fairly clear that the process that is set up under these amendments is simply that the Remuneration Tribunal makes a determination once a year regarding the magistrates’ pay and conditions. That determination is presented and tabled in the parliament and, unless disallowed by a decision of this House, will go forward on an annual basis. It is exactly the same procedure as we have for the pay and conditions of members here and many other statutory positions within our government system.
So, yes, what it does remove from process is the direct intervention of the minister regarding the details of the pay and conditions of the magistrates. We feel that the perception of bias within that process was what led, in part at least, to the Bradley case, and this new procedure removes that.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, you now need to seek leave to move that the bills be read a third time.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bills be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bills read a third time.
TABLED PAPER
Auditor-General’s August 2004 Report
Auditor-General’s August 2004 Report
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I present the Auditor-General’s August 2004 report to the Legislative Assembly
MOTION
Print Paper – Auditor-General’s August 2004 Report
Print Paper – Auditor-General’s August 2004 Report
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I move that the report be printed.
Motion agreed to.
MOTION
Note Paper – Auditor-General’s August 2004 Report
Note Paper – Auditor-General’s August 2004 Report
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the report and seek leave to continue my remarks at a later hour.
Motion agreed to.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Timor Sea Gas Fields – Development Opportunities
Timor Sea Gas Fields – Development Opportunities
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, today I speak to Territorians about my government’s agenda to broaden the economic base of the Territory through our strategic approach to gas projects in the Timor Sea.
Let me start by assuring Territorians that this government has a bold vision for the Timor Sea and the development of its oil and gas reserves. Today, we have all come to understand that it is a long-term gain; one that requires a clear vision and a steady hand. It is an important time in the history of the Timor Sea, with a considerable degree of comment by politicians and senior industry leaders on Sunrise, in particular. I would anticipate some uncertainty and legitimate questioning by Territorians as a result. My statement today is, in part, a response to that uncertainty but, more, it is also a timely opportunity to reinforce to Territorians that this government will continue to use every lever at our disposal to bring the wealth trapped under the Timor Sea onshore.
What will always remain in the very apex of our policy stance on Timor Sea gas is three key deliverables. The first will be to broaden the economic base of the Territory economy so that we are less susceptible to the volatility experienced by smaller regional economies; something that we have all felt in recent times. Our existing industries remain crucial to our success: mining, tourism, Defence, construction and pastoral. However, new industries such as downstream gas manufacturing will add further momentum to our economy.
Our next deliverable is high quality and diverse jobs providing new and exciting employment opportunities for today’s Territorians and for our children to come. Jobs in the technology sector, new trades and professions, all increase the employment opportunities for Territorians. I will acknowledge that we will always need to attract new Territorians from interstate and overseas to supplement the existing Territory work force to construct these projects. This mobility occurs throughout the world in these types of projects. What we do want to do is to encourage these people to settle and stay in the Territory after completion of the project. We also want to capture those key jobs that transfer from construction to operations, as well as those key operational jobs that can provide exciting career opportunity for Territorians.
Our final deliverable is to position the Territory in world-class industries that will attract a steady stream of new investments directly in gas industries and indirectly in all those supply and service industries so necessary if we are going to capture the full length of the value chain.
This is very much a pro-development agenda and one that this government is distinctly proud of. However, it is not a one dimensional strategy. All development in the Territory must and will occur within the context of an equal consideration for the environmental and social consequences of any development. New gas projects must be world standard in intent and represent best in class environmental management and practice. We will not, and should not, accept anything less. Equally, each project must go through the full process of public examination. In doing so, it provides Territorians with the opportunity to comment and to fully express there views about any proposal.
A further demonstration of the government’s commitment is the practices established that oversee the relationship between our task forces and the Office of the Environment and Heritage. The practices help ensure the Office of Environment and Heritage undertakes its assessment of all projects completely separately from the activities of the various task forces. This process means that the environmental and developmental elements of any project are given equivalent weight. It is important that we do this to ensure that the benefits of developments, such as jobs and business opportunities, do not come at the price of a poorer or diminished lifestyle for Territorians. This government will never allow that to happen. Territorians can be assured that this government will work with industry, key interest groups and the wider community to deliver sustainable economic development under the banner of environmentally responsible management.
At the last Assembly sittings, I provided this House with my first assessment of the Prime Minister’s White Paper on Energy. At that time, I made the point that it lacked ambition. It also aimed too low, preferring to suggest modifications to the status quo rather than offering a national-building ethos, one setting a 21st century agenda for developing this great country.
I commented at the time that the White Paper is constructed principally to restate the current situation. It is focussed on coal as an energy resource, and on energy needs in the south-east corner of Australia, disregarding the crucial role gas can play in the nation’s energy future, particularly in regional Australia. It sees no role for government in reconstructing the project development environment in Australia to encourage new investments, while at the same time increasing the pressure on companies that may simply be seeking to warehouse their prospects. It offers no taxation reform to reflect the very different cash flow streams between oil, which is front-end loaded, and gas, which pays back over a much longer period of time. It forgets that Australia is a large country with a small population, necessitating a strong national government role in the development of primary infrastructure such as gas pipelines. It does not fully understand that energy is the key output for secure economic performance, and governments at all levels must focus on energy security and competitively priced energy independence if they wish to steer the future directions of the economy.
I can report to the House that these criticisms stand. I am writing to the Prime Minister to encourage him to elevate his vision on this important national issue, and I would assume that the Opposition Leader will do likewise.
All Territorians would recall the momentous decision of 15 June 2003, just over 12 months ago, when the Bayu-Undan joint venturers committed to proceed with the $1.6bn Darwin LNG project and the $750m Bayu-Undan pipeline. It heralded the Territory’s entry into the world energy market and signalled to the world that the Territory was going to be a new name in the roll call of major energy centres.
As ConocoPhillips indicated at the time, the Wickham Point LNG plant will be the greenest LNG, with significantly lower emissions than other comparable plants currently in operation. Territorians also have a major investment in the success of this facility via a $19m commitment in roads and services to the Wickham Point site.
Some 12 months or more since construction commenced, it is now timely to reflect on what has happened. I would once again like to put on the public record our congratulations to the Bayu-Undan joint venture, our industry partners who played such a pivotal role in Team NT, of course, the member for Brennan, and the large number of public servants who played such a significant role in this project and other campaigns.
Today, a world-class 3 000 000 tonnes per annum LNG project is coming together with more than 1000 workers striving to deliver this great engineering project. It is a wonderful example of what can be achieved in the Territory. Right now, construction of the Darwin LNG plant is approximately 20% complete. There remains only two wall pours to go to complete the outer concrete wall of the tank; the piling for the marine jetty is under way; and the foundations and structural steel for the main process elements are almost complete.
ConocoPhillips have informed me that it has completed 1.1 million man hours on site, some 400 work days, without a single lost-time injury. There are almost 800 tradespeople on site and, while it will always vary according to the timetable for the project, 50% of those are Territorians. This is exemplified by the count at the Palmerston construction camp. It is my advice that there are approximately 337 people in the camp, representing just 42% of its 800-person capacity.
Territory businesses also benefited from this great project. Some 2450 purchase orders have been raised on more than 240 Territory businesses, with a combined value of $231m. The income from these contracts, along with a substantial wages bill from the project, all circulate in the Territory economy to the benefit of all businesses, large and small.
We can expect the project to move into its mechanical phase next, with a variety of equipment arriving across East Arm Port - equipment such as refrigeration compressors, turbine drivers and heat exchangers.
The SEMAC pipe-laying barge has already laid out the first length of pipe, and is now on its way, slowly but surely, moving 500 km to the west towards the Bayu-Undan field. Once clear of Darwin Harbour, the SEMAC will lay pipe at a rate of three to four kilometres a day. The pipe within Darwin Harbour will shortly be covered by armour rock. Another vessel is expected into Darwin for this task, and it will place various sized rock, currently stockpiled at East Arm Port, to protect the pipeline from harbour activity, including tides and storms.
The word ‘Sunrise’ has become synonymous with defending what is right and what is in the Territory’s and Australia’s interests. The Sunrise campaign of 2002-03 left some bruises along the way, but it was a necessary campaign to stake out our position in the Timor Sea. Members would remember the very significant effort the Territory put into the Sunrise campaign to ensure that the benefits of bringing gas onshore over the then mooted floating LNG facility were clearly understood.
Sometimes, it is hard to feel positive about what was essentially a negative campaign, but we should. In my view, the concept of a floating platform just had to be rejected. It would have seen LNG tankers sailing past Darwin across the northern Timor Sea, collecting LNG from a processing facility and barge, then sailing past once again on its way to deliver LNG to the US market and, in the process, exporting jobs, wealth creation and new business opportunities for Territorians.
The Sunrise campaign also changed the political dynamic in the Territory. Members will recall the great sense of commitment embodied in Team NT, when political leaders from both sides of this House, local and national business leaders, and unions all sat together to work to protect the future economic development of the Territory. While time always moves on, I am hopeful we can draw on the same sense of community and common purpose in the future, whenever the situation calls for it.
Time has indeed moved on, but the intensity of the issues surrounding the Sunrise project remain as acute as ever. Today, the challenge is one of navigating on two fronts: first, to achieve agreement between Australia and East Timor governments and, second, to provide sufficient certainty to allow customers to sign up and the joint venture partners to commit a considerable amount of money to bring this $6bn project on.
At our own SEAAOC this year, I called for the de-linking of the Sunrise projects from the discussions about the Australia/East Timor maritime boundary, and my rationale was clear. The maritime boundary dispute is a cloud obscuring what really must be done and can be done; that is, a one-off, separate agreement on Sunrise delivering a revised revenue split that protects Australia’s interests and allows East Timor to build on its own economic independence.
To reinforce the Territory’s position on Sunrise, we also wrote to the four joint venture partners - Woodside, ConocoPhillips, Shell and Osaka Gas - requesting a briefing on their project development plans. I expect to talk to them about this in the near future.
My government remains supremely optimistic about Sunrise, but it will require strong leadership from everyone with a key role to play. That is why I was so pleased to see the foreign ministers of both East Timor and Australia, Jose Ramos Horta and Alexander Downer, meet last week to see what they could do to change this situation around. By all reports, there is a strong sense of common purpose between Australia and East Timor now, and a deal allowing the development of Sunrise is indeed possible. I would like to place on the public record at this time my personal congratulations to the Prime Ministers of both countries for their statesman-like approach to the matter.
The Timor Sea offers a diversity of offshore gas fields, each with different resource characteristics, which will open up a wide spread of opportunities over time. Sure, each has its challenges, but all resource projects do. Many gas veterans have reminded me, more than once, that it usually takes 10 years to get a gas project up, unless it is fortunate enough to have significant oil reserves as well.
However, the inescapable certainty is that energy is the key commodity of the 21st century, and we sit alongside a considerable amount of it. As each retention lease comes up for renewal, my government is making it very clear to proponents that our interest is in field commercialisation. We are saying to them that commercialisation must figure highly in their development strategy and plans.
The Blacktip project in the Bonaparte Gulf is most likely to be our second onshore gas project. As Territorians would all know, the gas is currently slated for the Alcan refinery in Gove and, with a few important decisions still to come, could see gas piped from Wadeye via Katherine to Gove by 2007. In the next month or so, the Blacktip joint venture will drill for further gas reserves in the Polkadot field, approximately 30 km north of Blacktip. This work could see an expansion of known reserves and additional gas for Territory industry. Don Voelte and David Maxwell of Woodside have both committed the company to establishing a gas hub for the Bonaparte Gulf region, using Blacktip, and I certainly encourage that strategy. Blacktip is one of three projects being coordinated by this government’s Alcan task force, and I can report considerable progress is made in facilitating this development.
Santos also has significant reserves in the Bonaparte Gulf in the form of Petrel and Tern. It is also ideally suited to domestic gas in similar fashion to Blacktip. I would also encourage both Woodside and Santos to sensibly work together to bring this vision of a Bonaparte Gulf gas hub to a reality and, in the process, creating a competitive market for domestic gas along the way.
In recent weeks, ConocoPhillips has also farmed into Permit NT/P61, east of Evans Shoals, which contains the Caldita prospect. Santos is also the other partner in Caldita, and I am led to believe that both companies plan a drilling program to search for further oil and gas in the next 12 months. Another prospect in the north Timor Sea is Abadi. It is in Indonesian waters but, once again, reaffirms the huge potential of our region to supply energy in one form or another for many years to come.
The Timor Seas is a significant resource with enormous potential. It has the prospect of at least six gas projects, exploiting 21 trillion cubic feet of gas in coming years. The offshore development of the 3.4 tcf Bayu-Undan project is complete, and it is producing condensate now for world markets. The downstream gas project is well under way in the form of the LNG plant and gas pipeline.
Sunrise, after being a cloud for some time, has re-emerged as a genuine new project. A deal between Australia and East Timor in the 7.7 tcf project may not be too far away, as I said; perhaps a matter of months. I am looking forward to the briefing on commercial matters from the joint venture.
Strong progress is being made in the development of the 1.1 tcf Blacktip project. An additional drilling in Polkadot will occur next month. We anticipate a final investment decision in the first quarter of 2005.
We are talking to Santos about how they may commercialise the 1.4 tcf Petrel and Tern, and 6.6 tcf Evans Shoals project. ConocoPhillips and Santos are to drill the Caldita prospect, formerly Melville, next Dry Season. We also believe that further work is planned at Abadi. This demonstrates that we are progressing on each prospect and field with the principle aim of getting more gas onshore in Darwin and, in doing so, establishing Darwin as Australia’s second international gas hub, and Australia’s first integrated gas manufacturing centre.
Whenever my government contemplates gas matters, it is within the framework of four key economic opportunities: first, LNG for export underpinned by the significant volumes of gas in the Timor Sea; second, power generation for Power and Water, and development of major resource projects; third, gas-based manufacturing in the Darwin region; and finally, potential for gas for the national grid. Taken together, these four opportunities represent the lynchpins for broadening the NT economy, and each field in the Timor Sea offers a different potential mix. This is why it is so important to pursue the development of all projects with the same energy and vigour.
That mix of opportunities will shift, over time, as individual field assessments improve and markets shift. It could see Sunrise developed for LNG, power generation and some gas-based manufacturing; Blacktip developed for power generation and possibly some LNG if a real hub were to eventuate in the Bonaparte Gulf; Petrel/Tern for power generation and some LNG; Evans Shoals developed for methanol and then gas-based manufacturing - synthetic fuels, chemicals and other products; and Caldita developed for LNG and possibly downstream manufacturing, similar to Evans Shoals.
Earlier on, I mentioned the work that this government is doing to take up its responsibilities in the development of the Timor Sea gas. In previous reports and statements to this House, I have covered many of these activities, but it is important today to recap on a few, and to also inform this House of recent events.
Gas is the fuel of the future - clean and in ever-increasing demand - and LNG is how it gets to world markets. LNG will be produced at Wickham Point in 2006. This LNG - three million tonnes - each year has been sold to both Tokyo Electric Power Company and Tokyo Gas. In place right now are approvals to expand this project with another LNG trade; most likely Sunrise, but also potentially Caldita. My government has been part of Australian delegations seeking to promote Australian LNG to the United States and Korea, as well as independently to Japan. These are strong markets for LNG. The critical supply/demand balance has been upset in the US and it must now seek gas from other parts of the world, such as the Timor Sea. Our location and Australia’s track record offer significant advantages over LNG producers in other regions. In addition, both Japanese and Korean demand continues to increase and the close geographic proximity of both markets to Darwin provides a real supply opportunity, as already evidences with Wickham Point contracts.
Minister Henderson also joined with our political and industry leaders in promoting Australian LNG to US Energy Secretary Abraham earlier this year in Melbourne. He also met with key LNG customers during his trip to Japan in November last year, and we will follow up on those meetings once again this year.
The LNG market has gone through dramatic shifts in the past two years, and demand continues to increase for this resource. Australia has an enviable record in this market and we expect Darwin LNG to add to that reputation. LNG is becoming a high margin product, the result necessary to get high-cost offshore products, such as the Timor Sea, across the line.
Secure supplies of domestic gas at nationally competitive prices is essential for the long-term economic development in the Territory. It is important to everyone who lives here and, equally so, for our industry. It is likely that our largest exporter, ALCAN, will have secured gas so as to generate steam and power to its expanded refinery by years end. The refinery in Gove, in expanded form, will export almost $1bn per year of alumina making it the masthead of the very significant worldwide ALCAN family.
Likewise, Power and Water will need to secure contracts for gas in the coming years, most likely for supply commencing between 2009 and 2011. Options include gas for renewed Sunrise project or a Bonaparte Gulf gas hub, maybe at Blacktip; a development of Petrel/Tern; or even an extension of contracts from the Amadeus Basin; or perhaps a cocktail of gas from all these options. My government fully understands the pivotal role power plays in the lifestyle enjoyed by Territorians and, just as importantly, in holding onto and securing new investment in our industry. I have made it clear to the owners of all Timor Sea prospects and fields that domestic gas for power generation in the Territory must be part of their development together.
The Board of Power and Water and this government are at one in putting our energy into the right gas deal to carry Power and Water through 2030 and beyond. The next deal must deliver lower electricity tariffs to Territory business and consumers. Success in this ambition will build our business competitiveness, new investment and new jobs, all contributing to expanding the population base of the Territory.
Several weeks ago, I travelled to Thailand and Singapore to visit two key industrial parks, Map Ta Phut in Thailand and Jurong Island in Singapore. I wanted to see first-hand just what vision and commitment could deliver in way of downstream gas-based manufacturing. I must tell you, I was really impressed with what both countries have achieved in investment, jobs and balancing industry and the environment. It was such a contrast to speak to people in both countries and listen to those who have the runs on the board, and then to reflect on the limited vision for downstream projects in the federal government’s National Energy Policy.
These industrial centres capture the full extent of the value chain, cracking the petroleum products such as gas, and manufacturing a range of intermediate and final products for world markets. The whole principle underpinning the centres is to hold onto the wealth and jobs embodied in the primary resource, whether that is oil or gas or both. Philosophically, these governments who have provided the vision for these industrial parks are at the opposite end of the continuum to Australia, which still languishes in the ‘dig it up and ship it off’ approach to economic development.
Map Ta Phut is a modern industrial complex approximately 200 km from Bangkok. It currently has 58 large industrial plants owned and operated by the who’s who of the world’s petrochemical companies. The plants there employ almost 14 000 people.
While in Map Ta Phut, I had the opportunity to view a number of plants and to meet with representatives from Siam Cement, Dow Chemicals Petrochemical Group’s Styrene Monomer, polyethylene, polystyrene, poly-urethane and latex plant; Rayong Olefins Company’s Naptha cracker; PTT’s gas separation plant; and the Industrial Estates Authority of Thailand. It is interesting that gas for this complex comes from a fragmented gas field some 520 km offshore in the Gulf of Thailand. It is really not too dissimilar from some of the issues we find here in the Timor Sea.
Another important feature of this complex, and one reinforced at Jurong Island two days later, was the prominent signage at each plant reflecting their commitment to ISO14 000 environmental accreditation and their success in managing work place safety. It was a genuine commitment demonstrated by all management and staff, in the cleanliness of the plants and the management of issues such as stormwater run-off, noise and air quality. With 58 plants in close proximity, really, there was not an industrial smell anywhere.
When I returned to Bangkok, I also met with senior management of PTT, Thailand’s state-owned petroleum company; Unocal, a major investor in the Gulf of Thailand; and Siam Cement, the large conglomerate and owner of Cementhai Chemicals, one of the largest producers of chemicals in Thailand.
In Singapore, I met with Australian High Commissioner, Gary Quinlan, and the Singapore Economic Development Board and visited the Jurong Industrial Park. It is an astonishing facility that has developed in a relatively short period on the back of gas- and oil-based manufacturing, with a wide diversity of plants, each value adding in some form to primary and intermediate products. The key to success in both centres was the vision and direction or guidance from government.
Glyde Point will not be Map Ta Phut or Jurong because its development must reflect the characteristics of our offshore fields, the situation in world markets in 2004 and beyond, and the level of infrastructure available. However, it can provide the catalyst to add value and to create jobs. It will require a shared vision, one that the federal government must also take up. The planning process is now under way to establish the benchmarks for the development of Glyde Point. We are also working on developing an understanding of the likely development scenario and the economics underpinning such projects, and we have been working with major chemical companies to development an understanding of what they require in gas and infrastructure to make the very significant investments that are modern industrial chemical facilities.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank Andrew Liveris, Chief Operating Officer of Dow Chemicals Worldwide - and a Darwin High School boy to boot - for the tremendous assistance his people provided in guiding us around Thailand. It is industry and government partnerships such as this that will deliver results for Territorians. Andrew and I have also agreed to work cooperatively by jointly sponsoring a series of studies designed to position Timor Sea gas and Darwin as an attractive location for new technology-based gas manufacturing.
Gas is important for the Territory, but it is also important for Australia. It is a clean resource. The rest of the world is moving this way. We have significant reserves, but they are in remote areas of the Territory and Western Australia. Recently, my government participated in a multi-client study undertaken by well-known resources consultants Wood Mackenzie. This study looked at the potential of pipelines from the NT and Western Australia to supply south-eastern Australia to secure long-term gas supplies. The Western Australian government also supported this consultancy. The report by Wood Mackenzie indicated that there is great potential to elevate Australia’s approach to energy through strategic investment in new pipelines.
It is vital for our future that we apply as much effort as possible to the challenge of steering the development of Timor Sea gas projects and the economic benefits that will flow from success. That is why today I am pleased to advise that a few weeks ago, I established a new small task force targeted at these important issues. To be known as the Onshore Gas Developments Task Force, it has already met a number of times to review our current efforts and to elevate our commitment in this area.
As a reflection of this importance, I have nominated the Chief Executives of the Department of Chief Minister, Treasury and Business, Industry and Resource Development, along with the Chief Executive of Power and Water and the Executive Director of the Office of Territory Development to this task force, along with the Chairman of the Power and Water Corporation, Neil Philip. Paul Tyrrell will chair this group and it will, importantly, also draw on the combined expertise of the Territory public service, as well as key private sector specialists with particular industry and market knowledge. The first of these specialists is already on board and more are to follow, building on the work done with a range of specialists over the past three years.
We are particularly keen to receive quality advice on matters such as offshore gas field development, project commercialisation, onshore gas-based manufacturing, emerging market opportunities, strategies for creating a competitive onshore gas market, and key industry intelligence. The budget this year for the work is estimated to be $400 000.
The task force has a number of objectives, but the two key ones are to secure competitively priced gas for power generation, and to guide the development of a downstream gas-based manufacturing industry onshore in the Darwin region. The task force will work with all relevant industry players and the Commonwealth government, as necessary, to achieve the objectives we have set. I have asked the task force and its specialist advisors to be ambitious in their efforts, and I have every confidence that they will do so.
In parallel with the work of this task force, the Office of Territory Development, in partnership with other agencies including Charles Darwin University, is working on a long-term project aimed at attracting new investment into the technology layer within the Territory economy. As part of this work, they will look into the synergies between offshore production, onshore process control, and the new Defence platforms such as the Tiger helicopter, Armadale patrol boat and Abrams tank. These synergies build a critical mass of demands so essential for the establishment of further technology businesses in the Northern Territory. Our vision is to lead Territory businesses into these new business opportunities so that Territory business grows into the international energy service and supply sector.
We are now 12 months on since our first gas project got under way across Darwin Harbour at Wickham Point. It was a momentous occasion at the time, and it remains so today. We now have every expectation that a second project will get under way in 2005 as the Blacktip project prepares to supply gas to the Alcan refinery in Gove.
My government’s vision for gas onshore goes well beyond the 1970s approach of ‘dig it up and ship it out’. We are committed to ensuring that the gas resources of the Timor Sea provide competitively priced energy for power generation and the establishment of an integrated gas manufacturing centre in Darwin.
Our vision is centred around the principle of sustainable, economic development. All gas projects will meet the very highest of environmental standards and community aspirations, delivering 21st century environmental and technological performance. It is this government’s intention to stake out and pursue what is best for the Territory. However, this is a tough business and this is the leadership role of government. Territorians can be certain that every ounce of commitment and energy will be applied to fulfilling my government’s vision of a broader Territory economy; one that delivers jobs, new business opportunities and investment dollars.
Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of this statement.
Debate suspended.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Timor Sea Gas Fields – Development Opportunities
Timor Sea Gas Fields – Development Opportunities
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I take this opportunity to comment on the statement that the Chief Minister delivered this morning.
If one were to read this statement as an essay competition, one would think that there have been some wondrous achievements. However, on closer analysis you can see that there are some areas of grave concern on two specific fronts. As the Northern Territory, over many years, has looked towards our north and the potential of bringing gas onshore as a progressive work that we must focus on and bring to resolution, inherent in the issue are matters of foreign policy and ensuring that we have gas onshore so that we can build an industrial capacity in the Northern Territory. You can go back many years and see the same language with regards to the need to broaden the base of our economic capacity.
On reading the statement, on two counts this Chief Minister has demonstrated clear failure. I would go one step further and say she has brought an embarrassment upon the people of the Northern Territory and fair-minded Australians who wonder what side of the fence this Chief Minister stands on.
I stand, yes, as a Territorian and as an Australian. I would ensure that, in any negotiation that involved another country, I knew clearly where I stood. For a Chief Minister to enter into a domain with ideas that are considered probably suitable for a university discussion group and to put them on the national stage - and, hopefully, look up at the gallery that might gather around such an action, such as the suggestion to de-link the Sunrise issue from the maritime boundary discussion, and see that we would have a round of applause from those who would gather about, saying: ‘Oh, what a clever Chief Minister we have, coming up with innovative ideas’. However, this is serious business, and it is misguided from the beginning to the end. The Chief Minister has sent out the clear message to those involved in this negotiation, which causes confusion and uncertainty and alters the very parameters of that discussion. I noticed, too, that Mark Latham entered into this arena and made a statement which he quickly withdrew. He, obviously, was a little smarter than our Chief Minister, who stood up at SEAAOC here to inject some considerations for those seated around the table who were encountering very high level negotiation, and wondered what on earth they were dealing with. It sends out messages that require a significant amount of management behind the scenes, and we are dealing with nation to nation.
I know which side of the border I stand upon, and I would make sure that we are going to work in partnership with negotiations to do with Australian sovereignty and that which involves our close neighbour. It is no small matter and it has caught many observers’ attention. Whilst I was in Canberra on the Friday, it was quite noticeable that it was Ramos Horta. It was on the Friday, and this is evidence of how proactive Senator Hill is in regards to responding to an issue of concern in the Northern Territory. On the Friday, after lunch, in the company of Nigel Scullion, the member for Solomon I brought this to his attention, raising this issue. Senator Hill said: ‘I will arrive in the Northern Territory early and I will ensure that I personally meet those who have concern with this matter of Defence industry support’. I pay credit to the lobbying capacity of the member for Solomon and the Senator for the Northern Territory, Mr Nigel Scullion, to persuade and to have Senator Hill respond so promptly and directly to a need here in the Northern Territory; something over which we have only had words and hand-wringing over here after the event. We have had action and response in a very short period of time.
Whilst in Canberra, it was remarked upon that it took the actions of Ramos Horta and Alexander Downer to come to an agreement. The issue that was placed upon the table was placed there by East Timor. It was an issue that had nothing whatsoever to do with the scheme that the Chief Minister dreamt up of de-linking. It is noticeable there is no activity, no mention, no involvement of the Chief Minister at the point of brokering a deal. Therefore, it leaves me, and many observers, with the view that this Chief Minister is more interested in making a statement to appeal to a gallery, and to receive that short-term effect, but has no real interest or intent of actually achieving a real outcome; that is, to ensure that that gas comes here onshore and we actually build our economy - that it flows into our grid and that we have real progress. That is clear evidence of the capacity for an effect to say something outrageous, something apparently interesting, something well considered - perhaps, as I said earlier, in the realms of a university discussion group, or in some newsletter of dubious origin to the left of politics.
However, it is not befitting a Chief Minister of the Northern Territory to be playing games on both sides of the fence, bordering on treachery, to be involved in discussions of this nature, at this level, with such an intent and such naivety. To then go on the record and say: ‘I have written to the Prime Minister …
Ms MARTIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I need your advice on the Opposition Leader just calling my actions as ‘bordering on treachery’. Is that the basis of a substantive motion? It is fairly offensive.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes. You should withdraw that. That is most unparliamentary language.
Mr MILLS: I will withdraw it, Madam Speaker. I got a bit carried away there …
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you.
Mr MILLS: … with that word. Then to have the Chief Minister make a grand statement for all to hear - once again, to pander to a gallery packed with those who are breathlessly waiting for words from this Chief Minister to demonstrate her proactivity in this area: ‘I have written to the Prime Minister. I have written to him and he has not responded to me. I am thinking of even writing a second letter, but why bother because I have not received a response to the first one’. Well, I wonder why? I wonder why the Prime Minister did not respond promptly to the Chief Minister’s wonderful idea of how we can progress this negotiation between Australia and East Timor …
Ms Martin: He subsequently responded. The letter came a few days later; it was great.
Mr MILLS: I wonder why? I believe, first of all, the Prime Minister had a look at this letter and thought: ‘Is this person for real? Is this a Chief Minister of the Northern Territory? Is this the head of government of one of our states or territories?’ He gave it due consideration and considered it fairly seriously, hoping that it was, in fact, a real suggestion. Then, in fact, he did respond and said that, if Ramos Horta and the Foreign Minister of Australia can broker a deal which has nothing to do with de-linking or challenging the positioning of maritime boundaries, then the Chief Minister’s suggestion is irrelevant; it is just speculation. Once again, it was demonstrating: ‘I have a good idea. I will put it out there and create the impression that I am in there fighting for the Territory’.
Well, objectives 1, 2 and 3 are in there just to create an impression, a sense of activity, a sense of having a handle on these things and making some real progress for the Territory. It looks good in glossy brochures, standing with a hard hat on out there on the wharf, gazing over the horizon and pointing at something that might be in the harbour here and saying: ‘There you go, there is evidence’. There is evidence of little activity, evidence of things just happening, with or without this Chief Minister. She will see if she can get in front of some media stunt that will draw attention to her and create the impression that she actually has something to do with this. Well, evidenced by recent activities, nothing could be further from the case. When you have no immediate response from the Prime Minister, it is clear evidence that it was not taken seriously and, in substance, it was irrelevant to propose such a suggestion.
Whether the Chief Minister has a sycophantic crew around her who breathe words of encouragement and adoring advice and say: ‘We think you are wonderful, Chief Minister, and the comments that you made at SEAAOC were so good. They are so caring, and you are showing a whole new face to politics’. Well, you might have had those voices around you but, in the wider scene, those who would not be speaking directly, right across this country, and particularly in the Northern Territory, had expressed grave concerns about the irresponsible utterings of this Chief Minister with regards to negotiating the maritime boundary between East Timor and Australia.
The fact that now, close to the arrival of gas on our shores, we have no gas pledged into our system, when gas will be flowing, I am sure, close to Channel Island, was why those who attended the AGM meeting of the Palmerston Regional Business Association the other evening were absolutely stunned to learn that 40 petajoules of gas were set aside for use in the domestic market to produce electricity through the Channel Island power plant, so it could be used at the plant at Wickham Point. It was reserved, it was set aside, so that power could be generated at Channel Island for use at the LNG plant.
Negotiations occurred and there was no outcome of any satisfaction to any Territorians. You would think that you could get that gas into our own system to produce electricity for a very significant customer. Not possible; it was not achieved. The Chief Minister is pretty defensive when it comes to the allegations that we have a hands-off approach. Well, I would have expected a hands-on approach in this matter to ensure that, in the best interest of Territorians, you could have found a way to solve that issue - that that gas coming on to our shore could have gone into our power generation capacity at Channel Island to produce at least power for a significant customer. But no - no such resolution. I count that as a disappointment and a failure - not achievement.
Well, why not then, perhaps, if we fall short on that goal and grow weary in endeavouring to get that solved, that we go to point two? This company is now going to set up its own power generation capacity to supply its own need with its own gas that is coming onshore. Could some of the power generation go into the Northern Territory grid? Has that been achieved? Or do we have a ‘hands off, I hope it works out’ approach? Apparently we do; not even that has been achieved. We have gas coming onshore into a private power plant producing power for the LNG plant. The Chief Minister and ministers who have offices on this side, can stand up there on the balcony and look out there and say: ‘Look what we have done’. It is a disappointing outcome when there was clearly the will from Power and Water and Bechtel to achieve this, and it was not possible. We have the worst possible outcome. We have a separate power generation capacity; a private operation which has no benefit at all to Territorians.
On those two fronts, I am particularly disappointed when we have the involvement of this Chief Minister in foreign policy at a level that has brought an embarrassment upon the Northern Territory, the reputation of the Territory, and the reputation to this government’s seriousness in actually working hard to achieve an outcome rather than to achieve an effect and, secondly, the lack of gas actually being brought onshore to produce power, not only for Territorians but for the LNG plant. No gas delivered onshore of any benefit to Territorians is a failure.
Mr Henderson: A $5.5bn investment is a failure?
Mr MILLS: Into power generation, minister.
The Chief Minister made a fair amount of space available within her statement to criticise the Prime Minister with regards to the energy policy. The Chief Minister’s statement demonstrates a lack of real understanding of this energy policy, and takes the opportunity to try to carve out a little space for her federal master, Mr Latham.
In fact, I would ask the Chief Minister to direct her attention to Mr Latham and ask him if there will be an axing of Invest Australia, because Mark Latham has made an assertion that he will axe Invest Australia. This is our own national inward investment agency, set up in 1997 by the Howard government to attract production and foreign investment and support sustainable industry growth. Mr Latham, the federal Opposition Leader, has made a commitment to axe Invest Australia. I ask the Chief Minister if she will side with Mr Latham on this issue or will she oppose that decision of federal Labor? Invest Australia has been the cornerstone of encouraging new investment into Australia and the facilitation of whole-of-government approval processes. So what plans does the Chief Minister have to maintain this momentum and level of investment services in response to the announced policy by Mark Latham and federal Labor? After all the big talk, will the Chief Minister lobby her federal Labor boss to change his decision?
That is where the activity needs to take place. That is where the real effort needs to be made, rather than taking the opportunity to score points on an ill-informed commentary on the energy policy. The Chief Minister should focus her attention more on details of the Northern Territory economy and, flowing from the economy, addressing in real terms the building of capacity in the Northern Territory economy.
The statement makes easy reference to ‘we are going to do all we can to keep those people who are working on the gas plant here in the Territory, to stay on’. That is nice to say, but this is an incredibly serious issue and we need a bit more substance. Discussions with Woodside - and I have had a number of meetings with them - reveal a very concerning aspect to the profile of the skill shortage not only nationally but, specifically, in the Northern Territory. This is of a magnitude that I would expect that this government would go further than talking about a jobs strategy, the one they promised upon being elected. They said they already had one and, after two or so years, still it is being wheeled out. We need a real jobs strategy because we do have a real issue here. In discussions with Woodside, they could ask what a Territory government could do to strengthen the case for the bringing of gas onshore in the Northern Territory. What could a Territory government practically do? Rather than grandstand and create impressions, what work could they focus on that would strengthen the appeal to bring gas onshore? We thought about it for some time and was the answer was more glossy brochures? No. The answer was this: it is the skills shortage in our nation and, specifically, in the Northern Territory that is a negative factor to bringing gas onshore.
Yes, so off we go, we are going to have a look backwards in the rear vision mirror and say: ‘Oh, you remember the past?’. I am not interested in the past; this is an issue in front of us now. I would expect this Chief Minister to pay more than lip service to such an important issue. You arrived in government with a grand announcement that you have such a strategy and, after two years, we have had faint reference to it. In fact, it did not even exist. Then you contact someone in Adelaide to construct this strategy that you told Territorians that you had.
The issue is in front of us; it is our young trainees and apprentices. They need a concerted focus of government now. I would feel far more satisfied knowing that that has been properly attended to, rather than the provision of lip service and the production of glossy brochures that are designed to make this government look good.
We want to get serious about bringing oil and gas onshore and having sustainable development in the Northern Territory. We must build our capacity locally. We must focus on it directly and get on with the real work instead of posturing on the international stage and putting out schoolgirl ideas of how we can solve this international problem. Get on with the real job. Build our skills base. Put a proper focus on our training. Use the GST revenue to stimulate and grow the domestic economy. Get the action happening. Get the oil and gas onshore and get it into our grid so that we can have cheaper power. On those two counts, you have failed. There has been an increase in unemployment, whatever that gobbledegook meant during Question Time. I could not make head or tail of it, but ...
Mr Stirling: Go for it. Come for a briefing and I will explain it to you.
Mr MILLS: I will try and read Hansard, but it is going to be a very difficult argument to follow through and be convinced at the end of it. The fact is, the assertion has been made, in April 2003: ‘Look ahead, it is going to get better’. At that time, the unemployment rate was lower than it is now. ‘Look ahead, have faith in the future’, said the Chief Minister. ‘It is all going to work, 2011. It is going to work in the future. We have everything lined up. It is going come to pass in the fullness of time’. Well, in the fullness of time, predicted the Treasurer in 2003: ‘You just wait until it all starts out there at Wickham Point, and you just wait until we see the Dry Season’. We have had the great stories about how tourism figures have picked up and everybody has come to town. ‘Just you wait and see. The Dry Season will come; it will all be activity out at Wickham Point’. Lo and behold, we have increased unemployment. We have arrived at the point of prediction. The prophecy that was given by the Treasurer has failed to come to pass. We have had, in fact, an increase in unemployment.
The Chief Minister stood up and said: ‘Oh, you know, I am very sensitive about this. How dare you say that we have got a hands-off approach?’ Well, I cannot see many fingerprints on the tiller of this show. It is all just happening. Stuff seems to arrive out there in the harbour, and it is: ‘Oh, give us all a round of applause. We will crack a bottle of champagne and toast whatever it is out there. There are pipes going to be laid soon. Let us have another glass of chardonnay and say what jolly good fellows we are; look what we have done. We are a marvellous bunch of people ...
Ms Lawrie: Some of us do not drink.
Mr MILLS: Sorry? You do not drink chardonnay?
The fact is, on two very clear fronts, we have had a failure. We have had unemployment increase; we have less in the labour force; we have Territorians leaving. We have no cheaper power and we have none of our power generation which is being produced by gas being brought onshore. There is nothing sadder to see. All this activity going on there; a bit of fuss and bother and a few people getting jobs; that is great. But that will pass. We are well into this project, and we have electricity being produced out there which will benefit Territorians zip.
We have unemployment increasing and confusion and an embarrassment with regards to the involvement of this Chief Minister in international affairs. I really think, if you wash this statement clean of all the hype and rhetoric and have a look at it under a microscope, you will find it is not too good. It is just a lot of talk. Once again, it has achieved the objective of looking and sounding reasonably good; close analysis - no good at all.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I urge the Leader of the Opposition to take a little trip out to Wickham Point, and have a little count for himself. They must be fictitious. There are about 1000 employees out there at the moment that were not there 12 months ago.
With tourism the way it is, the hospitality/tourism industry are having the best season since September 2001 and the collapse of Ansett in the latter part of 2001. With the number of jobs that that creates, it beggars belief for ABS to say that we are losing jobs; that our participation rate is declining and that our unemployed rate is climbing. It beggars belief. Go out and have a look. Count up how many workers you can find. You will find about 1000 out there and the tourism, hospitality and retail industries are the same.
I am pleased to support the initiatives and actions outlined by our Chief Minister to broaden the economic base to the Territory through the development of the opportunities of bringing gas onshore. The existing industries that we have will remain crucial to our growing economic success. They are mining, tourism, Defence, retail, construction and pastoral. However, it is the new industries such as the opportunities coming out of downstream gas manufacturing, that will add further momentum to our economy and provide new and exciting employment opportunities and increased career choices for Territorians of today and tomorrow, with real quality jobs.
Behind every industry, of course - existing of new - is a strong skilled work force. We have taken major steps to ensure that we have the people with the skills to fill high-quality and diverse jobs. Through the first-ever blueprint for maximising job and training opportunities for Territorians, Jobs Plan NT, Building the Northern Territory Workforce, we now have a tool that provides us with a capacity to better plan for recruiting, training and building the Territory work force to meet the needs of the merging industries such as oil and gas.
The $160m three-year Jobs Plan, developed in consultation with industry, unions, businesses and the community, is building a skilled and flexible work force. This is the piece of work criticised by the Leader of the Opposition. For 10 years in opposition, I came in at every budget and said: ‘Where is your jobs plan? What are you doing about jobs? What are you doing about training Territorians for the future?’ Absolutely no response in 10 years! He has the hide - has the gall - to come in here and criticise this government for its efforts in producing our Jobs Plan NT, Building the Northern Territory Workforce.
We are providing training, skills development to Territorians, as well as financial incentives for employers taking on apprentices and trainees. Apprenticeships and traineeships have been boosted in record numbers. In the three years 1998 to 2000, 5602 apprentices and trainees commenced training in the Territory. Between 2000 and 2003, that number rose by 958 to 6560, a 17% increase. Currently, over 2700 Territorians are in training, representing record levels of participation. In just three years, we will have supported more than 7000 apprentices and trainees, working to ensure the future viability of our work force.
Training for oil and gas industry is focussed on up-skilling of existing trade skills, as well as growing the skilled work force through new apprentices. DEET has been working closely with the oil and gas industry to meet the current needs and short-term requirements, as well as critical and strategic planning for medium- and long-term changing skill requirements. Much of that work has to be done at an operational level. We have a strong commitment to training. We will continue to work with industry and business to see where we will need to build and train for skills for the future.
In 2003, 25 local tradespersons were up-skilled in welding, and a further 23 trainees completed Certificate II in General Construction, targeted at industry shortfalls, at a cost of approximately $400 000. We also provided $390 000 in 2003 to upgrade the welding facilities at Charles Darwin University to maximise the forthcoming training and employment opportunities identified by the local manufacturing council and associated industries. DEET is currently working with the Welding Training Institute of Australia, the Territory Construction Association, and local businesses to address medium- to long-term skill development for this and other major projects. In 2004, the government allocated over $400 000 to up-skill indigenous Territorians for skill shortage industries associated with welding, construction and hospitality. Fifty-one people graduated from those programs and have gained, or are well placed to take up, employment opportunities in skill shortage areas.
Bechtel has commenced negotiations with the new Apprenticeship Centre for the employment of third and fourth year indigenous apprentices on the LNG site, and DEET is assisting with those negotiations. Following provision in June 2004 of its projected skilled work force for the next two years, DEET is working with Bechtel and training providers to develop training programs to ensure that Territorians applying for jobs on this and other projects have the best possible chance of securing employment. DEET has also commenced consultation with the Western Australian government regarding information sharing from a study that it has conducted into skill shortages and training needs of the oil and gas industry.
Under the jobs plan, Building the Northern Territory Workforce, employment and training in the Northern Territory has a real focus and a bright future. It is promising to see so much activity in place and the returns Territorians are already experiencing through this initiative.
When this government contemplates a gas issue, as the Chief Minister said, it is with the framework of four key opportunities: LNG, power generation, gas-based manufacturing and domestic gas for the national grid. That mix of opportunities will shift over time as individual field assessments improve and markets shift, and so will the jobs and skills required to service the industry. Whatever those outcomes, we have to be prepared to make the best of the employment opportunities that these major projects will bring with them.
The strategies and training initiatives that this government has in place will ensure that we are ready to meet the challenges through our employment and training initiatives. The Territory work force and all Territorian will be well positioned to reap the long-term benefits of the sustainable oil and gas industry on our shores.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Madam Speaker, the statement by the Chief Minister is interesting in that it gives us an update on what is happening with gas projects and potential gas projects in the Timor Sea and waters surrounding the Northern Territory. It also suggests that, somehow, the Chief Minister is influencing the nation in how we should deal with energy strategies for Australia in the future. The second issue I could put aside because that has been pretty well comprehensively dealt with by the federal government and also her own federal colleagues in the way that there has been a resounding silence with regards to any of her proposals. She does not seem to have in perspective what the greater issues are that are involved: the resources that are available in Australia that, with the correct environmental controls, need to be produced to benefit not only other states and territories in Australia but the nation as a whole.
Regarding this particular statement though, if one goes back in the Parliamentary Record over many years, one would see similar statements with regards to the potential for gas onshore for Territorians, the potential benefits in skills upgrading, jobs, etcetera.
I see all of those stickers are gone now, but I remember when Bayu-Undan was finally about to commence construction there was these ‘gas for jobs’ sticker across all of the government members’ computers - of those who used them in the Chamber. That seems to have disappeared. The reality is that the long-term jobs that will be created by the Bayu-Undan project have simply not eventuated. No one doubts for a moment the benefit that the construction project has created for Territorians. In my own electorate, it is clear to see the construction camp, the number of people involved in the camp, and the flow-on benefit for Territorians, in general, from that construction phase. However, equally, I do not believe that anyone would doubt that there was an expectation that gas onshore from Bayu-Undan would give to Territorians greater benefit than it has.
Quite frankly, I do not believe people generally understand what all this gas is about. They are more concerned with day-to-day problems with keeping their own business solvent, or with job for themselves or their children. Gas is something that is out there in the future, potentially of benefit to Territorians. However, unless they actually feel that benefit themselves it has little relevance.
Therefore, it is in that context that, when the Chief Minister alluded to the future for gas and the benefits of gas to Territorians and the efforts of her government, I believe that she fails two very simple tests. One is that a test is already being produced, and that is the test on what has been the result of Bayu-Undan. If one looks at that particular test, it is very difficult to find anything constructive that the Northern Territory government and Clare Martin, as Chief Minister, has achieved.
I would have thought that any provincial government in Australia would, at the outset, argue in the national interest. I know that, in the past, CLP governments have been accused of being outspoken. In fact, Clare Martin herself, as Opposition Leader, criticised my government on a number of occasions for comments that we made with regards to negotiations in East Timor. One thing we did do was speak with the same voice as the federal government. We did not speak as the de facto representative of the government of Timor Leste. I find it particularly disappointing that, when it came to adhering to a strategy that is in the national interest, a provincial Chief Minister would act so irresponsibly - and frankly, so childishly - in trying to promote and interfere with the negotiations that were taking place.
Anyone who has been involved in this gas business for any amount of time knows that, particularly in the case of East Timor, they play really hard ball. They have, in the person of Mr Galbraith, a very tough negotiator, someone who, notwithstanding my criticisms of the man personally and the way he acts, if one were in East Timor and he was representing your interests, you would have to be very comfortable and confident in the approach that Mr Galbraith has made in his negotiations with the Australian negotiators, including the foreign minister.
All the more reason, therefore, that I would expect a Chief Minister of the Northern Territory to either stay out of it or speak with one voice with our own foreign minister. I understand there was a sucking in of breath at SEAAOC. I understand it was not even on the Chief Minister’s notes. If it was, it was irresponsible of those who put them there. For the Chief Minister to somehow suggest that there would be, in the heat of negotiations at a time when Mr Galbraith himself was threatening that these things had to be finalised in a number of months, where there were threats to Australia for not putting this in the hands of the International Court to deal with maritime boundaries, when the Chief Minister of East Timor was calling the federal government in Australia a ‘bullying nation’ that, in itself, I would have thought, would have had most fair-minded Australians’ hackles up - Australians who have put their lives on the line in East Timor over a number of years in helping that country achieve nationhood. Soldiers are still there in a very difficult environment helping the East Timorese people and government mature as a nation.
Therefore, in this environment, the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory decided to side with East Timor. She decided that, not only do they have their own parliament and negotiators, she might just give them a bit of a helping hand. She made a statement suggesting that the Prime Minister of Australia and the foreign minister should come up with a new strategy; that is, to de-link the issue of maritime boundaries and come up with some special one-off deal that is more generous than had been the holding point in negotiations by our foreign minister and his negotiators at that time. She, somehow, thinks this is mature and responsible.
My understanding is, certainly in circles in Canberra, that it was seen as unforgivable. Also, we now have some understanding as to the way the Labor Party operates, because her own federal leader has also proposed a similar suggestion; that is, that upon gaining government, a federal Labor government would deal far more generously with East Timor on these issues. Most Australians would find that appalling in terms of efforts to undermine the discussions, negotiations and position of the current Australian government elected democratically by its people.
Therefore, when it comes to the national interest, Clare Martin’s interest in Australia is really weighted in favour of East Timor. This parliament, under her leadership and the leadership of the Labor government of the Northern Territory, may as well have Timor Leste flags on your tables, because you are more interested, as a government, in the aspirations and benefits of the East Timorese people than you are in Territorians and Australians. That is your negotiating position. No wonder Mr Galbraith sits back and says: ‘Well, it is only a matter of time. We can just hold off because we have already seen the cracks appearing’. No wonder that minister Downer himself takes a very tough position. The issue of maritime boundaries are very firmly set off the agenda, otherwise there will be no concessions. It is also interesting to see that the suggestion of the Chief Minister has been thrown comprehensively out the window, because any deal that will be done with East Timor will certainly not include any renegotiation of our maritime boundaries or those maritime boundaries being taken off the agenda.
The Chief Minister speaks highly of ConocoPhillips. In fact, she even goes so far as to say not only have ConocoPhillips done so well, but approvals are already in place for further trains to be added to the Wickham Point gas plant. That is news to me. I knew that there were environmental impact studies that allowed for a 10 million tonne gas plant, but I certainly did not know that there were further approvals that had already been agreed to. If the Chief Minister is only speaking about environmental impact statements that give approvals for the possible expansion of that plant, that is fine; we are aware of that. However, if further approvals have been given to ConocoPhillips to expand their operations, given the uncertainty that is currently there with regards to other fields in the Timor Sea, and also because of the actions of ConocoPhillips, I would like to know what those details are.
I would also like to know, when the Chief Minister speaks so highly of ConocoPhillips and says that, on her task force includes the CEO of Power and Water, it would be interesting to refer to the Estimates Committee hearing where Mr Phillips, the Chairman of Power and Water, made a couple of points, and so did Mr Wood. He said, at one stage, when he talked about the fact that no gas will be coming onshore from Bayu-Undan for domestic use by Territorians:
- This not just a matter for Power and Water, of course, it is a matter for the Territory and for all of us. Yes, we
share your disappointment. In fact, my managing director was hounded a little for describing some of these
approaches as ‘un-Australian’.
There was a certain irony at SEAAOC, I thought, when one of the speakers talked about Kim Wood, who described all of the gas being exported offshore and none available for domestic consumption as ‘un-Australian’.’ That is Kim Wood, the Chairman of Power and Water who, I would suggest here, has more gumption than the Chief Minister. He can stand in front of an Estimates Committee and say, without a blink of the eye, that it is un-Australian the way ConocoPhillips have acted in the way that none of that gas is being reserved for Territorians.
He also went on to say that, in negotiations over a period of over the last 18 months - your period in government, I might add - in negotiations with ConocoPhillips and the Sunrise joint venture, we were running those discussions over a period of 12 months in tandem. We had got down to price, terms, almost to the commercial terms agreed between the two potential suppliers, and we were paying a lot of attention. In fact, of the two, you could not put a hair between the two contracts. This is how close the negotiation was with ConocoPhillips to get gas reserved for Territorians. This is from the CEO of Power and Water: you could not put a hair between the two contracts at the time. Then, effectively, ConocoPhillips walked through the door and said: ‘We have sold all our gas to the Japanese for LNG’. Then Sunrise went on the backburner. We asked the question: ‘How long had you known about it?’ In answer to that they said: ‘Within the last month we were told’. Within the last month.
Therefore, when the Chief Minister comes in here and says: ‘We are talking about 2009, 2011’, painting the picture that somehow we never had an expectation of getting Bayu-Undan gas onshore, and ‘Just you wait, there will be all these other gas projects in the future, and by the by, in time, Territorians will get some gas either cheaper or for domestic use’, it just does not wash. It is typical of the Chief Minister. She has a capacity to reinvent history, and she also has the luxury of not being interrogated sufficiently on some of the statements in history that she has made.
The Chief Minister of the Northern Territory was given, essentially, a project that was all but sealed. All the efforts of the Northern Territory government had been done; all of the monies were committed. The Labor government can say: ‘We put so much money into the roads, all those capital works programs have all been approved. We did so much for ConocoPhillips’. You did nothing! You had one job to achieve; that is, make sure ConocoPhillips pay the tiller-man. It was time for ConocoPhillips to give something back to Territorians - something back in terms of a chair at Charles Darwin University, in helping the skill development for Territorians over that Bayu-Undan plant, and to also deliver on the expectations that they have raised with Territorians and, certainly, with previous CLP governments. That is critical to getting Bayu-Undan gas onshore - critical. In fact, it used to amaze us that, somehow, the small amount of gas that was to be bought by Power and Water was so critical in these whole negotiations. It was at the forefront of every discussion: ‘We have to get the contract with Power and Water’. The one thing this Labor government had to achieve was to get some gas at a cheap price so that Territorians could see some real relief in the gas that was generated, in either capacity and/or capacity and price. You delivered zip – nothing! In fact, as the Leader of the Opposition said today, the reality Territorians need to know about that whole Bayu-Undan gas project is that, apart from the construction phase, they have not even got enough gas for domestic use to work their own cigarette lighter. That is a scandalous outcome.
Worse than that, ConocoPhillips themselves, at a briefing at the Palmerston Regional Business Association, said they did not even want to build a power plant. They did not even want to build a power plant, but they are building a 12 MW power plant. They are using gas that is coming in at about one-eighth of the cost of gas that Power and Water are paying for their own plant, and they are going to generate power for their large 10 MW requirement at Wickham Point. None of that gas is going into the power grid, and we are supposed to sit here and cop it all sweat and say: ‘Oh, well, that is a reasonable sort of a deal’. ‘Not only is it a reasonable sort of deal, by the way, we have given you approval for another two trains; do what you like’. What do they do? Walk in and screw us all over again. It is disgraceful ...
Mr Henderson: ConocoPhillips are going to enjoy reading this.
Mr BURKE: Well, you can tell them. You can go running to ConocoPhillips and give them everything. I will give them the transcript, if you like. ConocoPhillips know exactly where this side of the House stands.
Mr Henderson: Very irresponsible.
Mr BURKE: When it comes to negotiating on behalf of the national interest, a former CLP government has done everything – what are you shaking your head for?
Mr Henderson: I am up next; I will tell you.
Mr BURKE: When it comes to negotiating with ConocoPhillips on behalf of the national interest, they know how much the former CLP government did - not only to get them over the line in terms of the unitisation and the taxation arrangements with East Timor. They know what was done, and all they had to do was give something back to Territorians in reserving some of that gas. All of it is going offshore. I will stand here - and I will say it in front of Blair Murphy or Jim Mulva or anyone else who comes along - and say: under a CLP government there would not be one additional train put on Wickham Point unless there were guarantees provided for gas being reserved for domestic use for Territorians - full stop; end of story.
What we have here from the Chief Minister is to say that approvals have already been given for further trains to be put on Wickham Point. Well, approvals which give us what? Which give back to Territorians what? Where are Territorians going to benefit from the massive industrialisation of Wickham Point? I can see where ConocoPhillips are benefiting. I can see where two large Japanese users are benefiting. I can see where the shareholders overseas are benefiting. I certainly can see the short-term benefits that have come to some Territory companies through the construction phase of the project. However, we wanted a lot more than that.
If we are going to accept this under a Labor government, as the way the Northern Territory does business in the future, no wonder they think we are a pushover. We have a Chief Minister and a government that cannot argue in the national interest; it is more interested in the national interest of East Timor than it is in the interests of the Northern Territory or the national interest of Australia. It is a government that has been democratically voted in by the same people who voted in the Howard federal government, and it will side with East Timor on national issues rather than its own federal government. That is the situation that we currently have at the moment. And you stand proudly and say that you are looking after Territorians energy requirements in the future?
Well, no wonder one has to treat this statement with a fair amount of contempt. However, more than that, it underscores what many people are saying: that this is a government that is full of gloss, full of PR, and knows how to promote itself. It has spent about $3m more on ministerial staff than the previous CLP government, it has a bunch of ministers that are hands-off and, when it comes to negotiations that have some real clout for them, you get nothing at the end of the day except the public relations effort and a large multinational which has taken generously from Territorians. They have taken generously from Territorians at great risk to successive governments. We believe that the long-term benefits of gas will benefit Territorians, but it will not happen with a government that is focussed on the interests of another national government, or a government that is so incompetent that it has no influence on this particular multinational which can walk through the door and say, ‘Sorry, any contractual agreements and negotiations that we have with regards to reserving gas for Territorians is now off the table because we are selling the lot to Japan. Sorry, go away, see you later. Thanks very much for the road, for all the buses, for all the native title effort you did, for the negotiations with the Commonwealth, but we are more interested in our interests and our shareholders’.
That is the report card that the Chief Minister has given to this House today. That is the report card that, if anyone has to have any sense of confidence in the future negotiation and achievement of gas onshore, particularly with Sunrise, we would want to see a lot better effort in real benefit to Territorians in the future.
Mr HENDERSON (Business and Industry): Madam Speaker, I obviously support the Chief Minister’s statement. However, the member for Brennan has a very selective memory in regards to his time as Chief Minister of the Northern Territory and the role that he played single-handedly – not in the national interest or the Territory’s interest – but single-handedly in jeopardising very sensitive negotiations that were going on at the time.
I have not been prepared. I do not have the press clippings, the radio transcripts and the direct quotes because I was going to speak in very generous support of this statement - an inspirational statement that I thought all members of this House could have supported. The member for Brennan talked about the Chief Minister’s capacity to reinvent history and failure in negotiations. Let us go back and look at a bit of the history, to the time when the member for Brennan was Chief Minister in the Northern Territory, in the last 12 months leading up to the election in August 2001, and the very sensitive and delicate negotiations that were going on at the time between ConocoPhillips, the Commonwealth of Australia and, as yet to be declared the new nation of East Timor - an interim government and the United Nation ruling authority. They were very sensitive negotiations at the time. We had the then Chief Minister, virtually every day on ABC radio, tipping a bucket on the aspirations that East Timor were putting in those negotiations, and creating great offence.
I have spoken to people in East Timor and the government of East Timor about this. He single-handedly jeopardised those entire negotiations. I have also spoken to the members of the Bayu-Undan joint venture who are certainly less than impressed with the then Chief Minister’s bull-at-a-gate, blundering approach, trying to grandstand himself in front of Territorians with ‘We know best, if only the member for Brennan …’, the then Chief Minister for the Northern Territory, ‘… could have carriage of these negotiations we would deliver this project overnight’.
If you recall, again, a great genius play by the member for Brennan when he organised – or the government of the day organised - a delegation of Timorese business people to be brought to Darwin at the then government’s expense. Those influential Timorese business people were essentially harangued by the then government and other officials in government, by pointing out very starkly to the East Timorese people that, if the Timorese government was to stick with its current negotiating position, then they would lose the project and revenues, and it would destroy the aspirations of East Timor.
What an outlandish and outrageous blundering interference by, as the member for Brennan said, a relatively small power that we, as a state or the territory, had in these negotiations. He blundered in and outrageously tried to subvert the Timorese government in waiting, and the positions that they were negotiating. The Timorese took extraordinary offence at that, and why wouldn’t they? It was not the government of the day’s role to try to subvert those aspirations so blatantly. There was extraordinarily hostile reaction from the Timorese and, as a result of that, there were front pages in the newspaper. When the deal was finally signed, the Chief Minister of the day, the member for Brennan, was very patently and pointedly not invited to those signing celebrations. It is certainly something that is still spoken about, not only in East Timor but among the corporate entities that make up the Bayu-Undan joint venture.
The member for Brennan said: ‘We, as the government of the day, had the wisdom of Solomon. We could have delivered this, that and the other’. What they delivered was an announcement from ConocoPhillips in the lead-up to the election that the investment decision for the pipeline was deferred indefinitely. That is what they put on the table. Negotiations had broken down. The then Prime Minister in waiting of East Timor had slammed the door in the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory’s face and refused to meet him. If this is an example of great diplomacy and negotiating abilities of the member for Brennan and the CLP, I will go he. This was a very selective interpretation of history by the member for Brennan.
I just wish I had those press clippings and interviews from the time because, when we came to government, negotiations had virtually broken down. The government in waiting in East Timor were refusing to have anything to do with the Northern Territory government at all. We, very much from day one, took a position that we would try and facilitate bringing the parties back to the negotiating table and we very successfully did that over time. For the member for Brennan to say: ‘The deal was done; all you had to do was to deliver gas onshore’ is a total misrepresentation of history. I am sure that anyone who studies that period will back up my version and recollection of events over the member for Brennan’s any day.
In many ways, the member for Brennan is probably one of the more competent commentators on the other side and, possibly, still has aspirations to go back to the top job. However, in his contribution here tonight regarding the appalling period of history of his stewardship of the Northern Territory on this particular issue, history does not stand him in very good light at all.
Moving on to more positive versions of what is happening today: developing the Timor gas fields offers the opportunity to lock the Northern Territory into higher long-term economic growth, creating many high-skilled, high-wage jobs for Territorians and attracting millions of dollars in investment and new business opportunities. The government is working hard to maximise benefits for Northern Territory business.
This is not just about construction of an LNG plant. ConocoPhillips have been required by government to deliver a local industry participation plan outlining how they will maximise the use of local business in the construction, installation and operation of their Bayu-Undan gas condensate production facilities, Darwin LNG plant and the Bayu-Undan to Darwin gas pipeline.
The scale of the project to develop the Timor Sea gas fields is huge - so huge that it could be out of reach for the average Territorian running a small business. However, the opportunities for Territorians and Territory business to benefit from bringing gas onshore are there, and some of these opportunities are already being realised. Territory-based businesses have supported the development of the Bayu-Undan project from the start of exploration, and continue to do so following the start of production in February 2004. Territory businesses are involved in the project across a broad gamut of sectors. Among the services provided locally are logistic support, food, drilling supplies, industrial gases, safety equipment, welding equipment, chemicals, fuel, water, communications equipment and support, engineering and maintenance services, and waste management.
Several companies invested in new or expanded facilities to support the offshore development including, for example, Toll Energy supporting the ConocoPhillips supply base; Baker Hughes INTEQ for drilling mud plant, while Upstream Petroleum and the RAMS consortium assembled the 320 m long product transfer hose at Lee Point. The operations base at the Bayu-Undan facility and the construction and operation of the Bayu-Undan to Darwin pipeline and Darwin LNG plant create additional opportunities for local business for the life of the project. The government estimates the annual operational expenditure for the offshore operations to be worth up to $100m per year, with up to 80% of that, or $80m per year, a realistic local content target. That is $80m being spent each year here with Territory business - expenditure that will cycle through our economy to many other Territory businesses.
For the opposition to be so ignorant to say: ‘Well, this is okay, we have the construction phase but there is absolutely nothing coming afterwards. This is a great opportunity missed’, we are talking about $80m a year in supporting the offshore production facilities, let alone the ongoing operational expenditure at the Darwin LNG plant. It just goes to show the extraordinary incompetence of the opposition to fail to understand that this is the start of an industrial age for the Northern Territory. It is not just money during the construction phase, this money will be ongoing. If they dared to take their heads out of the bunkers and the flags that they wrap themselves up in and travel the rest of Australia and the world, and look to see the type of developments that these types of facilities can bring, they would see that they are not static, that they are ongoing and those opportunities do develop over the life of the project. There is extraordinary ignorance in comments from the members opposite.
The laying of the pipeline from Bayu-Undan to Darwin by the SEMAC barge commenced early in August, and will take approximately four months to complete. There are more opportunities here for Territory business. NT-based business can realistically target $40m of the pipeline construction work, including surveying, rock supply, barge crewing, catering, diving, pipe hauling, pipeline pegging, hydrostatic testing, supply of both fuel and personnel transport – all businesses in the Northern Territory who are very happy with this $5.5bn investment in the Northern Territory. The only people who are unhappy about it are those members opposite with their blinkers on. Not only is it a boost to those industries - I am sure the fisheries minister will agree – but a great tourism benefit because, with that rock armour wall up through Darwin Harbour, it is going to be a great artificial fishing reef, as I so memorably advised the AFANT meeting a couple of years ago at the Aero Club.
Kim Heng Marine and Oilfield, the owner of Darwin Offshore Logistics Base, is providing three vessels to support the pipeline project. I have met with Kim Heng on a number of occasions. He is a Singaporean businessman who, on the back of this project and opportunities in the Timor Sea, has invested heavily in the Northern Territory. I understand he is about to become an Australian citizen. Again, these are benefits of this project, in a small way, but direct investment and confidence that people in Singapore have in the Territory’s economy, unlike those members opposite.
Rock to protect the pipeline from storm, anchor and fishing net damage is being stockpiled at East Arm from the Mt Bundy quarry. Boskalis, which has the contract to bury the pipe, is established in Darwin, leading to yet more jobs - jobs that those opposite fail to see.
Construction of the Darwin LNG plant at Wickham Point is over 20% complete and is running to schedule. The LNG tank can be clearly seen from the city. Over 1 130 000 man hours have been worked without a single lost-time accident, and on an industrial project of that scale that is absolutely fantastic. Congratulations to all involved. Major client equipment is arriving on site, including the large carbon dioxide stripping tower, which was transported to site by road from the East Arm Port. Piles for the LNG load-out jetty are being stockpiled at Perkins Shipping and pile driving has commenced at Wickham Point. The LNG storage tank outer concrete walls have been placed to the full height of nine levels for two of the four quadrants, with only two wall pours remaining. Concrete foundations and structural steel for the main process are nearing completion.
Eighteen major subcontracts have been awarded to Territory companies, or companies with significant local presence, including Thiess, Sunbuild, ATCO, Fleetwood Portables, Patricks, EC&E, Auslec, Universal Engineering and Onesteel. These and further contracts worth an expected $20m to $30m will be awarded for asphalt paving, permanent buildings, non-destructive testing, heavy lift transport, chemical cleaning, cryogenic insulation and fireproofing. Bechtel’s Darwin office has so far issued around 2500 field purchase orders worth around $7m to almost 300 local businesses. These are businesses the opposition would have you believe are not benefiting a cracker from this work. This is serious money going into those businesses, which they will be able to reinvest in those businesses. And this is the result of the failure that the Leader of the Opposition has spoken about? He really does need to get out more often, and start speaking to people and stop just listening to Shane Stone, who seems to be his main advisor at the moment. These cover a wide range of goods and services including printing, signage, plumbing supplies, hardware fabrication, safety equipment, office supplies and furniture. Bechtel offers prompt payment by credit card on purchases of up to $10 000. Suppliers include Coleman’s Printing, Aussie Signs, Auslec, the electrical supplier, Reece plumbing suppliers, Darwin Plumbing Supplies, Blackwoods engineering supplies and hardware, Geminex safety suppliers and Corporate Express office suppliers. Again, Territory companies are benefiting very well out of this project. It does not look like failure to me.
The approximate total value of business that will be accrued to Territory companies - this is the failure that the Opposition Leader was talking about - is $231m, coming directly into this economy, which will continue to be realised over the life of the project, and then around at least $80m per year thereafter. It is a pretty fantastic failure that the Leader of the Opposition is talking about.
In addition to the business contracts, the wages paid to workers associated with the Wickham Point LNG plant will also be injected into the Territory economy. About six weeks ago, there was a very small, but very significant example. A constituent of mine walked into my electorate office and shook me by the hand and said: ‘This is absolutely fantastic’. He is a boilermaker by trade. It was bad news for the company at Howard Springs which was employing him, but great news for him and his family in Leanyer. He is earning $600 a week more for the next two-and-a-half years he will be working on this project. That is an enormous amount of money going into that family - going into their mortgage, paying for their kids’ education - and it is money that will stay in the Territory economy and go around the Territory economy.
Darwin LNG plant operational expenditure is projected to be around $50m per annum. Darwin business should be able to win a substantial share of that. With $80m on the offshore, $50m at the LNG plant - $130m ongoing a year into this economy – it is a magnificent failure that the Leader of the Opposition talks about. I am absolutely astounded at their contribution here tonight.
Northern Territory business is not winning all the work, but at least some of the successful interstate and overseas companies are setting up permanently in the Territory, helping to build Darwin’s capabilities. Those capabilities and the ambition and aspirations of this government is for Darwin to become a service and supply hub for the offshore oil and gas industry, not only in the Timor Sea, but also elsewhere in Asia. There are companies looking at basing themselves here in the Territory.
ConocoPhillips and Bechtel are providing local industry with full and fair opportunity to win work through the use of the NT Industry Capability Network to identify potential contractors, participation in seminars advising Darwin business on project opportunities and contracting procedures, and the issuing of a vendor assistance kit.
The current work force at the Wickham Point site is about 1000 people, and will increase over the next few months to peak at between 1100 and 1200. Territorians comprise about 57% of that manual labour, so that is over 500 of those jobs. The extra $600 a week that my boilermaker constituent was talking about is staying here in the Northern Territory. Non-manual labour is 31%, and 48% of the subcontractors are on site. In total, there are 774 tradespeople on site. It was great to hear the work the Department of Employment, Education and Training are doing to ensure that our apprentices and our young people get the opportunities, not only on the site, but ongoing on the plant.
In addition to the current Bechtel work force, ConocoPhillips is also yet to finalise the number of their staff to be based here in Darwin. About 20 ConocoPhillips staff are currently based in Darwin for project management of the LNG plant construction and to manage the transition to operations. They are currently recruiting nationwide, and have already bought eight houses for staff and will purchase more in due course. Of course, we would love to see them base their national headquarters and move that from Perth to Darwin. There are ongoing discussions and prodding for ConocoPhillips to do that. They have their own corporate reasons as to why they think they are better off in Perth, but we certainly remind them on a regular basis.
However, they are doing their bit, and the insulting comments made by the member for Brennan to ConocoPhillips really just does not stand the opposition in any good stead at all. You have to be able to work constructively with multinationals, particularly multinationals that are investing billions of dollars here in the Northern Territory. To come in here and parade a tirade of insults is not constructive, and just goes to show that the member for Brennan has not learnt anything of humility and the ability to sit down and negotiate with people rather than harangue them.
It is a fantastic project. I have a lot more here in my statement about other projects, but this is an inspirational statement. It is about the industrial growth and the diversification of the NT economy. I agree with the member for Brennan; there have been many such similar statements in here in the past. However, unlike statements in the past, we actually have a project now. We have a $5.5bn project appearing on Wickham Point in conjunction with the pipeline and the offshore. We have a project that is a world scale project, the largest single investment of private sector capital ever seen in the Northern Territory’s economy.
The only people who are not excited about the opportunities that will flow from this are those members opposite. It really is a very sad contribution from their side of the parliament tonight. Haranguing multinationals and throwing insults at them is not the way to achieve better outcomes, and the member for Brennan stands condemned by his statement here in parliament this evening.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the Chief Minister for her statement. It gives a good summary of where we are today with gas development in our region.
As the price of oil continues to reach record highs, it is more important than ever for Australia to be looking for more sources of energy. As we are in a shaky world where the supply of energy can become dependent on the stability of supplier nations, it is important for Australia to develop its own resources. I note the Chief Minister has said that her government’s vision goes beyond the approach of ‘dig it up and ship it out’. Whilst I hope that this is the case, with our first big gas development in the form of the LNG plant at Wickham Point this has not exactly happened. I take on what the minister for DBIRD has said. Certainly the LNG plant has brought great benefits in the construction phase; there is no doubt about that at all. If you have a look at the number of trucks travelling through the rural area from Mt Bundy with material to cover the pipeline, you will realise how much effort is being put in just to cover the pipeline, let alone all the other work required in the form of concrete, steel and materials into the LNG plant.
However, we must look at it holistically. We are not going to get any gas from that project and, when the construction stage is finished, we will only have 80 people working there. Eighty jobs are important, of course, but once the benefits that we have from construction have gone, we will have 80 people working but we will have no gas. I wonder whether the Chief Minister, perhaps like me, who supports the LNG plant, looked at all the glossy side of this development and forgot what benefits we would get out of this project. When you consider that East Timor and Australia also split the royalties 90:10, you have to wonder, when everything is finished will we only have the Territory’s biggest tank to look at - which might raise some money from the tourism industry? Will be have much else?
The reason I say that is not knocking the project. I believe the project is certainly a project that is presently bringing great benefits to the Territory. However, there is talk about Sunrise coming onshore at Wickham Point as well. I have to ask what the government is doing – and I believe that this government on its own cannot do that - about lobbying Canberra to make sure that a percentage of our gas - regardless of the argument about whether it is East Timorese gas or Australian gas, but presuming some of that gas is ours - stays onshore, and we use our gas for our industry. That is really what we should be looking at here so that we will not have to buy gas from a foreign company to keep our industries operating. If the Chief Minister really believes that we do not want to go down the old path of ‘dig it up and ship it out’, then she should be working with Canberra and convincing them that some of our gas should stay onshore.
The Chief Minister also mentioned a government vision. However, the question is: how real is that vision? The first part of the vision is ‘LNG for export’. That is fine, but we should really have a proviso over that, that our export vision be based on Australia first and export second. The Chief Minister also talked about power generation and, as we know, that has not worked with ConocoPhillips. Is it a reality? What could the Territory government do if a company decided to bring gas onshore that said: ‘No thanks, we want to export it all to companies overseas’? Do we have the power to say: ‘No, you will not export 25% of our gas’? I do not know. Again, we might say this is what is going to happen but, surely, the federal government is the one that will control the ownership of gas or have a say as to whether we can ask companies to retain some of that gas onshore.
The Chief Minister also talked about gas-based manufacturing in the Darwin region. I have to ask if she is referring to Glyde Point, or the gravel scraped landscape of Middle Arm Peninsula, which I have renamed ‘A Levelled Peninsula’ with the acronym ALP. After seeing how the government has allowed this part of our harbour to be slowly destroyed for industry that could be sighted elsewhere, is the government really putting jobs before the environment? What is going to happen at Glyde Point - the same thing?
I support job creation, but I wonder if our planning for industry is more about producing glossy, feel-good brochures than actually looking on site and seeing what we are going to develop. I support gas coming onshore, but I would like to know that our planners have removed themselves from square-line planning, which continually ignores the environment which we are hoping to develop. If the key catch-cry is ‘sustainable development’ - that is, development that will not only create jobs now, but will not cost a fortune to repair the damage done by the development in the future - we have to be careful where we develop onshore gas industries.
I raise that point because the minister, in her statement, heaped praises on the work of developers in the Map Ta Phut and Jurong Island area in Thailand and Singapore, and said how wonderful the development had been in relation to the environment. Therefore, I am hoping that, if she can heap praise on those areas for their industrial estates, when we develop something similar, we will be able to do the same.
I know that gas is always a key focus of this government and I note that the Chief Minister mentioned our Prime Minister’ White Paper on Energy. However, what about efforts outside the gas arena when we are discussing energy sources? Why isn’t there more interest placed on using the sun that shines on household rooves to either help power our homes or put it back into the grid? I know we can get household roofing panels - not just your solar panels, but you can get corrugated panels that produce electricity. In fact, your whole roof can be a solar bank for electrical production. I gather there are rebates for those. It is fairly expensive but, again, it is those sorts of things that also create jobs.
I could always raise my favourite old topic of hot rock technology. I hear very little about it, yet I notice that since GeoDynamics, the company that is building hot rock technology in South Australia, has commenced, its shares have doubled since it first floated its shares. The federal government now putting money into that project in Innamincka. I have to ask where all our experimental work gone on tidal energy? We did work at Bathurst and Melville Islands on wind energy. We researched solar energy in Tennant Creek. And saltwater - there are the solar ponds in Alice Springs. What has happened to some of that experimentation work?
Madam Speaker frowns a bit, but I am of the understanding that, in Alice Springs a few years ago, there was quite a bit of work done on developing electricity from solar ponds. You can find quite a bit of that information on the net. All I am saying is that we are looking at gas, gas, gas, and that is fair enough because it is very important. However, we should be looking at other forms of energy in the Territory.
If I were to say that we could even look at nuclear, well, people would fall over and die. No one says: ‘We are killing our planet with brown coal’. I do not hear the same outcry for that. I wonder whether we have a very balanced debate, or are we just too scared about the flak we would take rather than look at things from a practical point of view? We have heard a number of environmentalists in England saying the way we are going now with greenhouse, it is nearly getting the point that we may not be able to return from the damage that we are doing. We have to be careful that we do not bury our heads in the sand and avoid all forms of alternative energy that may have potential for Australia.
I ask the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries what happened to the electric car. Do we still have an electric car? Has the government decided to buy electric cars for its local public servants, the ones who just ride around town? There was a big fuss. I think Honda released an electric car and the minister hopped in it and waved to the crowd. What has happened to that?
Mr Vatskalis: Still there.
Mr WOOD: He is still there. Well, I would be interested to know why we have not put more effort into, say, purchasing that type of vehicle, especially when …
Mr Elferink: It is too expensive to charge the battery, but we could give it one-eighth of the power cost.
Mr WOOD: Well, fuel at the moment is 107.9 at Howard Springs and I would hate to know what it is at Erldunda or out at Yulara. It would be pretty …
Mr Elferink: Nyirripi over $1.50 a litre, I recall.
Mr WOOD: Right. We should certainly be looking at alternatives at the moment.
Why have we continued to allow developers to build subdivisions and houses which are conducive to using high amounts of energy in a hot tropical climate? Houses are 1.5 m apart.
Mr Dunham: Bring back the verandah.
Mr WOOD: That is right, and bring back decent sized subdivisions. I might raise that point in another debate regarding a certain development in the Lee Point area.
It is nice of the Chief Minister to tell us the wonders of gas but, surely, how much energy we as consumers are using must come into the equation if we are to look at energy not in isolation. As the Chief Minister mentioned the Energy White Paper, it would be nice to see a Territory White Paper on each goal for energy independence because, at the moment, we just seem to be full of gas.
While there is no doubt that gas will bring benefit to the Territory - great benefits, especially in the construction stage - we cannot and should not put all our gas in one basket. Our reliance on just one source of energy without looking at other options - especially cleaner options - needs to be questioned. I welcome the Chief Minister’s statement, but I hope the statement presented to this parliament looks wider than just gas and looks seriously at all options for energy.
Madam SPEAKER: Sorry, member for Drysdale, I just make the comment that there were many of us who live in Central Australia who were quite appalled to see all the gas from Central Australia go to Darwin without a lot of benefit for the people living in Central Australia. I am sure the member for Macdonnell will agree with me.
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Thank you, Madam Speaker. It is a wide-ranging debate because the statement is a bit of a patchwork quilt. It talks about gas offshore and about some vague policy notions of government, is full of the usual platitudes, has a little slap at the federal government’s energy policy, where I went on my holidays by the Chief Minister, and a variety of other things here that is intended to give us a warm glow and a confidence that we have these vast resources offshore and the lights will not go off.
The Chief Minister has to learn to be a bit more specific about this stuff. There are even some significant errors in here that I was a bit surprised at. However, I think it is because it probably had several authors, and somebody up on the fifth floor cobbled the whole lot together and, therefore, we have this disjointed thing at the end that says: ‘We love gas, we are good people, it is clean and green, everyone will benefit and we will all live happily ever after’.
The fact is the Chief Minister does not know about contemporary issues, and that is a pretty big concern. The Chief Minister was unable to answer a question I put to her this morning about whether she knew that Bechtel, on behalf of ConocoPhillips, was building a power station at 12 Mg or thereabouts, adjacent to our power station, that will be using the gas from Bayu-Undan, which is not available for domestic use for other people in the Territory whom we call Territorians.
The Chief Minister has missed out on a few things here. She talked about how it is ‘all in the melting pot, we will look at everything’ and, yet, when we go and look at the options that are available, we see that, critically, Bayu-Undan has now slipped off. Bayu-Undan no longer exists as one of these options for energy for the Power and Water Corporation. Even though the statement says we must deal next with lower electricity tariffs to Territory businesses and consumers, her horizon of 2009 is way too far out.
We had to look at opportunities that exist with this gas coming onshore. I know it was on the table because, as the minister for Power and Water, it was on our agenda every time we spoke to the big companies; that is, both Sunrise and Bayu-Undan. Neither of these companies are particularly keen to be power generators. Both of them wanted to be suppliers to our relatively small demand here in the Northern Territory, and they wanted that because they wanted us to be foundational customers. They wanted us to be customers that got in on day one, had the strength of will to commit to a project, had the strength of will to say: ‘Not only do we think this is good but we are going to buy it’. They saw that as a very good sign of goodwill and bonding between certain parties.
We now have a circumstance where, next door to Wickham Point where we generate power, that power is not good enough for a major customer - a customer that would generate tens of millions in revenue for the Northern Territory. Power and Water, if they were able to provide power to the site at Wickham Point, would generate millions and millions of dollars of revenue over the period of this. They have decided not to buy it. That deserves further interrogation. I hope the Chief Minister takes up whether she gets a brief on this.
However, the second issue is that the cheap gas that is available to produce power is only producing power within a precinct for one customer, and that is the customer that owns the gas. Therefore, we have a problem here. The problem is that we now have a precinct; there seems to be a diminution of goodwill between the parties; there seems to be that the capacity that was there for trading of cheap energy to a generator, and generated power to a massive customer, has now broken down. We know it only broke down in a matter of the last month or so. We have on the Parliamentary Record that this is a very recent issue. The issue of not providing any gas to Channel Island is recent. The issue of modifications to the design at Wickham Point so that a power station could be built is a very recent issue. The Chief Minister has to tell us why there is a problem because, if it is a problem with patsies in the negotiations, it does not augur well for the future negotiations she talked so confidently about in this statement. If it is an issue of a deficiency in the service we provide in terms of power, we should address that. However, I would have thought that with the ten sets - or nine sets at Channel Island now - and the provision of a couple of others and some guarantees about continuity of supply, you could have made a very good bid on some cheap energy as a contra to pay for that. I am surprised that the negotiation of that type is not on the table and has not been solved.
I was interested that Mrs Abala was quoted in the paper yesterday applauding the Labor government. She is going to vote for them next time. One of the reasons is what they did with Bayu-Undan. I thought it does go to show you that, for the Chief Minister to get up and keep talking about ‘gas, gas, gas; we are concerned; it is a dream; it is a black hole but we will fix it up for you’ is actually getting through. In the article, Mrs Abala claimed that she was a hairdresser. Most hairdressers will get very little from Bayu-Undan unless they actually do a few haircuts for those 300 or so workers on site when it starts to run. The sad fact is that it will not be of major benefit to this community, and that is an opportunity wasted.
I can recall going to the Discovery nightclub and hearing a presentation from Bechtel. In the crowd was a wide range of people from the business community; the person standing next to me was a picture framer. Essentially, the question on everyone’s lips was: ‘What do I get out of this?’. The spin that was put out by this government was that, once gas comes onshore, we will all live happily ever after. However, that has not happened. The Chief Minister, in her economic blueprint, said that she would bring Sunrise onshore by 2007. That cannot happen - could not have happened when she wrote it - and it goes to her entire credibility about this whole issue. She throws issues out there; the people become confident that it is a saviour for them – a single purpose saviour – and, at the end of the day, there is massive disappointment. It should not be so, because any opportunity that can be harvested should have been harvested. Whether that was cheap gas, jobs, training, upgrade of arterials, upgrade of roads, new fishing habitats on the armour rock for the pipe - who cares? - so long as every time we sit at that table we try and make sure there is a winner for us. That has not happened here.
The Chief Minister had a bold vision, and she told us what it was early in the piece: the deliverables on gas. Cheap energy is not in there. The biggest deliverable for most people in the Territory is that they want their power bill to go down, be static or whatever. When she talked about broadening the economic base that is, essentially, to do with cheap power. We have water here, we have land here, we are well positioned geographically - we have all of those factors, but power is a problem. One of the ways of breaking that is to make sure we can get good, cheap power onshore. Apart from making some references to it, this statement does not make any guarantees about it.
I was interested about a couple of things, and one is that we only want the big guys. At page 3 of the statement, the minister said and I quote: ‘New gas projects must be world standard in intent’. I do not know what that means, but I would have thought that if there is a gas field that can be commercially exploited, let us exploit it. Whether it is of world standard or not, we should exploit it. Certainly, there are some minor fields - one of them I can think of is Dingo in Central Australia - that are very small field, very marginal. However, there is the potential to exploit those fields and that should be always analysed.
The minister also said that Blacktip is most likely to be our second onshore gas project. Well, she should really go and see Mereenie in Palm Valley because they are both onshore, they are both significant finds of gas, they both provide our power station and our energy needs here, and they both have a horizon. So, we have onshore gas and this statement does not talk about the potential for finding more gas onshore. We are highly prospective with gas. Therefore, do not stand up here and say: ‘Oh look, one of your ministers came and had all these ELs and we have progressed all these ELs’. How many have been approved? How many for oil and gas? How many look prospective? Are we helping them out? Gas is not just out there in the middle of the ocean. They are not just issues of boundaries; they are issues of onshore gas. We have had a considerable heritage in this area of searching for onshore gas going back nearly 50 years. Therefore, this idea of just looking at the big guys and it has to be offshore, is a little strange.
The second train that has been approved for Wickham Point is a bit of a concern because the Chief Minister said that one of her ambitions is to have a province of the type she saw in Thailand or Singapore associated with that downstream gas. That has to be spelled out here because the province was always Glyde Point, and Glyde Point has to be seen as the place it will be. It has to be fully understood that it is all very well saying we do not want to diminish people’s lifestyles, but we need to discuss those issues out in the community. I believe pretty much everyone in this House has signed off on the discussions concerning Wickham Point; Glyde Point likewise. However, you have to have the discussion.
I am attracted to some of the research and intellect that the member for Nelson has put into this. I believe that nothing is carved in stone. You cannot say we cannot have these corridors going here or there, or you cannot change the zoning here, or because that is coloured purple it cannot be coloured green. That is just a bulldozer approach and we should be looking at a wide range of options and making every post a winner. We should be careful we know what we trade-off, and we can quantify what it is.
I was disappointed that the Chief Minister has attempted to put a spin on her bizarre call at SEAAOC for the boundaries to be untangled from the negotiation in a way that mirrored what Prime Minister Alkatiri was saying. This is a very strange notion. It is strange on several counts. However, first it is an unusual thing for a state politician to be talking about international boundaries in such a way. It had the potential to scuttle significant negotiations - and Woodside almost said as much. She is now trying to say it meant something different. What it meant was she was agreeing with Prime Minister Alkatiri. If you look at his three points, one was to establish a deadline for negotiations for sea boundaries between the two countries. Well, that deadline is established; it is not negotiable. It is not a negotiable thing, so that has been fixed. The second was to stop issuing exploration licenses in the disputed areas of the sea. Well, it is not disputed because that has certainly been established for some decades. If I recall, it even went as far as the International Court at one stage. The third was to accept that the boundaries cannot be negotiated within three to five years - somebody else will come in and tell us.
If the Chief Minister wants to sign off on those parameters, she will find most Australians do not. She will find on point one they do not think the boundaries are in dispute and, if they do, there is a very significant argument for people sitting in small timber boats out there in our harbour at the moment who have been caught in these very boundaries that the Chief Minister – one would believe – would think are in dispute. Those people have been fishing out pretty close to that international boundary too. Some of their forefathers did it for many hundreds of years before them. Therefore, before you want to run a case that the boundaries are in dispute, look downstream. Look at what it means to illegal fishing, our industry, and to the significant international boundary between Australia and Indonesia which is some thousands of kilometres longer than this boundary that we are talking about. If it is an issue of money, let us address it as money. However do not introduce issues that are not negotiable and have the potential to not only stall but abort the negotiations that are on foot.
I will not name him, but I can recall a minister talking to some of his counterparts in East Timor and they said that what they were trying to establish was the line between generosity and greed. That has to be an easy enough line to find. No one can say that Australia has not been generous. No matter how you look at this debate, you cannot say that Australia had some sort of a parsimonious attitude to the fledgling nation of East Timor. That is just a nonsense. I do not think we should ever be cowed by the allegation of going over there and bullying the small nation, of us being very affluent while they are poor and we should give more money. By all means, give them more money. However, please do not run the case that our boundaries are up for negotiation when they are not. The changing of those boundaries by whatever kilometres to the south-west have massive ramifications for the boundary between Australia and Indonesia. The Chief Minister should realise these things.
The matter of the power station should be something that this House should hear about pretty quickly, because the horizon of the 2009 is too far away. I hope in the rejoinder that the Chief Minister can tell us how that happened. She can tell us how it happened not by some comment in here, or some statement or media release. I found out, basically, through contacts that the design had been amended and they are now building a power house. That is something that should be in a statement of this type.
I also ask the Chief Minister to look to the issues relating to continuity of cheap power supply with the Power and Water Corporation. I would like her to look to issues relating to their market position if they have a competitor come onto the market that can obtain energy - which they cannot - at a much cheaper price. Not only may they have lost a significant customer, they may have seen the birth of a significant competitor that will blow them out of the water, which might be good for consumers but not so good for Power and Water. Not only that, it would seem to indicate that there are problems with Power and Water’s supply side, to get to the high standards required of a facility like that at Wickham Point. So please come back in the rejoinder to this statement about those issues. Maybe she can put some of those issues to bed.
I also ask that, because this statement is so far-ranging and we are starting to talk about energy issues, that the minister disentangle that and come back to this parliament and address some of the issues that you spoke about, Mr Deputy Speaker, including the energy policy of the federal Labor opposition. With an election coming up, it is important that we have a look at some of the notions of the Labor opposition. They have certainly been as infatuated with the cheap power provided by brown coal as any other south-eastern government before them, and I can see why. It is easy enough to forgo and compromise various other issues if you are addicted to cheap power. However, if she says that Latham has said that the people in the south-eastern corner of Australia will pay double for their power as a premium for greenhouse and Kyoto - which was also not mentioned in her statement – and that would then render this gas commercially viable, it would be a very brave move. It would certainly benefit Territorians and the environment, and we would see the whites of the eyes of Mr Latham. To come out just short of a federal election campaign, canvass the issues in one party’s policy and not canvass the others - particularly when you are so close to them - is a little sneaky.
Come back in the rejoinder and tell us what the commercial probabilities are of getting Territory gas into the grid, particularly if the cheap southern brown coal has to pay a premium for the destruction that they cause to the environment. Tell us that Labor has signed off on that because it will be received with raucous applause in this part of the world with our two or three seats. However, it might not be so popular in other places in Australia, and that is the issue. The issue is that the Northern Territory’s party, the CLP, only cares about what happens here and we want to make the place up here a winner.
This bleak little attack on the federal government, pretending that you are hiding behind the best interests of Territorians, should be seen for what it is. The Chief Minister should juxtapose those policies with those of the alternative government and, if she really believes that what happened in Thailand is so good and replicates so closely what we are doing here, let us see the photos – she could not smell any industrial smell, everything was tickety-boo, there was total harmony and everybody was really pleased, and they are going to drop one of these at Wickham Point. I would like to see the photos. I believe it is a little tricky to talk about what is happening downstream and then not describe it in greater totality.
I want downstream gas manufacturing, and I want all the stuff that goes with it – the plastics, the fertilisers, the chemicals - all that stuff, it is great. However, I have been to some of these places also, and they do not look real flash and they do not smell real flash. Therefore, it is really important, once you start talking about downstream industries, that you describe where they will be. For the Chief Minister to give such a glowing round of applause, I would think that she has been to facilities that I have not been to, because they are, certainly to the eye, fairly offensive. The products that they store are often dangerous, noxious and offensive. While it is something we hanker for and we seek - and I am quite happy to put that on the Parliamentary Record - I would like her to be able to tell us categorically where the buffers and whatever around it will be. I would like her categorically to tell us that it will be at Glyde Point, which is the area that has been set aside.
With those few questions for the Chief Minister, I will cease, and I hope to hear some answers in response.
Mr VATSKALIS (Mines and Energy): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on gas, and also to express my dismay about the performance of the opposition members, who seem to be determined to rewrite history. I am not going to go into details because my colleague, the member for Wanguri, stated and outlined some of these untruths, or twisting of the truth and rewriting of history.
I was also dismayed because this is a statement about gas. This is a statement about gas in the Timor Sea. It is not a statement about whether there is not enough gas for Power and Water, where this gas is coming from, or if there are going to be problems with power, if the power is going to be cheap. We are talking about the big picture; about the gas to the north of the Northern Territory.
The reality is that oil in Australia is not abundant; it gets scarcer all the time. The harsh reality also is that oil has reached about $US50 a barrel, and it seems that it is going to be more expensive. Therefore, the reality for Australia is that we have to, and will rely, more and more upon gas, and the vast gas resources are either in the north-west of Western Australia, or in between us and Indonesia and East Timor in the Timor Sea. These gas fields are of immense interest to Australia, and also to the Northern Territory. Quite rightly, the Chief Minister outlined that the Northern Territory government, our government, is focussing in three key elements.
The first one, of course, is to broaden the economic base of the Territory economy. The second is to deliver high-quality and diverse jobs, and the third one is to attract investment. We see how this can happen because, just take, for example, the expansion of Alcan and their reliance upon the Blacktip gas. Here we have a $1.5bn expansion, we are going to have up to 1700 people working in Nhulunbuy, and we are a significantly attractive investment by foreign and Australian companies in the far corner of the Territory – and that is what we will not do with the gas. We are not talking only about Bayu-Undan. Bayu-Undan was significant because it was the very first of the gas projects to come to the Territory. I was amazed to listen to the member for Brennan, ex-chief minister, that he is not going to accept anything less from any company but that they have to bring gas to the Territory and have to have gas for domestic use, otherwise he would rather have this gas in the ground than bring it out.
That was amazing, considering the fact that it was the CLP government that had vision years before to explore for gas and find gas in Central Australia, and to pay a significant price for that gas to power the power station in Darwin and in other regions in the Territory like Tenant Creek and Alice Springs. Sometimes, you have to make the first move before you start talking about downstreaming and having further development in the gas industry. There were people like those pioneers and people with vision like Tuxworth - who decided to convert the power station from a coal-fired power station to a gas-fired power station - who was prepared to pay the expensive price per unit of gas, which translated into more expensive power to the Northern Territory. However, it brought gas to the Territory, to the north of Australia, fired the power station in Central Australia, and also benefited the environment and people in the Territory because it created jobs at a time of the construction of the pipeline and the power station.
The same thing happened in Western Australia. It was the Western Australian government that had the vision to bring gas from Karratha to Perth and as far down as the south-western corner of Western Australia, to fire power stations, aluminium smelters and other industries - paying an extraordinary price for that gas and committing themselves to consuming a certain volume of gas per year and, if they did not, they had to pay for the whole volume as a grid. These people did not make any conditions. What these people wanted and wanted first, was the establishment of the first industries in their region and, from there on, the benefit would start flowing.
We have here across the harbour the LNG plant. I am very pleased and proud that I was part of the team that was instrumental in establishing that LNG plant in that area. I know there was controversy at the time, but the reality is that LNG plant has contributed and will contribute significantly to the Territory economy. At this stage, it is through the contractual stage and the number of workers who work, live, make money and spend money here. In the future, through the export and royalties obtained and other money that will be spent in the Territory, it will continue to contribute to the Territory economy for the next 27 or 30 years. However, what is more important is that we have here a first train to the LNG plant and, very easily, we can actually put another two trains, especially if gas comes from other gas fields in the Timor Sea.
We are not talking only about Bayu-Undan; we are talking about Sunrise. I am very well aware that my colleagues and the Chief Minister worked very hard to bring Sunrise gas onshore. I recall very well the disappointment we felt some days when news came that Sunrise gas would not come onshore because they were looking at a floating platform, and the joy when the floating platform did not seem to work. Then, a few months later, we were again dismayed because the floating platform was floating again - all this defeat, and all the ups and downs.
We believe that gas is very important to the Territory; it is the future of the Territory. We hope that gas will bring the benefits that we have not seen yet in the Territory. One thing we would like in the Territory is a manufacturing industry. We rely upon tourism and the service industry but, if we are going to become a self-reliant state or territory we need a decent manufacturing industry to provide jobs for people and to provide the attraction for people to come from down south or from overseas, so that our population will grow, our economic base will broaden, and we will become one of the new and rising territories in Australia with the gas industry.
We are also talking about Blacktip. We believe Blacktip will supply gas to Alcan. The reality is that, at the moment at Blacktip, when they drilled they found out that it will provide up to 1 tcf. In discussions I had with Woodside, they have told me that this is a very conservative estimate because they are not prepared to announce that they have more gas until they do the exploratory drilling and they hit the gas fields and can confirm there is more gas there.
Of course, north of Blacktip is Petrel and Tern. Petrel and Tern will become isolated gas fields when Blacktip is developed and provides gas to Alcan. Certainly, Santos, which owns Petrel and Tern, have to make a decision regarding what they are going to do with these gas fields. Petrel and Tern are of sufficient size to be connected with Blacktip and, in turn, can provide gas to Darwin and to Power and Water. So, there is not a lack of gas in the seas around the Territory; the question is when it will be coming onshore. Of course, we have a window of opportunity because we will have enough gas from Central Australia until 2009 to 2011 - bearing in mind that the company that owns that gas fields in Central Australia is doing exploratory drilling to hit more gas pockets and, hopefully, they will find more gas.
Another, of course, is the Evans Shoals. The Evans Shoals has some limitation because of its high content of carbon dioxide. However, I was very amazed the other day during ministerial counsel to hear my counterpart from Western Australia argue very strongly about Gorgon, an enormous gas field that has enormous difficulty. It has about 30% carbon dioxide and, of course, when the Gorgon gas comes out they have to burn the carbon dioxide. They are very afraid that the federal government will penalise them because of the significant increase of greenhouse gases.
There are gas fields there - the Petrel and Tern, Evan Shoals, and Caldita – and, recently, ConocoPhillips has an agreement with Santos to start exploratory drilling in the area, and there are very good signs. Of course, just over the border with Indonesia is Abadi, an enormous gas field. We know that the only thing that the Indonesians do not want this to be is gas for LNG because they do not want somebody to compete with their own market. This gas is about 350 km to 400 km north of Darwin, very close to the Territory. There will be a lot of interest for this gas to be developed, bearing in mind that as the price of oil is going up, then the gas becomes more and more attractive.
I was also very dismayed to hear the comment of the member for Drysdale about what the Chief Minister said at SEAAOC. I was there and I do not recall the Chief Minister arguing about renegotiating the sea boundaries. On the contrary, what she said is to disassociate the Sunrise with the sea boundary dispute. She called for the federal government to actually have a look again how we divide the royalties and, if necessary, give some more money to the Timorese as an emerging nation because they need it. After all, Australia is getting the lion’s share. If we provide more royalties to the Timorese that would benefit the state of Timor Leste and it would certainly provide goodwill towards Australia.
What was surprising was that, at a recent ministerial council in Alice Springs, all of my colleagues from all the other states, apart from Queensland - the minister was absent at the time - agreed with that position, especially when I stood up and explained to them the reasons why the Chief Minister called for that proposal to be adopted by the federal government. The reality is Timor Leste is an emerging state; it is still not stable state. We have seen many demonstrations; until a few months ago there were demonstrations. If we are not supportive, we either have to provide foreign aid which will come again from Australia or, if things go really, badly wrong, we might see refugees arriving in our port, as we have seen many times in the past coming from Timor or as far as Vietnam. It was a reasonable proposal and I am very pleased to hear that, after that the stand-off between the Timor Leste government and our government, our Foreign Affairs Minister and the minister for Timor Leste found common ground to continue discussions in order to resolve this impasse.
Sunrise is very important for the Territory, but you can imagine how important it is for East Timor when they have no other industry, no other income, and they rely heavily upon the income from the royalties from the gas fields? Nobody argued about the renegotiation of the sea boundaries. That is not our position. We cannot argue about it; it is a federal matter, not a Territory matter. However, we can actually put a proposal on the table for the federal government to consider, and that is exactly what the Chief Minister did. Therefore, all the other suggestions that the Chief Minister urged the federal government to renegotiate or to look again at sea boundaries is not true; it is false.
Going again to the gas, this is very important to us Territorians. We recognise there are difficulties, there are problems and we have called on the federal government to have a look at the development of the gas fields to the north of our state. The Chief Minister also stated clearly that she prefers a position of ‘use it or lose it’. It is not in our interest for foreign companies controlled by multinational interests to come to Australia, to waters off the Northern Territory, strike a big gas field or a find, and lock it that way for the next 10 or 20 years because they prefer to develop other gas fields they have found in other parts of the world, because they are cheaper to develop or they can get a better return for their investments. At the same time, in this 20 years, everybody else is locked out of this particular area and nobody is developing that resource that, after all, belongs to the Australian people and to Territorians.
We prefer to have a system in which people have a specified period of time to do the exploration and, when they find the resource, to use it. If they cannot use the resource within the specified period of time, let somebody else to come along and use it to the benefit of Australians and Territorians.
We have written to the federal government and have asked them to encourage investment in Australian oil and gas exploration; to recognise the requirements for major gas projects to achieve critical market mass; to improve the environment for green field gas pipeline development; to support the strategic investment that will enhance Australia’s energy supplies, security and promote self-sufficiency; and to encourage the increased utilisation of less carbon intensive fuel, including natural gas, for power generation.
As you stated before, Mr Deputy Speaker, greenhouse gases are an enormous detriment to the environment and the utilisation of coal, which is a cheap energy source, will create more and more problems. Of course, gas is a hydrocarbon and it will produce greenhouse gases, but not the same volume or the same kind of gases that burning coal will generate. Gas is greener and it is cleaner, so you can use gas in high density population cities and you will not see the same effect that you will see in cities that rely upon diesel or coal. There are benefits to the environment, and certainly both long-term and short-term benefits.
We asked the federal government to facilitate the exploration of new gas fields by providing tax incentives, by improving access to land, and by improving the benefits to people who are prepared to do the exploration. We brought that to the attention of the federal minister, Mr Macfarlane, at the recent ministerial council in Alice Springs, and we had the support of all the states. States like Western Australia and South Australia argued strongly for tax incentives in the same way that other countries provide to mining companies and explorers. We want to see that happening as soon as possible.
We also urged the development of Sunrise and how the federal government should facilitate this development of the Sunrise gas field as soon as possible because the south-east corner of Australia relies heavily on gas. In the past five years, we have seen incidents of explosions in gas plants, for example, the gas supply in South Australia was cut and, earlier, the explosion at the ESSO plant in Victoria cut supply to Victoria. Because there was inter-connected gas lines from other states in Australia, they managed to provide gas to South Australia and to Victoria.
I proposed that the development of Sunrise gas field would not only provide benefits to the Territory because of downstreaming, but it would provide benefits to Australia. After all, we have the pipeline that goes from Darwin to Alice Springs. There is a corridor that is already cleared and surveyed and would be able to provide for the establishment and construction of another pipeline. From Alice Springs to Moomba is about 300 km, which is not a technically difficult task to complete.
I support the Chief Minister’s statement because I can see that gas is the future for the Territory. We have other minerals in the Territory. The mining sector provides about 23% of the gross state product and gas will be one of these emerging industries. What is important about gas is not only the power generation and the export of gas, but also the downstreaming - the downstreaming that occurs in other countries in the world where gas is utilised for the production of urea, fertilisers, plastics and other materials we use in our everyday life.
Yes, I understand that some of these industries are dirty, but let us not forget they can be as dirty as we allow them to be. Australia is a developed country. Australia has in place control mechanisms and processes that strictly control these type of industries. After all, we have refineries and we do not have the same level of pollution that we see in third world countries. Our industry is strictly regulated, inspected and investigated, and we would not allow the industry to produce the gases or the offensive waste we see in other areas. The argument about the gas coming here and that we do not like this kind of industry here because we have seen it is very dirty, I do not think can be valid. It is up to us what we are going to make of this industry.
Again, as I said before, gas means broadening our economic base, giving the opportunity for the Territory to develop as a strong economy, broadening our trades and skills base and attracting investment. At the moment, as was mentioned before, we lack the skills for the gas industry, not only on a Territory level but on a national level. I support the gas industry. I will work very closely with my colleagues and the Chief Minister to make sure that gas from the Timor Sea, Sunrise and other gas fields in the area will come onshore, because I believe in the future of the Territory. After all, I have a vested interest. As a father of two young sons, I would like these boys to stay here in the Territory, have a bright future, have jobs in the Territory and, being selfish, have them stay with me rather than lose them to Sydney, Melbourne or Adelaide. I strongly support the Chief Minister’s statement on the gas and, as I said before, I am prepared to work very hard with my colleagues in the government to bring gas onshore.
Dr BURNS (Essential Services): Mr Deputy Speaker, as we have heard during this statement, the gas projects in the Northern Territory are already taking the Territory to a new threshold of development, and the extent of that development is palpable now. The benefits to Territorians of the Bayu-Undan development are also being felt. The minister for business earlier today spoke about the massive investments, high rates of local employment, and demonstrated capacity of local industry.
Our government is set to deliver high-quality infrastructure and services to this high-technology sector. The Territory is increasingly recognised on the national investment map as an emerging gas hub, and this is attracting interest in other flow-on investment and opportunities. It has become evident that there is quite a lot of cargo coming through the port in relation to the development out at ConocoPhillips, and it is providing quite a lot of work at the port as well. There are many flow-on effects and opportunities associated with these developments.
The scale, as has been outlined previously, of the current and projected investments is truly enormous. One of the investments that really stands out, of course, is the expansion of the Alcan facility at Gove. Alcan is currently nearing the completion of its 15-month feasibility study and environmental report in regards to the expansion of refinery production from two million tonnes per annum to three-and-a-half million tonnes per annum. The feasibility study itself has a cost of $40m, and this shows the scale and the seriousness of these investments, and the serious money that is involved. Alcan is a very serious company. It is a global company, but it has strong links with the Territory and it is set to invest even more within the Territory.
As part of that investment, the company is exploring opportunities to source gas for this planned expansion, so they are putting a dual case for the expansion. One is based on their current fuel source, which is apparently sulphurous fuel oil, and the other one is, of course, to use gas, which would be a lot cleaner and, I believe, cheaper. This is a strategy that Alcan is looking at. As part of that strategy, they are looking at the trans-Territory gas pipeline, which is a mammoth project in itself, and that is the link-up with the Blacktip gas deposit, which may provide the preferred energy source.
Gas, as most people would know, would come onshore somewhere in the Port Keats region, go to Mataranka, and then right across the Territory over to Gove. Just the logistics and the negotiations involved in that are truly huge. During the two-and-a-half to three year construction phase, the expansion project would generate a peak of 1200 jobs and a further 120 jobs in the long-term operational phase. Work has commenced on the $8.5m Gove Airport expansion and upgrade, with the new runway already completed and now awaiting commissioning. Once again, the company is putting some serious investment into Gove, Gove Airport and the Gove region, and they are here for the longer haul. It shows by the investments and the plans that they are foreshadowing. The gas supplied to the Alcan project from the Blacktip deposit would require an investment of $500m in the Blacktip field, and a further $550m in the trans-Territory pipeline. Construction on the expansion project is planned to commence before the end of the year. Alcan are still to make their final decisions in relation to this matter, but all the signs are there that they are extremely serious about this project, and they see immense benefits for the company. They are also foreshadowing immense benefits for the Territory, both economically and socially.
It was my pleasure, during Community Cabinet that we had at Gove and Nhulunbuy recently, to have an extended tour of the plant. I found it extremely interesting to get a detailed overview of the processes that are used, although some of them are very secret. That is what gives the company the edge on other aluminium and bauxite producers. However, it is a massive outfit there at present and it will be even larger once they expand. I also had discussions with senior company executives about the expansion. The government will be supporting the company and their developments as much as we can, because we believe that it is incredibly beneficial to the Territory.
Amongst some of the things in Alcan’s plans are the use of the public wharf during the construction phase for the movement of project material. That will be an incredibly complex logistic task in itself, and there has been a lot of planning go into that. I took the opportunity while I was in Nhulunbuy to take a tour of the wharf, and I got that briefing as well as other aspects of the proposals. Alcan plan to phase out bauxite exports in 2006. I was fortunate to get the briefing on the wharf, and to take a helicopter flight to have a look at the extent and pattern of their red mud holding ponds there - a very important part of their operations – and the rehabilitation that they are undertaking. They take the rehabilitation of the area extremely seriously. I got an idea about some of the leases that might be required for the expansion of the Gove operation. As I said previously, as a government, we will be supporting that particular project as much as we possibly can.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Glyde Point is something that you mention quite a lot, and you mentioned tonight in your role as member for Nelson. We have had a few discussions about Glyde Point. It is a very important strategic part of further development of gas coming onshore, and having industry associated with gas coming onshore. The Land Development Division of the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment has lodged a notice of intent with the Office of Environment and Heritage, and with the Commonwealth Department of Environment and Heritage, for a major industrial estate and associated infrastructure development at Glyde Point on the Gunn Point Peninsula.
The development would involve the clearing and reclamation of a significant area of land; provision of services including water, power, gas and roads; port facilities comprising an access channel, turning basin and berths; workers accommodation facilities at Murrumujuk as a precursor for the development of a rural township catering for an eventual population of up to 16 000; and roads and service corridors linking Glyde Point with the Middle Arm and East Arm Peninsulas.
The Minister for Environment and Heritage has determined the project will be assessed at the level of environmental impact assessment and has stipulated guidelines for the conduct of that assessment. The Commonwealth minister has determined that the project is a controlled action pursuant to the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. I lay on the record that, as a minister and as a government, we are completely committed to preserving and conserving biodiversity and the environment in that area, and also with that development. I have had representations from the Environment Centre of the Northern Territory about their concerns about development there, and I have undertaken to go there with them on-site and hear their concerns first-hand. As a government, we are listening to the concerns of those who are worried about the environment and the environmental impact of such a development. However, I wanted to assure this House that, as a government, we will take those concerns on board and we are very keen to preserve that particular area.
I am going sideways a little here, Mr Deputy Speaker, but the Commonwealth Minister for Environment and Heritage who was - I am sorry; I have lost the train of thought. I might come back to it later.
A range of engineering investigations in environmental studies have been completed in relation to the Glyde Point project. The following baseline environmental studies are under way: fresh water ecology, aquatic ecology, surface water hydrology and ecology, and heritage. These studies follow previous work in the areas of flora and fauna, marine habitat surveys, collation of metocean data, and a gap analysis of the available data. All available science will be focussed on these environmental aspects and concerns. The environmental assessment is strategic in nature, and focusses on the port and land aspects of an industrial estate. Future industry proponents will be required to undergo an assessment tailored to the nature of that industry.
The Glyde Point area is zoned Development DV to facilitate the development of major strategic industries including gas-based, road, rail or port related industries. The zone provides land for major industrial development that is of strategic importance to the future economic development of the Territory. Developments will be assessed having regard to, amongst other things, their environmental impact and their effect on surrounding developments.
Much has been said about power generation, and members of the opposition have raised the very important issue of securing gas supplies for our power generation, both domestic and industrial/commercial, within the Territory in the coming years. As the Chief Minister pointed out, gas supplies are secured from Central Australia from 2009 onwards for another two years, so there is still a window of opportunity. However, I want to assure this House as others have, that we are taking this issue very seriously. We are in constant negotiation with a number of players in this particular area, and the task force that the Chief Minister foreshadowed before is working very hard on this particular issue. I will touch on these issues a bit later.
Based on current electricity demands, the Power and Water Corporation has sufficient gas contracted to satisfy forecast demands to around about 2009. Power and Water has also recently undertaken a strategic review of its future gas needs, together with an assessment of potential sources of longer-term gas supply, and the means by which it expects to secure such supply on the best possible commercial terms. This is the key: there is quite a bit of gas out there but it is securing it on the best commercial terms. I am sure members opposite realise that; it is not just about securing the supplies - that is comparatively easy – it is securing it at the right price for Territorians, and that is what we are committed to.
All supply options for feedstock fuel are being considered and arrangements to secure gas after 2009 are progressing. Potential sources of gas to meet Power and Water’s forecast requirements beyond 2009 include the Tern and Petrel fields in the Joseph Bonaparte Gulf. The Blacktip discoveries, also in the Bonaparte Gulf, or a combination of some Amadeus Basin gas to supplement the major portions of Power and Water’s gas supplied from either of the sources identified above. I would not rule out, in the gas going over there and the trans-Territory pipeline and the supply of gas to Alcan, whether there could be further gas proved up from gas deposit. I have had discussions with Alcan about whether there would be room for the Territory to jointly access that gas.
I want to assure members opposite and the House that the government is taking this very seriously, and we are taking every opportunity to talk to the major players, keep our options open, but have as our major goal securing gas at the right price for Territorians.
The Sunrise field in the Timor Sea is also a potential source of gas for the corporation. Appraisal drilling at Blacktip to confirm sufficient reserves to supply Alcan at the rate of 40 PJ per annum for 20 years will allow Power and Water to gain a better understanding of potential gas supply from this source. Woodside has stated that it intends to undertake further drilling in adjoining prospects - that is Penguin and Polkadot - to locate additional gas reserves.
As outlined in the Chief Minister’s statement, the Onshore Gas Developments Task Force has been established, with one of its two major objectives being to secure competitively priced gas for power generation. The task force consists of the chief executives of the Department of the Chief Minister, the Northern Territory Treasury, the Department of Business, Industry and Resource Development, the Power and Water Corporation and the Executive Director of the Office of Territory Development. The task force will also draw on key private sector specialists in assisting it to meet its objectives.
We are at the threshold of great development. The Alcan expansion is a further development that is welcomed by this government. I have given assurances to this House in terms of preserving environmental values that this is something that the government takes very seriously.
What I was struggling for earlier when I mentioned the Commonwealth minister: I wanted to put on the public record my commendation of David Kemp who was the Commonwealth’s Environment Minister. I always found him to be a very reasonable person to deal with. He was someone who showed a lot of courage. He had some difficult decisions and issues to deal with in relation to Kakadu and Uluru. I felt that he always wanted to give the Territory a fair go and he was particularly interested in supporting indigenous people. I wrote to him when I heard that he would not be continuing on in that role or in parliament, and commended him for the cooperative way that he has worked with us. I know other ministers share that view. I wish David Kemp all the best in retirement. Someone with his experience, expertise and attitude will be much in demand and he still has a great contribution to make.
Mr Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, I commend the Chief Minister’s statement. It is a great era for the Territory. This is a government that is keen on economic development, but balancing that with our environmental and lifestyle issues.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Environment and Heritage): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement. The Chief Minister has highlighted some exciting opportunities in gas and allied industries. They are opportunities that will move the Territory ahead in job creation and economic growth.
This government is equally committed to ensuring that these opportunities do not come at the expense of the environment and our great Territory lifestyle. As environment minister, I am very aware that sustainable development does not come easily; it is the product of hard work and commitment on the part of government, industry and the community. It means taking a good look at the environmental and social issues as well as the financial bottom line.
Increasingly, forward thinking industries are making significant strides in understanding what sustainable development really means. These industries understand that they have to earn community acceptance; it does not just come from a licence. Forward thinking industries are forming partnerships with the community by, for example, voluntarily disclosing environmental performance and even allowing community representatives to participate in environmental audit teams.
Industries that are seriously grappling with environmental sustainability are not just focussed on regulatory compliance. They realise that compliance is merely the starting point and that, to position their industry for a sustainable future, they need to get ahead of the game. They need to go beyond mere compliance with the law. All of this would have been unthinkable 10 years ago. Of course, it would be overly optimistic to think that all industries operate this way.
Nevertheless, if we are to meet the challenges of sustainable development, it is this type of thinking we need to foster as the Territory’s industrial base expands. An important way to ensure sustainable development is through rigorous environmental assessments of new projects. Environmental assessments enable an up-front examination of environmental issues associated with a project, and the development of safeguards to avoid and minimise impacts on the environment. These safeguards can then be factored into approvals.
In her statement, the Chief Minister mentioned a number of gas-related developments, and I want to highlight these again, and others, which include the Bayu-Undan/Darwin pipeline, the ConocoPhillips LNG plant, the expansion of the Alcan alumina refinery at Gove, the trans-Territory pipeline, the Blacktip gas pipeline and processing plant, McArthur River Mine expansion, and the Glyde Point industrial estate. All of these developments have required environmental assessments at the highest level – an environmental impact statement. This is a measure of importance that this government places on sustainable development. Assessment of these and other projects means that my Office of Environment and Heritage is very busy dealing with an unprecedented number of EISs.
The Chief Minister highlighted the Alcan expansion in her statement. The EIS for this project was recently completed. The draft EIS was publicly exhibited for over seven weeks and received nine public submissions, all of which were assessed by the independent Office of Environment and Heritage. The office concluded that the environmental issues associated with the Alcan expansion have been adequately identified, and that the expansion can be managed in a way that avoids unacceptable environmental impacts. I subsequently accepted this assessment, which will see stringent requirements placed on Alcan - some 29 recommendations in all - including a requirement for Alcan to prepare a social impact study in anticipation of the creation of up to 1700 jobs. As set out in the assessment report, the strict conditions that Alcan will have to meet surround the issues of:
the ongoing management of potential social impacts on nearby populated areas;
owners of the region;
construction;
I expect the recommendations from the assessment to be taken up in the mining management plan, which needs to be approved before the expansion can proceed.
Once a project has been approved then the hard work of monitoring starts. The Office of Environment and Heritage has a team dedicated to monitoring the ongoing compliance of development once approval has been granted. For example, the Chief Minister highlighted the very important construction activity occurring at Wickham Point to build the ConocoPhillips LNG plant. My office is currently monitoring the construction at this site and provides a weekly inspection report. Work on the LNG plant is proceeding in accordance with the environmental management plan and approvals. Construction of the LNG tank, process plant, the loading jetty, office buildings and the pipeline are checked twice a week. Dredging for the pipeline has now been completed. Water monitoring and aerial surveillance indicate that sediment plumes due to the dredging activities have not impacted on the Channel Island coral community or weed reef.
This level of scrutiny is only possible because of the additional resources this government has provided to the Office of Environment and Heritage. To cope with this unprecedented activity, we have put on five new positions, with two positions dedicated to monitoring compliance as development progresses.
With this unprecedented level of investment and development it is, indeed, very fortunate that the Northern Territory now has much more rigorous environment protection and assessment processes in place. It is only since the Martin government came to power and we strengthened these processes, that the Commonwealth has accredited our environmental assessment procedures as meeting national best practice standards. It is clear that Canberra understands that environment protection and assessment is now taken seriously by the Northern Territory government. It is incredible to think that, only a few years ago, this sort of development was being talked about while, at the same time, our environment assessment procedures were not recognised or accredited by the Commonwealth.
In grasping the opportunities provided by gas-based industries, it is very important that the greenhouse implications are managed responsibly. In the next five years, the ConocoPhillips LNG plant and the Alcan expansion are likely to increase Northern Territory’s total greenhouse emissions by around 13%. While this is an increase of the Northern Territory’s emissions, the additional emissions are coming off a very low base. The Territory currently contributes less than 2% of Australia’s greenhouse emissions. Therefore, in the Australian context, the additional greenhouse emissions from the Territory result in a 0.3% increase to Australia’s total greenhouse gas emissions.
That said, there is no reason for complacency. The Martin Labor government is working hard to offset these increases which will come as we diversify our economic base. One very effective way for the Territory to reduce its emissions is to reduce the greenhouse gases coming from savannah fires, which release about 50% of the Territory’s greenhouse gas emissions. Government has committed over $200 000 to the operations in the Arnhem Land bushfire region, which will have a direct impact on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Government is also working with industry to establish other ways that they can effectively contribute to other climate change initiatives and offset industry emissions.
Gas is a clean fuel compared to coal and oil. It is important that we do look at using gas when we can meet the nation’s energy needs. Earlier this year, we saw the Howard government outline their energy plan which, basically, amounted to not much more than subsidies to companies in the petroleum industries. In contrast to the Howard government having no real plan to deal without reliance on imported oil, the federal Labor Party has outlined a real alternative based around gas. A federal Labor government will give the task of bringing more of our offshore gas reserves onshore and establishing a gas to liquids industry with priority it requires and deserves. This is great news for the Territory and for the environment. Add this to the long list of compelling reasons why a federal Labor government will be such a bonus for the Northern Territory.
Mr Deputy Speaker, this government is moving the Territory forward with jobs and economic growth, and it is my job to ensure that we achieve environmentally sustainable development for all Territorians. I commend the Chief Minister’s statement.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank all members who contributed to this very important statement in the House today. Importantly, from the government side, we heard from the Employment and Training minister. Any talk about gas strategies for our future has to look specifically and realistically at how we can get jobs happening for Territorians, and it was outlined by the minister responsible for that area.
We had a business contribution, a mines and energy contribution, a central services contribution and, lastly, we just heard from the Minister for Environment and Heritage - all part of that cross-government approach that we have taken to a gas strategy for gas onshore, and the opportunities there are for Territorians.
I would also like to thank my hard-working experts in the Office of Territory Development for the input that they made to this statement, which was considerable and certainly reflects their expertise in this area. A big thank you to them.
I have to express disappointment about the contribution of the opposition. I was keen to hear the different elements of contribution to what is a comprehensive gas strategy and what we are targeting for Territorians and for Australia, with talk of the national grid and gas of the national grid. To summarise the response that we had from the opposition, including the member for Blain, the Opposition Leader, and the members for Brennan and Drysdale, essentially, it was irrational, inaccurate, and also ill-informed and illogical. It is very sad that, when we have such a major statement to the House about such a critical issue for the Territory’s future, you have such a poorly prepared response that seems to demonstrate that there was no interest from the opposition about this important issue for the Territory, and certainly no comprehensive or even part-sensible response to the four elements of the gas strategy that I outlined in my statement. I was going to apologise that the statement was quite long, but it was comprehensive. However, the responses that we had simply fitted the categories of illogical and ill-informed and certainly, in many cases, inaccurate.
Mr Dunham: Well, you correct it then – correct it now.
Ms MARTIN: It is very disappointing, and the member for Drysdale can make the interjections now, but it is a bit late. The opportunity to put forward …
Mr Dunham: Correct it now; you have 20 minutes.
Ms MARTIN: If you do not like the government’s vision, if you are critical of elements of it, it was not demonstrated apart from an ad hoc approach. If you have a different vision, I did not hear that. All we heard was griping and negativity and much of it ill-informed. It does sadden me in terms of where the Territory is going in the future. Getting gas onshore for downstream gas manufacturing developments is critical; also getting gas for our local gas supplier – critical, for our local energy suppliers. Yet, all we hear is griping and negativity from the opposition.
I will go specifically to an issue that was raised by the Opposition Leader. He began his contribution to the debate by accusing me of interfering in international issues, of being an abject failure, of embarrassing the Territory, and even - until he had to withdraw it - of almost treachery. He did not actually described why. He just went on with a lot of rhetoric, but did not say why. Yet, fundamentally, he has totally missed the point of what do you do - and this is in referring to my statements to SEAAOC, and subsequently - about an impasse for the important gas fields in the Timor Sea that was going nowhere. The implications from Opposition Leader seemed to be that we should just shut up and be quiet. That was the implications from the Opposition Leader. He told me that I should not be interfering in matters between Australia and East Timor. I should not be suggesting to the federal government ways through this. He said: ‘You just shut up and sit down and do not be an embarrassment’ ...
Mr Dunham: No, you were not listening again, were you?
Ms MARTIN: He did not suggest alternatives. That is exactly what – I am paraphrasing it but it galls me to repeat the rhetoric that we heard - it was rubbish. However, to criticise the Leader of the Territory for offering solutions to an issue that had an impasse, I would have thought a valid criticisms was if we did not propose …
Members interjecting.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms MARTIN: That would be very valid; to come in here if we had done nothing and say: ‘What has the Territory done? This is a field that can be developed it has potential for onshore of the Territory. What are you doing? What are you doing to propose a solution?’ Instead, the Opposition Leader came in here and, in his worst flowery rhetoric, criticised me for offering a solution. He went as far as to say that I am somehow treacherous. It was really the most illogical and absurd argument I had heard in here for a long time, and made me think that he simply has not had a briefing on this issue and does not understand one element of it, because that is what he displays.
On the Sunrise and the maritime boundary issues between Australia and East Timor we should watch this space. There have been productive discussions and I am very pleased to say that what we know publicly of those discussions is certainly responding well to the suggestion I made. That is terrific. There is no doubt it, maritime boundaries between Australia and East Timor is a very important issue and must be negotiated. As Prime Minister Alkatiri said, there are no maritime boundaries between Australia and East Timor because East Timor is a brand new country. However, they will take five years at least, and that is in the Prime Minister’s words.
The revenue sharing about Sunrise has become part of that, so what do you do? Do you sit there and say nothing can happen; the opportunity to develop a field like Sunrise, a very large field of gas, will just slip away because there is not a solution to this other problem? Quite logically, you say: ‘What can happen?’ De-linking the two issues and addressing some of the concerns being raised by East Timor is a perfectly proper non-rocket science solution. Yet, the Opposition Leader accused me of being at the level of some kind of university student debate - which is insulting to university students - in which it was implied that I was doing the bidding of East Timor. What a load of rubbish! Ill-informed rubbish and highly offensive.
Standing up for the Territory, finding solutions to problems, is what this government is all about. If that means proposing a solution to a difficult problem to the federal government, I have my hand up and I am proud of it. I am not embarrassed by doing it. I do not think it is a sense of failure that I have done it, and I certainly do not think it is treacherous, but they were the words that were used by the Opposition Leader.
I find the extraordinary hypocrisy of a statement like that, compared with what happened between the Territory and East Timor under the previous government - as outlined quite clearly by the Minister for Business, Industry and Resource Development - should certainly demonstrate to the opposition that they are on very dangerous ground when they head into this area, because the way that the previous government dealt with the East Timorese issue was a disgrace.
Mr Dunham: Rubbish!
Ms MARTIN: It came to a halt.
Mr Dunham: Didn’t you ever go to the Kalymnian Brotherhood?
Ms MARTIN: Negotiations came to a halt because of the rude ...
Mr Dunham: Didn’t you see us feed them? Didn’t you see us provide humanitarian sustenance?
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, member for Drysdale!
Ms MARTIN: … aggressive and political use being made of what was a difficult issue between Australia and East Timor. The opposition can try to rewrite that, but that is the truth of it - that is the absolute truth of it.
On the issue of where the domestic gas from Bayu-Undan is, it is interesting because there was a media release from the then Opposition Leader in 2002 - despite the member for Brennan’s words in here tonight - welcoming the deal done for all the gas from Bayu-Undan to go into LNG to Japan - welcoming it! There is a slippage here. On one hand, the opposition welcomed the Bayu-Undan agreement, the entire field of Bayu-Undan LNG at Wickham Point to Japan. Now we have the opposition coming in here and saying: ‘Where is the domestic gas component?’
These are complex issues and to say that the only opportunity for domestic gas for the Territory - and I am not saying it is not a possibility from Bayu-Undan. Anyone who understands gas fields knows that you make an assessment, you have a proven resource but, sometimes, there is more resource. I am one who always has a sense of optimism about these kinds of things, faced with reality. There are a number of fields, as the statement said, where we can possibly source gas.
It is not a matter that we are short of gas. There is a lot of gas in the Timor Sea, as so clearly spelt out by the Minister for Essential Services. The issue is getting that gas at a competitive price. That is what Power and Water is focussed on. That is what the Onshore Gas Developments Task Force is focussed on. It is cute to say: ‘We can get gas. Why aren’t you getting gas?’ Key to this is the price. We must have competitively priced gas. Anyone will sell you gas at a high price. It does not take the most skilled negotiator in the world to get some gas. That is easy. It is getting gas at a competitive price. As government, we have made it very clear, and the task force is making it very clear, to all involved in the gas fields in the Timor Sea that part of what we are looking for is domestic gas. We have made no bones about that.
It would be a lot easier, for those opposite who, when the Prime Minister says jump, say how high?, to be arguing and joining us in saying that the White Paper on Energy did not do enough. The hands-off approach to our future energy needs and simply saying: ‘What we have is what we will work with’, will not serve the Territory’s and Australia’s interests, and that is the problem we have. We have significant resources in gas, and yet it is going to take a much more hands-on involvement from the federal government to really see Australia benefit, as we can, from gas. To simply say: ‘Leave it the commercial sector, leave it to those who have the leases, who can exploit the fields, let them decide according to commercial priorities what they are going to do’, I say is not good enough. Those resources are owned by Australians, and they should be used for the maximum benefit for Australia. Other countries do that; they are much more prescriptive than our national government is. It is about time, when you look at the infrastructure costs associated with gas development and the benefits of having gas on a national grid, that the federal government needs to be much more involved in setting the framework for how and when gas gets developed. Otherwise we will be at the mercies of the international market and companies who say: ‘Well, developing something in Australian waters or developing something in the Timor Sea – not on our agenda now, we will put it down the bottom of our list’. That does not serve Australia’s interests.
Therefore, while we are pursuing vigorously the companies who have interests in the Timor Sea for domestic gas for the Territory, and for opportunities for Territorians, it would be greatly assisted if the federal government simply stopped its hands-off approach and got much more seriously engaged in the issue of what we do about gas reserves, what our priorities are, and how we support that.
I am confident we will get the best deal that we can for Territorians for the future past 2009 to 2011 for gas supplies …
Mr Dunham: Yes, what about the past, you have done a great deal there. That is how we are judging it.
Ms MARTIN: It would be interesting to hear what the opposition thinks is an alternative pathway. None of that. That is why I said this contribution was very poor from the opposition. There were no, ‘we do not like what you are doing’ that was implicit in the statement, but no alternative. No alternative, just bagging. It is very easy to whinge and whine and bag, instead of coming up with an alternative. The proposal and the strategy that I outlined is sound; it will bring benefits to Territorians. However, I am saying if the opposition had a better one, let us hear it.
Mr Dunham: Get some gas from Bayu-Undan, what about that?
Ms MARTIN: Let us hear it.
Mr Dunham: There you go, you heard it.
Ms MARTIN: Silence, Mr Deputy Speaker.
Mr Dunham: No, get some gas from Bayu-Undan.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr Dunham: She has encouraged me to respond, Mr Deputy Speaker, by saying there is silence, you are obviously ignoring the interjection. Get some gas from Bayu-Undan.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, member for Drysdale!
Ms MARTIN: It is interesting, with the member for Drysdale’s insistence on repeating his mantra, that what Power and Water is doing commercially should not be discussed in a public place like this, because it reduces the options of Power and Water to be able to negotiate the best deal. For a man who was previously the minister for Essential Services, he should understand that. He understands the nature of government owned corporations, he also should understand the commercial sensitivities involved in these kind of negotiations.
Mr Dunham: They told us, it is on the Parliamentary Record.
Ms MARTIN: We are keeping our options open. We are pursuing all the available options for Territorians, and no matter how much the member for Drysdale whinges and carps, it does not really make any difference; he is just hot air happening in one small corner.
The government has a vision for the Timor Sea gas, and has in place strategies to fulfil it. It is based around jobs, business opportunities and, importantly, the lifestyle for Territorians. That strategy is based on LNG development, gas for power generation, downstream gas manufacturing, and gas for our national grid.
The resource development on the scale of the Timor Sea is a major undertaking. It is complex and is ever-evolving. There are many interested parties, not the least the multinational corporations which, as I have indicated, shift their capital round the world, have priorities that are global and, for the Territory, not always focussed on the Timor Sea.
I caution the opposition not to come out with ill-informed statements and opinions in this House, and to seek the briefings that are necessary. We have considerable expertise in the public sector about these issues - considerable expertise - and all you have to do is ask for a briefing. What I say to you is: get informed, understand the issues, understand the complexities of the issues and, then, if you have valid criticisms of the strategies presented by government in this House, we will listen. However, as I said, what you presented was simply ill-informed, illogical and, very sadly, it did not make a contribution to the debate.
This is a great gas strategy; it will serve Territorians well. We are absolutely determined to pursue gas onshore for the Territory, and every single opportunity that can be gained by Territorians from having such a substantial gas resource on our doorstep. We will do it, not only focussing on jobs and business opportunities, but focussed on the social and environmental balance that we need to find. That is very important.
It is a great vision, a great strategy, and I am certainly very proud, as Chief Minister, to have carriage of pursuing that together with my government. I thank again those who have worked so hard to contribute to this debate, and the members of the Onshore Gas Development Task Force in the Office of Territory Development who have contributed to this because it will make a significant difference to where the Territory is going.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
ADJOURNMENT
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Tonight, I tell members of a recent visit I made to the 2004 Women’s Land Management Conference at Nimirrli conference camp site on the Blyth River near Ramingining. The Women’s Land Management Conference is an annual event that brings together women from across the Territory who are involved in caring for country.
This is the fourth year the conference has been held. Each year it is hosted by a different ranger group and this year it was the turn of the Djelk women rangers from Maningrida.
Ms Scrymgour: Hear, hear!
Ms MARTIN: Yes, your electorate.
The Women’s Land Management Conferences are facilitated through the Caring for Country Unit in the Northern Land Council. They provide an important opportunity for women to discuss their various ranger activities, and to share their ideas and approaches to environmental issues. For the most part, the groups of women community rangers volunteer their time and resources to look after their country and increase their skills in environmental management.
Minister Scrymgour and I attended the final day of the conference, which was held in the beautiful setting at Nimirrli camp site on the Blyth River. We were welcomed to country by Sophia Bryan, who told us about the brolga, clap stick and parrot dreamings associated with her country. Then the Djelk rangers performed the possum dance and presented both of us with dilly bags and spectacular orange conference T-shirts.
It was wonderful to hear from women who had travelled from all over the Territory to attend the conference. About 150 women and 15 children travelled from Wadeye, Timber Creek, Katherine, Minyerri, Borroloola, Ngukurr, Bulman, Weemol, Maningrida, Jabiru, Pine Creek, Kakadu National Park, Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park, Alice Springs and Tennant Creek.
We were privileged to hear of some of the things that women rangers are doing in their country; how they are working to protect the environment through participating in the management of their lands and waters. Many of the ranger groups are linking their communities in with national projects such as quarantine surveillance, and weed, fire and feral animal management. I was particularly interested to hear how women are incorporating their own traditional ecological knowledge and experiences with western scientific knowledge.
Some groundbreaking economic initiatives are emerging from this blending of traditional and modern techniques. Among these are the harvesting and marketing of bush tucker samples by the Malak Malak people, and the medicinal soap making by the Wagiman women. We also heard about the junior ranger program being run in conjunction with Territory Parks and Wildlife, involving young people in environmental education and land management activities. The junior ranger program is an important step in raising young people’s awareness of both traditional and western environmental practices and in supporting their continued participation in land management practice.
I also acknowledge the role of the Northern Land Council in the organisation of the conference. It would be remiss of me if I did not mention the volunteers from the NLC who staffed the kitchen for the conference. They prepared delicious meals and morning and afternoon teas for everyone for three days, and I can certainly vouch for the excellent buffalo stew we had for lunch.
I was greatly honoured to receive the invitation from the Djelk women rangers to attend the conference. The work that the women rangers are doing in and with their communities is often unnoticed and unrecognised. However, they are making a very important contribution to the maintenance of Australia’s biodiversity. My government is examining ways in which we can further support the work of these women.
I hope that everyone was able to attend the 2004 Tropical Garden Spectacular held at the George Brown Darwin Botanic Gardens on the weekend of 7 and 8 August. I suppose it actually depends on where you live in the Territory. If you are based in Tennant Creek, it might have been a bit tricky. It was wonderful to have visitors such as Peter Cundall and Isabell Shipherd to provide gardening stories, tips and information. I just missed the Landscape Olympics, but there was a packed program: Tim West on how to choose which plants we use; Harry Frakking from the Bromeliad Society, Tunis Mekar from the Balinese Cultural Collective and others. Also appearing were Chantal the Fairy, Leanyer School Folk Dancers, Darwin Callisthenics, Jabaru and Greek Mediterranean Cultural Dancers. Denise Goodfellow was on hand to tell us about attracting birds to our garden. Also playing were the Darwin Brass Band and the visiting Danbury Brass Band from the USA. There was also – and I do not think I am going to do this pronunciation very well - the Nga Whanau a Aotearoa Dancers – I think they are Kiwis!
My government provided $25 000 this year to support the Tropical Garden Spectacular. The community also provided a great deal of support: Mix FM 104.9 - and Lisa did a great job; Darwin City Council; Top End Sounds; 7 Darwin; and ABC FM 105.7. Thanks to everyone who contributed including Dave Griffiths and his team at the Botanic Gardens, who were on hand to drive trains, move plants, and generally see that everyone had a fantastic time. My congratulations to Simon Smith, president of Nursery and Gardeners Industry NT and the patron, Nerys Evans for another fantastic event.
Darwin is not a large capital city by Australian standards, but the month of August reminds me that we are disproportionately blessed with the contribution of our artists. On last Sunday, 15 August, I was fortunate enough to attend the closing of the Sculpture in the Park on the last day of the Darwin Fringe Festival. Sculpture in the Park is a fantastic initiative that has been going on in its present form for the last two years, and which began as Sculpture by the Sea four years ago. This is another event my government is proud to support. It is easy to see that this event is popular and well supported by the community and many Darwin businesses. Sponsors include Browns Mart Trustees, 24 Hour Art, Browns Mart Community Arts, Darwin City Council, Darwin Festival, Darwin City, Darwin Fringe Festival, Waterhole Restaurant and Bar, Northern Air Charter, Chubb, Salvatore’s, Peter Brown Auto Electrics, Jackson’s Drawing Supplies, Delaney’s Country and Western Store, Michael Rees, Cavenagh Medical Centre, Carlton United Breweries, Atomic Clothing, Roma Bar, Bridgestone, Brian Johns, Peter Adamson, McDonalds at Casuarina, Ludmilla and Darwin, 69 Mitchell, Rivers, Territory Colours, Raintree Gallery, Palm Photographics, Shenannigan’s Irish Pub, Vintage Cellars Darwin, Betts, Darwin Newsagency in the Mall, Paspaley, Business and Community Developments and Adhara. That is not a bad list of sponsors for one event of the Fringe Festival. This is a fine example of the business and community supporting innovation in the arts and the community is to be congratulated for getting behind the venture.
The art works were terrific. Project Coordinator Julie Milton took me around and showed me all the works on site at the mall, the UN lawns, Town Hall Ruins, Civic Park and then on to the Brown’s Mart courtyard for the closing. In the courtyard, we also saw the work of last year’s People’s Choice winner Paul Miller, showing the enduring benefits to all of us of this project.
There were some problems with display of works in public spaces and some artists had to remove their pieces before the closing. This is disappointing, but Julie said that all involved will meet to talk about how their works to be safeguarded in the future. Not all responses from the public were destructive, by the way. Some were humorous and whimsical, but displays of art in public places can have difficulties. The artists and their works were as follow: Barra Rage by Paul Hill; Glimpse by Tobias Richardson, which won the Main Award, Non-Acquisitive; The Art of Buoyance by Victoria Katoni, which won a Commendation Award; Seated Figure by Janice McEwan; and Three Chairs for Clare by John Hazeldine. I was sorry that the chairs were vandalised over the week and John, who put a lot of work into them, in the end took them home, which is really sad. However, thank you, John, for thinking of me in Three Chairs for Clare. There was Untitled by Martin Selwood. Martin is usually a canvas person who does a lot of spray work, and this was a welded metal work that was really quite stunning. I certainly hope Martin does some more sculpture in whatever form he chooses because he is very talented. The Good Ship Society Dashed on the Rocks of Enlightenment was an installation by Mark V Maguire. There was The Offering by Adrienne Kneebone; Spirit of the Wind by Gabriel Alves; and Kinetic Didjes by Year 9 at Dripstone High School that won the schools award, which was stunning. It was didgeridoos made of piping, all painted and hung from a structure and they just look stunning. It was very creative from Year 9 at Dripstone High. There was Head Job by Darwin High School, which was literally a lot of different heads put in a tree and was also very creative; Spring Chickens by Alison Dowell; and Human Nature by Aly de Groot that one won the Innovative Use of Materials Award. Her sculpture was made of rice paper and tree sap. There was Proposed Development 2 by Winsome Jobling; Insect Figure by Geoff Sharples; Forest by Cath Bowdler, which won the Commendation Award; You Don’t Speak for Me by Jen Taylor that won the Main Encouragement Award; The Wall of Kindness by Chris Kuhl; The Flock by Bridget Higgins; Industrial Totems by Paul Miller, who was last year’s People’s Choice winner, won the Site Specific Award; Tao by Freedom Summers; Remnants of Presence by Hayley West; Raw is Nothing Less than Pure Love by i3; Dancing Drops by Ro; Mandala by Lia Ngaree Gill; Once There Was Wisdom in These Woods by Saul Dalton; and High Tide by Yannee P Notmac.
There were 27 entries. As you can see from the list of those who contributed to the Sculpture in the Park, some extremely well-known artists took part. The whole effect was magical, walking from installation to installation, at times amazed, moved and inspired. I really do not know how anyone could judge winners of categories because they were all quite amazing pieces of work. Ken Conway was the MC for the closing ceremony, and I was able to announce the People’s Choice winner, which went to Bridget Higgins for The Flock, a witty piece featuring flying thongs.
I also met a 10-year-old boy who asked me to look at his piece of work. He was entry No 28 and a surprise last entry. His name was Asher, who was 10 years old and said that, after coming on Saturday to see the exhibition, he believed that he could do a piece as well, and presented on Sunday with The Log that Turned into a Dog. It certainly was a very creative piece and it was good to see a 10-year-old being inspired by all the other entries.
Arts certainly enriches our lives immeasurably and brings us great pleasure. In my own case, I must say that Spring Chickens, which would appeal to anyone over about 45, was a delightful work by Alison Dowell. To look at a stuffed chook on a spring, and all the other bits and pieces she had to go with it, really made most people smile.
Congratulations to all those artists who submitted pieces for Sculpture in the Park. Thank you for another year of it. Congratulations to Jane Tonkin and her team of helpers and volunteers. Well done to the Fringe Festival.
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonnell): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I make comment on an answer that was given during Question Time from the Minister for Ethnic Affairs in his capacity as the Minister for Ethnic Affairs. He used the quote - in fact, I will quote him. He said:
- Looking around today and seeing the flags, I recall very well some European politician said, in the years between the wars, that nationalism is the last refuge of scoundrels. They are clinging to the flag of the Territory, trying to claim it as their own ...
Looking around today and seeing the flags, I recall very well some European politician said, in the years between the wars, that nationalism is the last refuge of scoundrels. They are clinging to the flag of the Territory, trying to claim it for their own, just to prove that they are true Territorians.
I wish to place on the record my irritation at the minister for trying to make that imputation. The beginning of my criticism starts with the very fact that he is the Minister for Ethnic Affairs and, in the very same answer, he identified any number of nations. He identified indigenous Australians, Torres Strait Islanders, Maori, Irish, Indian, Scottish, Bosnian, Cypriots, Pacific Islanders, Samoans, Brazilians, Indonesians and Balinese - people who form parts of nations and people who form nations themselves. Out of that list that I have just read out, many flags fly, and these people all come together in a celebration under their flags and they celebrate their nationalities.
If I recall correctly, the minister himself stood up in this House and told us how proud he is of his Greek heritage. Indeed, I noticed that the minister himself was one of the people to celebrate when Greece won the European Soccer Cup recently. The minister made a great point out of the celebrations of Greece as well. And guess what? The Greek community also has a flag which flies over them. I wonder if the minister has considered, by his very statement today, that he has identified all of these groups as scoundrels because of their nationalism.
I get irritated, because flags are merely a symbol, and as we so often hear about the importance of symbolism from members opposite, they would have to understand that symbolism is just that: it is representative of something else. The flag that sits on my desk and the desk of every member of the CLP here at the moment, and on so many of our collars that we proudly wear, is symbolic of something. What is it symbolic of? Well, it is symbolic of a democratic part of the nation of Australia. In fact, when I claim this flag as my own, I claim it for all people who live in the Northern Territory. What is the Northern Territory? It is an administrative area which comes under the administrative control of this parliament and the government of the Northern Territory, duly elected in accordance with the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act, and ultimately established under the rights and powers granted by the federal government, under the constitution of this country, to govern territories as they see fit. This flag is also symbolic of the fact that everybody who actually lives in the Northern Territory is, politically, a second-class citizen.
I take great pride in this flag because I have seen this flag fly over the first government and every subsequent government of the Northern Territory, and because it is symbolic of the great achievements that Territorians have been able to bring together. I think it was Graham Richardson who actually said that if we obtained statehood, we would have the best flag in the country, and I agree. However, at the end of the day, it is only symbolism. But symbolism is also very important to so many people, for all sorts of reasons.
In fact, it was the flag of the Rising Sun that my mother had to look at for every year of the four years she spent in a concentration camp under the Japanese, and it was the Nazi swastika that my father had to look at for six years. Those flags are also symbolic of something that is a whole lot more offensive.
The minister can either take one position or another. He can say that he supports, as the Minister for Ethnic Affairs, the different and diverse groups in our community, or he can step outside nationalism and say, like Socrates before: ‘I am not an Athenian or a Greek, but a citizen of the world’ - in which case, he should stand down from his role as the Minister for Ethnic Affairs because he does not believe in what he stands for. The minister’s use of that quote in an effort to be cute, in actual fact stands as an indictment of the way that he sees his own position. However, as usual his mouth was running off before his brain was engaged.
To demonstrate how clearly his mouth was running off, he said that it was a politician between the war years in Europe. Well, that rang a bell with me so I went a checked it and made sure I was correct. That actual quote, by the way, is not ‘nationalism’, it is ‘patriotism’: ‘Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel’. The quote can be attributed to one Samuel Johnson, who lived between 1709 and 1784 - so he was only out by 200 years. I point out another little quote from Samuel Johnson to the minister before he decides to open his trap again, in relation to making quotes of that nature. The other quote from Samuel Johnson is this: ‘Almost all absurdity of conduct arises from the imitation of those whom we cannot resemble’.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, this month celebrates a milestone in the service of the Red Cross to our community, and tonight I tell members a story about a very quiet contributor who has been a blood donor since 1960. I refer to a friend called Dennis Blaiklock. Unfortunately, records are not terribly accurate on how much blood Dennis has donated, because he started in South Australia and then moved to the Territory. However, when you make 25 donations you get a badge. When you make 50 donations, you get a gold pen. Dennis actually has 3 badges and a gold pen. Therefore, he has probably donated over seven or eight times the amount of body blood that he has. I do not know if I have said that very well, but you know what I mean.
He tells a very interesting story of when he was a very young man marching out in his national service uniform, he decided that he would become a blood donor. He swaggered, he said, in his uniform down to the Pirie Street Red Cross Blood Bank in Adelaide to achieve that first aim of his youth. He had wanted to be a blood donor for many years, he said, since hearing about the need for donors during a health lesson at a Broken Hill High School many years before. It is interesting that the students of that year, 1954, are having a 50th reunion this year in October, which I am sure he will be attending. I am sure he will also tell them the story, because what impressed him most was an address given by the Athletic, Health and PE teacher who was new to the school. Obviously, with a little tongue in check, Dennis said: ‘I heard the important part of her presentation but what I remember most clearly was her PE uniform’. As a teenager, they had not met such a quite athletic female PE teacher, and she was the one who inspired him to become a blood donor.
Dennis started donating in Adelaide, moved to the Territory in 1963, and registered at the old Alice Springs Hospital. Back in those days, I have to admit, the amenities and the hospital were not quite as flash or upmarket as they are today. As he said, they were not often called upon, but he remembered the deed was done once in a small room on what he thought was a book trolley:
- The trolley was slightly higher than a bed - a metal stainless steel base with a blanket and pillow on top and it
was cold and hard. My blood was drained into what I thought was a revolving glass milk bottle. A doctor did all
the things necessary and kept an eye on me and, when it was completed, I rested for about 15 minutes and I was
allowed to leave. It was not until much later - many years later - that the coffee, cake and beer choices came
about that you get offered now.
He also, from 1967 to 1977, moved to the Top End of the Territory, and occasionally made donations at the Katherine and Darwin Hospitals. He has this history of, wherever he was, always donating blood; something that many of us never think about but, certainly, that I have had the need of at certain times.
He then came back to Alice Springs and he said the Alice Springs Red Cross gave him one of the most exciting times because he popped his vein twice over two years. He said at that stage the cover was not quite as firm as it is today and both episodes created quite a stir. He did feel something warm but he was not really aware that it was the blood flowing freely. He said: ‘A new nurse grabbed me to stop the bleeding, ripped my shirt and singlet off, tossed them in a bowl of water and then started on my trousers. All were spotted with blood’. It was at this stage that Beth Cardona - and I am sure you might remember Beth, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker - appeared rather concerned, raced out and came back with a white coverall to avoid any further revelations when the nurse took his trousers off. They both then proceeded to wipe away any evidence of blood. The young nurse seemed proud of what she had done while Beth Cardona retired in a bit of a flurry. He said, ‘I was eventually able to close my sagging mouth over a biscuit and a cup of tea, but it is not often that one gets attacked in such a way when you are going to do a good deed such as giving blood’. He said he never saw that particular nurse again but he certainly remembers Beth Cardona and she might remember what happened to him. But the revamped environment has certainly improved the draining of the blood over the years and it certainly is in a much calmer environment than it was then.
What we would say to someone like Dennis Blaiklock, who is such a quiet contributor, is to thank him for those many years of service to this community. He is on call and is one of only three universal blood donors in the Northern Territory. That means anyone can accept his blood, and I suppose that is unique in the fact that we only have three in the Northern Territory. He can be called upon every 12 weeks. I have to admit his arm has quite a number of pinpricks. People have never questioned him on how he actually got them but, in today’s world, it might be considered the he got them for all the wrong reasons. However, that is not so; he certainly got them for the right reasons.
I want to congratulate the Red Cross Blood Bank on the fabulous job they do for our community, the many lives that they have saved and, in particular, I acknowledge Dennis Blaiklock’s contribution. I guess without people such as him we would all be in a much sadder state. We should really reward and acknowledge these people as best we can.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, today I would like to congratulate members of the Indonesian community in the Northern Territory on the occasion of the Indonesian National Day.
On 17 August 1945, in Jakarta in front of his house at Pegangsaan Oost 56 at 10 am, Indonesia’s late founder, President Soekarno, confirmed the independence of the largest Muslim nation in the world – Indonesia. At a simple ceremony, President Soekarno read the proclamation of independence. Captain Latief, one of the few people in uniform, fastened the white and red flag that is officially known as Sang Saka - which had been made by Mrs Soekarno - on to a flimsy rope and attached it to a bamboo pole stuck in the ground. That was the first time that the Indonesian flag had flown in 350 years. There was no music, no dance, just a few people singing Indonesia Raya.
However, the formal transfer of power from the Dutch, who had ruled Indonesia for more than 350 years, was effected only in 1949, four years later - four years of armed struggle. Indonesia’s current borders are principally those of the former Dutch East Indies. Indonesia has had five presidents since independence. The post-independence political landscape has been dominated by long-serving Presidents Soekarno (from 1949 to 1966) and Soeharto.
Indonesia is the world’s largest archipelago and has a diverse and multicultural population exceeding 238 million people. The ethnic groups in modern Indonesia include Javanese 45%, Sundanese 14%, Madurese 7.5%, coastal Malays 7.5% and other ethnic groups 26%. The language that is spoken in Indonesia is Bahasa Indonesia, a modified form of Malay. They also speak English, Dutch, and local dialects, the most widely spoken of which is Javanese.
There are a number of issues that Indonesia faces today. One of them, of course, is political stability. After the fall of President Soeharto and the election and power of Megawati, after the elections coming up in September they will decide who is going to be the next president of Indonesia.
Indonesia is very important to Australia. It is our closest northern neighbour. It is one of the largest nations in the region. It is the largest Muslim nation in the world and in the region. Indonesia is also very important to the Territory. It is our closest neighbour. A significant number of people of Indonesian descent live in Darwin. There is a continuous cultural and trade exchange with Indonesian, which bought a significant number of live cattle and has developed close working relations and cooperation, especially after the signing of the memorandum of understanding in 1992.
Once again, today is the Indonesian National Day and I take the opportunity to congratulate the people of Indonesian descent in Darwin - our fellow Territorians who come from Indonesia - and wish them happy and prosperous years to come and, of course, political stability and economic progress to their country of origin.
I would also like to speak today about a significant exchange between the Dripstone High School in Casuarina and the Kibi Cho Junior High School in the Wakayama Prefecture of Japan. The two schools have developed a very close relationship and, every year, about 20 students – 10 girls and 10 boys - and two staff come to Australia to visit Dripstone High School. The students are billeted in pairs with students and staff families for the entire stay, and they generally stay in Darwin for 10 to 11 days.
This year, I billeted two Japanese girls who were 14-years-old and who did not speak a word of English so, as you would understand, it was a very interesting situation at home. However, the surprising thing is that neither the girls nor my boys had any problem communicating, going out, playing basketball in the yard, or sitting and watching television. It is amazing that young people can find a way to communicate even if they do not speak each other’s language.
In 2000, the Dripstone school sent 15 students and staff to Japan and, this year, they hope to repeat the experience by sending another group of interested students and teachers to Kibi Cho. In 2003, the Kibi Cho local government and the city of Darwin signed a formal agreement in recognition of the cultural exchange between the two schools.
This year, we had 20 students and two staff coming to Darwin. With them was the Superintendent of Education for the Kibi Cho Town Council, Mr Shigeru Kusuku and Kibi Cho Town Council representative, Mr Osamu Misumi. They were billeted with families in Darwin and they had to go to school every day. They were paired with Australian students and they had to attend English, SOCE, Science, Maths and Physical Education classes, working in groups with Dripstone students.
Also, the students went on excursions that were organised by the school. They came to Parliament House and I hosted a small morning tea in my office and welcomed the students from Japan, their teachers, the superintendent, and the president of the town council. They were very impressed by the building and also by the different areas of the building, including the Chamber.
The students then went to an overnight camp at Litchfield and, for some of them, it was the first time ever that they had slept under a tent because, in the place where they live, from the photographs I have seen, there are not many open spaces where they can camp overnight. They also visited the Territory Wildlife Park, Batchelor Outdoor Education Centre and went for a cruise on the Adelaide River Queen Jumping Crocodile Tour.
I would like personally to thank all the families that billeted the students from Kibi Cho. I also thank Mr Martin Trouw and Mr Raymond Dixon, the organising coordinators from Dripstone High School, Ms Lyn Elphinstone, the Principal of Dripstone High, Mr Peter Stretton, Ms Meredith Vovoli, and Mr Phil Blooberg, International Services, and all staff at Dripstone High School. I will be sending some gifts from the Territory with the Dripstone High School children when they visit Japan later this year.
This month, we are celebrating Seniors Month. On 5 August, the Chief Minister hosted a morning tea for a large number of seniors in the Main Hall of Parliament House. Many seniors attended the morning tea and it was typical of Darwin. You saw people from different backgrounds, some of them dressed in their traditional costumes. The Filipino Senior Citizens Association performed, dancing and singing some traditional Filipino songs, entertaining all the senior citizens. I was very pleased to be able to host this function with the Chief Minister and, with my colleagues, to serve morning tea to some of the seniors.
Some of the seniors were from Tambling Terrace in my electorate and the Tiwi Gardens Retirement Village, and I was very pleased to see them here. I intend to invite some of the seniors from my electorate to my office for morning tea as a sign of respect for our senior citizens. In my culture, senior citizens are always respected. They are not just a retired person, or people who have done what they could when they were young, and now they sit in a corner. They actually provide experience and are a valuable asset to the family, because a lot of seniors look after the children. It is the best baby-sitting service, because they not only care for and love the children, but they pass a lot of the cultural information, religion, to the young generation. The Greek families rely upon their seniors to help out when the need arises.
It was a very enjoyable morning and I am looking forward to host seniors from my electorate in my office. If any of my colleagues wish to bring some of the seniors to my balcony, which has a good view - member for Sanderson, I would be very happy to welcome people from your electorate.
Mr Kiely: Thank you, on behalf of the seniors of Sanderson!
Mr VATSKALIS: It is significant we acknowledge the contribution by our senior citizens and help out wherever we can. I am pretty sure members from both sides are prepared to help our senior citizens and provide information and service whenever it is necessary.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I advise members of the Assembly of the second women’s golf day - Golf for Breast Cancer Day - that was organised in Alice Springs last week on 13 August. I am proud to say that I am one of five organisers; the others being Dee Davies, Karen Jones, Deb Pepper and Renee Manuel. Members may recall that, last year, we commenced this golf day. I spoke in parliament at the time, in October last year, and said that the support from the business community and women generally in Alice Springs was outstanding, and that there was some pressure on us to have the golf day again. Well, true enough, we did decide to organise it again and, not to put too fine a point on it, we have created a monster. I say that with a slightly tongue-in-cheek attitude, because the response to the golf day was simply incredible.
We had support from 60 businesses or thereabouts in Alice Springs. I will not name all of them, although shortly I will name a couple. To get 60 businesses for anything these days is incredible. To get 60 in a relatively small place like Alice Springs is simply outstanding …
Ms Carter: Hear, hear!
Ms CARNEY: The member for Port Darwin was in Alice Springs for some other business, as I understand it. She came along to the golf day …
Ms Carter: And played badly.
Ms CARNEY: And played badly, like myself. It was not a political exercise, not at all, and that is demonstrated by the fact that an advisor from the Minister for Central Australia’s office came along.
We set a number of records, and I understand the Centralian Advocate will be writing an article on it, perhaps this Friday. We had the largest number of women at a charity golf day in Alice Springs, and perhaps the Territory. We had 163 women registered for teams, and we had 38 teams in particular. I have played in a few golf days, and I know other members of this Assembly have as well. The average number of teams per golf day, it seems to me, is about 15 to 20. The fact that we had 38 was, again, quite incredible.
The aim of the day was to raise money for breast cancer research and, with the assistance of the Cancer Council, monies will be provided to them in due course. I understand that those monies will be forwarded to researchers interstate. That is why there were so many women who gave up their Friday afternoon to come along. Apart from the networking involved, and what was variously described as a very fun day, the fact is that all women - and, of course, all men because of the relationships they have with women - will be either directly or indirectly affected by breast cancer at some stage of their life. It is a serious problem.
I pay tribute to the 163 women who participated, and to the 60 businesses which provided goods and services. All participants received a bag of goodies and we also had a number of prizes - I think close to 30 or 40 in all. Some were team prizes, some were individual prizes. I make special mention of two businesses. One was the hairdressing salon Headlines in Alice Springs. I am sure members of the Chamber will join with me in thanking Peter Tiller from Headlines for his very generous contribution to the golf day. Headlines co-sponsored with Moving Pictures a hole for the day. Headlines also provided L’Oreal packs which were full of a number of products and information that all women gratefully received. Importantly, his most significant contribution was a prize in conjunction with Moving Pictures which was raffled at the end of the day. It was a special makeover to the value of $450, and it included a photographic shoot compliments of Moving Pictures. It is with some regret that Mr Tiller did not receive the acknowledgement he deserved on the day, and it is appropriate in this Chamber that I, on behalf of the other organisers, publicly thank him.
I mentioned Moving Pictures, and members will be aware that I have spoken about Moving Pictures in the parliament before. The proprietors of Moving Pictures, April and Matt Pyle, very generously took a photo of the 163 women on the golf course all together. It is a marvellous photo. They sold it for $10, and $5 of each sale was donated to our fundraiser. Again, I thank them.
We also had a promise last year of the donation of a perpetual trophy. Air Services Australia - in particular Bluey, and he will know who he is - through Bluey’s efforts, managed to donate a trophy. I understand it was valued in the range of $500. It was made by a professional wood-turner in Alice Springs, and is the perpetual trophy for the women’s golf day. Off the top of my head, I cannot remember the name of the team that won the trophy. The trophy is significant, not only because of the generosity with which it was given, but it does signify that we will have golf days every year for as long as all of us can manage it.
I do not know what the final figure is of how much money we have raised but, at this stage, it looks to be in the vicinity of $6000 to $7000. That is a great effort. I thank all of those involved, and I would like to table a copy of the program of the day with members’ consent. I am sure this program with a list of prizes and sponsors will be of great interest to members.
Leave granted.
Mr KIELY (Sanderson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I commemorate a significant event in the Defence Force calendar. Tomorrow, 18 August, is the commemoration of Long Tan day. I will recap for the information of members of the House - I am sure they and the broader public know - about what happened at Long Tan on this day, or commencing around about this time 38 years ago. I pulled this information down off the Internet, so I am pretty sure it is accurate:
- The Viet Cong had achieved dominion in the province …
… and decided to inflict a politically unacceptable defeat on the Australians. Their plan was to lure the Australians
from the base by firing recoilless rifle and mortar shells into it. They theorised that the Australians would sweep
the area around the base in an attempt to stop the attacks, and the Viet Cong would ambush the sweeping forces.
- On the night of 16/17 August 1966, the Viet Cong fired a barrage of shells into Nui Dat wounding 24 Australians.
Prior to this event, the Australians had become aware from radio interception and sightings that a large enemy
force was operating close to the base. Australian patrols set out specifically to find the Viet Cong had not
encountered the force.
On the afternoon of 18 August 1966, the battle of Long Tan was fought between D Company of 6th Battalion Royal Australian Regiment (6RAR) and elements of the 5th Viet Cong Division and other branches of the North Vietnamese Army. The Australian contingent was about 108 strong. The enemy numbered around 2000. This battle was the biggest and longest daylight action the Australians had in Vietnam.
Total Australian casualties for the Long Tan battle were 18 killed and 24 wounded in action. Also, out of an estimated force, as I said, of between 2000 and 2500 Vietnamese, 245 Vietnamese bodies were found in the battle area.
Truly, it was the most appalling of struggles for both sides. That so many should die in a conflict is a tragedy, there is no holding back from that. There are many books written on Long Tan; some with conflicting views. There are some which say there was an ambush strategy by the Vietnamese; there are others that say that this was not right. As you can imagine, in the heat of battle for people on the battlefield, there are all sorts of different perspectives. I have even read one account where one soldier did not even know he was participating in a battle; he was fighting his own private little war.
It is quite a significant day on the Australian Defence Force calendar and, more so I suggest, for the Royal Australian Regiments, one of which we have at Robertson Barracks, and the armoured personnel carrier or motorised infantry squadrons that are also at Robertson Barracks because, to this day, we still using APCs - although they are upgraded a little - as were present on the battlefield 38 years ago. It speaks volumes for the machinery that they used in that particular theatre of war.
I am also pleased to announce that the Australian Labor Party, should it be elected to the federal sphere of influence, will initiate an inquiry into the process of awarding bravery medals for the battle of Long Tan. It seems that the medals that were first recommended for officers serving in the field were downgraded because of part of an Imperial Bravery Awards recommendation system. The Labor Party and the Defence Minister in the Labor government will have a look at the way that these recommendations for recognition were downgraded and, should the review find that the recommendations stand, then these members will be awarded proper recognition by this country.
This brings me onto another point that I would like to raise in this House about the awarding of Australian Defence medals, or proposed awarding of Australian Defence medals, by the current government. I have a media release here from the Howard government which states:
- ‘Close to 900 000 new medal entitlements have been created since the Howard government was elected in 1996’,
minister assisting the Minister for Defence, Fran Bailey, said today.
‘The Howard government has a proud record of achievement in recognising the contribution of those who have
served in the Australian Defence Force.
‘We have introduced 11 new medals and created close to 900 000 medal entitlements for service at home and
abroad’.
Most recently, on 26 June 2004, the government announced the establishment of the Australian Defence Medal for
six years service in the Australian Defence Force since World War II. An estimated 400 000 personnel are eligible.
I am one of those people who are eligible. I happen to have served six years and two weeks in the Australian Defence Force. I will also receive one of these other medals the Howard government has struck for my service in Malaysia some 30-odd years ago. I was very happy and quite chuffed to receive the recognition from 30 years ago, but I have problems with the Australian Defence Medal which I probably will be receiving.
There is a campaign going on at the moment which is being managed and coordinated by Gary McRae, who is the President of the Aldgate RSL in South Australia in regard to this medal. It appears that the federal government, in its wisdom, has said: ‘Okay, we have awarded the National Service Medal to servicemen who were called up for National Service and served in the Army’. That is, in the main, about two years for anyone who was called up for National Service. However, there was no medal ever considered for Defence service volunteers. I believe Bob Buick said that, by recognising the ordinary peace time service of national servicemen with the anniversary National Service Medal, it should justly follow that comparable ordinary peace time service of volunteer servicemen and women ought to be recognised by way of a similar award. This notion that you have to do six years voluntary service before you are eligible for a Defence Service Medal is so unjust and unfair to those many ex-servicemen and women who did not complete six years service but, nevertheless, volunteered for service within their country.
On the Aldgate RSL Sub-Branch web site, there is an site where people can write in with their thoughts of the proposed awarding of the Australian Defence Service Medal for six years service. I would like to go through these; there are over 100 letters. The web site address, by the way, is ww.defencemedal.defenceinternet.com.au. I direct members to go there if they are interested. The people running this web site have removed the names of the authors for privacy reasons, but I will give you some of them:
- 53. 9/8/04.
I have already e-mailed my local federal member, no acknowledgment, but she never replies to me anyway,
minister for Vets Affairs and the PM, both of whom acknowledged my e-mail.
I am eligible for the award, 20 yearer, but my wife is not, just short of three years for the exact reasons stated
in the Labor Party stance. I think they are spot on with that one, ie pregnancy, marriage.
It was the 60s, after all.
The reason all this started was the award of the Conscript Medal, it was to get votes, just as this one is. I think
the Labor Party stance is the correct one, and I don’t normally vote Labor but I may make an exception in this
case, and if you hold the Conscript Medal, you don’t get a second shot unless you subsequently volunteered.
To my thinking this is the volunteer’s medal. The conscripts got theirs.
51. Congratulations on standing up and being vocal on behalf of people like myself that served in the Regular
Army for a period of three years (following a two year National Service stint).
During my term as a voluntary enlisted soldier, I completed a 12-month tour of duty in Vietnam. Why is it that my
service to my country (as a regular soldier) will not be recognised and what is different to me compared to a
soldier who signed on for six years? …
56.
The service of three year enlistees, K-Force troops …
- … and women forced to be discharged on marriage and pregnancy is cynically denigrated. As yet, I have not
seen any allowances made to people discharged due to illness. The criteria mentions only Total and Permanently
Incapacity due to injury during training - what about lesser injury forcing early discharge? And what is the
period of training - recruit training, initial employment training, further trade or promotion training?
What about all those discharged early due through illness often brought about by conditions of service?
Ironically, this criteria excludes those injured, sick or even wounded are active or deployed in service - the very
people who deserve recognition for their service and suffering. The biggest injustice of all is that such people
could be excluded because they actually went on deployment, when the whole false premise for the medal is
deployability.
The whole episode disgusts me, being in my view a betrayal of honour to those who served and are then denigrated
in this manner. I also feel strongly enough on this question to resign from the RSL if they fold on this campaign.
I wish you well in your fight for fair go for all who served.
43. I agree with you fully, Gary, I think it should be two years service, the same as National Service. We can’t have
one rule for some, another rule for the Regular Soldier.
Regards mate, and keep up the good work.
95.
It is interesting to read that the reason quoted by government not to reduce the six year requirement is because
people may not have completed their initial training and also may not been fully deployable. I enlisted on
7 Feb 1963 and was posted to 4 Field Regiment RAA in July 1963, posted to 111LAA Battery RAA, May 1964 ...
It goes on and on and on in this vein. The ex-servicemen and women are utterly disgusted with the position that the federal government has taken in some vote-grabbing effort to try and award medals because of the injustice of just awarding it for the national servicemen earlier on – and rightly so.
As the patron of the North Darwin RSL, I will be arguing the case that we adopt the RSL resolution of two years service in order to obtain the Australian Defence Medal. I believe that is a fair and just position. I note that the Labor position is after three years, and I will be taking that up with my federal colleagues on this matter, and seeing what we can do during the review that I mentioned of the awarding of medals for Long Tan and, while this review is being done, that we revisit the question and Labor’s position is changed to two years, along with the RSL’s national convention decision.
I must say that, in all of this, with Robertson Barracks being down the road, with the large number of ex-servicemen and women that we have in the Northern Territory, I am appalled that the federal member for Solomon has not gone off to the barracks to see what he could do. We do not have conscription any more. At Robertson Barracks, they are all volunteer soldiers. A lot of these soldiers will never see six years service, and there were a lot of soldiers before them - and sailors, and airmen, and airwomen, and women in the armed services all over the place - who have not completed six years service, but will be discriminated against. It is a terrible thing to happen.
I would remind our federal members, as the Howard government was quick to say, there are 900 000 people being awarded medals. That is a sizeable block. If they want to curry votes, well, get out there and do it right, and make sure there is some equity in this system. I, for one, will not be wearing my Australian Defence Medal until it is changed to where it is more equitable, and those with two years or three years service - and that includes the vast majority of women who served in their country’s call - are awarded this medal. I call on all my RSL and ex-service members to likewise stand by their mates. Do not wear this medal until we see justice and equity through the whole system.
I also congratulate Gary at the Aldgate sub-branch, and I want him and all serving and past serving members of Defence services to know that I am behind them 100% in this campaign.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I am very happy tonight to talk about the success of the 2004 Croc Festival, which was held in Katherine the first week in August. This Croc Fest was the biggest one that has ever been held, which confirms the faith that the Croc Festival executive committee had for the event in Katherine. Despite the lack of financial support from the Martin Labor government, and the adverse remarks by several government ministers as to the valuable outcomes of previous Croc Festivals held in Nhulunbuy and Tennant Creek, the people of Katherine showed total commitment to the success of the festival, as did the executive committee.
Forty-three schools from throughout the Territory, in addition to Kununurra and Rockhampton, took part in the festival, with over 2000 students participating. The schools were: Alpurrurulam Community School, Amanbidji School, Barramundi School, Batchelor Area School, Borroloola Community Education Centre, Bulla School, Bulman School, Casuarina Street Primary School, Clyde Fenton Primary School, Dundee Beach Primary School, Jabiru Area School, Jilkminggan School, Kalano Community Youth Group, Katherine High School, Katherine South Primary School, Kununurra District High School, Lajamanu Community Education Centre, MacFarlane Primary School, Maningrida Community Education Centre, Mataranka Primary School, Minyerri School, Neutral Junction School, Newcastle Waters School, Ngukurr Community Education Centre, Ntaria Primary School, Numbulwar Community Education Centre, Nyirripi School, Oolgoolgarri Remote Community School, Our Lady of the Sacred Heart School Wadeye, Palmerston High School, Pigeon Hole School, Pine Creek Primary School, Ramingining Community Education Centre, Rockhampton Downs School, St Joseph’s Catholic Primary School Katherine, St Joseph’s School Kununurra, Stirling College, Timber Creek School, Urapunga School, Woolaning Homeland Christian College, Wugularr School, Xavier Community Education Centre, and Yarralin School.
From the time the festival road trains arrived in Katherine and set up at the sports grounds area until the time they left Katherine, there was an atmosphere of enormous excitement in the community. The community concerts that were so professionally presented on the magnificent festival stage highlighted the talents of the 2000 students who entertained huge crowds on consecutive nights with a fabulous variety of well-rehearsed performances.
I congratulate the teachers who spent so much time assisting their students with their performances. I congratulate the Katherine Croc Festival organising committee who have worked tirelessly for the last 12 months and committed to the festival being successful, and the whole Katherine community for their support of the first festival. That is what made it so successful.
The economic benefit, with the influx of so many additional people to the town, was certainly well received by local businesses. The ongoing benefits to the students who participated in the Croc Fest, whose theme is ‘Respect yourself, respect your culture’ will, without a doubt, be recognised. I have seen the difference already with some of the Katherine students.
I congratulate the Croc Festival executive committee on having faith in Katherine to go ahead with the festival this year and, certainly, will be welcoming them back again, as I know the whole of the Katherine community will.
Following on from the Croc Festival, Katherine continued its cultural experience with the annual Flying Fox Festival, which is always full of exciting events to attend and participate in. One of those events was the St Paul’s Anglican Church Art and Food Festival, which adopted the art theme of ‘clear water’. Local and Territory identities were invited to contribute their artistic impression of clear water on a six by eight size of art. Some 30 varied pieces were entered in this exhibition, and it was very interesting to view each entrant’s contribution. I had my artistic talents truly tested for the first time in many years and surprised myself with the end result of my effort, as did our new mayor, Anne Shepherd. I would also like to thank the Chief Minister for her contribution to the exhibition, which was very well received by the organisers. It was a very interesting and enjoyable evening for the Katherine people.
Tonight, I would also like to recognise and pay tribute to a very gracious Katherine lady for whom I have great affection and admiration. I am talking about Bonnie Stephens, who is a very talented artist and has a wonderful outlook on life and, at the age of 84 years, still does not have enough hours in each day to accomplish all that she would like to.
Bonnie was born in Glen Innes, New South Wales, in 1919. She studied at East Sydney Technical College with Raynor Hoff, Lyndon Dadswell and Douglas Dundas, and at the National Art School for two years with renowned portrait painter, Graeme Inson. Bonnie has attended seminars with Bill Peascod, Tom Cleghorn, Fred Cress and Fred Bates. Pre-war she was a freelance fashion artist for David Jones, Farmers and Wyns.
Bonnie received her first award at Inverell Shire in 1988, followed by 21 additional awards throughout Australia, up to the Katherine Acquisition Art Prize 2000. Bonnie has exhibited in Sydney, Inverell, Tamworth, Newcastle, Young Masters Gallery Brisbane, Corbould Galleries, Brisbane Regional Gallery, Ipswich, and Framed Gallery Darwin and Katherine. She has also represented in private and public collections in Australia, UK, USA and Canada, and is listed in Max Germaine’s Artists and Galleries of Australia.
Bonnie has been living in the Northern Territory for 14 years now, since deciding to move closer to her daughter, Frances Anderson, and has painted some magnificent work in that time. While I have only had the pleasure of her presence and wonderful work since that time, she has been painting since 16 years of age. Bonnie, a keen impressionist, used to paint mainly flowers but, since coming to the Territory, she has been inspired to paint landscapes and, inevitably, our very skilled stockmen and Brahman cattle, which are such magnificent animals.
I am very fortunate to own two of Bonnie’s works that highlight aspects of the stockmen and cattle industry, and am eagerly in line with several others to acquire more of her much sought after pieces. Bonnie’s talent is being recognised at this moment with the honour of a retrospective in a Queensland art gallery. She will have 45 of her works featured in the Global Arts Link Gallery in Ipswich from early August to October this year. The exhibition is entitled Bonnie Stevens – A Painter’s Life and will include work gathered from the Northern Territory including the two pieces that I am fortunate to own, and pieces from Queensland and New South Wales. Bonnie is delighted and honoured that Ipswich have asked to hold the retrospective, as she was instrumental in the development of their gallery when she lived there years ago.
Bonnie has a great relationship with Peter and Cathy Farnden who own Gallop-Thru-Time Gallery and Framing in Katherine. Peter’s great talent with framing always enhances an already fabulous piece of artwork, and we are very fortunate to have such a talented and creative business as Gallop-Thru-Time in Katherine which also has a lot of business from Darwin.
Bonnie has travelled to Ipswich for the entire exhibition of her retrospective, and this will follow on with a commercial exhibition in Brisbane with renowned Australian artists Bill Odd and Chris Huber. While Bonnie is away, my secretary, Lorna Hart, and I are going to miss her weekly visits to have coffee and a chat. I know Bonnie will delight the interstate audiences and be very well received and rewarded. It is a great honour to be asked to hold a retrospective, and I wish Bonnie every success in Ipswich and the commercial exhibitions following. I will be absolutely delighted when she finally comes home to Katherine exhausted at the end of the year.
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, this evening I congratulate Karama Neighbourhood Watch for yet another fantastic fun day held on Sunday, 15 August, just this weekend gone by, at the Karama School. I acknowledge the hard work done by the Karama Neighbourhood Watch committee which consists of residents. We started the fun day last year as an initiative to bring the community together and to celebrate the diversity of Karama. It was a huge success last year, with some 600 people moving through the school grounds in the afternoon, enjoying each other’s company and local performances. I am pleased and delighted to say that it was another big success again this year, with crowd estimates at least on a par with last year, if not a bit more.
I acknowledge the enthusiasm of the Karama Neighbourhood Watch chair Ted Dunstan. He put a lot of effort into working with me to organise the event. Ted went around and got donations from local shopkeepers at Karama Shopping Centre. I thank Lyndall’s Hair Care, Panda Food and the Karama chemist for their donations. Ampol Karama donated gas for the barbecues. Importantly, Coles Karama donated all the food. We had somewhere in the vicinity of 500 sausages, 100 steaks or chops, 100 sartees, 50 loaves of bread, sauce and onions. All of that was donated by Karama Coles and they did a great job in feeding our community.
Volunteers from Karama Neighbourhood Watch worked the barbecues through the afternoon. I want to make particular mention and offer thanks to Joe and Helene Clark. They were there working the barbecues last year and they were back there again this year. They are a great example of very community-minded residents in the Karama area. They are a lovely couple. They have had long-term commitment to the Territory. Joe is a classic Territorian. They are terrific people and it is an honour to work for them and with them.
I also thank Louise Murray who, again, said she was going to do an hour’s stint on the barbecue but ended up being there all afternoon working really hard and putting in a huge effort. She is a mother of young kids, yet she took the time to get stuck in and assist in that effort with Neighbourhood Watch.
Sue Pattiselano is a great worker from Karama Neighbourhood Watch. She got stuck in to helping out on the drinks van with my mother, Dawn Lawrie. I acknowledge that Dawn was in the drinks van all afternoon handing out drinks which we sold for $1 a soft drink, and bottled water was free. All the local community really enjoyed the fact that the food was free and the drinks were affordable. It made it a really fun, affordable day for families. The drinks were arranged by me through Parmalat. I acknowledge Parmalat. They provided us with a drinks van. They also provided us with free donated bottled water, and they also donated their barbecue bullet which assisted greatly with our barbecue efforts.
Karama Shopping Centre is owned by the La Pira family. I acknowledge the donation of La Pira family, Joondana Investments, in providing the cover of the cost of the soft drinks. A very big effort from them to fork out close to $400 to cover the cost of the soft drinks, so I thank them very much as well.
It was a day of community activity. We started off with the Manunda Terrace Rope Ragers from the local school. They put on a beautiful performance to kick the day off with their very talented young team of skipping rope experts, who are fundraising again for another trip to Sydney for the nationals.
We had some sack races, which the kids loved. We did some tug-o-war, we had some wheelbarrow races, and there was great excitement for the kids getting stuck into the fun activities.
The sign choir performed. Rachel Kroes does a really good job with the Sing-Song Sign Choir. Many of the girls in the choir live in the Karama electorate and they are a great bunch of kids who have been learning sign language on Saturday mornings for about three years now. They are becoming regular and popular performers at various events around Darwin.
We also had a beautiful dance performance by children from the Holy Family School. They had created the performance for the Northern Territory Catholic Schools Performing Arts Festival and brought it back to stage for us on the weekend. It was just magnificent. Thank you to the girls there.
Karama Primary School performed the Wakakirri Dance performance that they had created for the recent Wakakirri competition - a very colourful performance by those young students at Karama Primary School. It was great to see both boys and girls getting involved in those dance performances.
I want to thank Lisa Greenslade, a hard-working member of Karama Neighbourhood Watch, who had her granddaughters perform a very beautiful Filipino traditional dance for us on the day. It was a delight. The crowd was enraptured by the costume and the grace of the dancing. A big thank you to Lisa for her huge efforts in organising the day with Ted Dunstan and I.
I want to acknowledge John Lear from Anula Neighbourhood Watch. He is a member of the Neighbourhood Watch Board and he is quite enthusiastic in dipping in and helping out other Neighbourhood Watch groups. He certainly put in a good effort with helping us out in both organising and assisting as a volunteer on the day.
I acknowledge the African community who came along. There was a group of about 20 boys ranging in ages from what appeared to be about age five up to early high school age, and they were fantastic dancers. It was great to see so many boys up on stage really showing their dancing ability. It inspired the crowd.
Congratulations to everyone who took the time to go there and participate in this community event. It really is a lovely way of bringing the community together. The theme of the day is to have fun, and everyone I was speaking to on the day indicated they were having a fun time. That was in no small part due to the fact that the fire brigade turned up towards the end of the day, when call-outs permitted, and they put on the foam machine for the kids. I have to say the squeals of delight spoke volumes for what a great role the firies play in ensuring kids have a good time with that foam machine.
I want to thank Chandra and Hemali Senevratne, Sandy Oldroyd, and Kevin and Rita Cluley. They volunteer whenever it is required and it is really and truly appreciated. Leigh and Barbra Kariko from Malak Neighbourhood Watch came over to see how the fun day operated, to get some ideas about Malak Neighbourhood Watch in order to do something similar. They were there all afternoon, volunteering right from set-up stage to pack-up stage. They are a tremendous couple. I know they have young kids, yet they put in a huge effort on the day to help our Karama Neighbourhood Watch.
I congratulate everyone involved. I thank the chair of Neighbourhood Watch, Ken Mildred, who was very handy in identifying any assistance Neighbourhood Watch could provide. They paid for jumping castles and a kids activity centre, which was great.
I thank St John Ambulance for coming down with an ambulance. There were plenty of kids walking around heavily bandaged. The good news is they were not injured; they were just having fun being bandaged up by the St John Ambulance volunteers.
I also acknowledge the efforts of Paul Wyatt. He is on the Neighbourhood Watch Board. I believe he is up to about 15 000 sausages that he has managed to cook over the years in his community activities. Paul, thank you for adding to your tally of sausages by helping out on the barbecue for Karama Neighbourhood Watch.
It really is an entire community effort. A lot of people put their efforts into helping out, and it is great to see. There were other Neighbourhood Watch board members there whose names I do not know, but I will be finding out in due course and writing to them and thanking them. It is just great to see so many people getting stuck into to helping out.
The police were tremendous yet again. I have to acknowledge especially the work of Acting Sergeant Geoff Pickering, who is working out at Community Policing Unit and working with Neighbourhood Watch groups throughout the northern suburbs. I did joke to Geoff, early in the morning when we were setting up, that he could not be envied because, while we were shifting vans and setting up some heavy equipment, he had the able assistance of myself and Ted, who is confined to a wheelchair. A fairly heavily pregnant woman and a guy in a wheelchair were not tremendous physical assistance to Geoff, but he took it all with good humour and got stuck in and did a lot of the heavy shifting, carrying and moving of equipment.
It just goes to show that we all have things to contribute in our community. If you have the desire to bring a community together to enhance a community, it really does work. Hundreds of kids had a huge time there on Sunday. A lot of parents stood around, and you could see smiles on people’s faces. There really was a sense of enjoyment with a community that was incredibly harmonious, and it was a real delight to participate. I certainly look forward to the event being held again next year.
I want to acknowledge the NT Catholic Schools Performing Arts Festival that I attended on Friday, 6 August, at the Darwin Entertainment Centre. The theme was Celebrating Catholic Education. I congratulate the choir, led by Lourdes Valles, with the artistic arrangement by Cassandra Mahony. It is a very lovely Catholic combined school choir, which really only had one particular afternoon of rehearsing as a combined choir, but they did a magnificent job. Kirsty McCallum, yet again, was just fantastic with her orchestra and her work on the piano. She is an inspiration to many talented musical children who I know are getting great benefit from her at O’Loughlin Catholic College.
I acknowledge the work of the schools involved: Holy Spirit School, St Paul’s, St Mary’s, Sacred Heart at Palmerston, Holy Family in my electorate of Karama, St Francis of Assisi at Humpty Doo and St Joseph’s College, Katherine. They all participated in the Catholic schools combined choir, and the combined orchestra had O’Loughlin College, St John’s College, St Mary’s School and the Holy Family School.
There were terrific performances. With the choir and the orchestra, they put on some beautiful music and some lovely singing. There was also a dance performance by St Paul’s. I was impressed with the screening of videos that included Our Lady of the Sacred Heart College in Alice Springs, and a projection slide from our Indigenous Schools Music Program. It was just a very impressive evening of dance, song and celebration, and a real showcase of the music and artistic talent that you see in our Catholic schools.
I congratulate the Catholic Education Office and the diocese of Darwin for putting this together. They try and provide a holistic approach to education. I know that they are very nurturing in their educational approach, and I know my own children get great benefit out of the very nurturing approach taken at Holy Family School. I know Jacqui Thompson, the acting Principal at Holy Family School, is doing a terrific job there while the Principal, Marg Hughes, is on leave. It is a small school in the electorate that is growing in popularity, especially since Rainbows was created, which takes in the early learning aspects of the centre.
Whilst I am an absolute avid supporter of our public school system, having been a product of the Territory’s public school system myself and working very closely with Malak, Manunda Terrace and Karama Primary schools in my electorate, and also Sanderson High, I understand there is a role for Catholic education. I really support the work being done by the Catholic Education Office here in the Territory. Our Catholic schools in the Territory have a very Territory flavour to them. They are not as strict as one would anticipate, and they really do focus on community and nurturing. I know they extend themselves to make sure that they have good indigenous programs running through the core of much of their curriculum. They celebrate Reconciliation Day every year; we participate in a whole range of activities.
I congratulate the Catholic schools for what was a really very lovely evening at the Darwin Entertainment Centre on Friday, 6 August. I was delighted to be one of the sponsors of that in my capacity as the member for Karama.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I would like to talk about the redistribution and give an explanation to the House as to why I put objections into the redistribution of my electorate. I will also explain or detail some of the happenings since that has occurred, from a political aspect.
My objections to the changes in the Nelson electorate are based on a number of reasons. There were three electorates in the Darwin region that had roughly the same population - they were Casuarina, Fannie Bay and Nelson. Of those three, only Nelson had a boundary change. As well as that, of those three electorates, Nelson had the only population change of a positive kind since the last redistribution. Nelson’s elector population increased by 1.65% since the last redistribution, Fannie Bay went down by minus-2.38% and Casuarina went down by minus-2.65%. For some unknown reason, Nelson had a boundary change. As well as that, the Redistribution Committee decided that there would be no changes to Fannie Bay and Casuarina because of perceived growth in either the Lee Point area or the Port Darwin area. It took no account, not only of perceived growth, but actual growth in the Nelson electorate and, therefore, decided to change the boundaries of the Nelson electorate. Once again, that was an unfair redistribution.
I will make a comment on the redistribution being based on what future growth is. I do not believe that the Redistribution Committee can look at future growth. It should look at the population as of a certain date. You could look at Lee Point, for instance, in Casuarina and say: ‘Yes there will be 1000 blocks of land’. However, only 15 of them might be turned off next year. Therefore, there is no guarantee that the population is going to go whump all of a sudden. Therefore, for the sake of consistency, the redistribution of all boundaries should be based purely on the population at a certain date. After that, if the population increases, when it comes the time for redistribution, boundaries are adjusted accordingly.
The other area, of course, that the Redistribution Committee is required to look at is community of interest. In fact, it says in the book that one of the objectives of electoral redistribution as set out in section 139 of the Electoral Act is to look at identifiable communities, and they should be included in only one division if practicable.
As people know, Robertson Barracks has been proposed to be put into the Nelson electorate, and there is very good reason, from the Redistribution Committee’s point of view, to do that. It is because the electorate of Brennan was 19% over the quota and, to reduce that, they naturally had to do something with the boundaries of Brennan. So, they just plonked the barracks into the Nelson electorate. From a community of interest point of view, which is a requirement of this redistribution, there is not a community of interest between an Army barracks and rural land, made up primarily of people living on five acre blocks.
I believe that the redistribution should have put Robertson Barracks into the electorate of Drysdale, which already has existing Defence land in the form of ex-Coonawarra land, and also has quite a number of people from the Defence Forces living in areas like Fairway Waters. Drysdale’s boundary could have been purely adjusted by taking out Woolner and placing it into Fannie Bay, therefore giving Fannie Bay a boost in population - because it was below the quota like Nelson - and putting Knuckey Lagoon, which is a rural area just like the Howard Springs/Humpty Doo area, into Nelson. You would then have had a Defence community of interest in one electorate and a rural community of interest in another electorate. I believe that makes sense. It has nothing to do with politics; it has to do with a fair redistribution of boundaries.
I placed those arguments which I believe are logical before the augmented Redistribution Committee. It is, I presume, their job now to make judgment on whether or not my arguments are strong enough to have a change of boundaries or not.
The one disappointing thing that I have found in this whole process is that this is being used - that is, my objections to the barracks being in Nelson - by some parts of the CLP to say that I am anti-Army. I find that downright disgusting, actually. I have spent a lot of time, both as president of the council and as the member for Nelson, working hard to try to foster a good relationship with the Army, especially through our Anzac Day cricket match which was designed, primarily, to recognise the importance of the Army in the Litchfield Shire, and to raise money for Army families through Legacy. I will continue to do that. Yet, just recently at the Knuckey Lagoon flea market on Sunday, a particular candidate from the CLP happened to be talking to two people who are very good friends of mine. One of them even has a very high award in the Territory for services to the Territory. Before I tell you what that person said, I double checked with each person that what I am saying today is accurate, otherwise I would not say it. That person said that ‘Gerry Wood is anti-Army, he supported them when he was on the Litchfield council, but he does not want to know them now, and Gerry must have changed his spots since then because he now gets more money’.
I just find that below the belt. I had to put up with this in the last election. I made a statement on the radio, for instance, that I did not support mandatory sentencing, but I do support people going to gaol for breaking into houses. During the election campaign, the first part of that sentence was quoted and the second part left off. That was deliberately done to try to tell people that I said something that I did not say. It was just done to trick people into believing I had said that I was soft on crime. Here is another case of the same thing happening.
I looked at the redistribution according to the act. I put my argument about the redistribution based only on that. I do not have any fear of the barracks; I support the barracks. In fact, I have had an election as president of the council with the barracks included, and I won that election. Therefore, why should I have anything to fear about the barracks? As I have gone around my electorate, I have found many people saying: ‘Why are they putting the barracks in our electorate?’ We deal with issues like how many horses on a block of land, what can you do on five acres - all those rural issues. They are not issues of Defence. I do not mind dealing with Defence issues, but if you look at the redistribution requirements, you would certainly try to put Defence areas in the one electorate. That makes sense. However, to have people make statements - and obviously the person did not realise that one of those was my sister and the other person was, as I said, a person who has received one of the highest awards in the Northern Territory - can give people …
Dr Burns: Sounds like the bloke we are talking about, anyway. No names, no pack drill.
Mr WOOD: I am not saying. No, it is not, so you are wrong there.
Dr Burns: You said he was a candidate.
Mr WOOD: That is all I am saying. You will have to sort that out for yourselves. I am not interested in the person; I am interested in what is being put out. I had two CLP friends ring me up recently - this was before this occurred - and said: ‘Gerry, you are going to find you are going to be targeted for being anti-Army because you came out and said the barracks should not be within your electorate’. They were dead right.
Tomorrow, I believe that there are a number of people from the CLP who are going to visit the barracks. Two of those are candidates, and they are going to talk to the 1st Brigade. Wouldn’t I like to be a fly on the wall! If I hear that this sort of statement has been made about me again, I will publicise it again and again, because this is what people get sick of. I did not run for politics for this sort of stuff. I came from a council background, which had no party politics.
The thing that people hate is the depth we get to sometimes just to win an election. In other words, there are no holds barred, we break all the rules, you tell all the lies, you drive people’s character into the ground, into the mud, just because you have to win the next election because ‘our party is better than the other side’. People hate that. Politicians have the lowest standing in the community. Look at all the surveys. Why? Because we treat one another like the proverbial ...
Dr Burns: I love you, Gerry.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, member for Johnson. That is what tends to happen: when you get towards election, sure enough, there will be some vigorous debate. Why isn’t it vigorous debate? Why isn’t it saying: ‘I can do this for the community’. Why is it: ‘That person, he sleeps with her’ or ‘We know what that person does’? It is always character assassination. That is bad and why people have a lot of disregard for politics in general.
We have to do our best to improve that. We are not going to encourage people to get into politics if that is the way we carry on. There should be a lot more people putting up their hands for politics. That makes a healthier democracy. However, when you get this sort of attitude, when people know that, if you put your head up, there is someone out there looking for the grubbiest way to pull you down, why bother? I have a lot of people say to me: ‘I would not have your job for quids’. Sometimes I say: ‘I do not blame you’. This is the bad side of politics. I have many good friends in the CLP. This is not a blatant blast at the CLP; there are some sections of the CLP that never learn and have never moved into the 21st century.
What is funny about all this is that I was not the only one who believed the barracks should not be in the Nelson electorate and should be in the Drysdale electorate. The important thing is that the CLP believed exactly the same thing. Either the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing or there is a split, but the CLP wing saw that the logic. I see the logic. I am glad of their support and I appreciate that, but when I see my statements about the barracks being interpreted as anti-Army, I am extremely disappointed. If people say that publicly, I will certainly make sure their words are publicised. I will mount an argument in the strongest possible way and I ask those people to come down to an Anzac Day cricket match that we have held for the last four years and say: ‘Who is anti-Army?’ The Strauss cricket ground is not even in my electorate. There are not many votes on Cox Peninsula Road for me; it is a matter of having some pride in our Defence, preserving our World War II heritage and raising money for Legacy.
I say to those people who issuing those statements: ‘Shut up. Get your facts right, and get a life. If you cannot win without having to stoop to that level, just give it away’.
Dr TOYNE (Stuart): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to speak tonight about an Italian community event that was held in Central Australia. I was delighted to host a function for the Italian community in Alice Springs with the assistance of Fred Marrone, President of the Italian Sports and Social Club in Darwin, who happened to be in Alice at the time.
The Italian community has made a significant contributions to the development of the Centre. Many Italians came over in the days of the mica mining at Harts Range. I was delighted to be able to chat to Mr Guiseppe Antonelli about his days working in the rough, harsh and primitive conditions there. He was there with his wife, Mrs Angela Antonelli, and their children and beautiful granddaughter, Chiara, who stole the show. What a wonderful name! Other early settlers such as Mr Baldissera whose three children came to the function, made journeys largely forgotten today, but surely as difficult as those of the early explorers. He and others walked huge distances from places such as Port Augusta and Oodnadatta to reach the ‘interior’, as he always called it – a place mysterious and unknown in those days. The courage of these early settlers must always be recognised.
I was very pleased to meet Mrs Terese Fadelli the mother of Bruce Fadelli, who has been a long-standing resident in Alice Springs, and is a lovely woman.
Italians have long been involved in the building industry in Alice Springs – the Golottas, the Bonannis and the Donas are just some of the families with a long history in our construction industry. Others were involved in the citrus and horticultural industry and, of course, our restaurant cuisine would not be the same without the enormous influence of the Italians, who ensured a good supply of homemade red wine and superb pasta long before it was trendy in inner Melbourne. Even today, Alice would not be the same without Carmella Giardina’s Casa Nostra.
Fred Marrone addressed the function about the need to keep hold of the Italian heritage that was gathered through the now disbanded Verdi Club. I spoke to both Jimmy Delgiacco and Joe Golotta, both former presidents, about this issue. It is now up to the Italian community to decide if they want to keep hold of this heritage and how, perhaps working with the Italian Sports and Social Club in Darwin, it could be looked after and displayed. There is certainly a lot of interest in the idea, particularly if the Italian heritage could be displayed somewhere in Alice Springs, perhaps with the help of our new Alice Springs archives. Pat Jackson, the archivist who is now working there, is certainly keen to help the Italian community ensure that their heritage items are kept and maintained for future generations.
I could not let this item pass entirely without commenting on some of the fairly ignorant media comment about this event, amongst others, in the context of the Greek celebration of their cup victory. To immediately brand every government event as being some sort of party, or a rampant wastage of taxpayers’ money, is very ill-informed. This event was an important one for the Italian community. It was certainly worth every penny involved in getting a venue and, unless there is some serious suggestion that we pick a tree in the Todd River bed, boil a billy and have a meeting with 70-plus senior members of the Italian families, I am not sure how else you could do the things that we were doing. The proof of the pudding will be in an important new initiative to help our Italian community - a community that is not newcomers or emigrants who have come out long after Alice Springs was founded but, indeed, were part of the founding group that started the town off and has continued to build it right through. They are a core group in our community and they absolutely deserve the recognition that we are trying to help them achieve.
I would like now to talk about a couple of our long-standing health professionals who are retiring from the Department of Health. Mary Dyer retired from service as the Supervising Scientist for the Haematology Laboratory at Royal Darwin Hospital in February 2004. This ended nearly 30 years of distinguished service and association with the department at Royal Darwin Hospital.
Mary arrived in Darwin on 12 July 1973 with just $5 in her pocket, and she immediately found employment cleaning rental cars. On 16 July 1973, Mary was interviewed by Dr Jrgen Rode, who told her that she was overqualified for a job in the laboratory, but that they were desperate for staff and asked if she could start immediately. Mary’s intention was to earn some money so that she could resume her travel holiday. Mary started work on 16 July 1973 in the Microbiology Laboratory as a laboratory assistant.
In August 1974, the desire to travel hit again and Mary resigned to go backpacking. On Christmas day 1974, Mary’s brother woke her with the news that Darwin had been all but destroyed by Cyclone Tracy. Mary contacted the laboratory to ask if she was needed, and arrived back in Darwin in May 1975. Mary was employed as Medical Laboratory Scientist and moved to the Haematology Laboratory where she became Supervising Scientist; a position she then held until February 2004. Mary’s contribution to the Pathology Department has been significant. Many of her junior staff have gained significant skills in haematology. As a result, many patients have benefited from her skills and, without doubt, she has contributed to the saving many Territorian lives.
I am sure Mary Dyer will be greatly missed by staff and friends in the Pathology Department, and I wish her well in her well-earned retirement.
The other person who has departed recently from our agency is Janette Conti, who is a registered nurse. Building a Healthier Community is based on the women and men working within our Health and Community Services system. The Department of Health and Community Services is made up of many dedicated staff such as Janette, who have provided years of dedicated service. On her retirement after almost 40 years of dedicated service, this evening I would like to highlight the contribution that Janette Conti has made.
Janette commenced duties as a registered nurse at the old Darwin Hospital in 1964. During this career, Janette has, no doubt, witnessed many changes to the health system; has provided service through the devastation of Cyclone Tracy; assisted the East Timorese evacuees in 1975; assisted the Vietnamese refugees over the next few years after that; was an evening supervisor at the old Darwin Hospital; was a day nursing supervisor during the transition period from the old Darwin Hospital to the Royal Darwin Hospital; was in community health specialising in immunisation and screening for sexually transmitted infections; and also was in domiciliary care.
Throughout her career, Janette was highly respected by her colleagues and patients, and noted for her excellent interpersonal skills and professional integrity. I thank Janette for her dedicated contribution, and wish her well for her well-earned retirement.
I want to finish this contribution to the adjournment debate by talking about an encounter I had with a nurse at the remote community of Ampilatwatja. I was doing a normal visit around my electorate to this community to the north-east of Alice Springs, and dropped in on the Aherrenge Health Service clinic to talk to the staff there about how things were going. I met Oona, one of the nurses there and, when I asked how things were going, I got a very passionate and general answer, I guess, to the situation remote health is now seeing in our communities, because I do not think Ampilatwatja is out of the ordinary in the health profiles and the work that the service is dealing with there.
Oona was, as I said, very passionate about the difficulties that we are facing. She was saying things like ‘How are we going to be judged in 20 years time when we see kids who are growing up and not being protected by their domestic situation, from early infections such as scabies and kidney infections and other skin infections?’ She was seeing kids two years old who already had significant damage to their kidneys. She was seeing kids five years old, where it is almost certain that they would be on a dialysis machine by the age of 30 or before. She said: ‘How can we continue this way? Who has to take responsibility for the current situation, particularly with child health?’ I could not help but agree.
She was saying that, unless we reach a point where the parents and the community leaders join with us in taking responsibility for these things, it is no longer enough or constructive to go into the future simply pointing to the health system and its health professionals and saying: ‘What have you done about this? Why is this going so badly?’ What she was really saying is that it is not just a case of seeking a partnership with indigenous parents and indigenous community leaders, but it is actually reaching a critical point where, if we do not get that working partnership, we simply are not going to produce the outcomes.
I came away and, I must admit, I have been thinking very heavily about what she had to say, particularly with the depth of her obvious commitment to her profession and to the outcomes she felt had to come from the work that she was doing. I hope there are a lot of Oonas out there. I believe and know that, if we can link up the many indigenous people who do have a heartfelt desire to work for their people and for the outcomes, and to take responsibility with us for the outcomes that have to be achieved then, perhaps, at least in some part in remote health and our health system, we can look to getting a better outcome than the terrible toll of people entering kidney failure and other chronic disease states.
I guess the most sobering thing in what she had to say was that, in many cases, the trajectory towards those chronic diseases has been settled by the age of two to five. If we are going to break out of the current health statistics, we have to do something urgently with that age group to break the cycle between generations.
Dr BURNS (Johnston): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, there was a fantastic night for the 8th India at Mindil Festival on 19 June this year. Government was very proud to sponsor this event which showcases the incredible Indian culture. Many of the locals, as well as others from overseas, came to showcase Indian culture to Darwin. There was not only culture but fantastic cuisine, holiday planning, fashion and entertainment, all brought together by the Indian Cultural Society of the Northern Territory.
I was very pleased to meet Mr Ganapathi, the Indian Consul General from Sydney; Mr Jay Jayaraman, President of the Indian Cultural Society, Mrs Ruma Chakravarti, the hard-working secretary of the society. Also there was Dr Ram Vemuri and his wife, Jyoti, and Priya and Bharat Desai of Moil. Mr Ratan Ghosh and his wife, Kabia, were also there and Kabia played the sitar. She is a very serious sitar player and has had formal instruction many years before coming to Australia. Her music is very beautiful to listen to. Of course, also there was Dr Ganeesh Ramdoss, his mother and sister, who are a great family. They are a very well-known family and have been in the Nightcliff area for many years. I certainly enjoy the company of Ganeesh and his mother and sister.
The Chief Minster was there, along with the Minister for Ethnic Affairs, who was very enthusiastic on the night, and Janicean Price, who is retiring as Director of Ethnic Affairs. She has done a fantastic job over many years.
Jaya and Aditi Srinivas were MC and there was a lot of fun and banter. Ram and Meeta Konesh, Bill Chakravarti and his entire family from Alawa were participants and part of the audience, together with a young tabla player, Deepak Lal from Wagaman, Sumesh Dhir, Vinod Jain, a former president of the society, Helen Fegan, Devjani Ghose, Megha Raut, Sebastian Kampallil, and also the Verma family from Moil.
This was the biggest India at Mindil ever, with over 12 000 people enjoying this unique event. There were so many people, in fact, that some of the stalls ran out of food at the end of the evening. There were over 40 stalls selling not only Indian food but Asian, Vietnamese and Malaysian - you name it, and it was there; very delicious. I would have to say there was Indian beer that was very popular - Kingfisher beer which came in the extra strong variety, about 9% - and a lager. I tried the lighter variety. In fact, as in cricket, there was another case of India giving the Aussies a real run for their money because the organisers still had cartons of VB left long after the Kingfisher had sold out; so a great success there also.
There was also a fashion parade organised by Megha Raut which was great, and also sari demonstrations. Some of the parades showcased traditional Indian wear and costumes which were very beautiful. Some of the younger people modelled them. It is a great way to showcase culture.
The entertainment was fantastic, with a large musical ensemble performing, plus two visiting cultural groups from overseas, from the Singapore-based Apsara Arts and the Kohinoor Bhangra group of performers. Both of them were very spectacular.
I also heard that the visiting Consul General personally contacted all dignitaries on his return to Sydney to thank them for a fantastic night. An Indian tourism pavilion was very popular with the Mindil visitors and catered for all those interested in visiting India. That is something I would like to do some time in the future.
Of course, the government is very proud to support this event, with $20 000 of funding plus another $5000 ancillary to that. We are very proud to support the Indian Cultural Society to showcase their culture. It is a great night out for Darwin people and visitors to Darwin, and it was fantastic.
It is a bit sad to hear that Jay Jayaraman has decided not to stand as president again, after having held the position of president five times. He has done a great job. Along with the support of his committee, he has India at Mindil to where it is today; a lot of the success must go to him. However, there are plenty on that committee I can see who will carry on that great work.
On 4 July, I attended the Shannon’s All Club Car run, which was held at Hidden Valley. I am patron of the Motor Vehicles Enthusiasts Club and I am proud to hold that position. I believe Daryl Manzie held it before me, and I am very pleased to be patron of that club. Gary Turbill, Manager of Shannon’s Ltd, handed over Hidden Valley to the motor vehicle club for the day, and Dave Collins coordinated another highly successful day for car enthusiasts.
Vehicles met at the club hangar at Parap in the early morning and, led by Dave Collins in his Holden ute, convoyed through the Darwin environs ending up in Hidden Valley for a run around the valley. This was a fantastic day, with everyone having a go, doing their three laps, categorised into vintage and style vehicles, before returning to Pit Lane on their ‘run down’ lap.
Lunch on the hill overlooking the valley of the V8s was wonderful. It was a great barbecue, and the whole day went brilliantly. Dave Collins is to be congratulated on a well-organised event attended by over 53 vehicles. Among the vehicles were, of course, Syd Stirling’s Corvette driven by Peter O’Hagan in Syd’s absence. Syd had to be in Nhulunbuy that day, but that was a bit of excitement - a bit of a red flash roaring around the track. Syd is really going to try and be there next year because it is a fantastic day.
There were GT Falcons also there racing each other, a couple of E-TYPE Jaguars belonging to John Hammett and Colin Beaumont who, of course, is in the taxi industry; Ben Munneke’s Model A Ford, John Palamountain and his original HR Holden - I can remember when they were original, and those vehicles are a lot of fun; and Eddie Furlin’s Datsun 2000 Sports. Ian Melville took me around in his 1964 Humber Super Snipe. Ian’s son, Lachie, and my son, David, went through the RAAF together at the Defence Force Academy, and they are great mates. Through other connections, I have come to know Ian and Lorna. Ian is a great enthusiast and, as we went around in the old Humber Super Snipe - I actually owned one of those, second-hand, many years ago; an armchair on wheels. Ian had a look on his face and the wheels were squealing, and we beat a few home on the day. It was a bit of excitement and the old Humber went through its paces.
The MG Club joined the party in force with five vehicles doing their thing. I was talking to Steve Sjoberg, the Principal of Casuarina Senior College and, unfortunately, the electrics on his MG failed and he could not do the laps. However, he is champing at the bit to have a go next year.
Most vehicles managed to stay on the track. However, I believe a Morris Oxford tried to improve his placing by cutting around the field. I also heard the amazing story about Bob McDonald of Kakadu Air, who bought a Chev Camaro when he lived in America, but had to sell it when it left. Fifteen years later, he went back to America and decided to track down his old car. Amazingly, he found it, bought it, shipped it back to Australia, and it was fantastic to see the car at Hidden Valley doing laps.
On 17 July, I attended the Bastille Day Formal Ball celebrations. The French community held a Bastille Day at the Marine Coastal Park on Stokes Hill wharf on 17 July. It is a venue that I have never been to before, but it is a fantastic venue, overlooking the harbour. Everyone commented on what a lovely venue it was with lovely sea breezes. It was a fantastic night, with over 250 people celebrating, including 40 French Air Force officers engaged in the Pitch Black exercise. The French Naval Attach also came up especially for the event from Canberra.
Ms Lea Mussak, the President of the Alliance Francaise de Darwin, and Barbara Baggley, the secretary, must be commended on the wonderful night of food, entertainment, and company which ensured the Bastille Day Ball was the great success it was.
At the ball, I saw Colette and Alain Lecul, who live in the Johnston electorate, and Lydie Marques, also from my electorate, as well as Zoe Marchant, the Honorary French Consul. Also there was Marie-Benedicte Harrison, who has been awarded a Lgion d'Honneur by the French President for services to the French people of Darwin. Congratulations to Marie-Benedicte on a great honour. The highlight of the night was the Can Can dancers from the Ricardo Dance Studio, who absolutely wowed the crowd with their energetic performance. I certainly know that the Air Force officers enjoyed it very much.
On 18 July, I attended the Greek Glenti 2004 ‘Thank You’. That was put on for all those who volunteered to help out at the Greek Glenti in 2004. Along with many members of parliament, I helped out on one of the drink stalls. It was hard work, but raised money for a good cause, particularly for the sporting clubs and juniors - It is fantastic. I had a fantastic time, as I said, behind the bar at the Glenti, and shared a drink with John Nicolakis, who is also my landlord, who is very active in support of the Glenti celebrations. Dominique Lambrinidis and Mary Klonaris were also at the table on the night of the ‘Thank You’ celebration, and we had a great night. Also present was a crew from a Greek tanker that was supplying fuel for Pitch Black, and we had a great time. I had a couple of Ouzos - just as well I was not driving. There was very good fellowship that night.
On 20 July, I was very fortunate to have lunch at the Tuesday Senior Citizens Group at Casuarina, something I am rarely able to do, as Cabinet usually meets on Tuesdays. However, when it does not meet on Tuesdays, I go and fellowship and meet with the senior citizens. Along with my colleague, the member for Nightcliff, Jane Aagaard, I had a great time catching up with old friends such as Doris Ford, who does such a fantastic job ensuring the Tuesday get-together runs smoothly with lots of prizes and activities. Eric Harris was there, filling in at present as the bingo caller, doing a fantastic job while Pat Wright, who is usually the very popular caller, has been incapacitated. We wish Pat all the best and hope that she is back calling bingo soon. Marie Heavey does a great job ensuring everyone is fed and happy. June Daley, who lives in Wagaman, is a great community-minded person, was there, and it was great to fellowship with her. Val McDonald, who is also a part of the Blind Bowling Group which had such success in national competition over the last year, Lillian Hamilton, Tandra Konesh and Olga Pereira were there enjoying the bingo.
Mr Deputy Speaker, it is a real privilege to go along to these particular events, and I value it greatly. I have a lot more to speak of, but I will have to save that for another night.
Mr McADAM (Barkly): Mr Deputy Speaker, tonight I pay tribute to Mr John Lavery who was recently awarded Territorian of the Year for our region of Tennant Creek and Barkly.
John arrived in Tennant Creek in 1975, along with his wife, Kirsty and their eldest daughter Kim. Right from the very start, John became actively involved in community activities and community events and was employed on local projects around town, particularly the building of the new hospital, the high school and other housing projects that were occurring at that time.
In 1979, John was given the opportunity to buy out his employer and start his own plumbing business. John has been in this business for some 25 years and has helped and/or assisted up to eight apprentices during this period. I guess that is indicative of John’s commitment and dedication to young people. Through his business, John has donated time, given immense financial support, and offered his own equipment and machinery to many groups and individuals in Tennant Creek - organisations such as the Tennant Creek Memorial Club, the Tennant Creek Speedway, the Barkly Rodeo, and a whole host of others.
As his family grew up and John and Kirsty had three other daughters, Elizabeth, Karen and Katherine, John’s involvement turned to those activities in which his daughters were involved by providing support to the local preschool committee, to the saddle horse club where his daughters were active participants, and to the marching girls who were also in existence at that time. It has been reported to me that, over the years, it was not unusual to see John working over many a hot barbecue, serving at the bar, or assisting in working bees for many or, indeed, most of the sporting and community groups in and around Tennant Creek.
John is also actively involved with the Barkly football league, now known as the Giants Reef League. In particular, he has a great love and passion for the Magpies Football Club, where John was able to encourage local members and committee members to assist him in handing out up to 700 gifts every year for our Christmas tree event. John and those same people have been doing this now for some 12 years. The actual Christmas tree event has been going for something like 60-odd years.
John has also been involved in the St Patrick’s Day Race Club since its inception round about 20-odd years ago, and much of the success of the Tennant Creek Racing Club, its facilities and the St Pat’s Day race meeting is attributed to John’s ongoing commitment and dedication to racing. John also has an interest in race horses today. I understand he has an interest in a horses called Litigious and Apiary. I know that John is looking forward to seeing those horses perform in the near future.
John has also played a role in respect of the development of the King Ash Bay Fishing Club now known as the King Ash Bay and Borroloola Fishing Club. He was also instrumental in assisting the Tennant Creek fishing club in establishing themselves at King Ash Bay.
I spoke to Kirsty, his wife, just prior to the awards. Essentially, she told me that, whether through his involvement as a committee member or as an individual, John has helped most people directly or indirectly, in one way or another, in the Barkly. He does not look for public thanks in return, and that was very obvious when John received his award as Territorian of the Year for the Barkly region. He was very clearly surprised and very humble. It was an honour to be able to present that award to John on that evening. To John, Kirsty, Kim, Elizabeth, Karen and Katherine, we extend our congratulations to your husband and your Dad for his outstanding contribution to the people in Tennant Creek and throughout the Barkly. We thank him very much and we wish you all the very best for the future.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016