2003-08-20
- Madam Speaker Braham took the Chair at 10 am.
PETITION
Palmerston Boat Ramp - Improvements
Palmerston Boat Ramp - Improvements
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 545 petitioners praying that improvements to the Palmerston boat ramp are undertaken. The petition bears the Clerk’s signature and conforms with the requirements of standing orders. I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
- To the honourable the Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory.
We, the undersigned, respectively showeth that residents have considered and supported a proposal that addresses theft and vandalism issues, as well as providing a much needed facility for land-based anglers. A fishing platform at the boat ramp will provide an opportunity for families and anglers without boats to access the Elizabeth River. This development would bring people into the area and thereby deter those who frequent the area to commit crime. Increased use of the area would also support a caretaker/commercial operator to service the needs of anglers who could in turn provide supervision of vehicles and boat trailers. Your petitioners therefore pray that the members of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory seek improvements to the Palmerston boat ramp, and your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
RESPONSE TO PETITION
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members that a response to petition No 34 has been received and circulated to honourable members. The text of the response will be included in the Parliamentary Record.
- Petition No 34
Establishment of safe accommodation at Aranda House
Date presented: 1 May 2003
Presented by: Mrs Braham
Referred to: Minister for Health and Community Services
Date response received: 19 August 2003
Date response presented: 20 August 2003
The petition requests that the Legislative Assembly acknowledge the past role of Aranda House as a safe haven for Alice Springs youth and to reopen Aranda House as a safe accommodation option with the necessary support services funded by appropriate agencies.
The Central Australian Aboriginal Child Care Agency (CAACCA) operated Aranda House as a Youth Accommodation Service until March 2002. CAACCA received funding from the Department of Health and Community Services (approximately $90 000 per annum) and Aboriginal Hostels ($130 000 per annum) to operate Aranda House. The organisation also received funding for a Youth Night Patrol (ATSIC funding) and for an Indigenous Foster Care and Family Support service (Commonwealth Family and Community Services (FaCS) funding).
After protracted and unsuccessful negotiations about performance and management issues within the organisation, NT and Commonwealth funding agencies decided to withdraw funds.
Various strategies have been used to redevelop the services that ceased:
will re-tender on finalisation of the review. In the interim, they have contracted for NT FaCS to
provide this services.
of $30 000 for a 13-week trial of extended hours operations has been allocated by the NT Office of
Crime Prevention.
Tangentyere Council and Alice Springs Youth Accommodation Support Services (ASYASS).
A new ‘Safe Families’ model of service has been developed in collaboration with the Aboriginal community. The support components of this new service have already commenced, however the crisis accommodation component is still being negotiated but is expected to be fully operational by the end of 2003.
Despite calls from some sectors of the community for the old Aranda site to be reopened, community elders, youth service providers, Tangentyere Council and ASYASS have declined the use of Aranda House as a suitable venue for youth crisis accommodation.
The petitioners should be assured that discussions with all relevant stakeholders are continuing to identify safe accommodation options that are acceptable to all parties involved and that this will be achieved as quickly as possible. The outcome is to provide safe and culturally appropriate crisis care and support to vulnerable children and young people and also to support family members to care for their children in a safe and ongoing way.
MINISTERIAL REPORTS
Death of United Nations Special Envoy
Sergio Vieira de Mello
Death of United Nations Special Envoy
Sergio Vieira de Mello
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, it is with great sadness that we have learned of the death of the former United Nations Special Envoy to East Timor, Sergio Vieira de Mello, who was killed in a bomb blast in Baghdad yesterday. Sergio was trapped in the rubble of his office for several hours before dying from his wounds in the most devastating attack ever on a UN facility. Anyone who saw the vision this morning - the press conference in progress and the sound of the bomb blast – would agree that it was a shocking thing to happen. We extend our heartfelt condolences to his family and to the families of all who were killed or injured in this callous attack.
I met Sergio de Mello on a number of occasions and found him to be a gracious and understanding man. He had a most difficult job to do in East Timor, and he was instrumental in the formation of the new country. The member for Lingiari, Warren Snowdon, who worked closely with Sergio Vieira de Mello, described him as a person committed to the principles of the United Nations, who played a very important role in the transition phase of East Timor’s formation. Warren said the leadership skills of Sergio were obvious to all who knew him and that the international community will be much poorer for his passing.
Sergio Vieira de Mello was 55 years old and was born in Rio de Janeiro in Brazil. He is survived by his wife and two children. In June, he was temporarily moved from his role as UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to become the UN Secretary-General’s special representative in Iraq. On radio this morning, our Ambassador to the United Nations spoke about Sergio, a man he knew well, and Sergio’s last words to him before he went off to Baghdad on this mission. He said that Sergio knew it was a dangerous mission, but it was such an important one, even though the UN had not auspiced the war, the UN’s presence there was very important for recovery and the re-establishment of local administration. It was acknowledged by our Ambassador that Sergio Vieira de Mello was the man with the special skills for this most difficult job. The UN today is flying its flags at half mast.
Sergio Vieira de Mello had worked in the United Nations since 1969 and rose to be appointed the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in September last year. He had extensive field experience in both humanitarian and peacekeeping operations in Bangladesh, The Sudan, Cyprus, Mozambique, Lebanon, Kosovo, Rwanda and, of course, where he connected most keenly with the Territory, East Timor.
Madam Speaker, all of us condemn this sort of senseless attack. It really brings it home when someone you have met and worked with, like Sergio Vieira de Mello, is killed in a terrorist attack. I am sure all members would join with me in the expression of condolences to his family, and would also condemn this attack in the strongest possible terms. The government will convey its condolences to Sergio Vieira de Mello’s family today. We will remember a truly capable and decent man whose life was cut short in such a tragic way.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr REED (Katherine): Madam Speaker, on behalf of the Opposition Leader, who cannot be present just at the moment but will be soon, I take this opportunity to support the Chief Minister and join members of this parliament in paying tribute to a great man, a man who worked hard to bring peace to many countries.
Mr de Mello was a rather regular visitor to the Northern Territory whilst he was committing his efforts and those of the United Nations to helping the people of East Timor. The Leader of the Opposition, Denis Burke, met with him on a number of occasions. I had the honour of meeting him once.
It is a world tragedy that a man who has committed so much effort in so many countries to bring to those countries a sovereignty that they were not previously able to experience, to bring to those countries a democracy that many of their peoples sought, and in the case of Iraq, will in the future be able to experience and enjoy, and particularly from our point of view and our neighbourhood, those people of East Timor who will in the future be able to know the benefits that we have, and experience democracy and their own sovereignty. It is a great tragedy.
I hope that in sending condolences to Mr de Mello’s family, the Chief Minister does so, not just on behalf of the government, but on behalf of all members of this parliament of the Northern Territory. We, fittingly, send those condolences, heartfelt as they are, having known and worked with this man, having a full appreciation of the efforts in gaining and sustaining peace for countries that previously did not experience it. His tragic loss in circumstances so brutal are the antithesis of the work that this man did. Our condolences are heartfelt and sent with passion.
Members: Hear, hear!
Schools Visits
Mr STIRLING (Employment, Education and Training): Madam Speaker, one of the most enjoyable functions I have in my ministerial role is visiting schools and workplaces throughout the Northern Territory. So far, I have managed to visit around 110 schools from the Tiwi Islands in the north to many of the schools across the centre. On each occasion, I have come away with a positive sense of the progress that is being made in our schools, to provide young Territorians with a solid basis for life education.
It does not take long, when you walk into a school, to pick up the mood. I do not know if that is for everyone, or whether my past teaching may help, but you can readily pick up the mood of how that school is progressing, whether it is working well - there is a good team work approach, and the students are bright and alert in a solid learning environment - or whether there are some signs that the school is struggling. No matter how many briefs you read, it simply does not match the actual experience of being out there and meeting face-to-face with the principal, the school management team, the teachers and the students.
What I have appreciated is the dedication of the teachers throughout the Territory and our school communities who support these schools. Most recently, I was at Driver Primary, Gray and Bakewell. At Driver, the Principal is Rob Presswell, an extremely experienced long-term educator with a mixture of bush and urban experience; someone I knew many years ago in Nhulunbuy. I am particularly impressed with the efforts at the school in support of the indigenous students, and efforts being made by indigenous people from the community to support the school. Indigenous attendance rates are around 86% and students are progressing in literacy and numeracy within their band levels. The majority of students are achieving the national benchmarks in Years 3 and 5.
A special tribute must be paid to the ASPA Committee here and the close links that the school has with the local indigenous community. I want to acknowledge Art Libien, who has been at Driver School since its inception in 1986, and has been teaching in the Northern Territory for 30 years. He came for a two-week visit, and has been teaching here for 30 years. He taught my son, Scott, at Driver Primary School in the mid-1980s.
The school has a special early leaning environment, fosters a community of learners and provides professional development for teachers with the school grounds laid out so that Transition and Year 1 classrooms are linked to the preschool area. The school has a special Bahasa Indonesia program, which is highly regarded, involving all students from Transition to Year 7, and being undertaken this year by Art Libien. The school has a strong music focus, with musical instrument instruction, a school band and a choir.
At Gray, I welcomed the new principal, Sue Bowden, who comes to us from Queensland with extensive experience in teacher professional development. She has a great sense of enthusiasm for the job ahead of her at the school. The special education program at the school caters to English as a Second Language. Learners within the student cohort comprise 48% of English as a Second Language students and 35% indigenous students. The school conducts a homework centre, operated by a committee of involved parents, that caters for 60 to 70 students two days per week. It has developed a Curriculum Alive project, which commenced this semester. All teachers are asked to design programs that promote lifelong learning through literacy and numeracy.
At Bakewell, one of our newer schools, which opened in February 1999, the school caters to the increasing population growth in the outer Palmerston area. The rapid growth rate has necessitated the placement of six transportable classrooms to cater for increasing numbers at the school. It does make special efforts within its Information and Communication Technology programs, and it has an excellent computer laboratory and a specialist computer teacher to enhance the school’s ICT program. There is a strong focus on curriculum planning and programming, with established collaborative teams supporting that focus. June Wessels is the principal there. She does a great job. The school looks fantastic, and the students are great communicators. I intend to return to Bakewell later in the year to pick up on two of the classes I visited, which are studying government in Australia. The school’s motto is Striving for Excellence, and they certainly do that.
I am energised by these visits, and I always look forward, when we have time in the calendar, to getting around these schools. Next week, I will be visiting schools on Groote Eylandt and, on return to Darwin, Taminmin High School and Humpty Doo Primary School in the near future.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I welcome the minister’s report. It is encouraging when anyone from outside the school environment comes in to pay respect to what is occurring in the school. Too often, those in our community do not understand what is happening in the schools. We have opinions of what happens in schools, but do not understand the pressures of a contemporary classroom.
I acknowledge the fine work of Rob Presswell, Sue Bowden, Peter Clark and June Wessels; Peter Clark being the former Principal at Gray Primary School. Issues at Driver Primary School would be related to procurement, itself the subject of a recent statement. There are school councils - and Driver Primary is a proactive school council - that are affected by the decision of this government to take away the capacity of a school council to have active involvement in the development of their own school property and assets. I predict that will be an ongoing issue between school councils and this government, particularly in the case of a proactive community such as Driver Primary School.
Further to that, the minister may well have noted at Bakewell Primary School there are students still working on the stage. That has occurred for the last couple of years. The school is filled to capacity and beyond, so the stage is not able to be used. The issue should have been addressed last budget; it was not. In the current budget, again, it was not addressed. At issue is the need to establish another primary school in Palmerston in the suburb of Rosebery. Rosebery is expanding with the development of Darla, and there has been no mention of any allocation at any kind with regards to the establishment of a new school. We all know that the population is increasing, we need to push the issue with regards to the advice we are receiving from demographers, but demographers often fall behind the game. You only have to see that the stage of the Bakewell Primary School has two classes on it, to my knowledge, which restricts that school in maintaining a proper service to the community.
Mr STIRLING (Employment, Education and Training): Madam Speaker, Rosebery is on the design list under the government’s capital forward works program. I have had a close look at this stage situation at Bakewell. It is not ideal, and certainly wipes out the usage of the stage. It restricts the usage of the area outside the stage because of the noise factor and potential disruption to classes, and we will have that fixed by years end.
46th Annual Tourism Ministers Council
Dr BURNS (Tourism): Madam Speaker, I inform the House of outcomes arising from the 46th Annual Tourism Ministers Council held in Canberra recently. Ministers from every state and territory and the Commonwealth gathered to discuss national tourism goals, brand development, funding, aviation capacity, world events and changes in the workplace; particularly reduced leisure time for people to be able to take holidays.
The council worked to identify important factors for consideration in the development of a 10-year plan for Australian tourism. The meeting represented an important step in the consultation process on the Tourism Green Paper released recently by the federal Minister for Small Business and Tourism, Mr Joe Hockey.
It was the first opportunity for the states and territories to provide their views and opinions on the plan since its release. Some 5000 printed copies of the green paper were distributed, and another 50 000 were downloaded from the Internet. The Territory, together with ministers from other states and the other territory, said that the federal government’s green paper strategy, classed as a medium- to long-term strategy for tourism, provided a basis for the future of the $69bn Australian tourism industry. However, it did miss some key points. State and territory ministers developed and presented a five-point plan to the federal minister, calling for action on the following points:
that the white paper is to be presented to the Council of Australian Governments, or COAG. This really
highlights the view by every state and territory that the federal government needs to be taking tourism
more seriously - and Australia as a whole - and that is why we want it placed on the agenda of COAG.
guaranteed growth in funding for the next 10 years.
have impacted on international tourism, certainly our international competitors have upped the ante in terms
of their spending overseas, and it was the strong view of the state and territory tourism ministers that the
federal government needs to do likewise.
taking leave entitlements. This is of great concern. The federal government needs to embark on a campaign
to reverse this trend and increase Australians’ sense of job security.
Finally, and very important for the Territory:
the development of a national aviation capacity. Building aviation capacity is a critical issue for Australia.
The Commonwealth, which controls aviation regulation in Australia, need to urgently consider all aviation
policy options that hinder the growth of the tourism industry. I put the view very strongly, on behalf of the
Territory, that there needs to be a freeing up of Commonwealth aviation capacity to encourage more
international carriers into the Territory.
There is a reasonable expectation that all the state and territory ministers can come to an agreement on the way forward for the industry. The federal Cabinet should follow our lead and listen to the concerns of the tourism industry.
The council gave in-principle endorsement of a one Australia approach to international tourism marketing, seen as a way of reducing competition between states for international tourism. This endorsement activates a process that will explore ways of achieving one team brand, a set of strategies and distribution system, with scope for individual initiatives by state and territory tourism operators. The council agreed to approach the Council of Australian Governments to raise issues of increased international competition, the damaging impact of world events, and the cost of maintaining competitiveness in the world market.
It is reported by tourism researchers that signs are indicating there is a return of confidence and desire to travel internationally, but Australia will have to work hard to maintain its competitive edge. The council acknowledged that the tourism sector was continuing to experience challenging and difficult times, affected by the whole world scene: terrorism, Bali, the Gulf War and SARS.
Importantly for the Territory, ministers agreed that tourism agencies would work more closely with conservation agencies to progress recommendations of the report, pursuing common goals, opportunities for tourism and conservation.
Madam Speaker, on behalf of the Territory, I voiced strong concerns about Uluru and Kakadu national parks – these are very important for us – and that hit a sympathetic chord with the national tourism minister. It was a fruitful meeting. I look forward to the Commonwealth giving greater attention to this important industry as we move forward.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for his report. I note, in relation to the green paper, that there is a view that some of it is not perfect. I have some sympathy with some of the comments going around. However, at the same time, I congratulate the federal government for producing the green paper. I am sure the minister will agree that it raises a number of issues of utmost importance for not only we, as the Northern Territory, but for the Australian tourism industry generally. In essence, it has been to date a very fruitful exercise.
I am very pleased that the minister met with his state colleagues and counterparts. I hope that he took some notes from them in relation to some in particular – and I think of Tasmania and Queensland. I hope he took some notes from his counterparts about their ability to generate not only enthusiasm but commitment for what they have done for their tourism industries.
In the Northern Territory, we are on our third tourism minister at a time that is arguably the worst that the tourism industry has ever experienced. Some states are doing well; the Territory is not. That falls very squarely at the feet of this minister and his two predecessors. It is a bit cute for this minister to say that he wants the federal government to take tourism more seriously. We all want this minister to take tourism more seriously. We all want this government to take tourism more seriously. It has seriously slipped under this government. It has, as its minister, the most junior minister in Cabinet. Do not think that the members of the industry have stopped talking about that, because they have not.
It is also a bit cute for the minister to ask for more funding from the federal government for the tourism industry, given his appalling track record to date and, in particular, the appalling outcomes for tourism in the last budget. Nevertheless, I welcome his comments but, gee whiz, he is being precious, to say the least.
Dr BURNS (Tourism): Madam Speaker, I will respond to that. The first thing is that it is a fact that Joe Hockey is not in the inner Cabinet within the Commonwealth government. That was remarked upon at the meeting. We suggested to the Prime Minister that Joe be put into the inner Cabinet as a measure of how seriously the Commonwealth government should be taking tourism.
In terms of spending by the Northern Territory government, it is on the record: we have spent an extra $1.5m on marketing. The Commonwealth, I believe, has only put in $10m extra. This government is more than pulling its weight. Joe Hockey commented that we were one of the few commissions that had a real increase in funding in our last budget.
It is pretty precious for the member for Araluen to say those sorts of things. She needs to be asking the Prime Minister to put Joe Hockey in the inner Cabinet. He is a very nice fellow and he should be in there.
Dental Awareness Month
Mrs AAGAARD (Health and Community Services): Madam Speaker, August is Dental Awareness Month and the theme this year is ‘Dental Care for Children’. The most recent dental statistics show an increase in dental caries amongst Australian children. One of the contributing factors to this is the increased consumption of bottled and filtered water instead of tap water, which has had an appropriate level of fluoride.
The National Health and Medical Research Council advises that exposure to fluoridated water throughout childhood reduces dental caries by around 25%. Fluoridation of water is recommended by numerous health bodies, including the World Health Organisation, the International Dental Federation, the International Association for Dental Research and the National Health and Medical Research Council.
Children in Top End remote communities of the Territory do not have the benefits of fluoride, which occurs naturally in Central Australia, and has been introduced into Darwin and Katherine water supplies when natural levels are inadequate. Aboriginal children living in remote areas of the Top End have some of the highest levels of dental caries in Australia and this contributes to their poor general health. In addition to the pain and suffering of toothache, decayed teeth can impact upon nutrition, growth, development of speech, sleep habits and school attendance. Children with rheumatic fever who have untreated tooth decay are at significant risk if they are not receiving regular health care.
I am pleased to advise that a four-year longitudinal trial fluoridating the water of two remote communities with inadequate natural fluoride is being undertaken by the Menzies School of Health Research with support from the Departments of Community Development, Sport and Cultural Affairs, Health and Community Services, the Power and Water Corporation, and the Northern Territory branch of ATSIC.
The trial is being funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council, ATSIC and the Northern Territory government. Nguiu and Maningrida have agreed to be trial communities, and Ramingining and Gunbalanya are to be comparison communities. Two other communities are in the final stages of formalising agreements with comparison communities. In addition to monitoring the impact of fluoridation on the oral health status of trial communities compared with other communities, new technological equipment is being tested for its suitability; in particular, reliability and robustness for remote communities.
Since the cessation of the Commonwealth Dental Program in December 1996, which resulted in an annual budget cut of $1m, oral health in the Territory has been inadequately funded either to provide necessary services or to maintain dental facilities and equipment. This government is doing something to manage this sorry state of affairs. In the past 12 months, new dental clinics with state-of-the-art design for infection control and efficiency have been opened in Palmerston and Darwin. Oral health has been identified as a priority in my department’s budget now and in the future, and over the next three years, recurrent funding for oral health will increase by $1.6m.
The promotion of oral health and prevention of oral disease is important to underpin general health improvement, particularly in the prevention and management of chronic diseases. The difficulty experienced in the Northern Territory in recruiting dentists is part of a national problem especially for rural and remote areas in the public sector. This issue is likely to become worse due to the inadequate number of Australian dental graduates and the limited number of overseas trained dentists eligible to work in this country. Access to adequate dental services is a high priority.
The oral health status of Territorians is worse than the national average. We have a higher proportion of public sector clientele and a rapid population growth. I recently revisited the critical shortfall of dentists in remote and northern Australia, particularly in the public sector, at the Australian Health Ministers’ Conference on 31 July. The adequacy and time frames of existing strategies to improve the labour market supply of dentists were discussed. The number of Australian dental graduates is approximately 220 per year and it has been estimated that this would need to increase by another 120 per annum to achieve a sustainable dental labour force. Increasing the numbers of dental graduates is a long-term strategy. In the short-term, overseas graduates are needed to fill the gap in the dental work force. A comprehensive national approach is required with strategies to streamline recruitment and direct dentists into rural and remote areas and the public sector.
The Australian Health Ministers’ Conference has asked the Australian Health Work Force Officials Committee, jointly with the National Advisory Council on Oral Health, to report on the progress made to increase the supply of overseas dental graduates into the public sector and to remote and northern Australia, at its next meeting in November.
Health ministers also strongly support the federal Health minister raising the concern of the inadequate number of Australian dental graduates with the federal minister for Education. I am pleased to advise the House that, in fact, she has done this. Oral health is an integral component of general health and wellbeing. This government is proud of the investment it is making to improve the oral health and general health of Territorians.
Ms CARTER (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I welcome the minister’s report. There is no doubt that dental caries is a major issue for the health of young people and, at the moment, for Aboriginal children in particular. We see in urban settings nowadays that dental caries have decreased in young people. So, in comparison to when we went to school, where it was a major issue with young children, that has now moved on and in urban centres with fluoride treatment, that problem has been addressed to some degree.
However, I would caution that dental caries come about from other factors, including diet and dental hygiene; whether or not the child cleans their teeth. Hopefully, out on the Aboriginal communities, that will be part of the program to address dental problems with young people.
I met with the Northern Territory Branch of the Dental Association a couple of months ago, and one of the issues that they raised with me, and the minister might be interested to take up, is the fact that governments have moved away from prevention programs with regard to oral health, so we do not see any broad health promotion activities - advertising programs and the like - occurring in the general community promoting good oral health. They have gone by the by. Certainly, the Dental Association and I would support this government investing some money in some prevention programs across the board in the Northern Territory to encourage all people to look after their dental health.
One of the other issues that they raised is that we all know that we are facing a critical shortage of dentists in Australia, and in the NT in particular. That came out through the estimates process. One of the options that can be addressed is promoting the role of dental hygienists in the community. That could help with this problem.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister – no, minister in reply. We only have one from your side.
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order. You know the rules. Minister.
Mrs AAGAARD (Health and Community Services): Madam Speaker, in relation to comments regarding the Australian Dental Association, I meet with them quarterly, and they are a very progressive group, one that really wants to work with the Territory government, particularly in relation to issues such as fluoridation, which they have been hoping to have introduced into the Northern Territory’s remote communities for decades. They are very excited about this project.
One of the things we will be doing later this year is introducing health practitioners legislation, which proposes to have dental therapists able to work with children and, after suitable training, adults. We believe that this will be a significant improvement in relation, particularly, to remote communities where we already have dental therapists going out for school visits. Soon they will be able to also work with adults when they are in those communities.
Reports noted pursuant to Sessional Order.
ASSOCIATIONS BILL
(Serial 174)
(Serial 174)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time. The purpose of this bill is to provide more modern and appropriate legislation providing for the incorporation, administration and control of associations.
In particular, the bill contains modern accounting, audit and insolvency provisions, as well as more effective investigation powers for the Commissioner of Consumer Affairs, should it become necessary for intervention in the affairs of an incorporated association.
The bill repeals the existing Associations Incorporation Act. There are approximately 1700 association incorporated under the current Associations Incorporation Act. Many of these associations are quite small, but a number are large and sometimes complex organisations. Some are in receipt of significant amounts of government funding. Over recent years, a number of incorporated associations have run into difficulties. There have been problems associated with poor governance, lack of accountability to members, allegations of conflict of interest and incurring debts not likely to be paid.
A number of incorporated associations have collapsed, some leaving unpaid creditors and, in all cases, certainly causing distress to members. In attempting to deal with these issues, it is apparent that the current Associations Incorporation Act, which dates from 1963, is deficient in a number of areas. In particular, the accounting and auditing provisions are deficient. The current act simply requires an incorporated association to prepare a balance sheet, setting out the assets and liabilities of the association once in each period of 12 months.
The current act does not require even large associations to have their accounts audited by someone with appropriate skills or qualifications. The investigation and intervention powers are deficient. The current act requires the giving of six weeks written notice before an investigation into the affairs of an association can commence. Powers in relation to books and records are not clear, and it is not clear whether the powers of investigation extend to a trust. The current act does not provide an appropriate regime for disclosure of conflict of interest, and does not set out the responsibilities of office bearers. The current insolvency and winding up provisions are outdated and, in some circumstances, appear unworkable.
These issues are not new. In 1996, a discussion draft Associations Incorporation Bill was tabled in the Legislative Assembly by the then Attorney-General. In fact, in April 1997, the Associations Incorporation Bill 1997 was introduced into the Legislative Assembly. This bill lapsed when parliament was prorogued on 12 August 1997. In October 2002, I announced that the current Associations Incorporation Act would be reviewed and replaced with more modern and appropriate legislation.
In February 2003, I released a discussion draft Associations Act together with an issues paper. The draft act was based substantially on the Associations Incorporation Bill 1997, but was updated in a number of important areas, particularly to take into account the recent changes to corporations legislation. Some 200 copies of the draft act and issues paper were distributed to interested persons, and the documents were made available on my department’s web site. Seminars on the draft act were held in Darwin and each regional centre, and these were well received. A number of written submissions were received, including from CPA Australia NT branch; the National Institute of Accountants and the Law Society Northern Territory, as well as from individuals with particular interests in the operation and management of incorporated associations.
It is fair to say that the main areas canvassed in the submissions were the accounting and audit provisions, and a number of the submissions made similar comments. In line with the submissions, membership of the National Institute of Accountants, as well as the CPA Australia, or the Institute of Chartered Accountants, has been recognised as an appropriate qualification for auditors of certain associations. Further, the bill recognises that the holding of a public practice certificate from either CPA Australia, the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia, or the National Institute of Accountants, is an appropriate qualification for persons auditing the largest incorporated associations rather than registered company auditors, as proposed in the draft act.
As I said earlier, a number of submissions were received from individuals, sometimes identifying issues of particular concern, and obviously based on their personal experiences. Each of these submissions provided valuable assistance to my department in finalising the bill, and a number of the suggestions for improvements have been incorporated into the bill. I would like to express my thanks to those who took the time to make submissions and help bring about the finalisation of this important bill.
I turn to some of the details of the bill. Part 1 contains preliminary matters, including definitions. It will be noted that the Commissioner for Consumer Affairs is to administer this legislation. The discontinuation of the appointment of a separate Registrar of Associations is a matter of administrative convenience, and reflects the reality that the Registrar of Associations and the Commissioner for Consumer Affairs have been the same person for a number of years.
Part 2 sets out some matters relating to the administration of the act. Of note is the provision permitting the commissioner to exempt an association, or an officer of an association, from compliance with a provision of the act or the regulations. This may be particularly important for a number of indigenous organisations that have been formed for the sole purpose of holding title to land. These organisations have no financial transactions from year to year and, in these circumstances, the commissioner will have the power to exempt the associations from compliance with various provisions, an example being the requirement to lodge audited financial statements each year.
Part 3 sets out the incorporation processes. The processes set out in the bill are much simpler than those under the existing act, and will permit associations to incorporate more cheaply and quickly than is currently the case. There is, for example, no longer a need to advertise in the newspaper the intention to apply for incorporation and wait at least a month for objections to be lodged with the Supreme Court. Under this bill, an association will be able to adopt a model constitution, which will be set out in the regulations. If an association decides to have a different constitution, that constitution must make provision for the matters set out in clause 21. An association will have two years in which to ensure its constitution complies with the act.
Part 4 deals with management of the internal affairs of the association. This is an area which has been given greater prominence over recent years in the corporations legislation, and it is appropriate that the associations legislation gives greater emphasis in setting out the responsibilities of office bearers and others involved in management of incorporated associations. Of particular note is the prohibition contained in clause 30 on certain persons being an officer of an association, which includes being involved in the management of an incorporated association. Breach of clause 30 leaves the offender liable to a maximum fine of $22 000. A person is prohibited for the purposes of clause 30 if the person is: insolvent; has been convicted of certain offences involving dishonesty or fraud or an indictable offence or an offence against this act; or if the Commissioner of Police has issued a certificate as to the bad character of a person who is involved in management. Such a certificate can only be issued on the basis of criminal intelligence or information. It must indicate that the person is unfit to be involved in the management of an association, or that the person has been involved in two other corporate bodies that have ceased to exist because of financial mismanagement, or is an associate of another person who is a disqualified person.
The bill also makes it clear that a member of the committee of an incorporated association who has a pecuniary interest in a contract or a proposed contract with the association, must declare that interest to the committee and to the next annual general meeting of members. The member must not vote on the matter.
Part 5 contains provisions relating to accounts and audits. These provisions will provide for greater accountability by committee members and others involved in the management of incorporated associations, and will provide members, creditors and other stakeholders with better and more reliable information regarding the association’s financial affairs. The bill requires an incorporated association to keep proper accounting records. The committee must ensure that a statement of the association’s accounts, setting out income and expenditure and assets and liabilities, are prepared annually. These statements must be presented to the annual general meeting, together with the auditor’s report. A member will be entitled to inspect the audited financial statements at least 14 days before the annual general meeting.
For the purposes of auditing, there will be three tiers of incorporated associations. The tier will be determined by reference to the turnover or assets of the association, and the dollar values which will determine the tiers will be set out in the regulations.
Tier 1 associations will be the smaller associations, and it is anticipated that these associations will have an income of less than $25 000 per annum. The actual dollar amount, along with the amounts for Tier 2 and Tier 3 associations, will be set out in the regulations, and will be finally determined following further discussions between the Department of Justice, Northern Territory Treasury, accountancy organisations and associations. These Tier 1 associations may be audited by any person who is not a member of the association.
Tier 2 associations will be of the mid-size, possibly with an income of under $250 000. Again, the actual cut-off dollar amount will be specified in the regulations, as mentioned previously. The auditor of these associations will be required to have qualifications or skills in accounting and auditing, and will be required to be a member of one of the three professional accounting bodies.
Tier 3 associations will be the larger and more complex associations, with incomes possibly over $250 000 - again, the actual amount will be set out in the regulations - or trading associations. The auditor of these associations will be required to hold a public practice certificate from one of the three professional accounting bodies. There will be more stringent requirements for the auditors of these large associations. The auditor’s powers and duties are set out in Part 5.
Part 6 deals with disposal of property by an incorporated association. These provisions allow an incorporated association that is not a trading association to transfer its assets to another body and automatically be dissolved. These provisions are basically unchanged from those in the existing act.
This part also deals with prescribed property. These provisions have not been amended, despite the fact that the government is aware that there can be significant problems with the way in which they operate. I have foreshadowed that these provisions are to be the subject of a separate review, which will address the main issues of why the legislation contains the provisions and how they should operate in practice. The review will also deal with the appropriateness of these provisions as used in respect of the excisions legislation regarding Aboriginal living areas.
Part 7 permits an incorporated association to apply to become incorporated …
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, could I just interrupt you for one moment? I am not sure how many more pages you have to go.
Dr TOYNE: Three.
Madam SPEAKER: Could I acknowledge the students in the gallery before you continue?
Dr TOYNE: Yes, certainly.
_________________________
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, we have Year 11 Dripstone High School Legal Studies students accompanied by their teachers Michelle Truscott and Margaret Vatskalis. On behalf of all members, I extend to you a warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
_________________________
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you, minister, for your tolerance.
Dr TOYNE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I personally welcome the students, too.
To continue: Part 7 permits an incorporated association to apply to become incorporated under another act, for example, the Corporations Act 2001, or another act, such as the Co-operatives Act. The commissioner will be able to direct an incorporated association to apply for incorporation under the Corporations Act 2001 or another act under certain circumstances. Matters which the commissioner must take into account before giving a direction under these provisions will be set out in the regulations, but will include matters such as the level of income or turnover, the value of assets or the complexity of corporate structures surrounding the affairs of the association.
Part 8 deals with the dissolution of associations by the commissioner in circumstances where the association is no longer operating or carrying out its objects. These provisions are basically unchanged from those in the existing act.
Part 9 deals with external administration and winding up of the incorporated association. The provisions of chapter 5 of the Corporations Act 2001, which deal with external administration and winding up, as far as possible or appropriate are adopted so that they apply to incorporated associations. These provisions will apply so that they are read with the necessary changes or the regulations may prescribe any changes that may be considered necessary.
The bill includes new provisions permitting the commissioner to appoint an administrator to conduct the affairs of the association should this become necessary. An administrator may be appointed in a number of circumstances, including if the number of members falls below five, if the incorporation was obtained by fraud or mistake, or if the association exists for an illegal purpose. Importantly, the bill gives the commissioner the power to appoint an administrator if the association has wilfully contravened the act or the association’s own constitution, or if, following an investigation, the commissioner is satisfied that such an appointment is in the interests of creditors or in the public interest. An administration under these provisions may cease upon election or appointment of a new committee or upon the appointment of a liquidator.
Consistent with the Corporations Act 2001, the bill contains penalties for committee members if an association incurs debts not likely to be paid. There are defences for those committee members not involved in any wrongdoing.
Part 10 sets out the commissioner’s powers to investigate the affairs of an incorporated association. The commissioner must give written notice of the investigation, which must specify the grounds for conducting the investigation. The power to investigate extends to any trust operated by the association. The commissioner has the power to require production of books and records and may require a person to answer questions relating to the investigation.
Part 11 replicates existing provisions related to the incorporated associations carrying out local government functions.
Part 12 contains miscellaneous provisions. An important provision permits a member or expelled member of an incorporated association to seek orders from the Supreme Court or, in some cases, the Local Court, if the affairs of the association are or have been carried out in an oppressive or unreasonable manner. In line with the government’s e-business strategy, the bill permits documents that are required to be lodged with the commissioner to be provided by fax or by electronic means. The association is to produce the original if requested.
Part 12 also provides, in clauses 114 and 115, that persons dissatisfied with decisions of the commissioner can appeal to the Local Court. The Local Court is then given the power to review the decisions on their merits. This power of review includes the power to review decisions made under clause 30 in respect of statements issued by the Commissioner of Police for the purposes of clause 40.
As part of the process of commencing this legislation, the Commissioner of Consumer Affairs will be conducting information and training sessions for members, office bearers, accountants and auditors of incorporated associations on the requirements of the new legislation. In addition, the commissioner will provide education and training for members and office bearers of associations to enable them to meet their accountabilities, and on the operation and management of an incorporated association generally.
I also note that, at a later time, legislation will be introduced dealing with consequential amendments to other legislation arising from the enactment of this legislation.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members.
Debate adjourned.
LEGAL PRACTITIONERS AMENDMENT (INCORPORATED LEGAL PRACTICES AND
MULTI-DISCIPLINARY PARTNERSHIPS) BILL
(Serial 142)
MULTI-DISCIPLINARY PARTNERSHIPS) BILL
(Serial 142)
Continued from 30 April 2003.
Mr MALEY (Goyder): Madam Speaker, when this bill was presented, I thought it was going to be great. I thought it would be an opportunity to travel through the bill and there would be lots of issues and hours of debate, arguing every provision; something I can really get my teeth into, and the Attorney-General and I would no doubt enjoy.
Unfortunately, it is one of these bills where, after talking to representatives of the Law Society, legal practitioners, there are not enormous matters in dispute. In fact, the profession is generally very happy with what is occurring, so mine is not going to be a particularly long response.
I can indicate that the opposition will be supporting the bill. There are a number of amendments, and the Attorney-General and his staff were kind enough to supply me with a copy of the reading notes that he will take honourable members through during the course of the committee stage. There are a couple of issues I had to raise, but they have all been properly dealt with by way of the amendments, particularly in relation to the transitional provisions.
The minister’s second reading speech in April provided an excellent summary of the purpose and effect of the bill. Full credit to the person who drafted the speech. I am grateful that whoever is doing this type of work is putting in the time and effort into the second reading speech, which contains a good summary, a history and the background leading up to the reasons that this material was incorporated into the bill.
I am not going to rehash what it succinctly contained in the second reading speech, save to say that there was, in 1995, an agreement between the Commonwealth and the Northern Territory - indeed, there were several significant inter-governmental agreements regarding the implementation of a National Competition Policy reform package. Part of that package involved an arrangement that required the Northern Territory, along with other jurisdictions, to review and examine all legislation that may contain, in a general way, anti-competitive provisions.
In the second reading speech, there is a summary of what type of provisions constitute anti-competitive, and I will refer to those briefly. They are the type of provisions governing entry or exit of firms or individuals into or out of the market; controls prices or production levels; restricts the quality, level or location of goods and services available; restricts advertising or promotional opportunities; restricts price or type of input used in the production process; is likely to confer significant costs on business; or provides advantages to some firms over others, for example, by shielding some activities from the pressures of competition.
Ultimately, all anti-competitive provisions will need to be removed and, in a perfect world, economically, there are some significant benefits to the broader community.
The Legal Practitioners (Incorporation) Act does contain some anti-competitive provisions. There have been murmurings in the profession. In the 10 years I practised full-time as a legal practitioner, it was often discussed how lawyers are in the unfortunate position; in a sense that they do not enjoy the benefits of incorporation, despite the fact that you are a director, you own a practice, you work hard, and the practice trades in the name of an incorporated entity. Ultimately, by virtue of a deeming provision, you are still liable for the debts and liabilities of the incorporated entity, and you are liable for the acts of your partners. Effectively, legal practitioners were denied the benefits of incorporation. There are loads of material as to why it is important to have incorporated bodies, so people can take risks and can provide services, and their personal assets - assuming they comply with the corporations law - remain protected.
There were a number of review teams. Input was sought from various departments. The Legal Practitioners (Incorporation) Act was examined clause by clause, and the review team found that a number of provisions should be repealed. Once again, they are referred to succinctly in the second reading speech, and I will refer to that briefly.
The prohibition on forming a company for the purposes of carrying on a practice of a legal practitioner: unless the company is a practising company, the requirement that a legal practitioner who wants to be director of a practising company must obtain from the Chief Justice approval to form a practising company; there is a requirement that each director is to hold an unrestricted practising certificate or, in the case where there are only two directors, one holds an unrestricted practising certificate and the other is a mere relative; the requirement that all voting shares are to be held by one or other of the directors; the requirement that the name of the practising company can only be the name as approved by the Chief Justice; and, finally, the provision that the directors jointly and severally guarantee the debt of the company. That last provision is the one that probably caused the most angst, in a general way, in the legal community, particularly those who are bold enough to run their own business and who are partners in the legal practice. The end result is that we have adopted a legislative provision that exists in New South Wales in the Legal Profession Act of 1987. We have taken a chunk out of that and it embodies a large proportion of the proposed amendments.
The bill under consideration will allow ordinary corporations to provide legal services for reward, subject to a number of regulatory obligations and safeguards, and they are referred to on pages three and four of the second reading speech. Some of the regulatory safeguards that will still apply to the incorporated entities that operate as legal practices: at least one director of the corporation must be a legal practitioner who holds an unrestricted practising certificate under the act or equivalent legislation in another jurisdiction, and such directors will be referred to as lawyer/directors.
The lawyer/director is to be responsible for the management of legal services provided by the incorporation, and for ensuring adequate supervision of professional and support staff, including breaches of the rules of ethics and the regulatory authority, and compliance with the general provisions of the Legal Practitioners Act. These are some of the safeguards: there will also be a professional obligation that employees of a legal practice are not diminished by the fact of such employment; that the rules regarding privilege of legal communications applies as if the corporation were a natural person, with the legislation providing that the extent of that privilege would depend on the capacity in which the employee or officer of the corporation has made that communication; for incorporated legal practitioners to be required to notify the regulatory authority, which in this case is the Law Society of the Northern Territory, that legal services are being provided; for incorporated legal practices to be obliged to provide prescribed information to the Law Society; and, of course, there is the ever-present power of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory to disqualify incorporated legal practices from practicing if the corporation has been found guilty of committing an offence, or has a history of employing people who have been found guilty of professional misconduct or unsatisfactory professional conduct, or employing suspended or disqualified persons.
As I said, the second reading speech is well put together. The government’s proposed amendments landed on my doorstep at the 11th hour, for which I am grateful. The amendments put to bed some of the concerns that were raised with me by some members of the profession. However, I can say that, unfortunately for the purpose of debate - it is going to be a short debate - this is good law and that is why it is going to be supported by the opposition.
Madam Speaker, the opposition commends this bill to honourable members.
______________
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Before we go on, member for Sanderson, can I draw members’ attention to the presence in the gallery of delegates to the Discovering Democracy Teachers Conference, accompanied by the conference organiser and Discovering Democracy Project Officer, Colleen Williams.
The Legislative Assembly, in collaboration with Colleen Williams, has produced a parliamentary eduction kit available to schools to promote a better understanding of the constitutional and legislative frameworks of representative parliamentary democracies and its institutions. On behalf of all members, I extend to you a warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
________________
Mr KIELY (Sanderson): Madam Speaker, I offer my support and contribute to the Attorney-General’s efforts to introduce the Legal Practitioners Amendment Bill 2003.
Before I get into my contribution, I would like to acknowledge the full support of the opposition as expressed by the shadow minister. I echo his words that this is good law. It is good to see such support, and to see parliament working in such ways for the betterment of society. I would like to continue with my contribution as, over here, we on the backbench are given the opportunity to research our own work and write up our own contributions. I would hate to see my labours just cast away. I would also like to say that this is a non-provocative contribution, much as the shadow expressed. I also went through this and found it to be a good law. I am pleased to say that there is not one swipe at the opposition anywhere in this. Therefore, if members and visitors in the gallery would indulge me, I will proceed with my contribution. Thanks, once again, to the opposition.
Ms Scrymgour: We can’t wait!
Mr KIELY: I know. So, sit back, relax; this will be a lovely, friendly contribution from me.
Mr Vatskalis: That is scary.
Mr KIELY: Unusual! Madam Speaker …
Mr Wood: Has he been converted? Has he joined the CLP?
Mr KIELY: Nearly! I have not quite had a Road to Damascus change yet, member for Nelson. It will be a long time before I travel that road.
This bill initiates further reforms of the legal profession in the Northern Territory based on the National Competition Policy review. I believe that in general it will further improve the way in which legal practitioners provide professional services, which is to be supported.
The reforms included in this bill are: all bodies corporate will be entitled to provide legal services, so long as they comply with the provisions of Part IVAA, and other parts of the Legal Practitioners Act dealing with incorporated legal practices. Such incorporated legal practice must be subject to the supervision of at least one lawyer/director, being a person who holds an unrestricted practicing certificate or interstate equivalent. Such incorporated legal practices are subject to the same rules and obligations as other legal practices, subject only to such modifications as may be in the act, or which may be set out in the regulations. The provisions of the act override the Commonwealth’s Corporations Act 2001 to the extent of any inconsistency. The companies authorised under the Legal Practitioners (Incorporation) Act may continue on in business as if that act has not been repealed, and persons who are not lawyers will be able to enter in partnership with lawyers.
I am pleased to be offered the opportunity to contribute to the legal profession reforms that have been introduced by the hard-working and very capable member for Stuart. I understand from the Attorney-General’s second reading speech that we will be seeing in the Northern Territory quite a change in how legal practices may be structured. This bill allows those who want to establish multi-disciplinary practices to do so and that has the potential to benefit not only the practising lawyer, but also the community at large. The nature of the legal industry is changing, and non-lawyers, such as accountants, merchant banks and trust companies, compete to provide what has traditionally been considered to be legal services. Lawyers have always practised either as sole traders or in partnership with other lawyers. Partnerships are cumbersome and unwieldy structures and, in more recent years, when lawyers come into competition with non-lawyers who are not so constrained in their mode of practice, lawyers have been at a considerable competitive disadvantage.
The current restrictions on business structures applying to lawyers in the Northern Territory could not only affect their competitiveness in the provision of legal services, but can also have residual effects on the cost of and excess to legal services for the community. There is a broad consensus in the legal industry that many of the restrictions that govern a practice of law will need to be replaced if the profession is to survive and prosper. Lawyers strongly endorse the push for freedom to determine their own business structures, stating it will enable them to compete more effectively with other incorporated entities, which are increasingly active in the market for legal service.
The ability of Northern Territory lawyers to determine their own business structures and, in particular, to be able to freely incorporate, has the potential to provide more advantages than disadvantages to the public and to the legal profession. The advantages of incorporation and other forms of business structures include: limited liability; better access to capital and debt funding; the ability to build up reserves; a more efficient management business structure; transferability of interest and continuity of existence; facilitation of commercial dealings and savings of costs; and increasing the competitiveness of Northern Territory lawyers, especially in the national arena.
It is an important consideration that reforming legal profession should not undermine the duties and ethical rules applying to lawyers. Protecting the high ethical standards required of the legal profession remains a priority. The integrity of the legal profession should not, however, be affected by the proposed deregulation of solicitors’ business structures, as there is no change in the ethical and fiduciary obligations of solicitors, regardless of the structure in which they practice.
The individual responsibility of every lawyer for his or her ethical behaviour is unaltered by the form of the business structure in which he or she chooses to practice. Some people may be concerned that the corporate form may create a barrier between the individual practitioner and the regulatory authority, allowing him or her to use the corporate veil to shield themselves from accountability in disciplinary proceedings. However, based on the experience of other professions in Canada and the US, permitting a corporation creates the potential for increased regulation and accountability of professionals. The corporate structure of a legal practice does not of itself constitute a violation of the profession’s ethical requirements. Nothing modifies or limits any law applicable to the fiduciary, confidential or ethical relationship between a solicitor and a client, nor does reform affect the responsibilities a lawyer has to the courts, his or her clients, or to fellow practitioners.
Multi-disciplinary practice has been defined as
- … an organisation wholly or partly owned by non-lawyers, such as accountants, which offers legal services
to the public with lawyers and non-lawyers practising together.
Multi-disciplinary practices have operated in Germany for decades and lawyers may now form MDPs with other professionals including auditors, accountants and tax advisors. In France and the United Kingdom, accounting firms are permitted to create or acquire captive law firms, which may solely service their client base or deliver a combined service to a shared client base.
In 1994, the Australian Trade Practices Commission recommended the repeal of professional rules so as to permit MDPs. However, New South Wales has been the only jurisdiction to date to apply such reforms. I note that the WA parliament is currently debating a bill which will permit MDPs.
It is perhaps in the USA that the debate surrounding MDPs has had most attention. Currently, the majority of US jurisdictions prohibit the formation by lawyers of MDPs. Some lawyers do, of course, work outside traditional law firms in industry, and for accounting firms and credit institutions, and they operate outside the ban on MDPs. As employees of a company, they provide advice to the company rather than to its clients. The regulation of MDPs has been a fiercely debated issue in the USA, more than in any other jurisdiction, and attitudes there vary widely.
The American Bar Association in July 2000 rejected a proposal to allow lawyers to form MDPs, and upheld a long-standing ban on lawyers sharing fees with other professionals. Arguably, the MDP model is the inevitable progression for the legal industry in Australia.
Customers are demanding inclusive services, and fears that the MDP concept will harm the legal profession and impinge on ethical standards are over-exaggerated in this jurisdiction. The profession in WA has actively lobbied for such legislation, and we heard from the member for Goyder that it is the preferred option for the profession in the Northern Territory.
Some in the legal profession have argued that lawyers’ core values could be damaged if lawyers become involved in partnerships with non-lawyers. They argue that a lawyer’s duty to observe standards such as inviolable client confidentiality, a duty to avoid conflict of interest and exercise independent legal judgment and loyalty to the client, and serve as officers of the judicial system will somehow be diluted or eroded completely.
While researching articles on the structure of MDPs, I came across an article on the demise of Enron, which I feel may well have contributed to the school of thought that lawyers’ core values could be damaged by a deregulation of business structures. I would like to share this story with my colleagues.
During the late 1990s, the multi-disciplinary practice was seen as a new business entity suited to the 21st century legal practice environment. Streamlined team approaches with easy lines of communication and fewer obstacles would offer clients quick, proactive service. Large accounting firms like Arthur Anderson were advertising themselves as the largest law firm in the country. Large firms were investigating, despite protests from the American Bar Association, what other services could be offered besides legal advice.
We live in an age where large, one-stop shopping in the name of convenience and efficiency has created consolidation and unification in almost every industry. Banking firms now offer brokerage services. Real estate firms now offer construction management services, and telephone companies now offer internet services. Even in the construction industry, design-build is a form of multi-disciplinary practice, consolidating the traditional relationships, owner, contractor and designer, into a hybrid form. Design-build purports to allow more prompt and efficient product delivery.
The Enron bankruptcy and the Arthur Anderson debacle demonstrate clearly what can go wrong with an under-regulated multi-disciplinary practice. The same entity that made supposedly independent audits of the financial transactions was offering consulting advice on deal structures of the same financial transactions. The problem is age old: the entity that is supposed to keep watch loses its objectivity. This is called conflict of interest. When times are good and there is fat on the hog, conflicts of interest are viewed as hindrances to progress, details and niceties that stand in the way of progress.
The papers are full of examples where deregulation has failed the entity it was designed to serve: the client. Enron shareholders are left holding the bag for billions of dollars of bad debt. A broker at Leibman Brothers, one of the company’s largest producers and oversaw its compliance department in its Mid-West office, allegedly made off with over $US125m of clients’ money.
Traditional business relationships and concepts have evolved over centuries and are created for a reason: to create accountability. Before we are quick to change an old system in favour of a new, improved one, let us look at the reason the old one has been around so long. Conflicts of interest are not legal niceties; they hurt real people, and the system is set up to prevent them may be inconvenient, but it is there for a reason.
The lesson of Enron is not discounted in the drafting of this legislation. I believe the Enron experience has helped us to draft good law. I encourage all those who have reservations in regard to conflict of interest, and other professional conduct issues, to read carefully Division 3 of the bill, Multi-disciplinary Partnerships. The bill requires rigorous accountability and includes considerable penalties for failing to comply.
Members may also like to consider the role of the Australian Accounting Standards Board when focussing on the governance aspects of MDPs. The Australian Accounting Standards Board has responsibility for the development of accounting standards for application by companies and by other entities in the private and public sectors, and for the development of statements of accounting concepts. The AASB consults with its members of its broadly constituted consultative group to increase the involvement of various interested groups in the standard-setting process. Members of the consultative group include representatives of parties interested in and affected by statements of accounting concepts and accounting standards. The role of members of this group include providing advice to the AASB on major technical issues and due process.
The consultative group is broadly constituted, comprising approximately 35 members, representative of those preparing, using and regulating financial reports. Members of the consultative group include the Accounting Association of Australia and New Zealand, AustralAsia Council of Auditors-General, Australian Prudential Regulation Authority, CPA Australia, Law Council of Australia and some 29 more peak professional bodies.
Australian Accounting Standards are considered to be amongst the most stringent in the world, and may be seen as another string in the bow of conflict of interest avoidance strategies to assist MDPs in their provision of quality service to the consumer. I am very confident that, under this bill, we will not see an Enron-type event arise in the Northern Territory.
The Legal Practitioners Amendment Bill steers a course that balances the principles espoused in competition policy with the ethical obligations of the legal profession. I echo the opposition’s voice on appreciating the hard and thorough work that has gone into preparing this bill by officers of the Department of Justice, some of whom are in the Chamber today, and of the minister’s staff for the work that they have done. Madam Speaker, I commend this bill to the Assembly.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, it is very encouraging to hear the support expressed today for this bill. It is good law and it was good to hear the opposition spokesman describing it as such. Ultimately, I would like to have on my record, as many times as possible, sponsoring good law that does serve people in the Northern Territory, whichever interest they may have in the action of government. Thank you to the opposition for their support. This is like a ‘love-in’ today. It does not happen often, so it really is good that it happened.
Robert Bradshaw produced that second reading speech and has done all the work on this bill for the department, often unacknowledged, and I would like to acknowledge the quality of work he does on these matters for the Territory.
To finish off my roses tour, I commend the contribution the member for Sanderson makes to these debates. It is interesting to see the raw clay of two years ago is taking on increasingly statesmanlike proportions.
Members interjecting.
Dr TOYNE: I have pushed it as far as I can.
Turning to the bill, Madam Speaker, I would like to explain the committee stage amendments and the reason we have a substantial body of them before us here for the next stage of this debate.
I made it very clear in the second reading speech that we were paying attention to the model legislation being developed as a national process through the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General regarding a lot of the issues that are embodied in this bill. At the time the bill was introduced, we foreshadowed that should the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General adopt the national model legislation, we would amend the current bill to accord with the provisions within that national framework. That has been done, and most of the amendments that will be proposed today are as a result of that process.
One of the amendments has come out of a series of concerns that the Bar Association in the Northern Territory had regarding provisions in the bill. I would like to cover some of those issues, on the public record, before we move to third reading. There was an assertion by the Bar Association that multi-disciplinary practices were not found anywhere else in Australia. That was true but, as a result of the provisions of the model legislation and the indicated positions of the various states and territories around the country, I would think that, with the possible exception of South Australia, all jurisdictions around Australia will be introducing multi-disciplinary practice provisions to their legislation.
The issue of the balances that have to be struck these days in a modern legal practice between the loyalty that the legal practitioner owes to both their client and to the court system as a whole, has to be balanced against the business principles on which practices increasingly have to be based. Obviously, if a practice is run as a business, it has to make enough money to survive. There will always be tensions, I guess, between those two aims within modern practices. The same would apply to medical practice and many other areas of professional work. We do not live in the old days of purity in that modern economic transactions are extending more and more into professional areas that previously were somewhat bunkered away from the general course of business operation within our communities. That is the reality, and we could only say that we have introduced provisions that allow in full measure those balances to be struck, practice by practice, arrangement by arrangement. We have neither curtailed options for the individual practices or arrangements, nor have we mandated arrangements.
We believe that, through a series of provisions that are now being contemplated, the bill provides, for example, for a lawyer-director who has personal responsibility for the professional conduct of legal practitioners and others employed by the ILP. That is in proposed section 35AL.
In respect of MDPs, there is a similar requirement for the lawyer partners in proposed sections 35AZN and 35AZO. The bill, in proposed sections 35AN and 35AZT, sets out that in providing services, an ILP or MDP must disclose the extent to which those services are provided as legal services, and the extent to which some other part of the ILP might be obtaining some kind of benefit.
The bill provides for the prohibition of various kinds of disqualified persons, for example proposed section 35AC, from being involved in any way in a legal practice in proposed sections 35AB and 35AZZA.
The bill creates significant offences for persons seeking to influence a legal practitioner to contravene any of the provisions of the legislation, including those provisions related to professional duties and obligations. The maximum penalties for breach are two years imprisonment and a fine of up to $44 000. That is in proposed sections 35AZJ and 35AZZC. Additionally, proposed section 35AM will permit the Law Society to make specific rules of professional conduct governing conflict of interest situations in these types of arrangements. I believe that we have built in checks and balances there while allowing these more commercial arrangements to be applied around the activities of a legal practitioner.
On confidentiality and privilege issues, it is a well known principle of legal practice that information passing between client and lawyer should remain confidential and under privilege. We are certainly preserving all the duties and rights concerning both confidentiality and privilege. For example, proposed section 35AL states that nothing in the legislation affects professional obligations or professional privileges. Proposed section 35AL specifically states that the law related to client legal privilege or other legal privilege is not excluded or affected simply because of the legal practitioner acting in the capacity of an officer or an employee of an ILP or, indeed, an MDP under proposed section 35AZR. Proposed section 35AZZD has the effect that nothing in Part IVAA is taken as affecting an obligation imposed on a legal practitioner under the Legal Practitioners Act, so there is a blanket protection of the existing confidentiality and privilege arrangements within the profession.
On the issue of the way in which barristers operate in the Northern Territory: all legal practitioners in the Territory are classed as barristers. However, some barristers choose to specialise as counsel. They do this by having themselves noted on the Supreme Court Roll as counsel. In doing this, they commit themselves to operating independently of any other lawyer or business. Collectively, they form an independent bar and as per the cab rank rule, are available for hire on a first come, first serve basis. With these operating rules, such counsel is seen as forming one of the bulwarks of the independent legal profession, ensuring that all citizens have the right to independent legal representation.
As a result of concerns in that area by the Bar Association in the Northern Territory, amendment 51.1 places within the bill, a proscription against barristers combining. They do have to remain as separately operating counsel within the existing arrangements. So we have responded to the Bar Association’s concerns by including that amendment in the committee stage.
Madam Speaker, I will finish there. As we move into these amendments, that we will produce legislation that is not only widely acceptable to the legal community, as the opposition spokesman stated, but it also foreshadows the adoption next year, in our legislation, of the model national legislation in respect of the legal profession. Other than Western Australia, we would be the first jurisdiction to adopt some of the provisions of that model legislation. We can look forward to seeing a national framework for the legal profession, which will give lawyers much more scope to apply their skills around the country as well as here in the Northern Territory. We look forward to that further reform.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Clauses 1 to 4, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Proposed new Clause 4A:
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.1, which is the amendment taking care of the barristers’ concerns: 4A. Repeal and substitution: ‘Section 16 Counsel to practice independently’. Section 16 of the Legal Practitioners Act provides that local counsel must practice independently of anyone else. This provision is seen, by the Independent Bar, as being critical to maintaining the independence of that part of the legal profession that is available to provide advocacy and advice services in accordance with what is known as the cab rank rule. New Part IVAA is not developed for the purpose of permitting the members of the Independent Bar to incorporate their practices. The definition of legal services in Part IVAA was designed to make this clear. However, the Northern Territory Bar Association is not convinced. For the purposes of allaying these concerns, and in order to make the position absolutely clear, section 16 is to be amended so that counsel cannot be involved as a barrister in any other business or employment with any other person. To this end, section 16 is omitted and replaced by a new section 16. New paragraphs (b) and (c) represent the new provisions.
Proposed new Clause 4A agreed to.
Clause 5:
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.2. The proposed section 35AC contains a definition of ‘corporation’ for the purposes of identifying the types of corporate bodies that may provide legal services. This amendment is in line with the model Legal Practitioners Bill, and provides for the deletion of subsections (b) and (c) of the definition. These paragraphs identified that particular types of corporate bodies could provide legal services. It is now intended that non-incorporation act companies be identified in regulations rather than in the body of the act.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.3. In line with the model Legal Practitioners Bill, the definition of ‘director’ is to be omitted and replaced by another definition. This amendment is consequential to the previous amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.4. In line with the model Legal Practitioners Bill, the definition of ‘disqualified person’ is to be amended so as to include a number of other reasons why a person will be a disqualified person for the purposes of proposed section 35AB, which sets out that a legal practice may not employ, have as a partner or as an associate a person who is a disqualified person. The class of disqualified persons now includes persons who do not have a practising certificate because there has been a refusal to grant one, persons who are subject to orders prohibiting them employing lawyers, or being a partner or from managing a legal practice.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.5. In line with the model Legal Practitioners Bill, the definition of ‘officer’ is to be omitted and replaced by another definition. This amendment is consequential to the amendment to the definition of ‘corporation’.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.6. In line with the model Legal Practitioners Bill, the definition of ‘related body corporate’ is to be omitted and replaced by another definition. This amendment is consequential to the amendment to the definition of ‘corporation’.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.7. In line with the model Legal Practitioners Bill, paragraph (b) of the proposed section 35AD(2) is to be omitted and replaced by a new paragraph (b). This is a technical drafting change designed to remove the words ‘for example’ and replace them with ‘namely’.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.8. In line with the model Legal Practitioners Bill, a new subsection (2A) is to be inserted in proposed section 35AD(2). This provision will permit regulations to be made that apply to the provisions of Part IVAA to corporations that are not incorporated legal practices because of proposed section 35AD(2).
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.9. In line with the drafting contained in the model Legal Practitioners Bill, proposed section 35AG is to be removed and replaced with new sections 35AG and 35AGA.
Proposed section 35AG, Notice of Intention to Commence Providing Legal Services, provides that an incorporated legal practice must notify the Law Society Northern Territory before it commences providing legal services. Proposed section 35AGA, Notice of Termination of Provision of Legal Services, provides that an incorporated legal practice must give notice to the Law Society Northern Territory when it ceases to provide legal services.
Mr MALEY: This is probably one of the most important provisions of the entire bill. When is the proposed assent day for this provision and the legislation generally?
Dr TOYNE: Sorry?
Mr MALEY: The proposed assent date, the date that it actually comes into effect. It will be passed through parliament today but the Administrator has to sign off on it. Do you have a proposed commencement date? If so, can you please tell us?
Dr TOYNE: I can advise that the next stage following the passage of the bill today would be to draft the regulations and rules that will be put in place. It will then commence as soon as that has been done. We will do that as quickly as we can.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.10. In line with the model Legal Practitioners Bill, proposed section 35AJ is to be amended by adding new subsections (2A) and (2B). New subsection (2A) provides that an incorporated legal practice commits an offence if it provides legal services during any time when it is in breach of the requirement contained in section 35AG that there must be at least one lawyer-director.
New subsection (2B) provides that an incorporated legal practice is in default in respect of its obligations to have a lawyer-director from a period of seven days of default until the time when another lawyer-director is appointed, or a person is appointed by the Law Society Northern Territory under section 35AG(3).
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.11. In line with the model Legal Practitioners Bill, section 35AN is to be deleted and replaced by a new section 35AN, Disclosure of Obligations.
New section 35AN(1) provides that each lawyer-director is responsible for all disclosure obligations of an incorporated legal practice. Additionally, section 35AN provides that the individual lawyer who provides a legal service is also responsible for compliance with the disclosure obligations. New section 35AN(2) provides for what must be disclosed and how it must be disclosed.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.12. In line with the model Legal Practitioners Bill, subsection 35AO(1) is to be deleted.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.13. This amendment corrects a cross-reference to section 35AN contained in the new section 35AO(2).
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.14. This amendment provides that a client of an incorporated legal practice is entitled to make reasonable assumptions as to the nature of service that is being provided. This provision deals with the services that might be provided by a number of professions or occupations - for example tax advice - which can be provided by legal practitioners and by accountants. The effect of this section is that, in determining whether the service provider has provided advice as a legal practitioner, regard is to be had to the assumptions that the client would have made.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.15. This amendment corrects cross-references to proposed sections 206C, 206D, 206E and 206F of the Corporations Act 2001, as contained in the new section 35AZD(2).
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.16. In line with the model Legal Practitioners Bill, proposed section 35AZH is to be deleted and is to be replaced by new sections 35AZH, 35AZHA and 35AZHB.
Proposed section 35AZH deals with external administration proceedings under other legislation. Proposed new section 35AZH(2) provides that the Law Society Northern Territory is entitled to be a party to proceedings involving the external administration of a corporation, except where the proceedings are subject to section 35AZG, which deals with proceedings under the Corporations Act 2001. New section 35AZH(3) permits the court, when exercising its jurisdiction, to have regard to the interests of the clients of the legal practice.
Proposed section 35AZHA, incorporated legal practice that is subject to receivership under this act and Corporations Act 2001, sets out the relationship between receivership under the Legal Practitioners Act and receiverships in accordance with the Corporations Act 2001.
Proposed section 35AZHB, incorporated legal practice that is subject to receivership under this act and external administration under other local legislation, sets out the relationship between receiverships under Legal Practitioners Act and receiverships in accordance with some other local act; for example a receiver appointed under the Agents Licensing Act in respect of an incorporated legal practice that provides real estate services.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.17. In line with the model Legal Practitioners Bill, proposed section 35AZJ, which deals with undue influence, is to be amended so that it applies to undue influence exercised by any person, rather than just undue influence exercised by officers and employees of the incorporated body.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.18. In line with the model Legal Practitioners Bill, proposed section 35AZT is to be deleted and is to be replaced by a proposed new section 35AZT, disclosure of obligations. Proposed subsection (1) provides that each lawyer partner of a multi-disciplined partnership is responsible for all disclosure obligations for an incorporated legal practice. Additionally, proposed section 35AZT(1) provides that the individual lawyer who provides a legal service is also responsible for compliance with the disclosure obligations.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.19. In line with the model Legal Practitioners Bill, proposed section 35AZU(1) is to be deleted.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.20. This amendment corrects a cross-reference to proposed section 35AZT as contained in the proposed section 35AZU.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.21. As with proposed new section 35AO, this provision deals with the situation where a multi-disciplinary practice provides a variety of different types of professional services; for example tax advice which can be provided by legal practitioners and by accountants. The effect of this section is that, in determining whether the service provider has provided advice as a legal practitioner or as an accountant, regard is to be had to the assumptions that the client would have made.
Amendment agreed to.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51.22. This amendment removes the word ‘knowingly’ from proposed section 35AZZA. The use of such a word in an offence provision is inconsistent with the principles for criminal responsibility as contained in the Criminal Code Act.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 5, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 6 and 7, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Proposed new clauses 7A and 7B:
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51 23. Proposed clause 7A inserts a definition of ‘legal practitioner’ for the purposes of Part VIIIA, which deals with placing legal practice under management. The effect of the change is to make it clear that the incorporated legal practice may be subject to the management provisions of the Legal Practitioners Act
Proposed clause 7B, Definition, amends the definition of ‘legal practitioner’ for the purposes of Part IX, which deals with receivership. The effect of the change is to make it clear that the incorporated legal practice may be subject to the receivership provisions of the Legal Practitioners Act.
Proposed new clauses 7A and 7B agreed to.
Clauses 8 to 13, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Clause 14:
Dr TOYNE: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 51 24. Clause 14 deals with transitional issues. The Law Society Northern Territory raised an issue as to whether the clause permits a practising company under the Legal Practitioners (Incorporation) Act to convert into an incorporated legal practice. This amendment sets out a process for such a conversion. In essence, the conversion will take place by a practising company serving a notice on the Law Society Northern Territory in accordance with proposed section 35AG. From the date of service of such a notice, the practising company becomes an incorporated legal practice and ceases to be subject to the Legal Practitioners (Incorporation) Act as continued in forcing in accordance with clause 14. However, the Legal Practitioners (Incorporation) Act continues to apply in respect of any events that occurred before the date of the notice given under proposed section 35AG.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 14, as amended, agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments; report adopted.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I wish to acknowledge the presence in the gallery of representatives of FORWAARD accompanied by Mr Leon James and Mr Damien Tonson. On behalf of all members, I extend to you a warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
MOTION
Adopt Report and Recommendations - Standing Orders Committee, Second Report 9th Assembly, June 2003
Adopt Report and Recommendations - Standing Orders Committee, Second Report 9th Assembly, June 2003
Continued from 19 June 2003.
Dr BURNS (Tourism): Madam Speaker, I would like to add to the debate on the report of the Standing Orders Committee for the last year that has been tabled.
First, I have enjoyed being on this committee, and I commend the support staff, particularly the Clerk, Ian McNeill, and Jane Gunner for the secretarial work that she does, and Graham Gadd who, as you know, attends these meetings.
The committee has considered a number of important issues over the last year, and I would like to go through them. There have been quite a number of submissions. One of the major works that we have undertaken is a code of conduct and the Register of Members’ Interests. I will come to that in a little while.
One of the things we looked at was Standing Order 263 in relation to personal interest. Basically, this reference came out of the Public Accounts Committee inquiry into the previous government’s practices around budgets. The recommendation that came out of the Public Accounts Committee was:
- Recommendation 7: Following concerns with having a committee member who is also a witness in the subject of the inquiry, the committee recommends that the Standing Orders Committee investigate whether changes to Standing Order 263 would be appropriate.
I wish to report that Standing Order 263 has been changed, and now reads:
- No member may sit on a committee if he or she has a personal interest, whether pecuniary or otherwise, in the inquiry before such committee.
This was quite a complex matter. Well, it was simple but it became complex through the efforts of the member for Drysdale who was the member in question. For those listening to this broadcast who might not be familiar with it, the Public Accounts Committee inquired into what the previous Treasurer had done in artificially reducing the estimates of expenditure, in particular those of the Health department by $8m, to show growth in the Health budget in an election year.
This matter was triggered by a memo from the then CEO of the Health department, Mr Bartholomew, to the current Health minister telling her that once he became aware of what he called this ‘proposed deception’, he rang his minister and asked how this could be done. The minister, who was then the member for Drysdale, was very alarmed, but nothing was ever done about it. That is part of it.
The other part of it is that the member for Drysdale continued to sit on the Public Accounts Committee as it was inquiring into this matter. In other words, the member for Drysdale was not only one of the main subjects of the inquiry, but he was sitting on the committee judging the evidence; he was a witness before that committee, and then he wanted to deliberate in the findings of the committee, which, to most ordinary, reasonable people, would represent a considerable conflict of interest.
I know that the member for Drysdale wrote to the Clerk and the Clerk came back with an opinion. I will read it:
- No comparable legislature has a rule concerning the participation in inquiries by members who may not be unbiased. It appears that in such legislatures, any question of the disqualification of a member for participation in an inquiry is left to the member.
I accept that advice from the Clerk. The second dot point encapsulates the advice given by Mr Harry Evans who, as everyone realises, has been with the Australian Senate for many years and is considered an authority. That dot point was:
- A member’s political interest in the subject should not prevent a member from conscientiously participating in an inquiry on that subject.
I acknowledge that the decision on whether the member for Drysdale sat on that inquiry or did not was a matter for the member for Drysdale, but I very strongly contend that it was a gross conflict of interest for the member to do so …
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member is reflecting that I had a conflict of interest, having said, initially, that I did not. I would suggest that if he is going to make an allegation of that type, having said that it does not have any offence to standing orders, he do so by way of substantive motion.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order. This is a debate on the Standing Orders Committee, but the minister should be careful that anything he says …
Members interjecting:
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Drysdale, you have the right to a personal explanation to correct whatever he says.
Dr BURNS: Madam Speaker, I hear what you are saying. I am sure those who are listening to the broadcast and heard my summation, which was a very fair summation of the circumstances surrounding, first, the Public Accounts Committee inquiry into this matter, and the very fact – and it is a fact - that the member for Drysdale: sat on the committee; the committee interrogated witnesses who had made allegations against the member for Drysdale; the member for Drysdale himself was a witness before that committee; and the member for Drysdale, because he did not excuse himself from the committee, sat on the committee during deliberative sessions when we were considering his evidence, the evidence of those who had made allegations and made statements about him - namely, Mr Bartholomew as well as others - and expected to be involved in that deliberation.
The precedents about conflicts of interest that have been raised by the Clerk of the Senate, and I have read through them, are relatively peripheral to this matter. The member for Drysdale was actually the subject of some of these allegations. He was involved in them. The precedents that have been put before the Clerk and through the Australian Senate were really about peripheral matters. There was one from the House of Commons in England where someone thought that a member should be excluded because they were on a housing inquiry that was looking at housing in the electorate of a particular person. There was a bit of a connection.
There was another one in the Australian context where there was an Australian member - I think it was a minister - who had made a ruling in relation to an Aboriginal organisation, and then was involved in a broad inquiry into Aboriginal affairs issues. These are comparatively peripheral to the matter of the member for Drysdale, who was at the centre of the inquiry that we are talking about.
I will leave this one soon, but it is to the member for Drysdale’s eternal shame that he did not show better judgment, because it was his call to excuse himself from that inquiry. It has the air of arrogance about it, the air of ‘don’t care’, the air of ‘it does not matter; I will do what I want to do’. That is what got the CLP into trouble in the first place.
Mr Dunham: I have never interfered with a police investigation.
Mr KIELY: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Dr BURNS: That is what got you into trouble in the first place because you have no respect. Very, very …
Mr Dunham: I have never interfered with a police investigation.
Mr KIELY: A point of order!
Madam SPEAKER: Just stop! For goodness sake, stop sitting there screaming.
Mr KIELY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I would like to draw your attention to Standing Order 62, offensive or unbecoming words.
Mr Dunham: You have time for a personal explanation.
Mr KIELY: I would ask the member to retract that …
Mr Dunham: No, no point of order.
Mr KIELY: … in that Standing Order 62 says quite clearly:
- No member shall attribute directly or by innuendo to another member unbecoming conduct.
To say that the member for Johnston has interfered in some police investigation goes right to the heart of Standing Order 62, and I request that the member be directed to withdraw all reference.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Drysdale, withdraw it.
Mr DUNHAM: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker …
Madam SPEAKER: I have just asked you to withdraw.
Mr DUNHAM: Madam Speaker, I never mentioned the member by name, by electorate or any other way.
Madam SPEAKER: By innuendo.
Mr DUNHAM: I said: ‘I have never interfered with a police investigation’, and I stand by that, Madam Speaker. I was talking about myself.
Mr KIELY: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker - innuendo!
Madam SPEAKER: By innuendo. Look, I am sorry that I was distracted for the moment. This debate is getting a little out of hand. Member for Drysdale, in the spirit of goodwill, I ask you to withdraw the intent of your remark.
Mr DUNHAM: Madam Speaker, I drew your attention to the fact that I was being mentioned by name in a way that offended that standing order. You gave me the option of speaking by way of a personal explanation, which I accept. I made the comment: ‘I have never interfered with a police investigation’. That has been taken to be specific to the member for Johnston. Now, if that is his guilty conscience, no problem. I am saying, on the record in this parliament, I have never been involved in interfering with a police investigation. That is a matter I have used my own name for. If you want to infer anybody else, you do it.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Drysdale, I asked you, in the spirit of goodwill, if you would withdraw the remark that offended the member for Sanderson.
Mr DUNHAM: I am trying to draw the link, Madam Speaker, other than the one he drew. I am saying that I, Stephen Dunham, the member for Drysdale, have never …
Mr Kiely: He did not say it. It is in Hansard.
Mr DUNHAM: … have never interfered with a police investigation. If that offends somebody else who may have some guilt complex about this, that is not my problem, Madam Speaker. That is the problem of the person who is drawing the inference.
Madam SPEAKER: Unfortunately, this is going to drag on, because I was not paying attention. I had hoped that you would compromise and withdraw in the spirit of goodwill, member for Drysdale. But you will not; is that what you are saying to me?
Mr DUNHAM: I am saying, Madam Speaker, that I am prepared to offer exactly the same finding as you did. If somebody believes I have said something that offended them, they have the capacity to make a personal explanation. I never mentioned the member for Johnston. The only mention and the only link that has been drawn is by the member for Sanderson.
Madam SPEAKER: That is not really what I asked you to do. We are getting to the stage of going nowhere with this. I have asked you to withdraw.
Mr DUNHAM: I withdraw the words ‘I have never been involved in interfering with a police investigation’.
Madam SPEAKER: Can I just say to members that I will check with Hansard and, if we need to pursue this any further, I will. I apologise because I was distracted at the time. We will continue, minister.
Dr BURNS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I will put on the record that I have not been involved in any of those matters that you are talking about either, member for …
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I ask that he withdraw those words.
Madam SPEAKER: He said that he was not involved.
Mr DUNHAM: He said exactly the same as me.
Dr Burns: Yes, that is right.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order.
Mr Dunham: He can say it and I cannot.
Madam SPEAKER: I will pay attention now.
Dr BURNS: Madam Speaker, moving on from that particular matter …
Mr Dunham: No, stay there, mate.
Dr BURNS: … we did consider the issue …
Mr Kiely: What?
Mr Dunham: Stay there. I am happy.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Drysdale, you are pushing it a bit.
Dr BURNS: We did consider the issue of breastfeeding in the Chamber and that, of course, has been a very topical issue, particularly in the Victorian parliament. I believe a good compromise was reached that, should there be a need for such a standing order change, we will consider it very carefully.
As members would be aware, the committee is still considering the Members’ Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards, and amendments to the Legislative Assembly (Register of Members’ Interests) Act. That has been deferred until February 2004. That is a very important inquiry by the committee, because I believe that the public want to see great transparency in terms of members of the Legislative Assembly and our pecuniary interests and expressions of that pecuniary interest and a code of conduct, which many other states have. It is a worthwhile goal for us to move towards. There has been very productive and constructive discussion on those issues.
In respect of a code of conduct for parliamentarians, the public is looking for integrity, accountability, responsibility, and they look to us to safeguard the public interest in the work that we do. There has been a lot of work that has gone on. We had a group from the New South Wales parliament, who I thought were very good, very honest. They told us where they might have gone wrong in some of the aspects of their code of conduct, how things can be become overly complicated, rigid and regulatory. When the committee met with them, we took on board those messages. We are moving, and are very close, to settling the code of conduct. That will be a big plus for life within the Territory parliament.
There have been other changes to Standing Orders 36 and 37. There were some anomalies in there about the ringing of the bells, a quorum, and how long members had to get back into the Chamber. That change has brought the time allowed in standing orders back in line with other time limits to do with the ringing of the bells. That was a constructive path for us to go down.
To finish off, there is one issue that has not been covered within the report and it is not a major matter, but I know the member for Greatorex raised the issue of dress standards, particularly in the press gallery. He drew attention to the fact that there are some members of the press who come in here not adequately attired. I really had not noticed that, but what I have noticed is that there have been some members who have come into this Chamber without ties and I do not think that that is right; and some members probably even wearing jeans in the Chamber. We have to dress and act professionally, and we should try to live up to that in adhering to the dress standards. It is a small thing, but we need to look at the standards and decorum within the Chamber and dress is a part of that.
Once again, I commend the work of the staff, principally the Clerk in the work that he is doing. We still have plenty on our agenda, very important work. I found it very interesting and I certainly enjoy being a member of the Standing Orders Committee.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Madam Speaker, as a member of the Standing Orders Committee I contribute to debate on the second report of the 9th Assembly, June 2003.
First, I recognise the membership of the committee. The Chairman is the Hon Paul Henderson. I am a member, with the Hon Loraine Braham, Dr Chris Burns, Dr Richard Lim and Mr Mike Reed. It has been a pleasure working with this group of people. Watching their different personalities and their different ways of conducting business in meetings has been of interest to me as a new member.
I thank the Committee Secretariat, in particular the Clerk, Ian McNeill, a man of few words, but when he speaks, it is with incredible power. He chooses his moments, and no doubt enters into debate only when asked, usually to clarify hazy areas. I also thank the research and admin officer, Jane Gunner. She has done a very professional job and has reported accurately all circumstances of meetings.
The first issue was to give a progress report on the review of the draft Members’ Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards, and amendments to the Legislative Assembly (Register of Members’ Interests) Act. As people may or may not know, the background to this was on 20 March 2002, Madam Speaker wrote to the Chief Minister and the Leader of the Opposition, suggesting that the Standing Orders Committee consider a reference on a code of conduct for members. This has been a worthy item to come before the Standing Orders Committee.
Submissions we received included three written submissions from Gerry Wood, the member for Nelson; the New South Wales Legislative Assembly Standing Ethics Committee; and Mr Mike Blake, Northern Territory Auditor-General. Mr Whitton, on 3 September 2002, provided information in regards to a Register of Members’ Interests, in particular the issue of spouse and family reporting requirements, and reporting of the value of real estate, shares and other holdings provisions in other jurisdictions and the recommendations contained in the submission.
Of particular interest to me was meeting the New South Wales Legislative Assembly Standing Ethics Committee. The members of that committee were very interesting, with their experience and background in such issues. The New South Wales experience was definitely worth listening to. As the members for Johnston and Wanguri have previously stated, we are coming together with a concept that will result in a documentary and legislative regime that we are going to be happy with, and that will demonstrate that we are an open and transparent parliament, with members working for the benefit of the whole community and putting their own interests on the backburner.
In the PAC reference to the Standing Orders Committee to examine conflicts of interests of members of the committee, the member for Johnston, being involved in that process from the beginning, eloquently, honestly and fairly summarised the issues. In the interests of good government and the public interest, any member – in this case, it happened to be the member for Drysdale – of this House that is placed in this circumstance should step down in the interests of fairness, and should remove themselves from any situation where there could be a shadow cast of a conflict of interest. Standing Order 263, Personal Interest:
No member may sit on a committee if he or she has a personal interest, whether pecuniary or otherwise, in the inquiry before such a committee.
should be commended, Madam Speaker.
In relation to breastfeeding in the Chamber, at the most recent meeting, it was decided that this issue would be discussed further. At this stage, I do not wish to add anything to that debate.
In relation to Standing Orders 36, 37 and 39, as mentioned in the report, at the meeting of 29 May 2003, the committee discussed the time of the ringing of the bells in the event that a quorum is not present. It continues:
- It was agreed that Standing Orders 36, 37 and 39 be amended to allow for the bells to be rung for three minutes when there is not a quorum to mirror the existing provisions for divisions.
That is a standard response, and the committee was supportive of those changes.
In summary, I thank all members of the committee for their assistance in working through the matters before the Standing Orders Committee. I commend the report to all members, and support the work of the Chair and the Clerk over the last few months.
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I thank members on our side who have contributed to this debate on the Standing Orders Committee second report of June 2003. I am surprised that there has not been a contribution from other members on the report.
I thank everyone who is currently participating. I have only been appointed chair of this committee and have been on it for about six months now. I can say that the committee is working through the issues of the code of conduct in a collaborative way. I am sure when we bring the results of our deliberations back to the parliament in February, we should be able to have a unanimous report or, if not unanimous, then the items attracting dissent will be few.
On the topic of debate surrounding the changes to Standing Order 263 on personal interest, which preceded my time on the committee, I will pick up on some of the interjections from the member for Drysdale in regards to why the Standing Orders Committee has made the change. My colleague, the member for Johnston, expanded on the reasons for the requirement for that change. I am surprised that the member for Drysdale did not show any personal integrity in accepting his conflict of interest in the matter surrounding the deception he was part of during the government processes surrounding the 2000-01 and 2001-02 budgets.
He certainly was right in the middle of the deception around that budget, and the evidence that was provided to the committee, not only in the form of a memorandum that was provided to and tabled in this House on 25 October 2001 from the then CEO, Paul Bartholomew, to the current health services minister.
I am not going to read the entire letter into the Hansard again but, the allegations, as they were, surrounding the member for Drysdale put by the previous CEO who worked directly to him, were substantial allegations. Regardless of the outcome of the debate, I would have thought that any member of this House with an ounce of personal integrity to this parliament would have identified the conflict of interest, and would have stood aside from the deliberations and hearings surrounding that matter. However, the member for Drysdale decided that, no, he would be part of the committee inquiring into allegations about himself and, unfortunately, the standing orders of the day allowed that to happen.
I will read the allegation that was put to the current Health minister and tabled in this parliament, and I quote from Paul Bartholomew’s memo:
- In summary, there was an artificial reduction of $8m in the Territory Health Services 2000-01 budget in order that the 2001-02 budget figure could be presented falsely as a 2.5% increase. In reality, Territory Health Services’ 2001-02 budget represents a reduction on the final 2000-01 approved budget.
That was the allegation. Mr Bartholomew went on to say: ‘I rang Mr Dunham …’ so, very explicitly:
- I rang Mr Dunham and expressed my alarm at this proposed deception. I advised him that in my view, this arrangement would be undoubtedly discovered in due course by the Auditor-General and would reflect poorly on Territory Health Services and the minister.
In addition, I expressed concern that, as a consequence of these artificial adjustments, Territory Health Services would
be seen to be exceeding its approved budget by $8m, when this demonstrably was not the case.
Minister Dunham expressed serious alarm at the information I conveyed to him, and indicated he wished to be kept informed of all developments. The minister was continually kept informed as the budget process continued, but there was no change in the decision to artificially reduce by $8m the 2000-01 budget.
So, a very explicit and clear allegation of the then minister’s total collaboration in that deception from the CEO. As I said, anybody with an ounce of integrity as a member of parliament would have identified that conflict of interest and would have stood aside from the committee hearing into that matter. The arrogance of the member for Drysdale knows absolutely no bounds. He still has not learned; he still cannot come to his own recognition that there was a conflict of interest and, hence, the need to amend Standing Order 263 to ensure that this appalling neglect and refusal to accept a conflict of interest never occurs in this parliament again. I am pleased that the Standing Orders Committee did agree to reform Standing Order 263.
Motion agreed to; report adopted.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures
Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures
Mr AH KIT (Community Development): Madam Speaker, the Northern Territory’s population is uniquely different from other Australian jurisdictions. Like the states, the majority of its people live in a single urban area, Darwin and Palmerston. These two cities and Alice Springs account for 85% of the non-indigenous population of the Territory.
On the other hand, the Territory’s indigenous population is remarkably de-centralised, divided between nine Aboriginal townships of between 1000 and 2000 people; 50 communities between 200 and 999 inhabitants; and a base of 570 widely dispersed communities composed of populations of less than 200 on outstations, pastoral excisions, and town camps. Such a decentralised population presents considerable barriers to social and economic development. Aboriginal people are distant from most mainstream economic activities, and there is a chronic shortage of investment in infrastructure and enterprise.
In 2001, gross indigenous income was only 11% of the Territory total, despite indigenous people forming 25% of the adult population. If only mainstream income is included, this proportion drops to 4%. In 2001, over 50% of indigenous income came from welfare sources, compared with 9% for non-indigenous people. If CDEP income is counted as welfare income, this rises to two-thirds for indigenous people. Of note is that almost 25% of CDEP incomes accrue to non-indigenous people, reflecting their roles as managers and skilled personnel in these communities.
Between 1996 and 2001, the only recorded increase in indigenous employment was with CDEP, from 15% to 17%. Mainstream employment fell from 20% to 16%. The participation rate dropped from 42% to 38%, vastly lower than the non-indigenous participation rate.
These figures make it absolutely clear that, because we are seeing such a crisis in the bush, it is rural and remote areas to which we must, as a government, turn our attention. It is for that reason that we must build stronger regions if we are to realise stronger futures for all Territorians. The Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures strategy consists of three main planks. I have a booklet here that I wish to table.
First, there is a framework of support and funding for the development of regional development plans and monitoring of implementation of these plans by five regional development boards. Second, there is the capacity for the establishment of regional authorities formed through voluntary amalgamations of local councils, where this is the community’s preferred method of delivery of local government services. Third, there is provision for measurement of outcomes so that we chart progress in improving employment and social conditions in our regions.
In a statement to parliament in March last year, I told it the way I saw it. I described the organisational bankruptcy of the vast majority of our remote Aboriginal communities. I said that we must escape the historical legacy of poor governance, health, education and employment outcomes that most of our remote communities experience. Let us face the truth: local government arrangements in the Northern Territory have failed Aboriginal people in many ways. As was pointed out at the Indigenous Economic Forum in Alice Springs, the Northern Territory has a serious economic development problem, with around one-fifth of its total resident adult population impoverished, structurally detached from the labour market, and ill-equipped to engage in it.
If we do not strengthen our regions, we will, as I said in March last year, risk the creation of a permanent under-class for which future generations, both indigenous and non-indigenous, will pay potentially overwhelming economic, social and political costs, and the Northern Territory will cease to function as anything other than a financial basket case.
The core of the transformation that I am proposing is the strengthening of our regions, and a radical transformation in the method of service delivery in the Northern Territory. We will move from the mode of maintaining small, detached service delivery points on each small, stand-alone remote community to a mode of regional service delivery focussing particularly on local government and infrastructure services. We will move towards greater regional autonomy and the control of services by the community sector. In fact, the Martin government has increased resources for local government as part of the Building Strong Regions - Stronger Futures strategy.
Let me make it clear the strategy is not just about reducing disadvantage, but is, just as importantly, aimed at upholding and strengthening public and private institutions in both the Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal domains in the Northern Territory. In the Aboriginal domain, this means mechanisms aimed at supporting traditional authority at a local and regional level. Economic growth in our regions is critical if we are to turn the tide of poverty that dominates the lives of the vast majority of Aboriginal Territorians and to create opportunities for all Territorians.
However, a narrowly economic approach is doomed to failure. The radical transformations we must seek must also embrace social, political and cultural priorities within that Aboriginal domain. Let there be no mistake about it: more of the same equals more of the same, and for that reason it is unacceptable. We will not achieve different outcomes by continuing with existing models and approaches. What the Martin Labor government proposes will not be easy, nor will it achieve overnight successes.
We are disentangling 30 years of failed policy and practice. In doing so, we will encounter obstruction and setbacks. We acknowledge we are limited in what we can achieve in the short-term. Part of the enduring legacy of these decades of lost opportunity have been the malign neglect of resources being diverted from the regions and Aboriginal development in favour of confrontation, neglect and blind bloody-mindedness.
Not only do we face a human tragedy, but the opportunity costs of this neglect in the fields of health, education and governance capacity can be directly measured in the lack of employment and enterprise on Aboriginal communities and the poverty that remote communities experience. It will take time to turn this around and accumulate the resources needed to overcome this legacy of neglect.
The major point of departure from previous policy and practice under the Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures strategy is just that: we seek regional solutions. Regions, however defined, and for various purposes, have always been a feature of organisation for Aboriginal peoples of the Northern Territory. Service delivery at the level of the individual community is not just stupid on the basis of cost efficiency or economic rationalism, it is just plain silly in cultural terms.
Listen to people such as Jawoyn leader, Robert Lee. He will tell you, as will many others, that the transfer 30 years ago of management of communities to so-called Aboriginal self-management and self-determination was largely a joke. There was virtually no transfer of skills and capacity to run individual communities then, and the collapse of literacy and numeracy over the last three decades has led to greater dependency than ever on non-Aboriginal people on most communities.
The great majority of local government organisations out bush are increasingly dependent on non-indigenous people for governance and financial skills. When we look for effective models, I am thinking of the work of groups such as the Bawinanga Corporation and its work with the Djelk Rangers. Bawinanga has delivered services efficiently and effectively at a regional level for most of the last three decades. Through Djelk, Bawinanga is delivering substantial employment and environmental benefits through dealing in culturally and politically appropriate ways across many different clan and language groups at the level of an extended region.
I am also thinking of the work of the Katherine West Health Board. Much as been made of the Katherine West Health Board’s effectiveness at delivering comprehensive primary health care, but it has also delivered economic benefits, something that has barely been noticed by analysts. As my colleague, the Minister for Health and Community Services, noted last year:
- In 1997, when government ran health in the region, there were 31 people employed in the health sector in the region. There are now 80 people working for Katherine West; 65% of its staff are indigenous and over 80% were recruited from within the Northern Territory.
Nearly 80% of the jobs are on remote communities. At a shade under 50 new jobs, this 258% increase in health sector employment is profoundly important for the region.
The Katherine West region, on any formal measure, is a remote area with little prospect of economic development. Outside the pastoral industry and the relatively marginal impact of tourists transiting through the region, there is little immediate potential for economic growth. Nevertheless, the health sector has provided the region its greatest local employment effect since the building of the beef roads in the 1960s and 1970s.
The Katherine West Health Board demonstrates the social and economic benefits of organising regionally. As our government rolls out health zones, there is the potential for up to 500 new and sustainable jobs in the Territory. It is difficult to imagine any labour market boost of a similar magnitude to be available to regional economies in the near future.
By building stronger regions, we will build a stronger Territory. With everyone involved in developing the Territory, we give ourselves the best possible chance of achieving the outcomes that we all want and must achieve. Regions are different in the same way as communities and individuals are different. The approaches we take to economic and social development need to take account of those differences. We need approaches and strategies that are flexible, innovative and inclusive to ensure outcomes vital to the development of the Territory.
The focus of the past approach to regional development has always been on economic and business development. While it is absolutely vital that this focus remains, it must not ignore the social and cultural development critical to the protection of our lifestyles. We must look at the foundations of sustainable social and economic development. There must be appropriate physical infrastructure and communication technology that meets realistic needs. Education and training outcomes must give people opportunities. We must achieve healthy living environments and environmentally sustainable communities.
There has been no properly organised and supported attempt to deal with these issues at a coordinated regional level in the past. We now need to do this, and as quickly, carefully and strategically as we can. The Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures strategy is not about providing an unrealistic wish list of projects. It is about establishing a process that will be flexible an innovative enough to take account of the differences between regions. It is about giving everyone the opportunity to participate, and it must be powerful enough to be sustainable over time. The Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures strategy deliberately focusses on improving the status of Aboriginal Territorians with a strong emphasis on economic development.
I shall move to the detail of regional development plans. The quickest way to alienate those who put their time and effort into working for the community is to ignore their efforts. Another way to do this is to have a system that does not efficiently and effectively deal with that effort. We are concerned that the processes that have been in place to develop and deal with regional development plans are inadequate. Our main concerns with the previous system are:
regional economic development committees had no clear role properly endorsed by government;
initiatives to pursue;
An independent consultant has reviewed the previous regional development advisory structures in the Territory to consider whether they have the capacity to meet the needs of the regions and the government. The review made a series of recommendations, the majority of which the government has accepted in the preparation of Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures strategy. Expressions of interest have been called for appointment to five regional development boards, covering Central Australia, the Barkly and Gulf, Katherine, East Arnhem and the Top End.
These advisory boards will have a crucial input into regional plans, and in determining broader economic and social objectives in the region. These regional development boards will be responsible to the Minister for Regional Development for the preparation of regional development plans, monitoring their implementation, provision of reports on progress, and carriage of specific studies of projects.
In the area of capacity development, across the Northern Territory there is a need for the development of capacity to allow the people of the regions to take charge of their development. This includes capacity to identify issues and options, and to develop and implement plans. In particular, there must be a strong emphasis on capacity building and governance in remote communities. There is little doubt that without this, we will continue to see such communities suffer through lack of accountability, both to their own members as well as to the broader public.
Needs will vary. This has already been found in the projects that are already under way. In the West MacDonnells, the need is to develop the capacity of the people to negotiate for a legitimate structure that will meet their needs. In the Nyirranggulung-Mardrulk-Ngadberre in Katherine East, capacity is being developed through the establishment of regional administrative structures. A long-running project is the law and justice project at Ali Curung in three Warlpiri communities. While the focus of that project is on the needs of those communities to deal with law and justice issues, the project is also about empowering those communities to deal with matters of common concern.
Just as projects will vary, so will the way resources are applied. In some cases, we will find organisations to undertake work. In others, it will be appropriate to place staff in communities to directly facilitate development capacity.
Starting this financial year, the Martin Labor government will fund additional Community Development Officers at a cost of $800 000. In addition, the expenditure criteria for two grant funding pools have been changed so that funds will now be applied in accordance with this strategy. The Regional Development Fund of $500 000 per annum will be applied to the preparation of regional development plans. The Capacity Development Fund of $600 000 per annum will be spent on priority projects aimed at developing community capacity in decision-making.
It will often be councils that will be the vehicle for capacity development. As part of the plan to develop regional decision-making capacity, a number of other initiatives will be taken to strengthen local government. The government has offered the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory a greatly expanded role in the provision of training for elected members.
In regards to regional authorities, I move now to potentially the most important element of this Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures strategy: the facility to establish regional authorities.
At the outset, I emphasised that the creation of regional authorities will only occur where it is the wish of the communities involved to adopt this model for service delivery. The concept of the regional authorities that we propose is straightforward. They will be established under the Local Government Act. The constitutions of regional authorities will give them the power to govern, and make by-laws for the area that they cover.
We are now inventing a new tier of government, but we are creating the capacity for councils to voluntarily come together for improved service delivery. A regional authority may want to deal only with a restricted number and type of services, or it may take a wider view. Such an authority might provide an umbrella decision-making body over boards or organisations that deliver local government-type municipal services, economic development, sport and recreation, or even law and justice services.
Regional authorities will not be created on demand. The establishment of such potentially powerful organisations will be the subject of long and detailed negotiations. They will not be imposed on communities and they will not be set up to fail. Some of the key advantages in establishing regional authorities are: achieving a critical mass of competent, professional service delivery personnel with effective support and guidance; informed engagement of communities in decisions about what kinds of services are appropriate and how they will be delivered; accountability on the part of the communities for the decisions and the demands they make on service delivery organisations; and reducing expenditure on administration and duplication of overheads.
Not everyone will want a regional authority; not everyone may have the capacity to develop one. There is no intention to force this model on regions. Indeed, any use of coercion to implement this model would work directly against a central tenet of the Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures strategy: that regions should have the power to determine their own future. There will need to be some legislative changes to provide for the establishment of regional authorities, but these are minor. The Local Government Act already provides processes that can be used. The provision for community government councils can expand to provide for regional authorities.
Before proposals are enacted, there will be detailed discussions with key stakeholders, including LGANT, ATSIC, and the land councils on both legislative changes and implementation. These discussions and negotiation processes also apply to the development of the constitution for an individual regional authority. There is a range of electoral systems possible for local governance, and it is clear that one model does not apply to every situation.
The Queensland government’s Green Paper on Indigenous Community Governance, released in March this year, notes that similar reports have identified that the most commonly legislated model of local governance for indigenous communities had assumed Westernised political norms and values, without taking any recognition of indigenous political norms and values. An advisor to the House or Representatives Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs commented, in its 1990 report, that existing legislative models imposed a governance model onto Aboriginal communities as though Aboriginal people had previously operated in what amounts to a political, social and economic vacuum. These issues have long been identified. It is well and truly time to address them.
Partnerships will be a key to the Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures strategy. A partnership is simply an agreement where the government and the communities of a region or, indeed, a regional authority, negotiate and agree on the service delivery issues that should be addressed, the way they will be implemented, and how they will be measured. Two agreements are being negotiated and acted on now with the Palmerston City Council and Thamarrurr at Wadeye.
Partnership agreements are intended to focus the attention of quite disparate government agencies and community groups on the key issues facing a region. They might deal with social, economic, environmental or cultural issues; they might involve agencies changing the way they do things; and they might involve communities taking on new functions or roles. Both parties will be accountable for the achievement of agreed outcomes. A regional community with no agreed idea of where it might go or what it might do is not equipped to negotiate a partnership agreement. After it has worked on a regional development plan, after work has been done to develop its capacity to make decisions on behalf of the region, then it will be able to negotiate a partnership agreement.
In regards to monitoring and evaluation, it is our intention to ensure that everyone involved in the Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Future strategy is able to monitor whether it is working.
My department has established an in-house academic research capacity. This will provide us with a constant source of critical advice, support and assistance in the development of an evaluation framework for the strategy in the coming year. We will convene a conference of stakeholders to review progress every two years. From this, a state of the regions report will be tabled in parliament. This report will allow the Territory public the chance to review progress that has been made. It will provide Territorians the opportunity to give direction to the progress of the strategy. What I am proposing is that we undertake a complete rethink of the way we look at our regions, and a re-imagining of the social and political structures and economies of those regions. This will mean changing the way we do things.
Change always presents challenges that are critically important if we intend breaking through the neglect of 30 years in regional policy and planning. I am confident that it will deliver because it will have people of passion and commitment involved in it, and they will now have a properly organised way to work in partnership.
In regards to the progress to date, this statement sets out the framework for reform, but we are not starting from scratch. Many projects that are consistent with the strategy are currently under way. Some have already achieved outcomes. On 7 August, I attended the swearing in of the new Thamarrurr Council at Wadeye. This new body will provide the people of that area, that includes Wadeye and the surrounding land, with a legitimate governance structure that is recognised by the Northern Territory and Commonwealth governments. Thamarrurr has entered into a partnership agreement with the Commonwealth and Northern Territory governments that, over time, will focus the activity of the three governments on key issues of concern.
On 1 July 2003, the new Nyirranggulung-Mardrulk-Ngadberre Regional Council came into existence. This new council takes in the communities of Barunga, Manyallaluk, Wugularr, Mardrulk, Werenbun and Jodetluk, along with all outstations in the associated land trust areas. The new organisation has taken many years to develop. It will establish a service delivery framework in the region under the control of the people of that area, which should ensure that administrative overheads are reduced and the funds available for services increased. A partnership agreement between the new council and the Northern Territory government will be discussed in due course. A new organisation is also being discussed in the West MacDonnells area in Central Australia. This new organisation will be a new council for a number of communities in that area.
The Tiwi Islands Local Government that was established in July 2001 also provides a service delivery framework across the communities of Nguiu, Wurankuwu, Milikapiti and Pirlangimpi. This new council had some serious difficulties following its establishment. Many of these difficulties have now been addressed, and the organisation is now gaining strong credibility and capacity.
All of the constitutions of these organisations are different. They have all been developed to meet the specific needs of the people of the areas concerned, establishing a proper balance between traditional authority and western democratic models. At the same time, all of the constitutions retain strong adherence to the fundamental democratic principles required by the Local Government Act. All of the organisations are local governments with all of the powers and functions that these bodies carry.
I am aware that the title ‘regional authority’ causes some people some concern. There are those who would prefer that these bodies were called ‘councils’ of some type. All titles bring with them connotations for different people. I am keen to ensure that the titles that are used are meaningful for the people they relate to, and that must relate to the organisation. A title such as ‘shire council’ may fit some circumstances, but for others, the title ‘regional authority’ will be more meaningful.
After a lot of mucking around, the Tiwi obtained agreement to the title of ‘local government’ and I am told they would like to retain that title. I propose to introduce an amendment to the Local Government Act to allow such titles to be used subject to normal legislative processes.
Regional development boards will play a significant role in the implementation of the Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures strategy. The primary role of the new boards will be to facilitate the preparation of regional development plans to assist in the implementation of initiatives and to monitor their achievements. Nominations for the five boards have now been called, and strong interest has been exhibited in the positions advertised. I will be appointing the boards during the next month. The boards will be supported by officers of my department. They will be briefed on the issues that the government sees as important in each region, and on regional development initiatives in other places as a part of the orientation for their roles.
Regional development plans are the first step in the identification of issues and strategies that will provide an agreed focus for the development of regions by both the government and the organisations of the regions. Plans will soon be announced for the Katherine and Anmatjere regions. The Barkly Blueprint is being implemented, as is Alice in 10. These latter two plans were originally developed under the previous government.
Plans are to be developed progressively in all regions. Work will start now on the preparation of a plan for the Gulf region and a dedicated officer of my department will be overseeing the process in Borroloola.
The Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures strategy establishes a framework for change. This change is, in the view of the government, absolutely vital if the full economic and social potential of the Territory is to be realised.
Madam Speaker, I commend the statement and move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, I have a bit of a smile on my face because is this dej vu or is it not? I am glad the minister introduced the statement, and I congratulate him for recognising that the evolutionary process of local government for our remote communities has continued through both governments. That is a great thing.
I take exception to the fact that the minister slagged into the CLP for having done this, that or the other. I have to take exception to it. Let me just draw your attention to a statement that this minister, then in opposition, made:
- The community’s health and strength is reflected by how strong its local government council is, either local or community government council.
No other state has done this.
I acknowledge from our side of the House – the minister was in opposition then – that the statement is correct. No other state has paid the attention that the Territory has to ensuring that small, remote Aboriginal communities have access to this level of government.
This is the man who thought that what the CLP did over all those years was great and, through time, gradual evolution, things have improved. Nobody denies that there are lots of problems out there in the bush. We all know that, but for goodness sake, white contact with Aboriginal people in Central Australia was made less than 100 years ago - maybe a touch more, but not really much more than that. The benefits of development have not been significant until recent decades. We need to remember that.
If the minister and his government want things to change overnight, then I wish him all the luck in the world. The minister was clever enough to include in his statement that it is not going to happen overnight. He was, in his statement, saying that we are going to do all these things, but do not expect us to do it and deliver it within a year or so. It is going to take a long time. I will come back to that when I eventually come to the place where he made this statement.
The CLP recognises that social and economic development needs to happen. Without that, building homes or putting infrastructure in communities will not do anything, will not achieve anything for Aboriginal people. What is the point of having a you-beaut house with running water, electricity at the flick of a switch when you have nothing else to do? What is the point in that? That is such a wasteful form of resource.
During my time as the minister, I started moves to ensure that housing infrastructure is included in the totality of regional development so that if people choose to live out in a particular area, there is more than just a home for them; that there is employment, productivity, so that suddenly their lives out there are meaningful. That is what it is about. I support the minister in his desire to bring this regional development about.
The local government reform agenda that was encouraged and pushed along by the CLP government was being implemented by the very same public servants who are now doing what the minister wants: building stronger regions. Hey! Not a problem. If this is not a re-badging of what has been happening over the last 20 years, then I do not know what it is. This is about doing what is right for Aboriginal people in remote communities.
Is there a crisis in the bush? That depends on your perspective. There are areas that are really devastated, I agree, but there are also huge pockets that have shown the determination to get on with their lives, to improve, to ensure that their communities and their lives are of first quality.
I quoted the minister’s comments when he was in opposition. There are several other comments that I can cite as well. He talked about how the CLP had brought about Aboriginal development during the years of its government. Let me go to some of these quotes from the member himself. He was concerned that any sort of program implemented out bush should not be too hurried because people do not want to be coerced into any particular direction, that they want to have time to develop their own ideas, to find their own communitive interests. The minister, then in opposition, said:
- People want the process slowed down. The field officers who have been out there trying to sell these local government reforms and trying now to introduce this partnership concept are just going to make matters worse.
However, he also recognised, following my statement that, in fact, the CLP was slowing it down and was not going to force people into it. What the minister is doing and what CLP has done in the past are very much in the same line of effort to ensure that Aboriginal people in bush communities do improve their lifestyle.
To say that local government arrangements in the Northern Territory have failed Aboriginal people is purely untrue. While in the early part of his statement the minister said that, later on he congratulated many communities, such as the Tiwi, for having made a success of their community government. He talked about Katherine West and congratulated them for their great success. The minister cannot have it both ways. Either we did not do it right, or we did it as well as we could within the circumstances that we had, exactly as the minister is doing now. He is going to do as much as he possibly can within the circumstances that are pertaining and within the resources he has.
I could not agree more when he said that we have to strengthen our regions to ensure that we do not allow a particular group of people to suffer the disadvantage of living in remote areas. This is what we all want. The CLP wants it as much as the Labor Party. When the minister spoke about it, he never quite got down to how he is going to implement it. He gave lots of nice, fuzzy, broad, big picture views of what he wants to do, but when it comes down to implementation, there is no detail.
There is a lot of money going to be spent on this process. He talked about $800 000 for or community development officers. I suspect they will probably be paid Labor Party apparatchiks there, pushing the Labor line rather than capacity building. He is going to spend another $500 000 on the Regional Development Fund and a further $600 000 on the Capacity Development Fund. The government has not come down with: ‘This is how we are going to spend it’. It has not shown us how the money is going to be dispersed. It is just going to say: ‘We are going to do it’.
If the minister was serious with a real plan, it would be there for us to see. What he tells me by what he has just said is that: ‘Here we have a some fuzzy idea about what we are going to do out there. We have all this money put aside to do it’. I suspect what this going to be is pre-election largesse. It will be splattered all over the countryside. Nearly $2m is a heck of a lot of money to be spending in the next year or so.
In all aspects of Aboriginal development, if we do not look at developing a region where there is work, perhaps even subsistence living, and good housing, people will not stay out there. You can say: ‘Yes, this is traditional. I want to go back to my traditional land’ but, after a while, the bright lights will still attract you and you will need to come in, or you come in for other services. If you have regional development in those areas where people are living, there is more incentive to go back.
I have travelled the Territory far and wide in the last nine-and-a-half years I have been in this parliament and, in particular, since I have been on the Substance Abuse Committee. We have been to many Aboriginal communities. I have seen for myself the good ones, the bad ones, the ones that are cared for, where local residents are very proud of the community, and the ones that have been left to go into absolute disgrace. I was at one not so long ago where I saw a painting of a community – I think the painting was some 50 years old or thereabouts – and it showed the community centre. There were farms around the periphery of the living area, from banana plantations to vegetable patches. I thought it was just fantastic. One of the traditional owners there talked about it and he was so proud. He said: ‘This is what we used to have when I was a kid, when I was between 6 and 10 years old. I remember all these things and now we do not have it any more’.
During the conference, I cracked a bit of a joke and, in a semi-serious way, said: ‘In this community there are about 500, 600 people. Had you brought in 200 or 400 Chinamen tomorrow, within six months the whole community would be productive. It would be absolutely productive. Why can’t it happen now? Why can’t it happen?’ For the life of me - maybe it is my cultural fixation, I cannot get myself out of that cultural box - I cannot understand why it cannot happen. Do not just say: ‘We do not have the resources’. For goodness sake, they have all that land. We are in the Top End where the rain comes down at two to three metres a year. You have the ground, water, manpower and welfare. So there is money coming in, there are people around, you have land and you have water. Why can’t you do something with that? I do not know. I need to understand the culture a bit better, and maybe I will learn one day why it cannot happen.
The fact is when I said that if you brought 200 to 400 Chinamen to this area, things would change, the response to me was: ‘Yes, it would.’ That is what baffled me. I see the member for Arafura laughing. She was there; she heard it. She would agree with me that those were the comments that were made by the people we talked to. So why can’t it happen? Maybe this is where capacity building has to come into it, to try to show people that earning a subsistence living is not that difficult. I look forward to something happening. Maybe it might take 20 or 50 years, I do not know but, hopefully, one day it will happen. If we can start the ball rolling today, then we can expect that something will happen in the future. If we do not do anything about it now, obviously it will not happen.
To say that this government is trying to disentangle 30 years of failed policy is a lot of rubbish. It is not true. This government is continuing, evolving, modifying and harnessing what has happened in the last three decades since the Territory has been under self-government, and that is the way it should happen. I trust that, once the CLP comes back to government at the next election, we will continue to promote the program that is now here to ensure that Aboriginal communities flourish into the future.
There was no malign neglect. Sure, we could not do things as fast as we would like. Had we unlimited funds and manpower, we could have changed the world overnight, but nothing is unlimited. Within the limited resources that we had, we did what we could. We achieved many good things, and the minister recognised the many good things that we did. To say there was no transfer of skills is untrue. We tried desperately to transfer as many of the skills as we possibly could; to empower community governments; to teach them as best as we could about governance. Yes, maybe the governance structures might have been slightly different from the cultural norm but, when you talk to people like Bob Beadman, he could so readily demonstrate to you that parallels between Aboriginal culture and mainstream Australian culture are there. You could see it so clearly. As the CEO, he was a man who knew so much about Aboriginal culture that he could encourage and enhance the delivery of capacity building through the public service into our communities.
A thought came to my mind, and maybe this is not politically correct to mention, but the Stolen Generation was an issue. Of today’s Aboriginal leaders, how many were brought up in a white culture where they became educated people? They are now the leaders, for goodness sake. They are now the leaders of the Aboriginal community. That is terrific. I do not deny that was one of the positive things to come out of it. Sure, there was a lot of tragedy involved, and Australia recognises that there was a lot of tragedy, but there were a lot of benefits that have never been articulated clearly for many people.
It is important for the minister to understand that what he is doing has the opposition’s support. It is time that we continue to push on and make sure that capacity building continues to occur, that resources are spent out there. However, this government has to be a bit more transparent because, at the moment, we cannot see what the real effort is going to be. The thinking is too woolly. Going through the statement and trying to pin down exactly what he is going to do is difficult. It does not tell me anything. He said:
- An independent consultant has reviewed the previous regional development advisory structures in the Territory to consider whether they have the capacity to meet the needs of regions and the government.
He talked about an independent consultant’s report. Where is it? What is it? I do not know. I have not seen it. It could have been a piece of A4 paper with 10 words on it. If the government did have an independent review, it is important for the government to table it so that it is open to scrutiny, so the opposition can have a clear look at it and, if possible, support the government in what it is doing. Without it, why should we trust that the minister has had an independent review worthy of anything? Government has to be more transparent.
I do not have a problem with Aboriginalisation of employment out in the communities. I grew up in a community where, because we were a British colony, most of the administrative jobs were taken up by British expats. For a long time, the country was run by British expats. Gradually, through time and the capacity of the local people who were educated in the system to be able to replace the British expats in those jobs, capacity building was there, as was the desire by the local inhabitants to learn the language, learn the system and the structures. That is important. It is not just a British expat job; it is something that we wanted and grabbed with both hands and took over. As we demonstrated capacity, the British expats left those jobs, vacated them, and, over time, we were able to localise the jobs to local residents.
The minister cannot get up and say the CLP did all these bad things, and here we are doing all these great things. You applaud the law and justice project at Ali Curung. You think it is fantastic.
- A long-running project is the law and justice project at Ali Curung and in the three Warlpiri communities.
You think it is great. You said:
- While the focus of that project is on the needs of those communities to deal with law and justice issues, the project is also about empowering those communities to deal with matters of common concern.
You think it is great. Who started that? You did, I suppose?
Mr Ah Kit: Who buggered it up? You did!
Dr LIM: You did? Well, you have been in government only two years. We all know that there are great projects that the CLP has commenced, and continued to support, and the law and justice project is one of them.
Minister, when you want to do great things for the community, I support you, but be transparent; show us where it is coming from, and show us where you intend to spend the money.
With regard to regional authorities, there are positives and negatives. The minister criticised the CLP for wanting to force people into larger community councils. What is the difference between that comment and wanting to form regional authorities? Nothing, except you say you want regional authorities and, to let people work themselves out, to decide where they are going to go, we are going to give some indicative margins or boundaries where they can come together. At least I was a lot more open than that. I said: ‘Look, I am not going to give you a boundary. You find your like-minded people, you find communities of interest, and go for it. Then come back and tell me who you have worked your communities of interest out with’. That, at least, is not providing boundaries.
At least with the regional authorities, it breaks down the concern that I had about the oft promoted concept of CANCA. This is a terrible acronym unfortunately, but CANCA stands for the Combined Aboriginal Nations of Central Australia. That was something that bodes a monopolistic governance of all Aboriginal communities in Central Australia under the auspices of the Central Land Council. That caused me a lot of angst. By having regional councils, that would definitely break down the grab that CANCA was trying to make in Central Australia. Good on you; we will see how you go with it.
With the regional councils, again, I am not quite certain where you expect the municipal councils to fit into it. You talk about Alice in 10, the Barkly Blueprint and, while municipal councils in those two communities, Alice Springs and Tennant Creek, were involved in those two projects, they are not the prime movers of those projects. Do you want a municipal council to be at least the focus? I do not believe that in this document that you tabled earlier, Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures, it is clearly articulated. There is a table in the last couple of pages of the booklet, but it talks about regions rather than which councils will be involved. Maybe you can explain that to me, minister, during your reply closing debate.
A regional authority will not be created on demand. If it is not going to be created on demand, who is going to create it? You? Are you going to say: ‘Yes, here you are. This is your regional authority, you are going to do it’. Who requests that the regional authority be formed? Is that your department? Is that you?
Mr Ah Kit: You did not listen to me.
Dr LIM: I listened very closely. Let me quote the words back to you:
- A regional authority will not be created on demand. The establishment of such potentially powerful organisations will be subject to long and detailed negotiations. They will not be imposed on communities, and they will not be set up to fail.
Therefore, if it is not going to be created on demand, it is subject to long and detailed negotiations, and not imposed on communities, who asks for it, who needs it, who wants it, and who is going to set it up? You need to think it through a little more, minister, and explain clearly what you want to do.
Then you are going to drag ATSIC and land councils into it. ATSIC and the land councils are not part of local government. ATSIC might have some hand in assisting with funding, but what have the land councils got to do with it? Is it something that you want? Surely they are not part of that system.
You talk about partnerships. Partnerships are something that we started, too, minister, and I am glad to see that you are continuing it. You fostered it, and continued to develop it. That is a good thing. Do not let me discourage you at all; in fact, let me encourage you as strongly as I possibly can to keep the partnerships going. If the truth be known, I was the one who initiated the partnership with the Palmerston City Council, and it was done a long time ago. Good on you that you have the next one going at Wadeye.
Obviously, any program such as this need to be monitored. I look forward to your future reports. Perhaps six months might be a bit soon, but maybe in 12 months time, you can tell us what you have achieved.
In closing, minister, I remind you of your own words so that you will go away from this debate remembering what you thought about this whole issue before you became the minister. What you said was this, and only a scant couple of years ago:
- What frightens many of the Aboriginal community government councils is the move they see by government …
That is you now:
- … in taking away their independence, the autonomy. What concerns them, if they were to come under the umbrella of a regional system of local government, is the ability to conduct their own affairs the way they do now. What concerns them - and if anything, most Aboriginal community government councils understand - is the financial accountability. What concerns them if somebody under that umbrella with them is going under because of bad bookkeeping practices, that it is going to drag them under also. Councils that developed a good reputation over the years, who pride themselves in that reputation, are worried that this could be blemished if they were to go down this regionalisation of resources under these local government reforms.
Minister, you have a track record of being cautious, and I congratulate you for that. It is important to remember the words that you uttered. Recognising that the member for Stuart will also be speaking, there are many words that he uttered in here that will be brought to his notice. I suggest he reads those words first to remind himself before he responds in this debate, particularly what he thought of regionalisation in his electorate.
Unfortunately, I have run out of time, so I have no chance to quote words that the member for Stuart said in 2001.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I come from the point of view of working for local government in Aboriginal communities and in local government in Litchfield Shire, so I come from a background of both sides of the fence.
I have some concerns about the statement. Whilst there is no doubt that some reforms need to occur - I have always been a supporter of some amalgamation of councils because there were far too many councils in the Territory - it has to be done carefully. It has to be done in such a way that people do not lose their rights. I do not see the protection of their rights in these new regional authorities as much as I would like. I say at the outset that perhaps we are missing the point.
The minister has made a couple of fairly provocative statements, I suppose, if you come from the opposition. I am not talking about me being the opposition. The minister said: ‘We are disentangling 30 years of failed policy and practice’. He also said: ‘Local government arrangements in the Northern Territory have failed Aboriginal people in many ways’. I do not accept that. I believe local government has done wonders for Aboriginal people. The reason for the communities being dysfunctional is not local government; it is the things that surround it. It is anything from lack of control by the Department of Local Government over what is occurring in local government areas, the introduction of unemployment benefits that meant, basically, people are not working any more, and the social breakdown caused by substance abuse. There is far more in the dysfunction of a community than local government. After all, local government’s job, mainly, in communities, was to pick up the rubbish, fix up the roads, make sure the footy oval is nice and tidy. In other cases, some of them were involved in housing, other places had housing associations to look after the housing. So, it is too simplistic to blame local government. I know many …
Ms Scrymgour: Well, they put on a number of services and did not resource councils. That is the argument.
Mr WOOD: I am not blaming either - I am saying in the history of local government, it has not always been serviced well. I believe that the previous government probably should have done more to monitor some of the failings of local government, whether people, for instance, were being elected when perhaps the election process was flawed; when shire clerks or town clerks perhaps were not doing the right thing, taking money out of the community, etcetera, but that is not to say local government was the problem.
The problem was the policing of local government. I worked at Nguiu Shire Council which, as far as I know, was the first Aboriginal local government in the Northern Territory. I do not recall that local government being the cause of the dysfunction. There was drinking when I was there; that was a cause of dysfunction. There was gambling; that is part of the cause of dysfunction. But as regards local government - it provided work; it cleaned up the place; it grew grass on the oval so everybody could have a game of footy on the weekend; it went out and collected firewood for the oldies; did erosion control down the beach - local government works.
The problem is, if you get the wrong sort of managers and you get governments that do not go out and monitor what is going on, then they will fail. You can build stronger regions but if you do not address the core problems, you will just gloss it over again. Government has to look at the issue of CDEP payments. We have to look at lobbying the federal government to say: if we are going to have CDEP and we pay people full wages - and I have listened to the member for Barkly, and I agree with him, when I have said that I think perhaps CDEP should be scrapped, I have listened to his wise words. He said: ‘Do not scrap it, just pay people basically a full day’s wage, give people full employment, use the same facilities to develop employment’. But that is one of the main issues we have to approach.
The stronger regions is going to take time. What we need now, right at this moment, is full employment on Aboriginal communities. If you continue with no work, you will continue with this dog chasing its tail, substance abuse - this dysfunction will continue and we have to do something about that. I believe in this paper, minister, you try to compare local government with the Bawinanga Corporation and the Katherine West Health Board. I do not have a problem with them being very successful, but you can compare a corporation with a corporation; I do not necessarily think you can compare a corporation with local government. Local government should be based on elections, all the people to provide services.
Ms Scrymgour: So are those organisations.
Mr WOOD: But these corporations are not local government. The Katherine West Health Board is not local government. The Katherine West Health Board would also come under the auspices of something we will be keeping an eye on it as well. There would be good governance above that, to make sure these things worked and that is what should happen with local government as well.
I also have some concerns, minister - and I am wary that the member for Stuart wants to speak - but you talk about the idea of bringing people together so that we can make more efficient services, and that is a good idea. On the other side of the coin is that you create unemployment. In other words, if you focus all your accounting in one spot, which I understand, it is good efficiency, you all of a sudden put someone out of work in those little communities. That might be purely working against the economic rationalists, but there are some issues there where you are trying to create employment, and in some cases you are taking it away because you are looking …
Mr Ah Kit: Not many Aboriginal bookkeepers out there, and accountants.
Mr WOOD: Well, there should be Aboriginal bookkeepers. My argument and my problem with the Tiwi Local Government Council is that you sometimes develop an efficient system that is so efficient that it requires complex mechanisms to run it, because you have more advanced accounting and more advanced processes for managing it and that sometimes leaves the Aboriginal people behind. We have to be wary that we do not introduce systems that make it harder for Aboriginal people to manage what they should be managing. I raise that as an issue because I saw some of the things that were occurring on the Tiwi Islands. When you looked at the complex processes required to pull all those councils in and create an accounting and managerial system, I thought: ‘Gee, things have not changed in the last 30 years. White people are still running the system’. We have to make sure that what we change does not leave Aboriginal people in the lurch.
You mentioned the Local Government Association having a greatly expanded role in the provision of training for elected members. The Local Government Association should be the key, should be well up there, because, after all, most of these councils are members of the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory. They should not have a minor role; they should have a key role in making sure that, as a neutral body – not as a government body, because government is pushing this – they can act as the devil’s advocate to ensure that what you are saying in this process is being done; that is, people are not being forced into it. Local Government can act as a counter-balance to make sure that is occurring. They play a very important role.
I only see once in here, minister, mention of democracy. I have said, time and time again, that one of the dangers I see in amalgamation is that people lose their democratic rights; the rights to have a direct say, not an indirect say. I thank the minister for the briefing his advisors gave me the other day, but I do see a system where you elect these people and they elect from themselves into another group. We are taking people apart from the direct election of the people who govern them. I do not think that is a good idea. If you look at a shire council, for instance, you would elect people directly onto that council. To some extent, these regional authorities change that and have almost an American collegiate form. You may say that is good, but I am not so sure.
Minister, you also mentioned that we had assumed westernised political norms and values without making any recognition of indigenous political norms and values. I do not entirely agree with that. When I was at Nguiu Shire Council, the council, for sure, had some westernised political norms, if you want to put it that way, but they also used their traditional skin groups from where they would elect people.
When we are dealing with local government, we are not dealing with a traditional institution. People drive cars, go to the club, live in houses, mow lawns, drive tractors, sit in aeroplanes. They are not traditional activities, yet councils look after airstrips, ovals, roads, rubbish. You are dealing with the provision of services in a manner that is not traditional because there is that change.
I have no problem with the issue of land being under traditional governance, but I have always argued that provision of services to people requires a system where people have equal representation on the board that provides those services. We have to be very careful there.
Another thing that is good if you have at least some westernised political norms is that in the larger system of Australia in the NT, Aboriginal people vote for this government and the Commonwealth government. If you can keep the voting systems as similar as possible, you create less confusion and that is a way of enabling Aboriginal people to have a better understanding of the voting systems for the broader community. There are some good reasons for trying to go down that path.
The minister talked about the idea that the words ‘regional authority’ could cause people some concern. I would be one of those because when you read through this document, you have mentioned the word ‘council’ several times. One is the Thamarrurr Council at Wadeye. You also talked about the new council, this new regional council. You have not called it an ‘authority’. I do not know who chose that name. If you want at least some uniformity in Australia, with Queensland, with Western Australia, the word ‘council’ relates to the third tier of government, and that is what this is about. ‘Authority’ could be anything from PowerWater to the museums authority. It is more a name given to a quasi-government enterprise. These are not.
The word ‘council’ is exactly what it is about, it is the council. We should maintain that name, whether you want to call it ‘local government council’ or ‘regional council’, the word ‘council’ is not just symbolic, it means a lot and it relates to this tier of government. You have the danger of causing confusion in Aboriginal communities about what is an authority. Why do you have a community government council, and then why do you have an authority? Why is Litchfield called the shire council, why is it not the city council? Basically, we used to have three divisions of what councils were in Territory: city councils, shire councils and community government councils.
I know you are trying to develop a broad regional council. I do not have a problem with that in theory, but you need to keep the word ‘council’. ‘Authority’ will be confused with other things. I would be interested to know who came up with the idea of calling it an authority. It sends the wrong message: ‘authority’ means someone has authority over you. ‘Council’, to me, has the implication of being based on democracy, a body we elected. It is very important that we stick by that.
One other thing, minister, we are talking about having these regional boards and partnerships. Sometimes we have to attack things in a simpler way, just as I say we should have full employment. One way to develop the Territory simply is to improve the roads. If you bituminise a road, you will immediately change things. Say a community wants to grow crops and the road is all corrugated, you cannot bring a crop in. Say the industry wants to have tourism, if the road is corrugated all the time, it is not going to encourage people to go there. In Litchfield Shire, which has bituminised huge amounts of roads in the last 10 years through a process where people actually help pay for the bitumen, the shire has developed, not with government help, not …
A member: Yes!
Mr WOOD: Well, some, but not in the sense that it has not gone out saying …
Mr Dunham: Establishment package. Very good establishment package.
Mr WOOD: Yes, yes! That is why we had to bituminise some of the roads you did not give us the money for. Be that as it may …
Members interjecting.
Mr WOOD: … that slight historical variation that is …
Members interjecting.
Mr WOOD: I cannot believe people are believing the member for Drysdale. This is a strange turnaround.
Dr Toyne: Sorry. We just got carried away.
Mr WOOD: That is all right. You did get carried away. The fact is that the council has built roads and that has helped development in the Litchfield Shire. This is great stuff, but sometimes I think we should be looking for simpler things. Look at the map there. I do not know what the road to the community you were just talking about? Manyallaluk? Is that road bitumen or …
Mr Ah Kit: A dirt road.
Mr WOOD: A dirt road. I presume it is the place that used to have Aboriginal tourism.
Mr Ah Kit: It still does.
Mr WOOD: Still does. I reckon that you would encourage more people to go up that road if it were bitumen. Sometimes simple things can help development. You can look at all these great theories - and this is great theory, it may work - but it is important to look at some simple ways that do not have to go down this path.
The other issue is that we are talking about development, and I wonder whether some of this is coming out of the right department. Should this be coming out of the minister for Business and Development because that is not really a function of local government as such? The regional development I see as part of minister Henderson’s portfolio, whereas the development of good governance is your department, minister. I do not believe local government wants to get drowned in necessarily developing great enterprises. Its main function is to deliver essential services. It can be a conduit to helping business development, but I do not think it is the main body that should be pushing for business development.
Minister, I will finish there, saying it is a great idea. I do not know whether we are going around in circles, as the previous government did. By all means, look at amalgamating councils, but let us not lose that very important emphasis; that is, the democratic rights of people, no matter whether their community is large or small, to elect the people they want to represent them. We do not diminish that, because that is what local government is about. I do not think this parliament should expect anything less.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, today I support the Minister for Community Development’s statement on the Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures strategy.
Before I get into the substance of my speech, I seem to be spending a lot of time lately, since the portfolio changes opposite, dealing with the member for Greatorex and his latest homilies. Being lectured to by a person such as the member for Greatorex about what is good for the bush and what we should be doing or not doing really makes my hackles rise. I can certainly point to one event that I can remember during his very short tenure as Minister for Local Government. We all recall from last week his encounter with Mr Bugger-off at Coconut Grove. It reminds me of another incident, also involving the member for Greatorex, after the local government conference in Alice Springs where, to make a big man of himself, he got up and announced the demise of the Willowra Community Government Council. He was then met by a little-known brother of Mr Bugger-off called Alan Bugger-off, and he was presented with the same symbol of the upraised finger. It was not telling him that Jesus Christ lives; it was actually letting him know that he was a complete fool and that he has made a completely stupid decision as regards the interests of the Willowra community.
Finally, after a couple of years now of steady work, we have Willowra back on its feet after the legacy of the member for Greatorex. I do not accept for one moment this man as a spokesman on indigenous affairs in the Northern Territory. He knows nothing about it. He should shut up, listen and learn, before he starts opening his big trap.
As local member for a bush electorate, I have experienced first-hand on many occasions some of those events that the Minister for Community Development talked about. Over the long periods I have been out bush, I have learned that there is a simple principle that must be followed: you must always start with the traditional ownership arrangements in the land area and engage in respectful consultations with the community regarding reforms. No matter what structure you are trying to put together, whether it be a community council, an art cooperative, a school, or whatever else, there is a clear connection made to traditional arrangements, traditional authority and traditional responsibilities in that area. It is a principle that the Martin Labor government follows and something that the CLP never really got a grasp of. That is why they failed to turn things around in the bush, particularly in implementing their local government policies and reforms.
Indigenous economic development is a key priority for this government, as pointed out by the member for Nelson as well, and this commitment is demonstrated through the Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures strategy. The Martin Labor government plan for how we are going to achieve equitable opportunities for indigenous Territorians to participate in economic growth and improve their economic outcomes, is set out in our Building a Better Territory economic development strategy of June 2002. In October 2001, not long after we first came to government, we held an Economic Development Summit here in the House. A recommendation from this summit was the need to conduct an indigenous economic summit, which was subsequently held in Alice Springs in April 2003. At the centre of the Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures strategy is a proposition to strengthen our regions, particularly looking at the delivery of the key government services of education, health and local government.
It is fair to say that in the government, we have had some challenging discussions about how to build these new processes and structures. It is quite clear that there are many existing and very worthwhile initiatives in the indigenous communities that can form potential growing points for regional development, provided that it is supported through a whole-of-government process, and provided it has access to government through an effective field service.
I applaud the beginnings of the establishment of a new type of field service, but also an old type of field service in that we will have field people out in the communities who can take a strategic view of what is going to be coming out of the regional development plans, and make sure that the areas of government that have to provide a response to elements of those plans are properly mobilised to provide the support that is needed. We lost that in the very early stages since self-government. We are regaining it as a very strong element of the regional reforms that the minister is moving into.
In my portfolio areas, I have been working on regionalising service delivery arrangements and building partnerships with regional and remote communities. Many of these projects - in fact by definition, all of them - are in the Justice area, but I never forget for a moment that, along with what we do in Justice and what is done in Education and Health, the potential connection is always back to an overall regional reform of the type that is talked about in Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures. In fact, we really cannot say that we have reformed an area until we have impacted on all of these key areas of government service delivery. They are all absolutely critical to the future and present wellbeing of indigenous people in these communities.
In my electorate of Stuart there are three coordinated service delivery groups. Warlpiri Patu Kurlangu Jaru Incorporated is a group that has become a regional education council and has arisen from a number of meetings, but also a very long tradition over a quarter of a century of the Warlpiri triangle schools working together; that is, Willowra, Lajamanu, Yuendumu and more recently, Nyirripi. Warlpiri Patu Kurlangu Jaru Incorporated is a body that will be capable of rolling out very important reforms in education program delivery in the Warlpiri area, whether that is the installation of new secondary level course work in the communities, the connection of the senior and adult end of the education programs to employment and local economic development, or the maintenance of cultural values that the Warlpiri people want to continue to support in their area. Therefore, this regional group will now be working through the Collins implementation commitments of the Martin government, and we would expect to see, over the next few years, a real revitalisation of the education programs at all levels. That will clearly flow into areas of governance and economic areas of development within that area.
The Warlpiri Health Zone is another development in the Warlpiri area, again, part of the arrangement with the Commonwealth government to establish more indigenous control over the delivery of, particularly, primary health care into remote areas. We have seen Katherine West, which was mentioned in the minister’s statement, as an example of regionalised and indigenous governance arrangements that have led to much more effective delivery of health services than dealing with health delivery community by community and with centralised control in the government system. We look forward equally to seeing the Warlpiri Health Zone’s development spread across the Warlpiri communities and allow new levels of primary health care to be provided to people there.
Finally, the Kurduju Regional Crime Prevention Committee, which comprises the communities of Ali Curung, Lajamanu, Yuendumu and more recently, Willowra, is the first indigenous regional crime prevention council to commence its work in the Northern Territory. The Kurduju committee has developed a set of protocols out of an urgent need to provide non-indigenous organisations with a guide on how they can engage with communities when they wish to visit them. The Kurduju committee communities have grown tired of the number of visitors, including government people, who did not know or did not observe proper protocols or rules when visiting their community.
An example of how sometimes government agencies make grave mistakes in dealing with the communities occurred when I lived at Yuendumu. In one year during the time I worked there as adult educator, I logged 480 meetings which were called to maintain the detail of over 100 service delivery arrangements. This was totally disempowering to the community, and it had the practical effect of engaging community members in one endless meeting that started at the start of the year and finished at the end, with a short time out when the roads were too wet to travel on. That is no way to deliver services into a community.
By establishing these regional governance arrangements, as proposed in the minister’s statement, we will cut through all of that fragmentation and disempowerment and develop forums where indigenous people can make powerful decisions, broader decisions about the arrangements they want, and have them respected by each of the individual service delivery agents, whether they are NT government, non-government, Commonwealth government or private sector.
With support through the Office of Crime Prevention, the Department of Community Development, Sport and Cultural Affairs, these protocols will be produced in a publication and widely distributed. The Kurduju committee is also considering a project to expand the law and justice model through peer modelling processes ...
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker! I draw your attention to the state of the House.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Ring the bells. There being a quorum, please continue.
Dr TOYNE: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, Kurduju is increasingly receiving requests from other communities, including non-Warlpiri communities, for support and information in relation to the Night Patrol, safe house, alternative dispute resolution, and pre-court conferencing. It is a strong example of the value of empowering local communities. I congratulate members of this council on their determination to tackle crime and justice issues in their community, and to make a difference working in partnership with this government. I single out particularly the Lajamanu community at the moment for the enormous progress it is making in reproducing the methodologies of the law and justice initiative at Ali Curung.
Kurduju is only one example of the regional crime prevention councils we are establishing across the Territory through the Office of Crime Prevention. Regional crime prevention councils strengthen and empower regional and remote communities, providing structures to improve service delivery, and ensure issues and concerns are brought to the attention of the government and acted upon. The principle here is to stabilise the communities socially, to provide the environment in which other service delivery arrangements can be installed: education, child health, women’s health, women’s welfare, and other health and governance issues.
Regional crime prevention councils are also operating successfully in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Katherine, Nhulunbuy, East Arnhem and Darwin. These arrangements provide powerful ways of empowering local communities and linking them into government initiatives and processes so they can work to strengthen their regions. Under these community partnerships, some fundamental work is progressing in the regions of the Territory. In Nhulunbuy, for example, the regional crime prevention council has been formed after several months of work between the Office of Crime Prevention and other groups in Nhulunbuy including Alcan, an ATSIC sponsored law and justice committee, indigenous organisations and community groups. That group has received a $5000 grant to commence its work and is establishing a working group that will look at initiatives being developed on itinerants and their application in Nhulunbuy.
The East Arnhem Crime Prevention Regional Council has also commenced its work, combining the communities of Galiwinku, Ramingining, Maningrida and Gapuwiyak. Led by Galiwinku, through the Knowledge Centre project, law and justice committees have been established in each community, and together they form this indigenous regional council. The law and justice committees will examine links between the renewal and preservation of Yolngu culture, and the maintenance of law and order according to both Yolngu and western law. The key focus of the committees will be to work in productive and culturally positive ways with those in the communities who are at risk of offending. The committees will also be looking at developing more formal involvement and participation in the justice system.
This government believes that committed local people working on local solutions are a powerful force to combat crime. We will continue to work in partnership with people in our urban, regional and remote areas to develop locally-driven solutions to crime and its causes. In this response to the minister’s statement, I want to pledge the work that we are doing in Justice into Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures. We are not about setting up separate domains. Clearly, what has been done in the education and health systems and what has been done by us in Justice can provide support and starting points for the broader regional developments that are countenanced in Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures. We believe and certainly pledge ourselves into a team effort to do this, as we said in the earlier statements on indigenous affairs in this House by the minister, and we have nothing here to prove other than some success.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, my colleague, the member for Arnhem, has established a reputation since he has become a minister as a person who tells it like it is. When he stood in the Assembly and delivered his first statement in this area, that was evidence of that. It does take courage to stand and call to account the excesses of communities and to speak about the need for change. It also takes, beyond that, courage in the first instance from a person capable of deliberation and thought, and a thoughtful person to commence that process of change because you then have to pull in and rely on others and the actions of others to deliver that change rather than the rhetoric of the opening statement.
It is that process of courage and thinking through, strategically, the many problems in our indigenous communities that has been missing in the Territory for many years because, far too often under our predecessors, we saw reports condemning health outcomes, education outcomes - report after report. In fact, we all knew what the problems were by heart, particularly those of us who had the privilege to serve constituencies in rural and remote areas. We did not need to see reports to know what the problems were. What we failed to ever see in those times, of course, was a conscientious and well thought out strategy to deal with them and address those problems. Therefore, by taking these issues on fairly and squarely, this minister and this government are going down a path that no Northern Territory government has trodden before beyond, of course, the rhetoric.
In delivering services to the Territory, governments are attempting to provide quality service across the most remote administration outside of Canada. No other Australian state confronts the mixture of small population base, small revenue base, far-flung communities of small numbers, and relationships between those communities based on cultural precepts as well as economic. It is a mammoth task. Until now, that task has been based on the delivery of services, as my colleague said, to stand-alone communities with small populations; populations too small to attain any sort of economy of scale or critical mass in service delivery. This method of delivery results in duplication of materials and services, which means money and effort is wasted rather than focussed. It has been, of course, to the detriment of the people living in these small rural and remote communities. If you add to that the conveniently hands-off approach that has been used by many people subscribing to self-management, then it is possible to say that many of these communities have, in the first place, been set up to fail.
As a member of parliament representing remote communities, I have seen, over the years, many valiant efforts, both sensible and misguided, to turn around some of the effects and outcomes of poverty in the bush. It is heartbreaking to see the acceptance of intolerable conditions that those of us in here would not accept for ourselves or our families. It is equally heartbreaking to see real effort being made to affect change that is rebuffed by some people in some cases because they are so alienated and marginalised that they are caught in the trap of being victim. It is frustrating to see genuine goodwill by people from both sides being undermined by the sheer inability to properly resource or support efforts from central authorities. That is not to say it is all gloom and doom. Great effort has been made and undertaken by people living on these communities themselves to rid themselves of the poverty cycle. Governments have embraced some programs that have lifted aspects of people’s lives out of this poverty in some areas, but it is not effectively coordinated and frequently withers on the vine from lack of the necessary ongoing support.
What has been missing is the willingness to toss aside inappropriate models and think a bit laterally about solutions to these problems. What has also been missing is the willingness to examine projects and measure their effectiveness and real outcomes. Too often, political sacred cows get in the road of real advancement.
My colleague, the Minister for Community Development, has embraced the need for change in service delivery and lateral thinking in the way we strengthen our regions. He is proposing what can be described as a radical change in this thinking; radical, but based on common sense. It means reorganising our delivery systems to focus on sustainable regions rather than small, cluster, stand-alone communities; pursuing effective infrastructure development in a more systematic way; delivering real educational outcomes; and being prepared to revamp employment models so people normally closed out of the system are given the opportunity for meaningful work.
The investment we make in individual Territorians will be integral to the task of strengthening our regions. Human capital will be our greatest tool as we work to build capacity at regional levels. However, we need to lay the foundations for this now. I spoke yesterday about indigenous education and the task we have ahead of us in turning around educational outcomes in remote territory communities. We have had a small measure of success in the past two years, but the real challenges are still ahead of us, and we make no secret of this. As the Minister for Community Development pointed out, economic growth and social development is the key to the future wellbeing and prosperity of our regions. In the same way, the provision of high quality education and training is the key to economic growth and social development.
This has been said 1000 times in this House - 1000 times, at least, and nothing has ever changed out there. The difference is that we are going to make that change and see it change, and the commencement of that change will be in the lifetime of this government.
Young people are the future of our remote communities. If they are undervalued, disenfranchised or living without hope, there is little chance for the survival of their communities. Without a solid foundation of skills and knowledge, Aboriginal Territorians can achieve very little and we cannot hope to develop the regions. That is why we are starting with the basics: getting indigenous children to school and keeping them there; increasing the focus on literacy and numeracy, and addressing the complex health issues that keep children from attending school; improving school infrastructure in remote areas; ensuring students are able to undertake secondary studies in their own communities; and providing them with alternatives to traditional schooling, where necessary, through targeted training and alternative education programs. We need to ensure these young Territorians have the skills they need to play a part in the future governance of their communities, their region and, indeed, their country. It is particularly important that we provide young people with flexible learning opportunities beyond the school gate.
For many young people in remote areas, formal schooling is not an appropriate or feasible option, and that is where programs such as community-based training for remote youth, or TRY, program come into play. It provides targeted vocational training to young people in remote communities aged 14 to 19. Because the program is community-based, it gives local communities a say in the sort of training that will lead to real job opportunities that meet their particular needs. The take-up rate for the program has been beyond expectations, equipping young people with real useable skills.
Another success story is the Indigenous Housing Association of the NT program being run in conjunction with the Department of Employment, Education and Training. Under the program, young indigenous people are taken on as construction apprentices and are undertaking training at the Certificate II level. When they have completed their training, these young people will have the sorts of skills necessary to assist further in the economic development of their region.
However, government also has a role in supporting people from remote communities and town camps to move from participating in training programs to making a living from the knowledge and skills that they have gained. For example, government has provided funding to support Centralian College’s efforts to develop small enterprise and industry. In Tennant Creek, this has led to tourism and cultural activities by Julalikari Council and the development of a grape plantation at Oak Valley. These are local solutions to local issues.
In the Northern Territory, the public sector plays a crucial role in our economic and social development, more so here than anywhere else in the country. That is why it is important that the public sector is representative of the people it serves, and at the moment it is not. The indigenous employment rate is around 5%, while indigenous people make up a third of the Territory population and are among the highest users of government services. A five-year indigenous employment and career development strategy for the Territory public sector aims to address this critical imbalance. The aim of the strategy is to advance the employment of indigenous people at all levels of our public service. It is this sort of career development capacity building that will go a long way to ensuring that indigenous people are in a better position to take control of the development of their own regions. An investment in individuals is an investment in the whole of the Territory.
As the minister pointed out, regional development will require strong partnerships between the communities of the region and the government to ensure that any action taken is in the best interests of that particular region and appropriate to their needs in time. That is where the need for lateral thinking comes in because no region is the same; each has their specific and unique needs. That means that government agencies will need to be flexible in their approach to social, economic and cultural issues at play in a particular area. Their ability to interact and work with each other and with community groups in a particular area will be critical. It may require a major shift in the way they have done business previously or the policies they have employed.
It will require a strong dedication to achieving real, agreed outcomes and an ability to listen, consult and act accordingly. Every person involved in the process has an important role to play and faces an enormous challenge, and government recognises what is being asked of them. For the first time, we have a real opportunity to make a difference in remote communities to enhance education and health outcomes, to break the cycle of welfare, to address the substance brought on by lack of hope and opportunity, to provide jobs and to support sustainable economic development. The benefits that will flow form our efforts to built stronger regions will not stop at those regions. It will lead to a better Territory for all Territorians. I commend the minister’s statement.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Minister in reply.
Mr AH KIT (Regional Development): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker …
Members interjecting.
Dr Lim: No, come on! There are lots of speakers yet. You guys said there were a lot of speakers over there.
Members interjecting.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Excuse me, order! Minister, it is to your discretion. I have made the call, and if you want …
Members interjecting.
Mr AH KIT: Being a good minister …
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: That being the case, the member for Drysdale.
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I would have thought there would be many people wanting to speak in this debate, particularly given some of the provocative language that has been used in the statement.
I am disappointed with the negative view held by this minister. I cannot believe that a minister responsible for Aboriginal development would have such a negative view about the portfolio area he has. There is a lot of good work that has happened, there has been a lot of good work take place over a number of years, and okay, not all attributable to the CLP government. But just to say that the past is so abysmally wrong, that we have wallowed in these terrible problems - to quote for instance from page 5 of his statement:
- We are disentangling 30 years of failed policy and practice. In doing so, we will encounter obstruction and set backs.
Further on the same page:
- Part of the enduring legacy of these decades of lost opportunities is the malign neglect of resources being diverted away from the regions and Aboriginal development in favour of confrontation, neglect and blind bloody-mindedness.
The mother document for all of this stuff is Building a Better Territory, a blue covered document that was dropped in this parliament. As I pointed out when we debated it, it includes a map. On that map you will not find one of the communities listed in this paper - sorry, you might find Palmerston, but I doubt it. There are many listed here, right through the Katherine area, Ali Curung, all of these communities that are out the west side of Katherine, around the MacDonnells, were not in the Chief Minister’s document. I can understand why a regional development minister would have difficulty deriving from that mother statement and would come up with something that would look to blame other people.
The Northern Territory is a fairly young place. We got self-government in 1978. In 1978, there were two local government instrumentalities - two. One was Alice; one was Darwin. At the time of self-government, we got another two: Katherine and Tennant. When you look at the speed of delivery of services and the devolution of services from the Department of Aboriginal Affairs, as the Commonwealth instrumentality was then named, it had this quaint little program called TMPU, Town Maintenance and Public Utilities. TMPU had two components: one was the council-type organ that did the roads, rubbish and that sort of thing; and the PU was what we now call essential services.
They had this program that dispensed grant monies to communities, and that grant money was put to work doing the traditional local government things. It was a very tight interest on the money. If a council decided it wanted to buy a blue ute, they might be told they had to buy a twin cab Hilux or whatever, and there was a lot of strength and control that came from head offices. Communities had bad-boy status, and I have mentioned that Ngukurr, Roper River, now part of the Yugul Mangi Council, was one of those, and it climbed out of that hole. As we went on, we found that there were different categories of local government. One was a fully fledged community government council under Part XX of the then Local Government Act. The others were these groups incorporated loosely under one of two acts: the Aboriginal Councils and Associations Act, a Commonwealth act of about 1976; or the Associations Incorporation Act.
Both of those were incapable and poor tools to carry the status of local government. When we moved to provide untied funding – and these are pretty quick steps – and a Grants Commission process, the Grants Commission process provided untied money to councils. There were a lot of people who said we could not do this; we could not hand these monies over to councils because they would waste and squander it and it would disappear. The reality was that on some occasions that did happen, but pretty much, people used the money for their own local priorities. That was a pretty good thing. It was called self-management. Some people equated two concepts, one being self-determination and the other self-management, and used the two interchangeably. That caused a great blurring of policy, though the policy name was really self-management.
We wanted communities to be able to manage themselves, to rely on funding that was predictable, came through a fair and transparent process with formulae that were well understood, and that those funds would come for the benefit of communities. That happened. In that time, it was difficult to make a unilateral decision that the whole of the Territory would be incorporated because pretty much, the whole of Australia is. There are portions of NSW, SA and WA that are unincorporated – I might be wrong about Western Australia – and they are largely wastelands. What has happened in other places is you are in a council, whether you like it or not. Here, we moved towards genuine self-construction of councils. They picked their boundaries. That was pretty novel. They said: ‘This is what we consider to be a community of interest’. Sometimes the boundaries changed.
Barunga was a community government, as was Beswick, and they became Barunga Wugularr. Sometimes they amalgamated; sometimes they disaggregated. Small communities like Wallace Rockhole, which was quite close to Ntaria or Hermannsburg, were considered as being in the same community of interest, and they strongly sought local self-determination in a community called Wallace Rockhole. This is a very difficult thing.
The member for Stuart described how first it has to come from the ground, the traditional owners. Boundaries are pretty important then. The voting system for our community government councils is radically different from council to council. Often, it replicated what were local, potent, power sharing groups. Often, it replicated the fact that these areas had governance – tribal, traditional governance – across a number of different areas. By laws could be different in each area. The member for Stuart talked about the great difficulty he had in Yuendumu when he all these visits from various people. The council could provide an over-arching body corporate on top of all those various incorporating groups that were at Yuendumu at the time. They could provide by-laws, including visitor protocols and avoidance of certain things. You could bring local issues of consequence into whitefella law, if you like, and have the full power and potency of that law. Frequency of elections - all of those things were matters of functions; the functions of a community government council. When people trot out something where they go to the Queensland government’s green paper, at page 16:
- The Queensland government’s Green Paper on Indigenous Community Governance, released in March this year, notes that several reports have identified the most commonly legislated model of governance for indigenous communities had assumed Westernised political norms and values, without taking any recognition of indigenous political norms and values.
That might be right. Quite frankly, I do not care. I do not care what they do in Queensland, that they have had several reports over there. If you really want to look at local governance in the Territory, let us look at the Territory. Now, there is a novel innovation. Why don’t we look at what happens here, rather than go to Queensland? If you really think that matters relating to how you run municipal services are traditionally unique, and have an Aboriginal appropriateness about them, you could mount that case. In fact, it was mounted, that certain things - maybe it is garbage collection, or animal control, or something like that - should be done differently in different places. You can mount that case.
Really, if you go across the world, you will see that services delivered by councils have a vague similarity to them, and that similarity means that - if you want to call it westernised or universal, or global, or whatever, that is, in fact, facing the truth, that is facing reality. Some of these services are very similar, whether you are in outer Somalia, Belgium or Yuendumu. How you pick up and dispose of garbage, recycling often has a similarity to it. It does not necessarily mean it is bad.
If you really want to look at a whitefella organisation, look at ATSIC. Gerry Hand came up here, raced around and, in 18 months, he created this thing that had all these democratic organs, a style of voting that was pretty similar to how we get voted into this parliament. It had all these functions that were pretty similar, and that was done in 18 months. This terrible previous government took 20 years to consult with community governments. Now, that was not confusion about policy; that was saying that we do not believe that there is an unholy stampede towards the one goal. We believe that there are halfway houses, like, for instance, being incorporated under other legislation, where you can move towards it. The business of picking your boundaries, by-laws, voting style, frequency of elections are features of the Northern Territory’s community government legislation, and they are very proud features. They are great things.
The fact that it did take some time, that is not a problem. You could have done it with a swipe of a pen, like Gerry Hand did, and that is: there is a thing called ATSIC, you are in it or you are out of it, and that is how it is going to work. We did not rush at it, we were very inclusive, we faced enormous combative structural antipathy from some of the organisations, and one of them was the Northern Land Council, which was headed up by a fellow called John Ah Kit who, ironically, is now the minister. If you people want to talk to me about the PAC, having a vested interest, sitting there in judgment and whatever, I suggest that this man should not be the Minister for Local Government. It is an absolute obscenity if you look at his background.
Mr Ah Kit interjecting.
Mr DUNHAM: He laughs! The belly laugh comes out, I hear that, and it is a beauty. I have to tell you, to find somebody as the Local Government Minister who has in his curriculum vitae such a constant, negative, angry opposition to local government, is bizarre. It is quite incredible. Then, we pick up his statement. Lo and behold! He don’t like local government, he don’t think it is working very good, we need another way to go, could be a CLP problem.
Well, blow me down. I could have written this statement for him 20 years ago because it is a thing called paternalism. That is what this minister has come up with. It is a thing called paternalism. What he finds offensive is that some of the problems of the past – there used to be this great word that some council are less ‘sophisticated’ than others. What they meant is that some really had problems with their bookkeeping, how they handled the money, rampant problems of avarice among some of the councillors, standover tactics, and all of that. These are growing pains on the way to self-management. Someone came in here and said: ‘You dumb fellows, we are going to fix this up for you. We are going to have these new thing’, yet what you have here is rampant paternalism. We are going to have these big regional councils, all these clever people there, and all that stuff you mob were doing in the past, we think is wrong so the Martin government is going to set up this new structure.
You can do it; the laws allow you to do it. You can even pretend you are doing it to rectify a problem of the past. You can even pretend you are doing it to advance the case of Aboriginal people in this place. It ain’t the truth! What you are doing here is another grand attempt at creating a self-management model that has a ring of familiarity to all of us sitting in a parliament like this. You take away some of the risks associated with giving people independence; you take away some of the risks associated with the problems you have had. You dress it up as an answer to a problem that you have inherited, and off you go.
The negativity ill behoves the minister. He started by saying:
- … gross indigenous income was only 11% of the Territory total, despite indigenous people forming 25% of the adult population …
There is another way you could look at it. I could say: ‘Indigenous income was 11% of the Territory total, despite having vast resources of land, minerals, potential agricultural, horticultural and aquacultural wealth that could be deployed to the best benefit of the people who own that land’. I could say that. It is not a criticism. It is saying: how could we have such a structural problem- and this, too, goes back to your time in the NLC – where people who own land find it difficult to deploy that massive, incredible asset to their best advantage? It is no good saying: ‘You could run a little killer herd; you mob might be able to do some art’. Have a look at some of the land out there. Look at some of the efforts you can make. Look at the old aerial photographs of pretty much every one of the major communities up here. It is land that is potentially highly productive. We have something like 25% of Australia’s groundwater resources here in the Northern Territory. We have water, land, and an unemployment problem. Let me see. There could be a solution in this: lots of land, lots of people without work, low income and great economic potential. Why do you not match it up? Now, there is an idea!
My colleague, the member for Daly, embarked on a program of looking for a number of economic opportunities. A lot of those were embedded in councils; some were not, but it does not matter. This is real black armband stuff, saying: ‘Poor bugger me, got no money and, therefore, it must be the government’s problem’. You have to be a little more innovative and you have to look at the fact that often, the voice for development for activity on Aboriginal land is coming from Aboriginal people who own the land. Why is this a problem? Because there are giant structural impediments to them achieving that, giant structural impediments. There are impediments to them achieving self-determination - if you would truly know what that means – and self-management including the use of their own assets and their own land, and various paternalistic attitudes dressed up in the guise of not allowing mining because it might not be good for you; not allowing joint ventures and partnerships because the whitefellas that are involved in it are so clever and smart that they might leave you stranded. That sort of thinking pervades this paper. If you want to build stronger regions, start talking economies. If you want to build stronger futures, start talking economies. If you want to address this thing that is right up the forefront of what you are talking about here about income, start talking economies.
The community government legislation that is embedded in our Local Government Act has worked. It does have problems, but we are talking about the oldest governments in Australia being municipal governments. Some of them pre-date the colonies and states. However, if you look at the Territory context, this is pretty new: 20 years. The minister has proudly talked about how he went out to a signing recently. Some of these organisations are a couple of weeks old. What do you expect? If you really believe you are in the role of setting up independence, some of this nurturing, caring, namby-pamby stuff is really, to be quite honest, offensive and paternalistic.
You have to let people take risks with their own money, their own land, their own asset. You have to say to people: ‘Some of these things are not our problem, they are your problem’. If kids are not attending school, you cannot wring your hands and claim that somehow this was some genocidal CLP plot and various other things that I have heard. That is just nonsense. If you want your kids to have an education you have to have an education ethic and you have to at least have an ethic about attendance. These are fairly simple conundra. These are not hard things to work out. Some of the solutions are very difficult, but the solutions are not paraded in this. This is an element of looking over your shoulder, finger pointing and blame. I really despair that this minister, who proudly proclaims his Aboriginal ancestry, would deliver a statement like this and would wallow in so much self pity, name calling, blame and poor bugger me attitude because it is not the way forward.
If you are saying Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures, a stronger future will not come out of this document. This is not a blueprint for making things better. This is a blueprint for going to an election and saying: ‘We would liked to have helped you, we have a two year plan – oops, that takes us over to the next election, but we have something in the kick and we will be able to work it out for you. Give us a bit of time. Monitoring, evaluation. What do you say somewhere towards the end of the next term of government?’ I do not think we have that amount of time, and I said it as the Health minister. I believe that some of the solutions in the whole area of Aboriginal affairs will take a long time. With health, they will take generations. I also believe that it is urgent that we start. It is urgent that we start now. So, the solution trail is urgent, the expectations of having solutions fall out of the sky in election time frames and election calibrations is crass politics.
Let us have an horizon here that will work. Let us have this horizon: Of the kids going into Grade 1 at Ports Keats next year, we expect 80% to get their Matric. That is a goal; 80% will go through. Now, that is a 12-year plan, and I do not have a problem with that because the investment has to be made for the Grade 1’s now. The urgency is something I would urge on the minister, a little patience about outcomes is something that is inevitable.
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonnell): A little bit of tag team work here with the member for Drysdale, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, because I listened to what the member for Drysdale had to say, and quite a deal of it I agree with. I also notice the Attorney-General tied economic development with local government and local governance models.
I cast my mind back to a work written by the then director of the NLC in a book called Our Land is our Life - if memory serves me - which is a compellation of Aboriginal writings. The minister, who was then the director of the NLC, wrote an article which still holds for me a great deal of hope. It was published in about 1993 or 1994; I could be wrong. But he describes the need, in that book, for the Aboriginal experiment with capitalism. I know that members opposite would require themselves to wash their mouths out with soap, even uttering the word, but it is worth dwelling on that, because I believe that back in 1993 or 1994 the minister was correct in his assessment. It is important to look at the fashions and trends of governance over the last 50 years to place the minister’s words in context in terms of the fashion of governance that has occurred basically since World War II.
Immediately post World War II, there was a shift in economic theory globally, which saw the whole world take a new direction of basically centralised, managed economies. It was done under the auspices and the direction, in many cases, of a fellow by the name of John Maynard Keynes. Without being an expert on Keynesian economics, this much I do know: Keynesian models said that you could simply tweak the economic machine in certain places and, as a consequence of tweaking it over here, you have an immediate cause and effect over there. I believe at one stage there was a machine belt that had water flowing through it and, by turning taps on and off, you could direct the water in different directions. The theory is predicated on a single assumption that you can direct an economy from a centralised place over and above the rest of the economic environment. That was the trend followed in very much a global way through the 1950s and 1960s.
The classic example of this sort of economic management was the theory that you created work and jobs and those sorts of things with productivity not being central to the economic theory. It was much more important to have people in jobs than those jobs being productive. My mind turns to the Indian paper mill factory. I forget which state in India it was in, but it employed about 1000 people, and it had three components to the industrial process, which were machines. Those machines pulped and milled and were supposed to create paper at the other end. The three machines came from different parts Europe and were totally incompatible. This factory, which employed 1000 people, did not create so much as a single sheet paper for a period of years. Every day, the employees would come along and clock in and out, and everything was tickety-boo. That illustrates an absurdity, the product of that type of thinking: so long as people are employed and the economy is managed, you will get yourselves a decent set of results at the other end.
Let us have a look at the Woodward Royal Commission, which reported to the Commonwealth parliament in 1974, I think. It was prior to self-government here in the Northern Territory, prior to the existence of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. In fact it was the precursor of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. The effect of the international environment at that stage had a fairly strong influence over the operation of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. The Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act reflects the economic thinking of the time: you centralise the economy, you can make it run and work, and by tweaking this, that will happen, and you would have people employed. That economic fashion subsided in the 1980s. It subsided in most parts of the world, including places like China.
The Chinese example is particularly useful to look at because China did start doing exactly what the minister wrote about in the early 1990s; it started to experiment with a freer system of economic development. The Premier of China - the sometime political prisoner, but nevertheless political survivor - Deng Xiaoping, was able to create a system in China by which many people were allowed to become participants for their own economic good. The observation was made in a book called Commanding Heights a few years ago that Deng Xiaoping could have on his headstone today: the man who lifted 300 million people out of poverty by allowing them to work for themselves and create wealth for themselves.
Although China is still nominally a communist state, they engaged in the experiment of capitalism and did so in a big way and created enormous amounts of wealth for the people of China. As a consequence, so many people were lifted out of this environment, so much so that the Chinese Communist Party has now passed a resolution that share ownership is part of the system of collective ownership as a way of getting around the difficulties of making a capital-based system operate within the borders of a communist state.
What has occurred in land trusts in the Northern Territory is that we still have this 1970s economic theory operating inside these land trust environments, centrally run; an elected body that makes everything happen from a central point. The consequence, as you pass over the borders of land trusts into non-land trust areas, is that the viability of what happens on that country is determined by the system of governance that overlies it. It concerns me that that line is so clear and cleanly cut in the map: one side of the fence will be productive and creating jobs for people; on the other side of the fence, that will not be occurring.
The minister was aware of this back in the 1990s, which is why he spoke about the great experiment with capitalism that needs to be encouraged. The minister, in this statement, seems to have backed away from those beliefs because he is now telling Territorians, and Aboriginal Territorians, that the whole thing can be managed centrally, and the whole thing will be managed and, extraordinarily, will be managed by, effectively, his department and the arrangements that they make. That is a shame because I do not believe the Territory government is capable of dealing with these problems in the current legislative environment that operates in the Northern Territory. That is not a criticism of the current government, it is just a reality of life. It is the same problem that the former government dealt with.
The problem, of course, for members opposite and the minister, is that if you encourage people to take chances, economic risks, and enjoy the returns of those risks, you will create inequality. The problem is that some people will start to move ahead, and some other groups will not move ahead, and the concerning thing is, for members opposite, that the inequality will grow, and for that reason it is important to try to bring everybody up together. That is really the thrust of it.
The fact of the matter is that, after all of these year of these economic theories working inside Aboriginal communities, equality has been maintained at the lowest possible level.
I hope that the government encourages an economic environment in which people can make decisions and generate wealth from their own decisions from their own country. But to achieve that, the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act does require amendment. To achieve that, you are not going to be able to govern your way into a position of wealth; it needs to be driven by the people who own the land.
I do not pretend to be an expert on traditional Aboriginal law. Indeed, I have six or seven different language groups and legal systems in my own electorate. However, this much I do know: the sense of ownership that sits across the raft of at least those traditional systems rests with family groups. Those family groups are headed up by, generally, patriarchal and matriarchal figures who are very senior in those systems. Those people are the people who should be calling the shots for their own country. That country is reasonably clearly identifiable by virtue of the songs for that country. The songs for country are a way of expressing your rights and privileges over possession of that country and being part of that country.
If individual families and the leaders of those families were allowed to exist in an environment where they made decisions without having recourse to a centralised body that may have different ambitions, then the experiment with capitalism to which the minister had referred all those years ago would, indeed, start lifting a lot of these people out of poverty, because the responsibility towards your family is a primary motivator, and to generate wealth from one’s own land is not a new concept. It was around long before the arrival of Europeans. Generating wealth from your land meant that your family was healthy, and that your family grew and increased in strength. The theory is exactly the same; how you go about it changes. You have to make more or different sorts of decisions in the current economic environment.
I would like to see Aboriginal Territorians, like any other Territorians, thrive in the Northern Territory. Yet, I do not see that thriving in so many parts of my electorate. The only clear generalisation I can make about it seems to be the governance practices on the land trusts themselves. It is not an issue of black and white. There a white people who live in Alice Springs who live in poverty; there are Aboriginal people who live in Alice Springs who do reasonably well and hold down good jobs and look after their families in that fashion. The only generalisation that I can see that works effectively is the generalisation that the different management practices, theories or economic systems applied on land trusts, as opposed to elsewhere in the Northern Territory, generate fundamentally different results.
The continued centralisation process is something that concerns me. The process of this government creating these economic areas through the development of council areas is useful for the purposes of local governance and administration, but to make that enormous leap forward and to suggest that by tweaking local government policy and arranging it in a certain way you are going to bring about fundamental economic change, is an extraordinary leap and ignores the very sensible comments that the minister made all those years ago when he wrote in Our Land Is Our Life.
I hope that the government gets honest about the way it approaches these issues; Labor governments in other places have. The old ideological battle of the 1900s is largely over; in that economic processes are now generally assumed to work in a similar fashion by both sides of the political divide. It is time to bring things like the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act up to 2003 and allow an economic system to prevail inside those areas, with the assistance of land councils, which still have an important role, but to finally allow the liberty of those people who own the land and hold the story of that land to express itself, and let those people make decisions as to what is appropriate governance for the purposes of economic development on their own land. Then they can elect a council to deal with local issues affecting everybody who lives in any community that requires some sort of governance.
Mr BALDWIN (Daly): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I totally agree with my colleague, the member for Macdonnell, regarding the way the land is managed now under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, and that we need to all sit down and look at ways of ensuring that the asset that Aboriginal Territorians have can be utilised in a proper manner. That does not mean in the manner that we are used to, in a contemporary sense, in putting it up as collateral to borrow money, but it certainly needs rejigging to allow more freedom for enterprise development.
I want to comment on the language of this statement first. I am very disappointed that the minister has used the language he has. In fact, it is very contradictory. On the one hand, he has totally bagged past administrations on the way that they - we - have done things, then throughout the statement proclaiming that this is the way forward and only he or Labor has thought of it. This is fundamentally about regionalisation, and it has two aspects: regionalisation of governance and economic development. I do not say that is a bad idea. Perhaps, as far as governance goes, that is the next step in the evolution of things in self-management. If you really want to be honest, the CLP government recognised that, as has the Labor government. It is self evident when you look around at what has been happening.
The minister mentions in here Thamarrurr. Thamarrurr is a regional authority, if you like. Call it what you like, it is a regional authority. The Labor government came in at the end of the formation of that. I have been working with those people for eight years to reach that stage, and there were a number of stages to reach there, with other names attached to what was finally developed. What has been finally developed is a form of governance under the Local Government Act that represents the 17-odd clan groups in that region. It is a regional form of local government, the same with what is happening east of Katherine, and has happened in Tiwi, done under us. It is not something new and it is really the next form of evolution. I support it, where it is appropriate, because that is what some people are saying they want to do, while others, in other areas and other regions, are not willing to approach it at this time. I do not think they should be forced to.
The community government scheme, as my colleagues have said, is something that everyone who has served in this parliament should be proud of. There has been a lot of debate since the formation of the first community government council in Lajamanu in 1980, I think it was. Some have actively opposed it, as the member for Drysdale has said, the NLC being one of them.
Galarrwuy Yunupingu opposed community government council for a very long time. In fact, there was a time – and the minister might remember, and be able to fill in the detail - but I am sure there was a time when the NLC actively employed, I believe for a period of two years, an officer to go around to communities to talk against community government council, so great was the fear that this was some form of CLP ruse to perhaps destabilise what the NLC was doing. I am not sure why; I never did understand why they were opposed to it.
The fact of the matter is that when you look around, many of these groups wanted them. Many of the communities wanted some sort of self-management and were very happy to take on the community government scheme. I have worked in many workshops and public consultations in communities where the schemes were developed. The reason they liked those schemes were because they were so flexible, as has been pointed out, and that they could design a scheme that suited their own needs, both culturally and contemporarily.
It is ironic that not many years ago Galarrwuy Yunupingu’s own clan, the Gumatj, formed their own community government council with their own unique and specific terms and conditions under a community government scheme. I have not heard anybody who has worked in that organisation or has had any benefit from that organisation that has stood up and said it was the wrong way to go. Certainly they have benefited from having that structure there. It certainly has not impacted on any of the land issues. They are separate issues that can be dealt with by the right authorities, including the four land councils that we have in the Northern Territory.
Therefore, it is a little over the top that the minister, on one hand, says it is all no good from the last 20-odd years. The fact is that most of these communities are people who have asked for schemes and now the development of those schemes has turned into regional type schemes, still under the Local Government Act, which is good to see. There could be cause - and we certainly knew that there could be cause when the formation of the Tiwi Island regional scheme was under scrutiny - for change to the community government act. That could still be the case as we move into other models.
In terms of the regional economic side of things, the minister is talking about five regional groups and that is committees. That is great. They will go and consult and put together regional plans and there will be a board in each of those groups that reports directly to the minister, not unlike what the CLP government was doing. Certainly, all of the projects that Labor now promotes for Alice Springs, like the Desert Knowledge Centre, came from regional development plans: Alice in 10, the Barkly Blueprint, and the minister has mentioned those. He also mentioned the Katherine Regional Economic Plan, which he will announce shortly and which takes in the entire region of Katherine. I know full well that plan was should have been ready prior to budget deliberations, and it has been waiting for action ever since. We are nearly three-quarters of the way through the year and we now find out that we are about to have an announcement about that. I say it is a great thing.
The point is that this work has been going on, that this is a re-jigging of what has been happening all the way through, even down to the Regional Development Fund of $500 000 per annum that will be applied to the preparation of regional development plans. Then the minister says he is going to have a Capacity Development Fund of $600 000 per annum and that will be spent on priority projects aimed at developing community capacity and decision making. That is great. It is not too dissimilar from what we had. We had regional development plans being developed from within the resources of the department, and they were fully resourced to provide support to those regional committees. Those plans were developed, and we had a $500 000 Regional Development Fund which could be then provided - on recommendation from the NT Regional Development Committee that reported to the minister - monies to help build capacity on ideas like doing feasibility studies, looking at different projects and that sort of thing. Therefore, that is a re-jigging of that as well, nothing new from what was there before.
Regarding economic development, I add another angle to the regional development side of things, although I concede that is important. At the time that government changed, we had plans under way in most regional centres including some smaller plans being developed; for instance at Wadeye. The other thing that we had that copped a great bagging from the minister over a number of years was the Indigenous Economic Development Unit that sat in the Aboriginal development area. That was a unit set up to provide one-to-one assistance to Aboriginal organisations, individuals, clan groups, whatever, to develop business ideas.
The Indigenous Economic Committee was formed to support it, and that committee was made up of agency people - not just Northern Territory, but also ATSIC - and land councils were often asked to provide input, and then there was an advisory committee as part of that. The reason the Indigenous Economic Development Unit was developed was that, whilst you can do a lot at the macro level, what you will find - and I am sure the minister and other members opposite have found this - is that when you move around communities, you are approached by a lot of people who have many ideas for economic enterprise development. When that happened to me, I was both minister for Business and Aboriginal Development. The business side of the arm of government was not really structurally set up to assist people because they were used to dealing in contemporary set-ups, so we set up a unit in the Aboriginal development area to provide a resource for people to go to and ask for assistance.
It is very telling that we were bagged for quite a while, particularly by the minister, because he thought it was a waste of time. It did not achieve results very quickly, and I am glad the minister points out in his statement that things will not happen very quickly. They will not. By the time Labor came to government, the unit was working on, from memory, well over 130 individual enterprise development projects. By the time Labor came to government, something in the order of six or 10 had actually reached full business phase, where they were fully operating, transacting business and providing jobs for themselves and, more importantly, they had realised their own dream and goal.
The reason it takes so long is because you bump into all of these problems, and that is why we set it up. The first thing you bump into is the problem of people not knowing where to go, how to get through the bureaucracy, what sort of licences you need, and a naivety about the sorts of things you need to do to set up a business. Obviously, you start encountering literacy and numeracy problems, and they have to be overcome. You start encountering cultural problems. You start encountering financial problems, and you need to do financial planning, and look for loan assistance, grants, that sort of thing. You run into, obviously, land problems, and they need to be dealt with. So there are very long, slow processes. The point is that if you keep chipping away at it, you get success. We had success, and it is a damn shame that the Labor government, and the minister particularly, scrapped the projects that were in hand. To my recent knowledge, they have not been picked up and carried forward. The people concerned are very disappointed.
At the Indigenous Economic Forum in Alice Springs, the minister mentions in his statement that he had the squeeze put on him, one might say, by various members of that forum as to why that project was scrapped and would he please bring it back. That is my information. Now, he can …
Mr Ah Kit: You were not there. They crushed me.
Mr BALDWIN: This is from people who were there, and were involved with that discussion. All I am saying is that, politics aside, it was a successful program. Yes, it took some time to get results on the board, but it got results. It is one of the things, in my view …
Mr Ah Kit: Name the six to 10 projects.
Mr BALDWIN: There were 136 programs on the go when it was scrapped; eight to 10 to come to fruition within a couple of years. Aboriginal people asked to be helped to get their idea off the ground, and this was the only program that was doing that in a substantial way that had benefits and brought results, and all of the agencies were involved. ATSIC thought it was good because they could see a structured way of moving forward for these people - clans and families who wanted to develop their own businesses. Anyway, the minister has copped some concern from people about that program, and they certainly have asked him to bring it back on the agenda.
I am also glad to see that the minister has used Thamarrurr in the Wadeye area as one of his shining lights for regionalism. It is very, very good to see. As I said, I have worked with these people for a long time to bring that to fruition. He talks about partnerships between government and these regional councils, and that is great to see. The CLP signed a partnership agreement a couple of years ago with Wadeye in the development of Thamarrurr. It was then we worked on getting the Commonwealth to the table, a culmination of which was the signing by this Chief Minister and the federal minister at a ceremony not that long ago. That partnership now is moving along very, very well. I would encourage other councils to do likewise to get some rationalisation into the delivery of services to communities.
As I said, in this statement, the language is poor, and it is contradictory. On the one hand it says: ‘You were to blame for all things in the past about self-management’, then it holds up community government as being a great way to move forward because, if it was not, then why would we set up these councils? Why does Labor condone these councils, the new regional councils to be set up under the community government scheme?
What we are in is a transitional period that the CLP recognised. We called it the local government reform agenda; they call it Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures. As far as the governance side goes, we had our economic development committees; they have their regional committees. We are heading in the same direction. It is a shame that it could not be written in more of a positive light. I look forward to some of the outcomes that the minister is proposing, and I certainly agree with him that nothing is going to happen overnight.
Mr AH KIT (Community Development): Madam Speaker, I thank members for their contributions today. Whilst I do not necessarily agree with many of the statements made by members opposite about the statement being provocative, as the member for Nhulunbuy mentioned, I am calling it as I see it . I will not change the way in which I do that whilst I am a member of this House, or anything else I deal with in life that is of utmost importance.
I will pick up on the comments from the member for Daly because they are interesting. I did not think he was as bad as the members for Greatorex, Macdonnell and Drysdale. Certainly, he understands it a lot more because he was involved as a minister in the previous CLP government. In respect to some of the comments he made in regard to my time at the land council - as did the member from Macdonnell, and I will come to him shortly - the member for Daly needs to know that I was down there recently to sign and witness the new council, the Thamarrurr Community Government Council. As I said in my statement, that council is made up of 20 clans, with representatives of two people from each clan. The statement that was made to me while I was there was that the most wonderful thing about this structure, where it encompasses local government community government council principles along with traditional authoritative principles was that, for once, all these clans had representatives under the one roof, at the one meeting. Whilst I acknowledge that the member for Daly may have worked tirelessly over the last eight years, we are in government and we are moving forward and we have been responsible for ensuring that Thamarrurr and Wadeye is a COAG community in terms of escalating services and turning the situation around.
Mr Baldwin: You had nothing to do with that, either.
Mr AH KIT: Madam Speaker, the member for Daly can sit there and sulk and he might have another 12 or 18 months of sulking. The reality is you had a go at it, and you did not do it properly. You did not do it properly. You had the local government reforms. Let us go back a little more to when I was the Director of the Northern Land Council. The land council at the time opposed community government councils …
Dr Lim: Yes, why?
Mr AH KIT: I will tell you if you shut your trap, member for Greatorex, I will tell you why.
Mr Baldwin: Come on, a bit of decorum.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, that was a most unparliamentary term.
Mr AH KIT: Madam Speaker, the reason why was that the landowners had told the land council that they were concerned about the boundaries. The principle of community government councils was not a problem if they were restricted to certain limits in regards to how they governed their community under the particular community government council scheme. When the boundaries started to be threatened was when landowners saw it as a problem. In some cases, community government council boundaries were being spread out to areas some 50 or 60 miles away to cover outstations. Traditional owners on Aboriginal land are not going to accept that, and they did not at the time.
We have had a change over the last 15 years. We have a change of government now. We have an opportunity, unlike the member for Macdonnell calling for amendments to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, we want to sit down and talk our way through this stuff. We want to be professional about how we advance the Territory and that is exactly what Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures is about. I pointed out today in my statement at page 10:
- Our main concerns with the previous system are …
I will read those again, Madam Speaker:
- Regional Economic Committees had no clear role properly endorsed by government;
there was no clear process for negotiation between the government and the regional community about initiatives to pursue;
there was no progress for monitoring progress and outcomes.
If the members opposite oppose regional development, let them say so. If they oppose regional development and they think that the rest of the Territory in the remote and rural parts of the Territory should not be advanced, and should not be a part of developing the economy in the Territory, should not be a part of having a vision and contributing to the Territory’s future, well, let them say that. Most of them said that in their contributions today.
I doubt whether many of the members opposite, from listening to their contributions, have read Building Stronger Regions, Stronger Futures.
Mr Baldwin: I have.
Mr AH KIT: You haven’t?
Mr Baldwin: I have.
Mr AH KIT: You have? Well, you did not understand much of it.
Mr Baldwin: Yes, I did.
Mr AH KIT: No, it did not sink in.
Mr Baldwin: Where was I wrong?
Mr AH KIT: Because the statement at the front says that by building stronger regions, we build a strong Territory with everyone involved in developing the Territory, we give ourselves the best possible chance of achieving the outcomes that we all want, and that is great.
Mr Baldwin: I agree with that.
Mr AH KIT: You agree with that. Do you agree with the vision also?
Mr Baldwin: Yes.
Mr AH KIT: The vision on page 1? I will read the vision, so that some of these members are a bit lazy to read:
- Planning for the development of the Territory has been marked by separateness, by plans and strategies for the development of specific industries, Aboriginal land, the economy, urban areas, Aboriginal people, towns, communities or homelands.
The Territory government wants to deal with the issues that are important to people where they live, work and relax in a way that deals with the whole of the community.
We know that the potential of the Territory will be realised, where each region is as strong as it can be and where all the people of a region are engaged and included in its development.
- Real regional development happens when people in an area agree on what is to be done and work together to achieve those outcomes and where the rest of the Territory, represented by the government, is a partner in working for those results.
The Territory government’s vision for regional development is one where all of the people in a region are included in the achievement of economic and social outcomes that are environmentally sustainable and that respect and encourage cultural diversity.
- We need regions where business and industry recognise opportunities and develop enterprises, confident that necessary physical infrastructure, such as transport and telecommunications will be available to support growth.
Business and industry should be confident that they know what the government will and will not do to support enterprises. We need regions where society is confident, where people can obtain the skills they need to obtain the jobs they want, where opportunities for work are available for all, where services are available at a level and of a nature that meets priority needs and where young people routinely complete Year 12.
- Clearly, the regions the Territory needs will not be achieved by a statement of desire. They will develop where they have capacity to take their own decisions, and accountability for those decisions and where they are able to negotiate with strength for the participation of the Territory government in achieving the outcomes they seek.
Mr Baldwin: I’ve read all that.
- Mr AH KIT: Strong, powerful regions should determine their own future in partnership with the wider Territory society.
You may have read it, member for Daly, but certainly some of your colleagues haven’t.
Dr Lim: I have read it, many times, mate, many times.
Mr AH KIT: Madam Speaker, we have the member for Greatorex who is carrying on a bit like his colleague, the member of Drysdale there, being bitter, twisted and vindictive, and …
Mr Kiely: Churlish.
Mr AH KIT: Yes, very churlish. We are serious here in discussing the way to move forward.
When I run through the contributions made today by members, I will start with the member for Greatorex. One could not really follow any sensible stuff that he had to contribute. He was all over the place, and he seems to think he is some sort of Einstein who can get to his feet and talk on any subject and try and imitate, I suppose, on a smaller scale, the member for Macdonnell.
Members interjecting.
Mr AH KIT: He tried to emulate the member for Macdonnell, and I understand that because you have a lot to learn, but the member for Macdonnell …
Madam SPEAKER: Cease for a moment! What you are supposed to be doing, minister, is summing up the debate, not making attacks on members, personal comments. It is getting a little out of hand. If you want to make comments on their comments, fine, but let us try for a higher level of debate in this House.
Mr AH KIT: Madam Speaker, I am making comments on the comments that were made by the members opposite in regards to how they see the document presented by me today as being very provocative. They had a chance for 26-odd years, and they botched it. Some of the ideas that were put in place are still there, and I have no problem in working with those concepts and to develop them to include a better go for the regions throughout the Northern Territory.
In the document, we talk about partnership agreements, which the CLP never, ever thought of properly. We talk about the Regional Development Boards, capacity development for governance, regional authorities, about which the member for Greatorex seems to be confused. We talk about evaluation and monitoring, implementation and coordination.
This is our document. The way the member for Daly interjects, it is like they have ownership of it. Well, I am sorry; you are playing B grade. Do you realise you are playing B grade, your mob? We play A grade, we are in government. You sit down there and you whinge, whine and carp as much as you like.
My statement today is going to enrich the Territory. We are going to work with communities throughout the Northern Territory to ensure that they are no longer going to be neglected. Development of our regions is absolutely essential for the future of the Territory. Most members acknowledge that, although some more strongly than others.
The member for Greatorex was arguing against some elements of the statement but, in the same breath, he confused me because he claimed credit for some of it, and that is where the confusion lies. The member for Nelson emphasised the central objective of creating real employment in our regions, especially in our remote communities. This is a core objective of the strategy. If we were to employ 2000 indigenous people a year in the regions, we will never catch up with the unemployment growth out there. We have a task force being put together with input from the minister for Education, the minister for Business and Industry, and myself. That task force will concentrate on looking at employment, training and economic opportunities, which were sadly lacking under the previous government.
The member for Nelson emphasised the central objective of creating real employment, and that is what we are going to attempt to do with this task force. The government has inherited a major economic development problem. Whilst the member for Daly touched on these 100-odd minor projects - I asked him to name those eight to 10, and he cannot name them, yet they were important in the 160-odd he mentioned. He cannot even remember them, and that is how unsuccessful, obviously, they must have been.
Approximately 20% of Territorians are impoverished, structurally detached from the labour market, and poorly equipped to engage in …
Mr Baldwin: Outrageous. I will get you the documentation.
Mr AH KIT: Sorry, what is your problem?
Mr Baldwin: I will table the names of all of those projects.
Mr AH KIT: Good. Good, because when I came to office, I had a look at those. I had a look at those, and whilst there was some good work done …
Mr Baldwin: No good?
Mr AH KIT: There was some good work done There were a lot of very small projects; there was no big picture stuff, so you just dabbled around the edges. Look, we have been cleaning up a lot of mess since we have come to government that you fellas have left behind …
Mr Baldwin interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Daly, could we stop the cross-Chamber chatter. Come on minister, wrap up.
Mr AH KIT: Madam Speaker, the task force that is coming together came arose from the Indigenous Economic Development Forum held in Alice Springs. It was one of their major recommendations. In fact, the next forum is going to be held at Kakadu, I think in September or November, and I am proud to be a part of presenting a paper at that conference.
This booklet was launched by me earlier in the year - I think it was May, in Alice Springs. It gives you a run down on the regions: Katherine, Barkly, East Arnhem, Central and the Top End. People need to turn their minds to how, if we work in a bipartisan way, we can develop the Territory for the good of all Territorians. We should have a look at some of the areas that either have something in place that can be worked on and developed further, or create, from the community government councils in the regions themselves, a type of regional authority that would fit with how they would like to see services delivered and how they would like to work with government.
We have the Tiwi Islands, the greater Darwin area, the Kakadu region which includes Jabiru, Gunbulyana, Warrawi, Minjilang and Cobourg Peninsula. These are the regions, and I mention them for the benefit of members. We have the East Arnhem region, Groote Eylandt; Maningrida and surrounding communities; Wadeye and surrounding communities, Pine Creek, Coomalie and Douglas Daly; Katherine; Katherine East including Barunga, Manyallaluk, Wugularr, Bulman and Weemol; Katherine West; the Roper River; the Gulf area including Borroloola; the Barkly area; the Anmatjere area including Ti Tree; the West MacDonnells including Papunya, Walungurru, Ikuntji, Mt Liebig and possibly other communities; the Alice Springs area itself; the Warlpiri community from the Tanami, and southern Arrernte; southern Central including Imanpa, Mutitjulu, and Kaltukatjara, the Plenty and Sandover.
That gives you an idea of the regions in which we need to begin work in developing the regional development boards. I will be looking at those nominations, as I mentioned in the statement. Recruitment of community development officers will give us more people out in the field working with communities and regions. I have not stepped back from the aim of developing partnerships with individual communities. As I have said before in this Chamber, it is about working together in cooperation; meeting each other halfway; communities taking the decision to be very responsible; government providing their commitments to meet communities halfway; getting communities to talk to each other about how best they can share resources, how best the economies of scale can better enhance communities in particular regions; community management; communities being responsible and running their communities with council managers, but ensuring that, if they are a part of a region, they have representation on a regional governance structure that possibly could be a regional authority; and it is about working with these people and ensuring there is no big stick approach, ensuring that we are not going out there to force them into regional authorities if that is not their desire. Patience is something that we have, and the consultation process has begun. I want to see the Western MacDonnells and Nyirranggulung and Wadeye be successful so we can move into other regions.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Northern Territory Transport Plan
Northern Territory Transport Plan
Mr VATSKALIS (Transport and Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, it is great to be here amongst ourselves, since the opposition …
Madam SPEAKER: I beg you pardon? No, I do not think we want to hear those comments.
Mr VATSKALIS: … is not prepared to comment about the transport statement. Obviously, we have to consider it …
Madam SPEAKER: You can just go into you statement, minister, without any comment.
Mr VATSKALIS: Yes, Madam Speaker. The government’s economic development strategy, Building a Better Territory, identifies transport as one of the three key economic drivers of the Northern Territory’s growth and development. The main priority of the Martin government is jobs for Territorians, which requires increasing economic activity and growth. The Northern Territory’s future economic development and jobs growth is dependent on the ongoing ability of the transport system to efficiently connect people, goods and services.
In keeping with Building a Better Territory, on 10 July I released a draft Northern Territory Transport Plan for public comment. The purpose of the draft transport plan is to provide the essential framework for Building a Better Territory transport system to accommodate the government’s vision for an integrated, accessible, effective and safe transport system. I need to point out that this transport plan is not about roads. I repeat: this transport plan is not about roads. Rather, as I have said, it is about modes of transport and the transport system. Obviously, the effectiveness of our transport system is underpinned by its infrastructure. We all know the reliance we in the Northern Territory place on our roads for economic and social development.
Because of this, we are currently preparing a related strategy, the Roads Strategy 2003-13. This strategy will prioritise current and future road projects for the foreseeable future. Our priorities in developing the road network strategy are contribution to economic development, improvements to the safety of road users, and enhanced access to communities.
Today, however, we are focussing on the draft transport plan, which I am releasing for public consultation. The draft transport plan will also complement and contribute to the government’s other planning initiatives including the strategic tourism plan and the infrastructure plan. Preparation of the draft transport plan has come at a very exciting time for the Northern Territory, with the imminent arrival of the first freight and passenger trains from southern Australia in Darwin, finally achieving what has been dreamed about by Territorians for nearly 110 years. The overall aim of the draft transport plan is consistent with this major change, and I quote:
- … to improve the efficiency of movement, to benefit businesses and consumers alike; it is also aims to improve the mobility of Territorians ...
The draft plan lists a number key drivers for transport. These includes major infrastructure developments such as the completion of Stage 2 of the East Arm Port and the adjacent Darwin Business Park. The development of onshore gas-based processing and value-adding industry, mineral processing and downstream value adding.
Other important key drivers for transport are population growth and distribution, tourism and access to remote and regional areas. National and international policies also significantly impact on the development of the Territory’s transport system. These policies cover a diverse range of matters including the federal government’s AusLink proposal, national heavy vehicle reforms, National Competition Policy, Defence and security requirements and a national greenhouse strategy.
I would like to refer briefly to the federal government’s AusLink proposal for national land transport infrastructure. At present, national highways are fully funded by the federal government. Under AusLink, it is proposed by the federal government to change, with states and territories being expected to contribute to maintaining the national highways. This has major implications for future funding of national highways in Australia and, therefore, for the Northern Territory’s budget.
I wish to make it clear that the Territory government would strongly resist any attempt by the federal government to, once again, cost shift to the states and territories and shirk their funding responsibilities. If AusLink is to succeed and have any credibility, the federal government must bring new money to the table to meet the present transport infrastructure needs of this country.
Another key driver for transport is the growing demand for improved services in regional and remote areas, and the issue of social inclusion. Many remote communities in the Northern Territory do not have all-weather road links to the rest of the Territory. For many years, this lack of connectivity was to some extent accepted as part of living in such areas. However, increasingly, this is no longer the case, and the government has to consider how to accommodate the increased demand for good transport connections for such communities. The draft transport plan identifies remote regional transport infrastructure and service and service delivery capacity as areas where improvements should result in better access and enhanced business opportunity. There has been considerable economic development in the Northern Territory in recent years, with expansion in such sectors as the horticulture industry. This economic development is another key driver for the transport sector because it often requires improvements in transport infrastructure and services.
The draft transport plan is based on six strategic issues or areas and contains a range of possible priority actions for each. These strategic areas are broadly what are we going to do, and the priority actions are how we are going to do it. The actions are prioritised for each mode and grouped under two major categories: infrastructure; and service.
The first of the six strategic areas is development of efficient inter-model linkages to maximise the economic development opportunities associated with Darwin’s role as Australia’s Asian gateway. Completion of the railway, the new rail terminals at Tennant Creek and Katherine, the new Darwin Business Park and Stage 2 of the East Arm Port provide the key infrastructure required for this. The challenge now will be to develop services that make use of this infrastructure. The draft transport plan proposes a number of priority actions in response to this strategic area. This includes continued development of East Arm Port and encouraging the expansion of international shipping services using the port.
The second strategic area is in the area of Defence support; to consolidate Darwin as a Top End forward staging area. We are all well aware of the importance of the Australian Defence Force in the Top End economy and community, and the provision of good transport infrastructure and services is essential if Darwin is to maintain its role in Defence logistics. The draft transport plan has two priority actions in support of this strategic area and the associated broader issue of Defence requirements. The two priority actions are directed at reviewing Defence’s road transport infrastructure needs and seeking increase Commonwealth funding assistance for Defence transport infrastructure requirements in remote areas.
The Territory received excellent news recently with the completion of the indigenous land use agreement for the Bradshaw training area, which paved the way for significant investments in further infrastructure for the Defence Forces, which will also provide more jobs for Territorians. I congratulate the Commonwealth government on proceeding with this important initiative.
The third strategic area in the draft transport plan is to expand domestic and international air transport capacity servicing the Northern Territory. Air transport capacity, particularly international capacity, continues to be a challenge for the Territory. Thanks to this government’s efforts to secure Virgin Blue to the Territory, domestic capacity has largely recovered to the levels achieved just prior to the Ansett collapse in 2001.
The challenge is now to bring about a similar recovery in international capacity, and to address air freight issues. The government is in close negotiation with a number of international carriers and, notwithstanding the further recent blow caused by the SARS virus outbreak, we will continue with the carriers to build business cases for new international flights to the Territory.
The draft plan also contains several priority actions regarding the future of regional aerodromes, particularly the network that is maintained by the government. The 2003-04 budget provided $6m to upgrade seven regional airstrips as part of an ongoing program to ensure that our remote communities have reliable airstrips, which are, in many cases, their lifeline in an emergency.
The fourth strategic area is to provide an effective commercial passenger and public transport service. The range of challenges in this is large, covering not only the operation of various types of vehicles such as taxis and buses, but also a wide range of situations from suburban to remote communities. This has been an area of considerable debate and change over the last 12 months, particularly for taxis, private hire vehicles and minibuses. The commercial passenger vehicle sector is of particular importance because it is often one of the first points of contact for visitors when they arrive in Darwin or in the Territory. In addressing this strategic area, the draft transport plan includes a proposal for the development of long-term plans for the provision of public transport services in the greater Darwin area. This work has already commenced and a public discussion paper will be released later this year.
The paper will consider long-term strategies to improve services and to increase patronage, and will also discuss issues such as development of new transport services. With regard to transport services to remote areas, the draft transport plan contains a number of suggestions, including the need to encourage the maintenance of regular passenger services and investigate whether there may be scope for a local ferry and community bus services to supplement regional air services.
The fifth strategic area is to improve road access for Northern Territory residents and tourists. A separate road network strategy will be released later this year, providing further details of the priority road improvements planned. The challenges facing road funding in the Territory, both to maintain the existing network and to extend and improve the road quality, are considerable, given our huge land mass and relatively small funding base. That is why it is so important for the Territory to receive every available cent of Commonwealth funding.
The Territory was short-changed under the CLP’s watch by the Commonwealth’s Roads to Recovery package, due to the large unincorporated areas of the Territory that received no funding. My department has estimated that we are at least $20m short of what we should have received under a more equitable funding formula. I have written to federal Transport Minister, John Anderson, asking for the Territory to be reimbursed this funding. Members of the opposition who purport to be concerned about the condition of Territory roads, if they are serious, should join this government in calling on the Commonwealth for this additional funding that would make a much-needed contribution to upgrading our roads, particularly in rural areas.
The draft transport plan identifies implementation of the road network strategy as one of the key priority actions in relation to roads. Also, given the role of my department in the provision of vehicle registration and driver licensing, the effective, efficient and sensitive delivery of this service is another priority action included in the draft plan.
The sixth strategic area is to ensure that transport services are delivered safely. My department has worked for many years to prompt road and marine safety and, more recently, we have begun work in the area of rail safety. Ensuring the safe commencement of rail services to Darwin is a challenge that faces us in early 2004. The draft master plan contains a number of priority actions in transport safety, including the completion of a new road safety strategy during 2003, the continued implementation of targeted road safety education programs, and the development of an effective cross-modal mechanism for improved safety planning.
In addition to the priority actions I have already referred to in relation to specifically these areas in the draft transport plan, I would like to draw members’ attention to several major groups of priority actions that apply across a number of strategic areas. The first of these groups of priority actions is the provision of transport infrastructure in remote communities. The government currently maintains a network of aerodromes and barge landings across the Northern Territory. Both have been provided by the government for many years. The draft transport plan includes suggestions for joint partnerships with local communities for the funding and management of the aerodromes, and a review of the barge landings to ensure they are being adequately maintained.
The second of these major groups of priority actions relates to freight transport. Several priority actions deal with various aspects of the AustralAsia trade route. Others deal with the development of a multi-modal transport service framework, provision of transport infrastructure necessary for the new port at Glyde Point to service a potential future major industrial estate there, and promotion and extension of rail infrastructure to improve inter-modal access to mine sites, industrial estates and major consumers and communities.
This is just a sample of the range of issues raised in the draft transport plan. I am looking for feedback and comments from the public to ensure the final plan reflects the views of the broader community. I hope to see a range of comments that will be made in response to this plan. I encourage members of the Northern Territory community, businesses and associations to review the plan and provide comments to my department. I am particularly interested in new ideas and fresh approaches.
I am committed to seeing the draft transport plan is considered by as many people as possible. We have already sent out a large number of copies of the draft plan to business organisations, community groups and associations. Additional copies can be obtained from my department, and an electronic copy of the draft plan is also available from the department’s web page. The advertised closing date for public debate was 15 August 2003, and the final plan is scheduled for release by the end of the year. I am happy to accept further public comments until the end of August.
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, from the outset, I should say that the opposition is in broad agreement with most of the elements of this plan, and there is a reason for that. The speech is largely platitudes, and the plan is largely a re-statement of things that are self-evident and known and well enunciated in a number of documents. In some respects, it is a difficult statement to argue against in that it has not been presented in a combative and debating framework, which is probably a good thing.
There are some points I will pick up as I go through, and some of my colleagues would like to speak more at more length on some of them. First, it should be said, right from the outset, that at page 2, where the minister points out that this transport plan is not about roads, is foolhardy and pretty much stupid. I could understand if he said it is not only about roads, or not just about roads, but what he said is that it is not about roads. It is quite interesting, really, because in his transport action, there are some 36 priority actions that relate to roads, and in his statement he spends two pages devoted to discussing roads. This is because the minister is aware that matters relating to roads are very important for communities throughout the Territory. He has stated policy in here, which is ill-defined, of social inclusion - as the member for Nelson said in the previous debate - does include roads, when he talked about Manyallaluk and other places. Roads are a very important social communicator between remote communities here in the Northern Territory, and a very important contributor to our economy.
It is a major flaw to present a statement such as this and say it is not about roads. He has a little ‘get out of gaol’ clause, and that is that he is currently preparing a related strategy, the Roads Strategy 2003-13. On that point, we are now in August 2003 so, perhaps, he is talking about 2004-13 because he is well and truly into this year that he is describing in this upcoming 10-year strategy. I shall leave other matters relating to specifics of roads to my colleague, the member for Macdonnell, who is very keen, as all members would know, to talk about roads and the impact it has on his electorate and the economy.
Before leaving roads, I will say one more thing: the minister talked about the road network strategy being a contribution to economic development, improvement to the safety of road users, and enhanced access to communities. I say on the Parliamentary Record that 33 deaths on our roads is not acceptable. It is entirely unacceptable on the basis of the vast amounts of money that have been reaped by reducing speed and, therefore, levying fines on speeding motorists - not that I have a problem, necessarily, with the strategy to reduce speed. However, the minister has to be aware, at this late stage, that it is not having an impact on our road fatalities. If he does a total audit of the figures, as was suggested to him during the Estimates Committee stage of the budget, he would see that there is call from this side of the House for a full audit of the reasons for our road toll. He would see that called for at page 116 on 26th of last month.
It is essential for the minister, in preparing his road strategy, to talk about this issue. We do not want to hear about bilingual signs and telling tourists about issues, and things like that; we want to see a look-back program at least for a year, that looks at all of those factors relating to the road toll on every site - every one of those 33 Territorians and people from outside who tragically died on our roads. I really do not mind if he goes back five years. It should be looked at by people with knowledge in this area, people who know the factors relating to road accidents: engineering, road conditions, driver capacity, driver impairment, particularly for drugs and tiredness and issues such as this, and driver ignorance.
If he is prepared to have a quality team looking at this - and there is a lot of money that is coming in through this speed camera stuff - that committee can report on this very important matter to this parliament. I am sure he will have bipartisan support. I am not saying this in a way to achieve some sort of political high ground because I am sure that side of the parliament is as aghast as this side that there have been several deaths in the Territory in the past month - perhaps not every day, but too frequently - and it is not acceptable to have it continue at the rate it is. That is pretty much all I will say on roads.
The minister’s statement opened with the main priority of the Martin government as jobs. He would know they have failed on that count. In the two years that the Martin government has been in place, we have lost some thousands and thousands of jobs. If that is the foundation stone for this statement, it does not really auger well for its future. He went on to say:
- Other important key drivers for transport are population growth …
There, too, the Martin Labor government has a sad and sorry record over the last two years. Not only have we lost jobs, we have lost people. It is a total surprise to me to see our population in decline for the first time since Cyclone Tracy. It is all very well talking about SARS and bombings and all the other calamities that have beset the world but, when people start voting with their feet like this, it is a sorry indicator for the Territory economy. It must be turned around. It can be turned around by a variety of reasonable attraction strategies. I applaud the Chief Minister going down south and talking to businesses about coming up here and setting up, but there are some more domestic strategies she could employ locally. I implore her to look at some style of exit analysis for these people and find out why people are leaving this Utopia, this beautiful place, and find out why they are choosing to go elsewhere.
The minister said, and I quote:
- … the government’s vision for an integrated, accessible, effective and safe transport system.
That is a variation from his vision in this document, because he has added in the words ‘and safe’, and I applaud that because my previous point was that is something he has to look at. The vision in here is for an ‘integrated, accessible and effective transport system that supports economic and social development’. I applaud that vision also, but I am surprised that it has been changed from the transport plan that have been put to the people and the minister’s delivery to this House.
He talked about the imminent arrival of the first freight trains and finally achieving what has only been dreamed about by Territorians. That is an insult to the many people who saw this as a realty and not a dream. There are many Territorians who fought long and hard for a long time to achieve this. To say that it somehow fell in our laps while we were sitting there quietly dreaming about a wonderful thing called the railway, and it happened by accident, really is a tad insulting to those people who did not see it as a dream and saw it as achievable, something that had significant hurdles and that those hurdles could all be cleared, and they took off clearing them. The ‘dream’ statement really comes from this Chief Minister, who called it a ‘faded dream’. When he said that it has only been dreamed about, that may well be true in the collegiate he has. Of the people he speaks to, maybe those dreamers have convinced him that that is what was the case.
If he looked to the wider community, he would see that there was an immense amount of action, immense miles toted up here and internationally. There was an immense lobbying effort across various governments and various parties. There were significant issues relating to matters in other states, to finances, to the development of consortia that had not readily worked together and did not even know each other existed until they had been introduced by various players. That effort really should be applauded in this statement, not dismissed as a mere dream.
I note that the transport plan has expunged the dates because the Chief Minister was burnt with their Building a Better Territory document where they had all these wonderful dates. In fact, it was a major feature of the discussion of that plan that they had the great fortitude to put these dates in here and be judged on them, and they were, because the dates were all pretty much deficient. That lesson has been learnt because in this plan the dates are not there and there is quite a bit of discussion about why they do not put the dates in, such as things could change. In fact, there is a ‘Note to Reader’ at page 2 and it says that we are going to put the priority actions in, but we are not going to put start/finish dates. There are a number of reasons: priority actions such as monitor register relevant legislation are essential; a considerable number of priority actions will be commenced during the next two financial years; number of proposed actions are essentially driven by Commonwealth-state agreements; and the transport plan does not contain input from the general community.
They are probably pretty good footnotes. What they are saying is that this can be changed by community consultation. We are looking for community input, which is a feature also in a couple of places in the statement where he talked about it being circulated, waiting for community consultation. A statement such as this that is so all-embracing, it affects pretty much every one of us in the Northern Territory, and it really should get to everybody. It is not enough to say: ‘We will post it on the web’, or ‘We have sent it of to peak groups’ or whatever. In some way, less glossy perhaps, it has to go into the households of all Territorians. There are now a number of these documents out there parading to develop the place and make it better under the new government. There is some cynicism developing about that because there is a feeling that these are just some parade of glossy documents trying to convince us that all is well and we can hear the fiddles playing as Rome burns. What we need is for this to be put in an easily digestible document and disseminated to people in a way that the minister acknowledges must be done in this document, and has been put out in a way that the minister notes in a couple of places.
He talked about the development of onshore gas and value-adding industry. I would like to hear more about that because, as many members know, there is some difficulty with value adding with the gas that will come assure from ConocoPhillips’ find at Bayu-Undan. That is something in the forefront of all our minds: to harness this enormous energy resource to our best benefit. I would like to hear more on that.
The minister talked about the policies covering a diverse range of matters including the federal government’s ‘… AusLink proposal, national heavy vehicle reforms …’. I would caution the minister to be careful in this area. One of the reasons for the efficiency of our horticultural and pastoral industries is that we were pioneers in having triple road trains, double-decker cattle trains. Some of those vehicles would not pass muster in other states; they are too heavy. They are 105 tonnes or thereabouts. They are very hard on our road asset, but that subsidy of keeping the road asset maintained, keeping those vehicles as efficient as possible, allowing such heavy use should be something that we can do to give us an edge. If New South Wales does not allow it, or some other state, we should be very careful about any national heavy vehicle reforms because it is, essentially, an enterprise and economic driving activity to make sure that we can maximise the efficiency of those vehicles on the road. Therefore, I sound a note of caution there.
The minister talked further about AusLink; if it is to succeed, it might dupe us of some money. That is not my understanding of AusLink. My understanding is that it is going to be configured more to systems of conveyance - be it rural roads, shire roads, railways, air freight, hubs, storage, handling, bypass roads - so it will be more looking to how we convey materials from one area to another. These containerised funding pools - where we look to funding roads and railways out of here, and national initiatives for freight handling out of here and ports out of somewhere else, customs out of somewhere else - is what AusLink is trying to do. If we run the book after that, and we find that it does introduce new efficiencies and there is a trade-off of some money, I expect the minister to make a line judgment on that. If it means that we are being duped, that our southern cousins are beneficiaries and we are not, I expect him to go to battle hard and present the case for Territorians. On that ledger, the efficiencies must be borne in mind.
I hope that a thinking debate could be brought to this parliament about AusLink. It is not just a debate to say: ‘We used to get $90m, they want to offer us $92 and, therefore, it is all terrible’. We are very sceptical of the style of debate in which the Health minister engages about the Australian Health Care Agreement. Certainly, the budget that has come down would put into sharp contrast her public utterances, those which we think will be the final outcome.
Go in hard against the feds - kick them, shove them, we do not care, we will join you in the battle. If it is to make the system better, please do not squander that opportunity. Please make sure the Territory, which has vast transport needs and long-standing communication problems, is at that table and that we are listening and are taking the benefit of the new efficiencies, even if somewhere there is a trade-off of some dollars. We would expect the minister to be in the best position to make that analysis, and we would expect him to bring thinking public debate into this parliament rather than something about: ‘They done me wrong, I need cash, the government are a pack of you-know-whats’. We are happy to engage in the debate, but we need a little more than what has been provided here.
The minister told us how important horticulture is becoming in economic development, and talked about the expansion of these sectors. I remind him that we immediately took it to this government about Fox Road in Katherine and the importance that road had on quality mango product and the necessity for the government to move quickly. The government has now fixed it, but it took a mango season or two. I say to government: please be aware that many of these roads - it may only be 5 km or 10 km of corrugation, but if you look at some of the issues in this paper, quality product is really important.
There is a very good statement here that I would have included in the minister’s statement. It is very good. It is on page 23 of the Northern Territory plan. This is something that should be tattooed onto the brains of everybody who has anything to do with marketing any product. It is at page 23:
- … assist the AustralAsia trade route and business park to achieve the five rights of efficient logistics management of supplying the right product at the right place at the right time in the right condition for the right cost.
That is the formula. That formula drives what we do here. That is why we are in Asia. That is why we have a research and development component on all sorts of product here. That is why we have quality programs. That is why we have programs of training. That is why we try to introduce new product. That is why we engage with Asia about the demand in those various places, and the style and quality and timing of product. That is a fundamental; everything else is pretty much incidental.
I note, however, on that same point, that this report is silent on logistics. I applaud the soon-to-be Charles Darwin University, the current Northern Territory University, for the emphasis in this area, the emphasis on appointing a senior person, and soon having quite a significant repertoire of skills in the areas of transport and logistics, because this will be a key to breaking that five rights formula. I am quite happy to put on record to Professor McKinnon and those responsible at the NT University that their emphasis on logistics is a very good step,.
The second strategy is Defence support, and I note the silence again on matters of Defence as a rail user. However, potentially that is a very big product for the rail, and it was one of those things that was factored in as an enhancement above the numbers. The minister talked about the indigenous land use agreement for Bradshaw. This has been delayed for years and, because of that delay, when you start to talk about its approval having an impact on the future, you can understand the opposite case to be true also; and that is that delays have an impact on our economy. Matters relating to the negotiation of native title are problematic for this part of the world, and continuing to be so. We should be moving quickly to make sure that matters relating to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act and native title do not put us at a disadvantageous position compared to our competitors, particularly those interstate.
The commercial and passenger transport system could take up the entire debate tonight. The minister has handled this extremely poorly. He has to tell us from a transport perspective what it is he is trying to do. Is he trying to, as he tells taxi drivers, guarantee income? Is that his intention? Is it to guarantee consumers of commercial vehicle services that they will be safe? Is it to tell the tourism industry that their welcome to the Territory will be of such a professional nature that they will not feel in some way intimidated, angered or embarrassed about the dress, type of cab and conversation that they have with the various people who are in commercial vehicles? If it is all of those, he is probably on the right track, but it is not evident from this statement that income guarantee is a portion of this, and that would appear from the cap and from other discussions that he has had with the industry, that guaranteeing income is a significant part of Labor’s policy. In the debates, it certainly featured largely that people who cannot make enough money out of it, we will address that by making sure that we play with supply and demand. We can do that as government by merely regulating.
It poses other problems, and I hope the minister, in discussion on that particular area, defines what his policy goal is. If it is merely safety, that is an easy thing to do. If it is merely ensuring competence and training, that is pretty easy. He has to describe to this parliament why he wants to be so heavily involved in this sector.
The fifth strategic area of roads, I will pass over, as I said, having made a fleeting mention of it. The area to ensure transport services are delivered safely, of course, has the support of government. I would caution, however, that sometimes there are inefficiencies built into industries in the guise of safety, and they are issues about how long a driver can drive, how fast he can go, the weight of his vehicle, training competencies and things like that. While it is important that all those factors be addressed, there is the potential to over-regulate in these areas, and to, therefore, increase the unit cost of freight and product.
The general matters relating to the statement are, therefore, easily seen. The opposition supports this area being given the focus that it has. It supports the fragmentation of various components of the industry to be put in a way that can be debated and consulted with the community. It is disappointing that some of the issues that the minister believes to be fundamental are so obviously flawed, particularly in relation to jobs and population. We believe that the government can be innovative.
The Air North route, for instance, which has reduced both in seating capacity and frequency, and which is very important for the townships of Tennant Creek and Katherine - the minister and the government continue to have a hands-off role with that particular service, notwithstanding that this statement lauds its sponsorship of Virgin Blue Airways. I ask the minister to look at some of those issues, because I understand that they are losing money, and that Air North is an essential service to these small communities. It is something, perhaps, that the minister should look at. We know that we sponsor the bus services that are pretty much commercial transport services in the urban areas, and this has a similar feeling in some of the more remote areas of the Territory. There are things the minister could do. I will leave it for other speakers to mention what those circumstances might be, but they easily come to mind: how the government could provide either additional passengers or additional support for a service like Air North’s service up and down from Alice to Darwin and return.
With those points, I commend the minister on his statement. I ask him to make it more readily available to more people and, if that means a condensed version that is less glossy, I would be supportive of that. I commend the fact that transport is a priority area for this government. That is yet to be seen in action but, given the minister’s words, at this stage I will take him on that word.
Mr HENDERSON (Business, Industry and Resource Development): Madam Speaker, I support the statement made by my colleague, the Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, in relation to what is a very important aspect of our commerce and trade in the Territory: a comprehensive plan for our transport system.
I say up front, after listening the member for Drysdale’s contribution, that there is an old saying that if you fail to plan, you plan to fail. Like so many aspects of coming to government in the Northern Territory and taking on the roles of ministers in various portfolio areas, there was an absence of strategic plans in place across government that departments were engaged in progressing and rolling out. This is another one. We came to government assuming that there was some strategic plan for developing our transport infrastructure in the Northern Territory, something that we could either adopt or modify, and, again, that was not the case. What we found on coming to government, and particularly in relation to our road network, which so many people in this House are passionate abut, particularly those with bush electorates, was that there was no plan or strategy. Essentially, we inherited an annual bun fight through the Cabinet process about who has the most clout, where is the electorate with the skinniest margins that we need to protect. Decisions made on a lot of those roads were based not on economic drivers, but political imperatives.
I acknowledge that the member for Drysdale has accepted it, but he was pretty churlish in a lot of his comments. However, when you start from scratch in such an area as a comprehensive, interconnected transport system in the Northern Territory, there are huge capital costs, infrastructure costs, and maintenance costs. A strategic document and a plan did not exist when we came to government; just an ad hoc approach, and declining amounts of real money going into this area every year.
I commend my colleague, the Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, on the work that he and his department have done to try to pull something together. At the end of the day, our infrastructure serves two needs on the social and economic agenda. One is the social aspects, in providing infrastructure out into communities, and on the other side is the economic impact, and the impact on attracting investment that decent infrastructure can have. Pulling those two things together and trying to get the priorities right between the social and economic imperatives in terms of additional private sector investment is a big plan to pull together.
This is a good discussion paper which will go out to relevant players in the community. We are very keen to see what feedback we receive from all of those people in industry sectors, but as well, and very importantly, from people in the bush who can give us their views as well.
I propose to focus on the aspects of the plan which relate particularly to my portfolio responsibilities; that is business, industry and resource development, trade and Defence support. I note that it links closely to a report I made to this Assembly last week on the 2003 Transport Symposium, which was sponsored by the government as part of Northern Territory Expo 2003, which focussed on: (1) trade development and opportunities in Indonesia; (2) a perspective on local shipping issues and; (3) opportunities with the new Adelaide to Darwin rail link.
As I said, the Transport Symposium offered a valuable insight for potential and existing investors wanting to capture the exciting business and trade opportunities about to be generated within the Territory with the near completion of the Alice Springs to Darwin railway, and Darwin’s new East Arm Port, thereby creating the Australasia trade route.
From a business point of view, the transport plan is a plan that must support commerce and trade, and the government took full advantage of the symposium to reinforce that important linkage. With 147 delegates from a wide range of local, interstate and international businesses, this was clearly an important symposium at which local transport operators were provided with detailed briefings on shipping, rail and air freight systems that will help them position them for the future. I congratulate the Northern Territory Chamber of Commerce and Industry on this initiative at Expo this year. It really was a no-brainer for me, as minister, to endorse and sponsor that symposium. When I spoke at the symposium and took questions with a number of presenters, it was great to see the room at the MGM Grand absolutely packed. There was standing room only, with a lot of very interested people keen to understand how this new trade route is going to work and hearing first-hand from people such as Bruce McGowan of FreightLink, who made a substantial presentation, as well as the freight forwarders, distributors and shipping companies keen to understand how they can plug in and what the opportunities are. Congratulations to the Chamber of Commerce and Industry for pulling that together.
Before I move on, I must highlight the importance from my point of view, as Business minister, of last week’s commitment by Toll Holdings, Australia’s leading transport and logistics company, to a state-of-the-art consolidation and distribution facility involving a $17m investment over four years in the new Darwin Business Park. This will support not only domestic freight, but future international freight opportunities. Certainly, through our Cabinet process, we are endeavouring to provide real rigour to these decisions about whether we are going to invest a large amount of public money into infrastructure. We put up $9m for the Darwin Business Park in the budget earlier this year; we need to really understand what capacity and leverage that gives the private sector to invest. Very quickly, as a result of that down-payment, we have a $17m investment from Toll Holdings, and stage 2 going out now that Toll have committed, to see who else in interested in establishing themselves at the Darwin Business Park.
The new Land Development Corporation that is overseeing that area on a commercial basis will have a significant role in allocating the land at the Darwin Business Park to ensure that it supports and complements the government investment of $9m to establish the vision of the new trade route into Australia. It is very important, where the public puts money into infrastructure, that we do so with a view and understanding of private sector investment that will be delivered as a result of that funding. This is about business capitalising on transport infrastructure and emerging transport systems to create business, to facilitate trade and, most importantly, to deliver jobs for Territorians.
I note the announcement by Mr Peter Hopton of Perkins Shipping, which coincided with the symposium, of that company’s purchase of Gulf Freight Services in order to strengthen Perkins’ strategic position in Top End and international freight services. This is another example of the private sector recognising the importance of transport as a business in itself, and positioning itself to maximise the business opportunity. I commend Peter Hopton, a relatively new CEO of Perkins Shipping, for the vision and enthusiasm he and the company have in continuing to expand their proudly Territorian company to compete on domestic and international shipping routes. The competition, if you talk to anyone in the shipping industry, is more fierce now than it ever has been, particularly in respect of international shipping. Trying to find a competitive edge is very difficult, so it was a significant announcement from Perkins in terms of their acquisition of Gulf Freight Services.
Another shipping company that I have had a bit to do with, through the Department of Business, Industry and Resource Development and the trade section within, is Rooney Shipping. They are doing a magnificent job expanding their shipping links throughout the Asian region. The sense of entrepreneurship by those two companies in a competitive global industry is something great to see. They have every confidence in the future of their organisations in the Territory.
It is not just being driven by the private sector. I cannot move on without noting the significant work being done by the government in collaboration with Northern Territory Airports Pty Ltd on the development of regional, interstate and international air links, and with a focus on growing both passenger and freight capacity. I particularly acknowledge the great job being done by Peter Roberts, our Aviation Development Executive and his team. The expansion of Virgin Blue services into the Territory is, in large measure, attributable to this effort and adds to the importance of our transport plan.
I, and my colleague the Minister for Tourism, have spoken time and time again about the business community wanting to see long-term returns, the security of those returns in terms of their businesses. The initiative to jointly support this position, trying to recruit someone from the aviation sector who really understands how airlines cost their business, what are the important ingredients for their business plans, the drivers, to have someone on board working with government and the airport to try to lever additional services into the Northern Territory by putting very compelling business cases to these airlines, is starting to bear fruit. We are close to additional international capacity coming back in to Darwin and it is in large measure down to the work of Peter Roberts and his team by getting out there with well developed business plans to airlines in the region.
If it is not one thing, it is another. We were fairly close a couple of months ago. Since then, we have had uncertainty about the Korean Peninsula, the bomb attack in Jakarta. Just when it seems to be getting fairly close, something else happens that scares airlines away, as well as the announcement by the United States President saying that it was unsafe to travel. To look at the reality of booking an airline seat in and around the place, this really does not help, and sooner or later these issues around the globe will be sorted out and people can get back to travelling without having to worry about terrorism. We continue to work, and work hard. To Peter Roberts and the team: keep up the good work.
I move on to focus on significant aspects of my portfolio responsibilities, and that is Defence support. The member for Drysdale said: ‘What are we doing about getting Defence equipment onto the railway?’ That is an issue for the ADF. I can say that they are talking with FreightLink, and the ADF does not need the member for Drysdale or the Northern Territory government to tell them that the railway provides a significant logistical opportunity for the ADF by supporting their infrastructure in the Northern Territory. I can assure the member for Drysdale that those discussions are taking place.
I refer honourable members to the government’s economic development strategy, Building a Better Territory, where we identified the need to collaborate with the Australian Defence Organisation and local industry to identify the ADO’s forward staging needs, and to encourage local industry to participate in these processes. This document is a focus of those negotiations, and we intend to use the plan to deliver on more jobs for Territorians as we respond to Defence’s needs for logistical support in Northern Australia.
To quote a few facts, this month alone, 2200 Defence personnel and 500 vehicles, including huge quantities of equipment and supplies, travelled from Darwin to Queensland for the Crocodile II military exercise. In the first half of this year, there were 269 movements of military vessels in and out of Darwin Harbour. These are significant logistical challenges in their own right, and underscore the importance of our transport linkages to Defence business in the south.
In regards to indigenous economic development, I do not need to remind members of the importance of affordable and efficient transport to the life and livelihood of many indigenous Territorians who reside in our remote communities. This transport plan will be a key future of the growth of economic activity, which is so heavily reliant on cultural tourism, primary industry, of which pastoralism is the predominant activity at present, and the trade in arts and crafts. Clearly, each of these types of commerce rely heavily on an effective and efficient transport system, and a strong transport plan will be an important element of our success in facilitating indigenous economic growth. Again, members on this side of the House, and, I acknowledge, on the other side, are passionate about those transport linkages into the bush, but it has to be done in the knowledge that we are being short-changed by the Commonwealth, as my colleague, the minister for Infrastructure, Planning and Environment said, to the tune of $20m a year by the Commonwealth’s failure to understand the equity issue that people in the Northern Territory, purely because of the incorporated status of land in the Northern Territory, are missing out. It is a fundamental equity issue. $20m does a lot for our road map work out in the bush. We continue to fight for it, and I hope that members on the other side of the House are using their influence with members they have sitting on government benches in Canberra to push the fact that this is an equity issue, and the Commonwealth needs to have a good look at it and make sure that Territorians who live in the remote parts of the Territory have the same access to funds for remote and regional roads as people in the rolling green pastures of New South Wales and Victoria in National Party country. So, I hope members opposite are lobbying their colleagues.
The importance of transport systems to the growth and expansion of our minerals sector cannot be understated. For example, we are already finding that the AustralAsia trade route is shaping up to be the critical liability factor for a number of huge resource projects located around the Territory including: the Bootu Creek manganese deposit north of Tennant Creek, the operators of which plan to ship 350 000 to 500 000 tonnes of ore north for export from the port of Darwin from late 2004; the Olympia Resources garnet mine at Harts Range, north-east of Alice Springs, the operators of which plan to export up to 200 000 tonnes of hornblende and garnet sands per year through Darwin; and AFZ Minerals Company’s Frances Creek and Mt Bundy iron ore deposit closer to Darwin, from which they propose to ship 300 000 tonnes per year, again through the port of Darwin.
We cannot unlock the economic value from these resources without being able to transport them to the coast and get them onto bulk carriers to markets overseas. The railway is one of the keys to unlocking the value of those deposits. All of these resource developments are exciting, and further underscore the importance of an integrated transport plan for our economic growth. It also highlights the need for strong stakeholder input into the finalising of the plan. Therefore, I encourage all Territory business people to consider the draft transport plan in the context of their business needs, and to contribute to making the plan as relevant and useful as possible. I encourage all communities in the Territory to have a look at the plan and to give their feedback to our government. I commend the honourable minister’s statement to the Assembly.
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonnell): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I start by posing a question to the minister: are you well? There is not too much pressure in the office upstairs? Everything is all right? I can tell you that, if this is as good as you get, we have some serious problems in transport in the Northern Territory. Any minister for Transport who walks into a parliament and says: ‘I am going to give you a talk about the transport plan’, and then starts with the assertion that this is not about roads, really has taken leave of any sense of responsibility, if not his senses. This is absolutely extraordinary. The extraordinarily weird thing about it is that, if you read the draft transport plan, it mentions roads - they are those long sort of flat things. In some cases, they are not that flat, they have ups and downs depending on where you have to drive on them. You will recognise most of them; they have some sort of bitumen on them, minister. To not talk about roads when you talk about transport is just an absurd and ludicrous idea in the extreme. I hope that there is a problem and that you can get better, because I hope to see a much better performance than the one that you delivered to the people of this Territory.
The fact is that this Northern Territory transport plan has listed in it 104, or thereabouts, priority areas, of which 36 are targeted at roads. For the minister to walk in here and say: ‘This is not about roads’ is just crazy. I know that the minister is under pressure from his colleagues from time to time. From last week’s little effort on the bill that he had carriage of, the microphones picked up two ministers, the Attorney-General and the minister for Police, saying: ‘Get up to your feet, you have to speak on this’. You were not ready for it, minister. I know that the Cabinet front here has to be rock solid but, gee whiz, they must be boxing your ears upstairs some days because it is just an absolutely extraordinary thing to say: ‘As the minister for transport, I am going to give you a chat about a transport plan, but we are not going to talk about roads’. Well, it is about roads. One-third of this is about roads. Your priority areas are about roads. I would strongly recommend, minister, that you read this, because it is clear that you have not. To suggest that it is not about roads and then read that one-third of it is, makes it obvious that you have not read it.
I came in here last week and complained bitterly about roads because I, like other members of this Chamber and other Territorians and people who visit this place, have to drive on those roads. I had to send my vehicle in for some repairs recently. One of the repairs, on a 10 000 km service, was to have the tail lights screwed back into place because they vibrated out of the rear of my car driving on his roads, the ones that he does not want to talk about.
The fact is that those roads are in an awful state, and it is extraordinary that we find people who have to drive on those roads call for them to be closed. I turn my attention to the Centralian Advocate of, I believe, 12 August 2003, where there is a call to close the Kings Canyon Road. What happened? A lady was driving along the Kings Canyon Road and the front end of her car broke
Mr Vatskalis: Was it the Kings Canyon Road? Are you misleading parliament? Are you misleading parliament? Which road was that?
Mr ELFERINK: The Kings Canyon Road.
Mr Vatskalis: Is that what the article said? It was not on Ernest Giles Road, was it?
Mr ELFERINK: The Ernest Giles Road? Do you know where Kings Canyon is?
Mr Vatskalis: I do know, and I also read the article.
Mr ELFERINK: Yes, and what are you doing about it, minister?
Mr Vatskalis: Which road was the lady referring …
Mr ELFERINK: Oh, that is right! We do not want to talk about roads. All of a sudden we do, do we minister?
Mr Vatskalis: Well, you brought it up. Let us talk about roads. Was it Kings Canyon Road?
Mr ELFERINK: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I do not care what the minister says, because I can rattle off at least a dozen roads which are in vital need of repair that this minister wants to ignore. This is absolutely disgraceful. I wonder if the minister can inform this House who Russ Driver is. Do you know who Russ Driver is?
Dr Toyne: A good bloke. He does outback recoveries.
Mr ELFERINK: I thought you read the article, minister. The fact of the matter …
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker. The member for Macdonnell well knows his comments should be directed to the Speaker. He is shouting across the Chamber at the minister.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. Member for Macdonnell, you will take that on board?
Mr ELFERINK: Taken on board, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker. I take it from the silence of the minister on the question that I inappropriately put to him that he does not have a clue who Russ Driver is, and the fact is that he just sat there and interjected that he had read the article. Had he read the article he would have known who Russ Driver is.
Russ Driver is a businessman in Alice Springs who pays $12 000 per year on registration on a single vehicle so he can drive on those roads, which are so awful he is calling for them to be closed. Mr Driver extended an invitation to the Chief Minister and other members of this House and said: ‘Come for a drive with me’. I challenge the minister to go for a drive with Mr Driver up to Utopia perhaps, or across the Ernest Giles Road, or on some of the other roads and he will discover how poor the roads network is.
The other thing that I will pick up on is the comment that both the minister for Police and the minister himself made to the effect that they want support from us on this side of the House to kick a few doors down in Canberra to get some of that Roads to Recovery money. Book the flight. I will go with you right now, tomorrow. Let us go on Friday, and we will fly down to Canberra together and kick down some doors.
Mr Vatskalis: You are not holding my hand; you can hold Jack’s hand, but not mine.
Mr ELFERINK: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I pick up on the interjection. He still thinks it is a joke. Well, you are disgrace. You are a disgrace to the portfolio you hold. To walk in here and be the minister for Transport and say I am not going to talk about roads is just stupid.
Dr TOYNE (Central Australia): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, that was a bit of a dummy spit, wasn’t it? Seeing the member for Macdonnell has lead the debate on to roads, I can say that, in all my time in opposition, I made regular sojourns in debate on to the topic of roads in my electorate. I do not deny the right of the member for Macdonnell to do the same for his constituents in the seat of Macdonnell. It is only right that he does advocate, but that was not advocacy; that was just simply an emotional dummy spit to replace the facts.
When I raised roads in here - and I would expect every bush member would do the same if they are doing their job properly. They would point out factually what the problem is in their electorate, what the minister should be examining regarding that problem and press in every way possible. Send him or her a letter, do media if that is going to put some pressure on the government. That was all fair play when I was in opposition and, like most of his colleagues, the member for Macdonnell is having a lot of trouble transitioning to the spotlight of the opposition where, if you do not get off your butt and start doing some research and bringing some properly argued cases into this Chamber, or in correspondence, then you are not going to get very far. You probably could have left early and it would not have done any more harm.
As member for a bush electorate, whether I am in government or opposition, we all know the importance of roads to Territorians, particularly remote living Territorians, and the statement does address that issue. Whenever we have a ministerial statement, the relevant minister will highlight particular areas that need to be brought to the attention of the House. You can never cover everything equally in any topic the subject of a statement, so, unlike the member for Macdonnell, I am not going to make a big scene about whether we did or did not talk about roads.
Like the member for Wanguri, it is my view that the Commonwealth is short-changing us by $20m a year for our road upkeep. One of the things that the member for Macdonnell and his colleagues could very definitely do is go and talk to those useless lumps that the CLP sends to Canberra every sittings, and get them to go and do something about this. They are part of the government of the day in Canberra. They are short-changing the Territory that they represent by $20m a year. I have yet to hear any useful action taken by either the Senator or the member of the House of Representatives in there at the moment. I call on those individuals to go and do their jobs properly. Perhaps members opposite can suggest that very loudly to them, that they get off their backsides and get us that money back so we can do a decent job on our roads.
The statement, as the minister pointed out, ranges over many aspects of transport infrastructure. Bush communities, for example, have issues about airstrips or barge landings in the north. Central Australia has issues with domestic and international seat capacity coming into Alice Springs and Yulara. Our government can stand pretty tall on its record of helping to get those domestic routes back in place after the disaster of the Ansett collapse.
We have further challenges with Tennant Creek regarding air services into that centre, and the numerous remote airstrips in the Barkly as well as Central Australia. I know my colleague, the member for Barkly, has been absolutely diligent in bringing Barkly issues through to our government. I hope we give him the responses he deserves from the work that he puts in. This government has shown a willingness to tackle the introduction of Virgin Blue Airlines to the Territory, and the recently announced direct charters from Japan into Alice Springs.
Although the statement is fairly wide-ranging across the different modes of transport, I would like to put on the record what we are doing in Central Australia to counterbalance the ravings of member for Macdonnell when he is in the mood he was today. Look at what we are doing in Central Australia, most of it on roads: Tanami Road Stage 1, $1.2m to widen and seal, plus an extra $2m for selected flood immunity, upgrading and sealing to provide improved access - that is part of the delivery of a $6.5m election promise to upgrade the Tanami Road; the construction of the Palmer River Bridge, $5.5m to make it less prone to being cut by flooding; the Mereenie Loop, $3m this year with a commitment for the next 10 years at that level - that is going to be an enormous boon, both to the communities living in that part of the member for Macdonnell’s electorate, as well as tourism based on Kings Canyon and the Rock and the Western MacDonnells; Docker River Road, $1m; the beef road upgrades for the Sandover Highway and the Finke, $0.5m each - like the member for Macdonnell, I travel fairly regularly over these dirt roads, and $0.5m is going to do an awful lot for the rougher sections of Sandover; $1.83m to fence rail crossings and other safety routes along the rail corridor; the Kalkarindji airstrip and the road to Daguragu, $950 000; the Lajamanu airstrip, $650 000; and the Kintore airstrip, $650 000 for a re-gravel and seal.
Going on to other measures to improve safety on roads, a very prominent multilingual sign is already erected near the exit to the Alice Springs Airport; Lasseter Highway speed limits have been noticeably reduced and have reduced, in turn, the road trauma along this high volume road; and new speed limits on the Alice Springs entrance from the north will reduce the possibility of accidents, particularly at the intersection of Corrie Road and the Stuart Highway.
Having put that on the record, I want to say that no government, given the stock of roads that was deeded to the Northern Territory with the enormous maintenance requirements for that road system since 1976, could have kept up entirely with maintenance requirements, given the type of funding that has been made available by the federal government. We have a serious problem with roads. There will always be reports coming back about beef roads and access roads in our remote parts of the Territory. We have to maximise, as we have in the strategic plan, the coverage that is possible with the funding levels we have. We have to continue to press the federal government to raise the funding levels so that we can make progress in winning back the condition of a lot of our essential roads.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I quote from the transport plan:
- The Northern Territory is on the verge of economic take-off which will see its efforts to achieve maturity rewarded by a major leap forward in industry diversification, sophistication and economic strength.
The transport system will play a vital role in this process. It is therefore essential the Northern Territory Transport Plan provide for a sustainable transport system, supportive of community and industry needs and aspirations.
In addition, the Northern Territory Transport Plan should ensure the ongoing flexibility of the transport plan to respond to future changes and demand requirements and, in so doing, guarantee the continued relevance of the transport system in the economic and social development process.
They are fine words, and I do not think anyone would disagree with that. When the minister said ‘this is not about roads’, I must admit that gave me a bit of a shock, especially as he has highlighted the word ‘not’. I scratched my head a little. Maybe I put a different emphasis on the statement than the member for Macdonnell. I believe he was trying to say that there are other things besides roads, and maybe that is how the interpretation should be.
Be that as it may, no matter what happens with the railway, ferries or planes, roads remain the key to development of the Northern Territory. There is no doubt about that. Governments in the 1960s recognised that bitumen roads, especially, were the way to develop the Northern Territory. I am not sure which Prime Minister was in government at the time - I think it might have been Malcolm Fraser - but the federal government put a lot of money into beef roads, and quite a few of those beef roads still exist. The roads out to Borroloola were beef roads.
That happened because they knew that this was the way to develop the Northern Territory. As I said before, when discussing the previous minister’s statement on Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures, you can write lots of these books. Sometimes we write and waffle on too much - and I would probably be accused of that - but sometimes we forget to look at the simple ways of developing the Territory. Road infrastructure has to be one of the ways to develop the Territory - all sectors of the Territory including Aboriginal people, especially when we are looking at tourism, beef and mining.
Improvement of our roads will help improve the economy. With the desire of many people not to go overseas today because of the state of the world, there is an opportunity here for us to expand our tourism industry by developing a better road network. When I went to Renner Springs and Elliott a couple of months ago, the number of vehicles on the road pulling caravans was enormous. There was a continuous flow. Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, you said the other night that Banka Banka was chock-a-block with caravans. There are still plenty of caravans moving up here now. If those people know there are more places that they can visit and that their caravan will not fall apart because the road infrastructure has improved, you will increase tourism in the Northern Territory. That opens up great opportunity for Aboriginal communities if you can improve the infrastructure in some of those communities. They would also need infrastructure improved. If you are talking about the transport plans as it relates to tourism, some finance has to be put into facilities for tourism not just to drive there, but to stay there overnight or whatever. Roads really are where our main emphasis should be.
Once again, I say: Litchfield Shire, regardless what the – oops, I cannot say it, but regardless of what a member said here earlier about Litchfield Shire receiving a start-up package, that amount of money went nowhere. It ran out in about the first five years. Litchfield Shire has put in a fairly good series of roads throughout the shire. In fact, they have a road which goes down to the boundary of Coomalie Council and stops dead. If someone would find the money to build another 24 km of road to connect up with the Batchelor Road, there is an alternative tourist route begging for use. It is another way to get to Litchfield National Park, and another way to allow development in the Darwin River area where you have the orchid farm and the rodeo area. Yet, for some reason, we do not have the money to take that extra step and develop another local road.
The Litchfield Shire does have a bit of a problem, and this is where the government has to lend a hand, not just hope that things will fall into place. In the Litchfield Land Use Objectives, there is a map entitled ‘Possible road networks’. Because Litchfield has what you might say historic subdivisions for which not a lot thought was given to future road connections, the government has come up with this proposed interaction of local roads, which means some people’s land has to be either bought or acquired for this sort of road infrastructure to occur. Also, someone has to build those roads because if no one subdivides, that is not going to happen. There needs to be a partnership between the local government and the NT government to effect these connections. They are important connections but, because people did not think too far ahead in the old days, the road infrastructure has some failings in the Litchfield Shire.
Another issue that the minister mentioned was the Australian Defence Force and transport infrastructure. I know from my time on Litchfield Shire Council that there has been a lot of difficulty in obtaining the full finance for what the Army should have paid for; that is the changes to Campbell Road. Campbell Road is the road that runs north of Robertson Barracks and takes enormous amount of traffic. Although people thought that everyone was going to live in Palmerston, they do not; they live in the northern suburbs of Darwin. That road link causes a lot of problems for local residents in the Knuckey Lagoon area. Litchfield Shire Council was willing to acquire the land to take Campbell Road into Stevens Road so that the traffic would not go into that local subdivision, which is Brandt and Farrer Roads. However, one would have to ask why even the NT government has to fund it. A huge development has occurred there; the infrastructure should have been put in by the Commonwealth government to make sure there was not any effect on local communities. Now, with the 1st Aviation Regiment coming, which is going to put about $75m into that area, I would hope the Northern Territory government can go out and bat, along with the Litchfield Shire Council, for that road infrastructure to the north of the barracks to be completed and paid for by the Defence Force. I am a great supporter of the Robertson Barracks and having the Defence Force here, but it should not impose that sort of cost on the ratepayers of Litchfield Shire.
Minister, you also mentioned public transport to the rural area, which I know is costly. There is no doubt about it, you have to travel further to pick up passengers. However, there are times when I have a look at my neighbouring municipality, and I have seen buses going around and around Woodroofe and suburbs with very light passenger loads. You have to ask: ‘Why worry about the rural area when there are a lot of buses going around some of those suburbs with not a lot of people on them?’ Rural people need a seven-day-a-week bus service. Sure, it cannot be every 10 minutes, but it could be every hour or two hours. I know you are doing a study of it, but rural people are entitled to a reasonable bus service. We are very close to Palmerston so it does not take a lot to connect it in there. You have to think laterally with a bus service in the rural area. Some of the private bus companies may think that is a bit hard, but I believe a rural bus service that went down, perhaps as far as the Territory Wildlife Park, could be used for the movement of tourists, especially budget tourists and backpackers. Tourists use public transport because they find it not so expensive.
We have many kids at university. A lot of them cannot get home. They might do their course in the morning and cannot get back because there are no buses in the middle of the day in the rural area. The only public buses you have are about the 7 am bus and the 8 am bus. At any other time, you start walking. On the way home it is the 5 pm or the 4 pm, I think - the 5 pm and the 6 pm, that is it. Miss the bus, walk home or hitch a ride or ring Mum and Dad. Although public transport is expensive, it is important that the rural area has a reasonable transport system.
We do not spend enough time promoting public transport. I am not one who uses public transport. I get on the push bike more than anything, but there are commuters who do the same trip day in day out, one person in the car. They are paying high insurance on their vehicle, a lot of maintenance on the vehicle, petrol and parking, and they usually get stressed out by the 17 sets of traffic lights and trying to get up to 100 km an hour. It is not easy. What is better than that? Buses. The government has to spend some time and money advertising the advantages of the public transport. You might say that is a waste of money because it is a service, but the time is coming when roads are going to clog up. Darwin is only a peninsula, it will have difficulties coping with increased traffic, so if you can get people onto public transport, that is a good target.
I have not had any time to speak about the convention centre. That disappoints me because that was an issue that I would love to discuss here. All right, it is a fait accompli; the government has made up its mind, but one area that needs looking at is a public transport connection from the convention centre through to the city. It might be right off the planet, but it has been said before: why could we not look at something like a airconditioned monorail or some sort of sky-chair system, or something? You might say that is stupid, but if you want to attract people to come up to the centre of the city, they are looking for something different. For instance, could something go down the Esplanade past Doctor’s Gully right down to the MGM Grand from the convention centre? We have to look a bit laterally. I throw those ideas around because we are talking about attracting people to the city, not just the convention centre. I mentioned before that we are trying to have something that will attract people here. That being the case, put something different in. They are new systems of transport, but so what? It is something worth looking at. Do not leave the convention centre down there and tell people in October, November, December to walk up to the Smith Street Mall, because you will have to have some first aid stations parked along the way or an airconditioned road or something. People will find it hard to walk back to the CBD.
There is a very strange little extract in the statement. I am a supporter of light rail, but when I had a look for it in here, I found it under ‘marine’. I hope it does not go in water! Pages 24, 25 and 26 cover marine. The statement reads, under priority action:
- … develop long term plans for the provision of public transport services including light rail, bus ways, express buses and ferry services in the greater Darwin area.
I was surprised to find that under ‘marine’, which does not seem the appropriate place for it. I should also mention, talking about ferry passenger services - although I have been a supporter of them - having talked to an ex-Naval officer who is well known in Darwin. He says be careful of ferry services because they are very expensive to operate. They might look cheap, because you only have water to run on, but for maintenance, ferries are very expensive.
As regards a light rail system, I believe there is an opportunity to connect Palmerston, Darwin, the northern suburbs, and even the rural area with some sort of express light rail system,. There is a corridor with the existing bicycle paths. There is nothing to say something could not be put to the side of that also connected to the existing new railway. There has been a lot of talk about having the railway station in Darwin. In fact, the plans that I have here, which show originally where the railway station was going, show that connection into town for an extension of the railway line. Sometimes we have to be brave with these things, otherwise, we sit stagnant and do not consider new possibilities. A good light rail system, again costly – I have heard people from Transport and Works say very costly, but they are not too worried about sticking more traffic lights in and putting down more lanes of road. If roads are our only solution to traffic problems, we are going to be in for a traffic jam.
There is one road we should be looking at sooner rather than later, and that is the extension of Tiger Brennan Drive. I know people laugh when you say there is a peak hour traffic jam from the rural area to Darwin, but if you are travelling from 7.15 am to about 8 am on the Stuart and connecting with the road joining on from Palmerston, there is a lot of traffic on that road and it becomes very frustrating around the 11 Mile or the Holtze area. The extension of Tiger Brennan Drive would be a good move by government. It certainly would help move people. We have to remember that the transport plan is not just about economics; it is about moving people from point A to point B.
I am interested to know whether the government is considering future traffic growth in the CBD. We are building unit tower after unit tower – in fact, I think Darwin’s name will change to ‘Unit Town’ one day – and there has to be some long-term planning on how many cars you can fit into the Darwin CBD. Where are they all going to fit? You only have two roads out of the CBD: the Stuart Highway and Tiger Brennan Drive. If we keep cramming people into this little peninsula – I know what one government’s answer was, and that was to put a bridge on Mud Island. I am not a great fan of that. There are other priorities before we go down that path. I used to say: ‘Why not travel on the Buchanan Highway and then tell me that we need a bridge?’ The Buchanan Highway runs down towards Kidman Springs and through the VRD and it is a dreadful road, but there are people who must use it all the time. My family lived down there for a while. It is hell on tyres and very costly, yet it takes a lot of cattle out of there, and Aboriginal communities use it. We have to keep our priorities right when we are spending money.
There has been some talk about this lack of $20m from the federal government. My argument is: no problem; put local government over the entire Northern Territory and claim it all because that is where you are missing the money. If local government covers the entire Territory, they could claim the money for those roads. To me, that is the way around the problem because I do not think you are ever going to convince the government. That is my proposal for the way we should go. It would take a bit of work. Building Stronger Regions - Stronger Futures does not look at that, but having larger councils or shires or regional councils may cover it.
Minister, I may be wrong because this book came a long time after I received your statement, but I could not find bicycle paths in here. They are a form of transport and they require infrastructure. In urban areas, they are very important. I have been pushing for an extension of the bicycle path into the rural area. We will have a yellow ribbon-cutting ceremony, minister, when we succeed in having the bicycle path extended past Palmerston. It is important. Bicycle paths are good for communities, they get people out and about; you can say they are good for people’s physical fitness. They are another means of transport for people, they are good for tourists. Quite a few people you see coming up have bikes stuck on the roof of their car, or attached to the back, so people do use them. I do not think we should forget them when we are doing a Northern Territory Transport Plan.
It is good to have a transport plan. I know this is basically a document asking for submissions. Perhaps you could take some of my contribution in this debate as a submission so I do not have to write it all again, but …
Ms Lawrie: Oh, go on. Write it, write it.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, member for Karama. A transport plan is essential, but let us not bog ourselves down too much in the verbiage in here. We have to get out and do things, and I certainly think that by improving and upgrading our roads in the Territory, we will automatically improve our economy.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to respond to this statement on transport development from a different angle. Reflecting on transport, we can get locked on to what is here now, that which is contemporary. However, if we broaden our lens, we understand more about the complexity of developing new trade links if we look to the past.
As a child growing up in the wheat belt some 120 km from the coast, I was fascinated to hear stories from my father about how his uncle had shown him a shell that he found on the top of a hill that was far from the coast. I was fascinated about how the shell got there, and it stuck with me. As I wandered around the bush, I started to learn a little more, and I found things that were in places around the area that had travelled a long distance to be where they were. As I further investigated this, I discovered that there were stones that were found close to the coast and had come from a distance far inland.
As I pursued this interest, I discovered that there had been existing trade links throughout our continent for many, many years, as indigenous populations traded goods of value and there were significant trade links. I have even learnt of things that originate on the coastline being thousands of kilometres inland, so trade links have always existed. Early settlement in Australia really only occurred due to the need to establish some kind of trade link, effectively.
How do we address our current situations? We can become trapped into exactly what is right in front of us, right on the page now, and we can talk about different aspects of bus links or propose that we might have a light rail linking one section of the Top End community to another. That is well and good, and there have been many comments made with regards to this very important topic.
I propose that we need to be thinking in a visionary sense with regards to transport because our future depends on it, just as the stories that I learnt from the past with regards to shells being found way inland, and red ochre being found on the coast, that these things would never have eventuated without communities talking to each other and developing a vision as to how we can satisfy a need that we have.
We in the Northern Territory have a need; and that is the need to expand and to grow, and to play a significant part in the development of this whole region. That is not the whole region including the Northern Territory within Australia, but the place that we have, here in this nation, to support and link with the emerging economies around us - the developing economies of the East Asian region. It is those links that we must really consider. We must consider them very seriously. We must develop very refined thinking as to how we can effect proper trade links to facilitate the prosperity of our region, not just for ourselves, but we will become richer by our engagement with the region. That can only be facilitated through the development of trade links.
Trade links do not occur by the utterance of a parliamentary statement; they only occur through people discussing these issues and proposing solutions. We need clear and refined thinking to be able to establish appropriate and effective trade links with our region. The idea must be developed, the need must be established, then we must identify precisely what that need is, and then work towards a solution. Solutions in respect of engaging the vast population to our north are very complex. It is very difficult to translate an idea into action because it is easy to talk about how we can engage the region; to make a statement in the Chamber; to go to industry groups and talk about the great populations just to our north, and to propose an Asian engagement strategy. It is easy to do those things, but to effectively make it work is exceptionally difficult and serious business that requires serious thinking and consistent application that can only be undertaken with a genuine vision that will not be put off.
How do you think we got a railway? Do you think that we had a few statements in here and then, ultimately, we worked it out and we started to built a railway? We know that a railway was a vision that was borne over an extended period of time, that was tested on many, many fronts as an idea, for starters. Then there were technical aspects that made it an incredibly difficult project to make happen. We only have to be reminded of the difficulties that we had, the obstacles that were put in the way of an idea being brought to fruition. That is something within our own borders. In speaking of engaging with our region, our neighbours will not go away, but the trade links that we can develop with our neighbours are ones that we must consistently work towards.
I suggest that we have the machinery within our own community to assist us in developing a comprehensive vision that will work; the idea first, and then we will talk about the machinery that will allow these trade links to be created. These are the ideas and visions we must consider - and not just consider, but dwell upon, determine the problems inherent in the idea to start with, refine that and then develop some unity in working towards achieving the objective, which is real engagement with our neighbours.
Anyone who has done any cross-cultural work will know that you have to understand the other culture. I must say at the outset before speaking of these ideas, we must understand that, to engage with our regional neighbours, we must develop the relationships first. We must maintain those ongoing relationships. Any trade, any transaction of any idea in the region to our north is only achieved through the constant maintenance of relationship, the building of good relations. They cannot be neglected, just as you cannot neglect a friendship within our own context. However, that is the business of transaction in our region, the business of relationships. You cannot construct or progress any idea without a significant investment in that area.
Having recognised that, I will now move to three ideas that could perhaps be considered, bearing in mind that I am talking about relationships as an essential part of infrastructure development, and the transporting of ideas. These are the ideas. Perhaps they have floated around for some time, but we need to go further than talk about ideas. We must work with Indonesia and the Brunei-Indonesia-Malaysia- Philippines-East Asian growth area. We must work actively with them to develop a north to south shipping route in the region, possibly connecting with ports in North Sulawesi, the Philippines, Davau, or General Santos, or the Malaysian ports of Labuan or Kota Kinabalu. With Darwin, we must connect those ports, and we have to develop a trade link from those regions down to Darwin. That will take significant work. It may receive nodding assent in the region, but to go beyond nodding assent to making it occur - if we consider how difficult it was to build a railway, it took almost 100 years to have that idea translated into reality - we have just a glimpse of how difficult it would be to translate an idea such as that into reality.
Darwin could provide access for the BIMP-EAGA into Australia. The BIMP-EAGA ports could provide access to the region and onwards back to north Asia; another idea for consideration. We must work with Indonesia to get an understanding of the trade in the eastern provinces of Indonesia - what kind of trade is occurring in this region with Australia? - and then to direct that trade through the port of Darwin. That is a good idea, but that is an idea that would take incredible and consistent application, governed by a vision that understands the need to build relationships in order to transact that business. Once we have an a link established of Indonesian vessel touching in at Darwin - initially it would be a challenge because there would perhaps be only minimal trade going through Darwin - that trade should grow.
Perhaps we could consider looking to Vietnam. The Vietnamese National Bureau of Shipping has already considered the idea of bypassing Singapore and travelling to Darwin. That is an idea that has some nodding assent and consideration within the region. These ideas must be developed to provide a real and meaningful engagement with the region.
As I mentioned before, touching on those proposals and ideas for consideration, we need to talk about the machinery that we have to make those ideas come to pass. I acknowledge that this is the place for statements and this is the place for debate. However, it is not statements, and it is not debates that will make it occur. We need to go to another stage. I believe that the current developments at Charles Darwin University for which legislation is to pass tomorrow - and I predict it will - we will see within the vision that has been outlined for that new institute for higher learning and TAFE, the capacity to develop and research these ideas.
We need to use our university to focus on problems that are of great importance to this community. We must make sure that a university is used in a way that is directly meaningful to this community contained within the proposition to engage the region in the areas that I have just outlined. We would have the built-in capacity, the emerging capacity within the university, particularly in the areas of the Institute of Advanced Studies, the very machinery, invested in by the Northern Territory government, fortunately in the last budget. I must say I am disappointed to learn that the federal government has not sought to invest, at this point, in the Institute of Advanced Studies. But that is not the end of the issue. I see, within the Institute of Advanced Studies, the opportunity to work on ideas such as this: how to develop those trade links. It is a good idea, yes, and we could probably get a bit of mileage out of it, and score a few political points by talking it up, but the issue, at the end of the day, is to make sure it does actually happen. It is not about us, it is not about our political points that we might have on a tally board; it is about achieving a result. That is beholden on both sides of this Chamber.
To that end, I commend the need to engage our nearest neighbour, and for that to be placed far higher on the agenda in real terms, not just in terms that pacify ears that are interested in such things. We must actively work with passion and vision to make some of these ideas come to pass. Now that we have a rail link, a port, infrastructure development in terms of relationships with the region – which are in decline owing to neglect - these relationships must be reinvigorated with real vision so that we can make some progress on the idea of engaging our neighbour in very real and practical ways to provide economic benefits to the Northern Territory and allow the wealth of this Commonwealth to flow into the region, and for us to be truly the gateway to the region.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I will be relatively brief. I do not propose to go through the statement in great detail. However, I want to make a couple of points, and I am hopeful that the minister will be able to respond to them in his reply.
I notice from page 9 of the statement that there is some recognition of the future viability of development of the rail terminals and the East Arm port, but there is not, curiously, a mention of the transport hub, which has been an idea tossed around this parliament for some time. Given the minister’s statement early on that this transport plan is not about roads, I thought there might be some inclusion of the concept of a transport hub, which I am sure he appreciates goes beyond simply combining the rail and the port. It includes aviation issues. That seems to have dropped off the agenda. I note the minister shaking his head, so I look forward to any comments he can make in that regard.
Also from an aviation point of view, on page 11 of the statement, I note and thank him for his comment that the government proposes to expand domestic and international air transport capacity service in the Territory. We all know that international aviation has declined and there are a number of reasons of that, but in the last figures I looked at, the international flights in and out of Darwin were down something along the lines of 20% to 30%. Other than the statement of commitment that the government will work with carriers to build a business case for new international flights to the Territory, I would be interested to hear a bit more substance. Obviously, that is a worthy aim, but, again, it seems to have been on the agenda for a while. I have not seen any media reports. I do not know what government is doing so I would be grateful if the minister could advise us of what efforts are being made to develop business cases with international carriers, noting that international flights in and out of Darwin are so very important.
I also note the comment in relation to domestic aviation and, in particular, what has been described as government’s efforts to secure Virgin Blue. Of course, I cannot just let that go through to the keeper. I feel compelled to say that the people of Alice Springs remain upset that it took the Centre 12 months longer to secure Virgin Blue than it did the Top End.
Finally, in relation to the issue of transport, I note with a degree of surprise, I might say, that practical measures such as assisting Air North were not mentioned. Perhaps the government will say that, in a statement of this nature, Air North does not need to be addressed, but there are some very obvious realities here that affect people in the regions. Given that the Minister for Community Development made a statement in the House today all about the development of stronger regions, and a number of people contributed to it, it seems curious that this statement on the same day does not refer to how important aviation is from the position, say, of Air North, where it flies Darwin-Katherine-Tennant Creek-Alice Springs. It used to be a seven-day-a-week service. It is now five. I understand that after October, those services will be further reduced.
I know, and I am sure the minister knows, that it is not fashionable for any governments to go around propping up private enterprise. However, given how very important Air North is to the regions of Katherine and Tennant Creek in particular, I would be very grateful indeed if the minister could give us an indication as to whether he thinks the government does have a role to play in assisting Air North. When we think of economic development of businesses, in particular in Tennant Creek and Katherine, the minister would know that business operators cannot just hop in a car and drive the 10 hours from Tennant Creek to Darwin. It is a bit easier in the case of Katherine, of course, it is only three-and-a-bit hours. Those people do rely on Air North, and that aviation link is so terribly important to them. As I say, I would welcome any comments the minister can make in that regard.
Much has been said, and I do not see any point in repeating it, but I wanted to take the opportunity of raising those matters. I look forward to the minister’s reply and also to the plan to be released later on in the year.
Mr VATSKALIS (Transport and Infrastructure): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank members for their constructive or otherwise comments. I would like to respond to specific issues raised by members, but also generally.
It is very easy to take things out of context, and to say the minister does not know what he is talking about because he says this plan is not about roads. It is absolutely wrong, because this plan is not only about roads. I listened carefully to what the member for Blain had to say, and this is what this plan is all about. This plan is about building interstate, regional and international links using all modes of transport - train, aeroplane, coastal shipping, international shipping and, of course, vehicular traffic on the roads.
I know the member for Macdonnell is a bit stressed. Politically, he does not know whether he is Arthur or Martha, whether he is CLP or not CLP and, of course, that is stressful. However, at the same time, on 18 August 2001, all his Christmases came at once because at last he could attack somebody. He could play devil’s advocate about conditions of roads. Before, he could not say anything because he belonged to the same party that was in government, the same party that, for the past 10 or 15 years, had not put any money into roads; the same party that allowed the regional roads to deteriorate to such a degree that today, when we are trying to grade one of those roads, we grade limestone because there is no gravel, nothing to grade.
We have to spend millions of dollars to bring some of these roads up to very basic condition. It is very easy to stand up and say ‘Kings Canyon road to be closed’ to the people in Central Australia. The reality is that what was closed was Ernest Giles Road, which is unsealed and it appears as an unsealed road in maps. I have driven roads like that, and I remember that in 1997 I saw the same road, and I saw the sign that tells you it is an unsealed road, drive carefully, defensive driving required. I have driven roads like that, not only the Northern Territory, but in other states, including Western Australia. The same conditions applied and I had to drive carefully, because these roads are not bitumen; they do not have the black ribbon on them. They are dirt roads that are pushed by grader, and there will always be some roads that are unsealed.
Besides that, let me start on the comment from the member for Blain, that we need vision. Yes, we do need vision. When we came to government, we did not find a transport plan by the previous government. If you have a copy, please bring it to me because no matter how much I look for it, I did not find one. We have to have vision, and that is exactly what we are doing. Our vision is to develop a road strategy for the next 10 years, 2003 to 2013, to identify the roads of significance, the roads that need to be prioritised, those that serve a purpose in the Territory to create wealth, help business and, of course, reduce the social isolation of some people in the Northern Territory.
The member for Macdonnell complained about the corrugation on roads in this area. Some people in the Top End would love to have a road like that during the Wet Season when roads are cut off because of the wet weather condition, because they have been pushed through black soil or through swamps, and the options are an aeroplane or to stay put and do not go anywhere.
With regard to the member of Araluen and the comments she made about the transport hub, there is a direct reference in the document on page 12, where it states the six strategic areas are the development of inter-model links and a transport hub is exactly that; how to bring all the modes together. That includes railway, shipping, road transport. That is what we intend to create in Darwin, that is what we intend to create in Alice Springs and in other regional centres.
With regard to air transport capacity, I absolutely agree with you. We need more international transport in Darwin. I have been very critical before in private conversation with Qantas. I have questioned Qantas about the wisdom of flying to Singapore during the SARS epidemic, and not bypassing Singapore flying from Europe to Darwin via Dubai, because the distance is the same and they could do it. The answer was: ‘Oh, we have never done it before. We cannot do it now’.
In the next few days, the Chief Minister and I will be travelling to Greece. We cannot go via Singapore because we cannot find a seat. We have to go via Perth and Dubai to Athens. My colleague, the Minister for Tourism, has actively pursued negotiations with airlines in Asia and Singapore, and we will pursue negotiations with airlines. We are currently trying to arrange a meeting in Dubai during our stopover with representatives of Emirates Airline, to invite them to come to Darwin to show them what a hub Darwin can be for their proposed link to New Zealand. Currently, they fly to Perth; they can fly equally well to Darwin. We are trying our best, but you have to remember that these airlines will make decisions on commercial grounds, not because they like us. They are trying to find out how many people they can bring in and take out. One thing that does not help is the decision by the federal government not to allow the foreign airlines to pick up passengers in Darwin to go to another state capital. I brought that to John Anderson’s attention and, believe it or not, I was in the same boat as Ron Boswell. Ron Boswell was very critical of Qantas, and his own government’s policy not to allow cabotage.
On the third issue of Air North, we are aware of the problems. I met with the Air North executive four times. The first time I met with them, I suggested that they should start looking at the reduction of air fares for backpackers. I also said that I am prepared to write to Qantas to support their case for one fare from Katherine to Sydney, using Air North from Katherine to Alice Springs and then Qantas to Sydney, or a similar fare from Tennant Creek to Sydney. We recently had more meetings, and no, the government cannot provide money to Air North. Why only Air North, and why not Anindilyakwa and other airlines? What we said is that we are going to do is work with Air North. The Tourist Commission has been working with Air North. Our aviation people are working with Air North trying to find a solution not to the Darwin, Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs - the problem affects mainly the Katherine-Tennant Creek section. People can fly to Katherine, but they cannot find a seat to come to Darwin. Air North is proposing some solutions; I will leave it for Air North to announce, but I believe there is going to be an increase of services from Darwin to Katherine and back to provide more seats for people who come in from Tennant Creek.
The other thing the government is doing is promoting the Air North service for public servants who are flying to Tennant Creek. I choose to fly Air North from Katherine to Alice Springs rather than come back and pick up the jet and fly to Alice Springs. We intend to support regional airlines, and we will do it. There are other solutions, and we are exploring every solution with Air North. I believe we are going to have a very positive outcome.
That brings me to roads. The reality, once again, is there was no strategic plan for roads, nothing at all. Roads were proposed haphazardly. They were attended to when it was good for election time. Some of them have not been done for the past 10 years. The member for Macdonnell asked me about the sign on the Plenty Highway that is burnt by the sun. When did you put it up? Well, I asked the department. Apparently, it was put up seven years ago. Seven years ago the sign was erected warning people that they were on a four-wheel drive road only. Do not blame this government for the condition of some of these regional roads. You should address your comments to some of your colleagues. We take note of your comments, member for Macdonnell, and we know about the condition of the roads down there. That is why we are putting in place a road strategy for the next 10 years, so we can identify the roads of importance, we can prioritise and we can start putting the money on roads that have yet to be attended to for various reasons.
We have started fixing beef roads and engaging local communities, instead of getting subcontractors from Katherine and Alice Springs to do their own road segments. The reality is that we cannot, under the current budget or any other budget in the Territory, address the issue of all the roads. We mentioned that we are losing $20m per year. I wrote to Anderson and I received a reply from him. His reply was: ‘We are not giving you any more money because we gave you $11m for your unincorporated area, which is much more than we gave to Victoria who we gave $8m’. What he did not mention was that the unincorporated area in Victoria is only 10% of the state while the unincorporated area in the Territory is 95% of the state. I wrote again and I would love to have your help. You can write to Anderson, reinforcing the point. After all, we are supposed to be here for the betterment of the Territory. Any support from any other members would be welcome. I am prepared to put my signature together with yours or any of your members, on the same letter asking for that money.
Let me tell you about the roads with regard to the Department of Defence. John Anderson was not aware that the Victoria Highway is cut off for about six to eight weeks a year. He was raving about the Bradshaw training section until I mentioned that you cannot use Bradshaw for six, eight or 10 weeks a year because the bridge goes under 10 m of water. His reply was: ‘I was never advised about that.’ That is the commitment of the Commonwealth to anything outside Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide or Perth.
Our plan here is to develop links. Our plan is to look at the intermodel links, to look at costs of shipping. We all talk about roads, we all think of transport in the Territory as vehicles. How many of us know how much coastal shipping takes place from Port Keats all the way to Groote Eylandt? We are one of the biggest users of barges and coastal shipping in Australia because of isolation, the roads being cut off during the Wet Season, and because you transport so much more material by barge than you do with a truck. We are looking into how to improve service delivery to remote communities that are served by barges, and how we are going to improve not only the transport, but other aspects of infrastructure. Barge landings: who is maintaining them? Money is thrown at them to maintain them. One heavy Wet Season and they are gone again. So we have to find a way to do it better.
Members asked what we are doing about the national heavy vehicle reform; that we should not accept any reform. The reality is that in the past few months when I attended Ministerial Councils, I was the only minister who spoke against any reform that will remove the heavy vehicles or road trains from the Territory. I was one of the ministers who stood up and spoke against the reform that was requested by Victoria and New South Wales with regards to four-wheel drives. Most people who live down there have no idea about the distances, the conditions in the Territory, what it means to drive down the Stuart Highway and come face-to-face with a Brahman bull, a kangaroo or another animal. They have never had this experience. Fortunately, John Anderson, who drives a four-wheel drive and is a farmer, actually supported us together with colleague, Alannah MacTiernan from Western Australia. The reforms they take, let us say, in New South Wales will not affect the Territory; we will maintain the right to have the heavy vehicles and the heavy transport.
AusLink is not about improving transport modes in Australia. The reality about AusLink - and everybody seems to understand that apart from the member for Drysdale - is how to shift costs for the maintenance of national highways from the Commonwealth to the states. The proposal is up to 25% of the cost of repair and maintenance for the national highway to go to states and territories. Do you think the Territory can afford the put so much money into the three major highways - Stuart Highway, Victoria Highway and Barkly Highway - for repairs and maintenance? I am afraid we cannot because we do not have the base to recover the money from taxation. We have resisted strongly, together with all the other states, any attempt by the Commonwealth to shift the costs for maintenance of national highways.
‘Kick the feds,’ said the member for Drysdale. Gladly, any time, especially when they do not serve our interests. I am prepared to do that, but I need your assistance. I notice that you did not say: ‘I will be with you’. You said: ‘Kick the feds, yeah! Do it, do it’. I did not notice that he …
Mr Dunham interjecting.
Mr VATSKALIS: It is all words. At least the member for Macdonnell had the guts to say: ‘I will come with you’. As I said before, I am very pleased to have anybody, from both sides of the House, go down and talk to Mr Anderson and get the money, and I am prepared to do it.
We have developed so many roads that will improve conditions for our farmers and for our beef producers. We have spent, and will continue to spend, money on beef roads. We have spent money in Katherine. I have spent money at the Douglas Daly to improve the conditions of the roads because the farmers came with a decent, solid case as to why it should happen, and we will continue to do it.
This is the way to progress, and this document, even if it does not refer specifically to roads, it refers to every mode of transport. This is a document that has been circulated and has the support of the Australian Transport Association, which was part of the consultation. I say to you again: this document will stay out for longer so we can have wide consultation with the community. I am prepared to extend the consultation period for another two weeks so that community is well aware of it. People are aware of it because we consulted with industry, the relevant professional associations, as many people as possible, especially people involved in the transport industry.
I commend this document to the House. I call on every person - even about bicycles, I do not have a problem - to make a submission. We have to consider it. I know we have problems with public transport and school buses. The reality is as people start moving out of the centre of Darwin to the rural areas, the distance is getting longer and longer, and we start having problems with buses because everybody wants a school bus at their front door to take the kids to school. Some of these buses have to travel 40 km in the morning or 40 km in the afternoon for the kids to attend school from Marrakai down to Palmerston, Humpty Doo, Howard Springs or wherever. So we know we have problems. This is a way for people to have a look at it, have their two bob’s worth by way of submission, and we will consider it.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
ADJOURNMENT
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
One of the things I have come to particularly value since taking leadership of government is the extraordinary calibre of our public service. I have been deeply impressed by their professionalism, their commitment and dedication. Tonight, I want to talk about one particular public servant.
Recent events have represented a great opportunity for advancement of the Territory’s indigenous arts industry. I noted in my Indigenous Arts Strategy ministerial statement and at recent events, such as the Telstra art award, the brilliance of indigenous artists and art practitioners, and the dedication of the industry workers. Tonight, as I said, I want to talk about someone whose commitment in this area has been quite extraordinary. I am speaking about the Curator of Aboriginal Art and Material Culture at the Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory, Margie West.
Margie is, most famously of all, the originator and founder of what we now know as the Telstra National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Art Award, which recently opened for its 20th year. This award is the oldest and richest indigenous art award of its kind, one of the most prestigious of art awards in Australia and ranks with some of the greatest. But this art award had a relatively modest beginning here in Darwin, and Margie played an instrumental role.
Margie West first came to the Territory in the 1970s working as an anthropologist with the late and great Professor Bill Stanner. The founding and visionary museum director, Dr Colin Jack-Hinton, appointed Margie to the Museum of Arts and Sciences, as the museum was then called, in 1978. At that time, the museum did not even have a building or dedicated collection storage space, after the old museum at the Palmerston Town Hall was destroyed in the violence of Cyclone Tracy.
Margie saw the establishment of the museum at its current Bullocky Point site. In the early 1980s, she went to the board with a proposal for a national Aboriginal art award. In 1984, the first award was held. The award continued to grow and develop in status and prominence. Following major sponsorship by Telstra in 1992, the award achieved its current status as the richest indigenous art award in the country, and the rest, as they say, is history. The award has continued in prominence and success. It is almost always controversial, and this year was no exception. Through it all, Margie continues her tasks of curating and presenting this marvellous event.
Margie has a long-standing relationship with many of the indigenous artists in the Territory and elsewhere. As director, Anna Malgorzewicz, noted at the 20th Telstra award, preparation for next year’s awards begins the day after the launch of the award for that year. So when opportunity affords itself from Margie’s very busy schedule, she finds the research aspect of going bush and working with indigenous artists her greatest professional passion. Margie has been recognised for her contribution to indigenous art. She has been invited to contribute to scholarly and popular publications, and to create exhibitions interstate and overseas, promoting the work of indigenous artists and the Territory to the widest of audiences.
Most recently, Margie was awarded a Churchill Fellowship to pursue her studies of art and indigenous peoples in North America and Europe. She has, with the exception of periods when she has undertaken higher study, worked at the Museum and Art Gallery as curator of Aboriginal Art and Curator of the Telstra art award. Now in her 25th year of service for the Northern Territory government in assisting in the research, collection, curation and exhibition of indigenous arts, I thank Margie for her extraordinary contribution.
I began by saying how the Northern Territory government rests upon the skills, dedication and expertise of the public service. Margie West is an example of that kind of dedication and commitment, and, on behalf of all of us here tonight, I would like to say thank you, and wish her many more years of work with the Northern Territory.
I take the opportunity to update everyone here about developments within my electorate. The Parap Markets, which are well known to many in Darwin, have been scheduled for an upgrade. Tenders closed last Thursday for the work, which includes surface treatment, hard and soft landscaping, seating, disability access, sullage points, power to the market sites and, importantly, lighting. Tender interviews will be conducted next week, and the successful tenderer will be commencing work very soon. I look forward to updating the House on further progress in this area.
I am also pleased to report that discussions are taking place between my electorate office and the Darwin City Council on the issue of traffic on Narrows Road. Last week, this House received a petition dealing with the speed of traffic on Narrows Road. This has been a great concern to many residents over the 20 years I have lived in Narrows Road, and there have been periods of speeding. The Narrows is only a small area, and the incidence of speeding, because there are two long, straight roads in the area, is quite frequent. Also in a little suburb between the Stuart Highway and Bagot Road, you get a lot of rat running, and that causes concern to the residents.
Darwin City Council is currently gathering data and looking at options. There will be a public meeting, and at present, this is anticipated for mid-September. DIPE is aware of the need for appropriate consultation, and their officers will be attending to provide advice and deal with issues that relate to the Northern Territory government’s roads, so the impact of the Stuart Highway and Bagot Road is one for DIPE, and the suburban area of the Narrows lies with Darwin City Council. We are all hoping that there can be a resolution to a problem of a very small area that gets undue traffic.
I would like to update the House on the Arafura Bowls Club site, which has now been cleared and rezoned. It is very important, in relation to this site, that no decisions are made on its future without adequate consultation with residents and other stakeholders. The site will be auctioned pretty shortly. It has been rezoned R2, which will allow the development of two-storey townhouses. However, quite recently, residents have become concerned about the kind of development that will occur there within that R2 framework. Officers from government will be working with the potential purchasers on consultation with residents prior to those plans being finalised, for what will happen on what is a terrific site for development. When you look at what happened with Parap Grove, not far from that site, the consultations with residents and the good outcome achieved, on a key site for the electorate, a potential purchaser and developer needs to work closely with the residents, who the purchaser/developer will find are very constructive in getting a really good outcome for the site.
There is also positive news from Parap Primary School and its upgrade. Stage 1 is more than 80% complete, and completion of this stage of the project is expected by October. The school council is undertaking the project with DIPE acting as work supervisor. Stage 2, funded in this year’s budget, is expected to go to tender by the end of December or January, and to contract by April next year. At this stage, we are looking at a completion date of the end of 2004.
I would also like to acknowledge, when talking about Stage 1 of the school, some of the dedicated staff and volunteers. Over the July school holidays, there were many people busy at work moving into the new building at Parap Primary in Stage 1. The major feature of that was a new administration building and a library. A lot of work was undertaken in the last week of the holidays in preparing the building for the first day of school. I am sure the Parap Primary community would join me in acknowledging the contribution of Alan Jones, Norma Rooding, Anne Grace, Antonio Goncalves, JP or John Potter, Herbert Molnar, Barry Kepert, Martina Soares and Rob Montague, because it certainly took a lot of work.
While I am on the topic of Parap Primary, I would like to mention some excellent results achieved by students in the recent Australian Schools Science Competition. I must say that Parap, as well as other primary schools across the Territory, consistently do very well in that schools science competition. Honours were received by the following students: Xavier Holt, Year 4, distinction; Nina Fitzgerald, Year 4, credit; Callum Barnes, Year 5, distinction; Sharda Campbell, Year 5, distinction; Alex Chala, Year 5, credit; James Constantine, Year 5, credit; Lindsay Bott, Year 6, credit; Louis Buckley-Cameron, Year 6,credit; Sarah Butler, Year 6, credit; Anneliese Dasilva, Year 6, credit; Elizabeth Duguid, Year 6, credit; Dean Kew, Year 6, credit; Stephen Giese, Year 7, credit; Shannon Hee, Year 7, credit; and Mitchell Hinchcliffe, Year 7, credit.
Mr Baldwin: Did you table this?
Dr Lim: When? It is not in the Table office.
Ms MARTIN: Don’t you like to hear their names? I think it is terrific.
Dr Lim: This has nothing to do with you.
Mr Baldwin: We are talking to the man behind you.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: A bit of order, please.
Ms MARTIN: Participation certificates were awarded to, in Year 4, Harley Mitaros, Sohum Raut, Max Sciacca, Dion Meta, Maddy Cvern, Nicholas Browning, Matthew Zarimus, Sam Van den Nieuwenhof, Dominque Giese, Alica Cann and Storm Ariho; in Year 6, Megan Gallagher, Emmeke Jones and Drew Browning; and in Year 7, Roman Maher, Christian Meta, Jason Pusparajan and Evan Barnes. Well done! A good tradition of Parap maintained. Well done to all those students, and congratulations to the staff and families of Parap Primary School.
I am also certain of interest to colleagues of the work being done on Darwin High School. As I announced earlier this year, $1m has been programmed for this financial year. The school has had consultants put together a master plan, and I look forward to meeting with officers from DEET to discuss progress towards full design and documentation of the project. It is anticipated that documentation will be finalised and tendering will occur during next year. There are, in addition, two further stages of $3m programmed into future financial years, and this will result in a total of $7m when finished.
I am also pleased to report that staff at Darwin High School have been recognised for their expertise and professionalism in a series of awards. Ruth Rynehart received the Chief Minister’s Award to travel overseas to study education and curriculum; Elizabeth Mountford was presented with the prestigious Australian Literacy Educators Association Award; Jeanne Watt won the National Award for Career Education. On behalf of everyone, my congratulations to all three.
In addition, the school has attracted three Commonwealth quality teacher funding grants to the value of $15 000 including $5000 for teacher development for adult learning styles, $5000 for senior study programs and a $5000 Literacy Initiative so that English staff can mentor other English staff in the Darwin and Palmerston area, sharing their expertise and knowledge.
These projects are positive and tangible improvements that will bring lasting benefits to Territorians, and I look forward to reporting on future development with these projects.
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonnell): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I touch on something that I spoke on last week in adjournment debates, and it is an issue for the whole-of-government.
I wish to start with my thanks to the Health minister for organising a briefing on the issue today, and pass on my thanks to a member of his staff, Edward Tilton, who was kind enough to organise the briefing quickly and in a very courteous fashion. The briefing was on an issue I raised last week, and that is the situation of the emergency services response in the area of Kings Creek Station and Kings Canyon. It really is an issue for the whole-of-government. It does not just rest with the Health minister.
The issue that I specifically raised last week was the fact that, in an area where there are 300 000 tourist movements every year, there is, effectively, one nurse on the ground at any given time. That nurse has the added difficulty of having to service many Aboriginal outstations and communities in the area, as well as deal with those 300 000 tourists. Not surprisingly, one of the most common things that the nurse has to deal with is twisted ankles on the road to Kings Canyon.
The road itself has produced six fatalities in a 12-month period, which has been responded to by staff members from Kings Creek Station, as well as people from the resort itself. I know that the government has been trying to create improved circumstances out there, but the truth of the matter is it is far beyond a small fix; it needs some pretty major projects. It needs some capital expenditure on a police station and an emergency services response team located there.
When you consider that Ayres Rock Resort has some 450 000 tourist movements a year, Kings Canyon and Kings Creek have more than half of that. Ayres Rock has a clinic with a doctor, nurses and paramedics on site through RFDS, as well as a five-person police station. Kings Creek Station has a few employees who work there and none of them have professional training in how to deal with major incidents or accidents. The expense that Kings Creek has to go through on a regular basis to do the work of good samaritans has gone beyond simple acts of good samaritanism. It has reached the stage where it is an indirect tax, and not an insubstantial one.
The costs of mounting some of the rescues and attending to some of these accidents, in fiscal terms alone, mounts up to easily thousands of dollars in the first instance, and tens of thousands of dollars for protracted responses. This includes not only time and wages lost in the workplace, but extra overtime and wages, as well as damage to equipment and purchase of new equipment for those folk to attend these very serious accidents.
The problem is also that the response to a major incident would be very difficult indeed. I was advised during the Estimates Committee, and during the briefing this afternoon, that the government is establishing an emergency services response team there. The problem is that those people who work in those response teams are going to be drawn from the staff of the resort, as well as people who work in other places around the area. That is problematic because to become professional in that area, you have to work for years in those fields. When you consider that the average turnover of staff at somewhere like Kings Canyon Resort is about eight months, you will get them to the stage where they will have a first aid certificate and some very basic rescue, but you will not have anybody qualified in triage response and those sorts of things should a major bus accident occur – and they can occur. Even a small one near the WA border last week demonstrated that resources can very easily become overtaxed very quickly.
It was pointed out that helicopters can come up from Ayres Rock but, once again, they are not people movers in the sense that they can shift casualties. It is uncertain whether Alice Springs is in range of those helicopters so, if they did have to move someone who was seriously injured, it is not certain that it could be done by helicopter - which tells me that there is no clear plan in place because some of these questions could not be answered. If they do deliver people to respond to an accident from Ayres Rock who have skills, like doctors, that will take an hour to an hour-and-a-half just for the flight to get a doctor there. That is a problem because in medicine there is a thing called ‘the golden hour’ which is that first magical hour meaning the difference between life and death, or permanent or temporary injury. If you have a major bus accident, it seriously lowers the chances of survival for people who are more than an hour away to deliver services to places like Kings Canyon.
Emergency swags that the Health department has provided to people in the area are a good idea, but they are a stop-gap measure in the sense that they are not going to be a major asset in the instance of a major accident in that area. There are numerous problems that will occur at some point in the future to which this government really needs to turn its attention.
The government has found money for police stations and the like in remote communities, and I congratulate the government on expenditure at somewhere like Kintore, which needs a police station. If the money is available for people in Kintore where there are a few hundred people in the patrol area of the police station; and if you include Kirakara in Western Australia in the policing district, should that happen under the Tri-State Agreement, you will still have in the order of a couple of thousand people. If you compare that then to 300 000 people visiting on an annual basis, there is a good and strong argument for the construction of a police station and emergency services centre at Kings Canyon or in the Kings Creek area.
Simple things can be done in the short term: remote landing lights would be a good start. I stood on the side of the airstrip a couple of years ago when a Spanish tourist had an accident. She had to be flown back to Alice Springs at 2 am with suspected spinal cord injuries. I was glad to be of assistance on the occasion, but we were standing there at 2 am lighting flares on the side of the airstrip, which is a pretty substandard way of dealing with an airstrip that is used regularly for emergency landings. RFDS will not endanger their aircraft, quite rightly, by landing in dangerous places. If the wind is up too much, those flares can be problematic. The technology is available and is not that expensive, for remote landing lights to be activated from an aircraft approaching an airstrip. Those are the things the government should be looking at.
The government offers counselling to the staff of Kings Creek Station, which is good, but it seems to be a very short-term fix when you consider that these folks are people employed in the tourist industry and in animal husbandry of cattle and camels. They are not well trained, nor should they be expected to be well trained, in emergency service response. It is well and good to provide counselling, but it is now obvious enough and reasonably foreseeable that accidents will occur there on a regular basis and you now need trained professionals operating in that area.
This is a very serious problem. It is beyond just the Minister for Health and Community Services to respond; it is now a matter for the government to respond. The Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services should surely be turning his attention to what I would now describe as a critical situation. I wonder what will happen if a nurse in the area is injured responding to a motor vehicle accident after missing out on 24 hours of sleep by virtue of the fact that the nurse had to be at work for eight hours that day, and during the evening had to deal with two twisted ankles. At 2 am, the nurse hypothetically has a motor car accident to go to, RFDS does not arrive until 6 am, the nurse is back on deck at 8 am and then there are clinic hours. There is another motor vehicle accident on Mereenie Loop Road and, before too long, a staff member like that is awake for 24 or 36 hours. You cannot expect a person in that situation to perform at their peak, and the civil liability alone that the government would carry when something went horribly wrong in that environment would embarrass the government. I am deeply concerned that it would also have a profound affect on those professionals who try their very best in these difficult places to deliver the very best service they can and, if somebody in that situation did make a mistake because of the fact that they were tired, it would have an effect on them as well.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I urge the government, as a matter of grave importance, to turn its attention to this very important issue. I am terrified that something major is going to happen sooner rather than later, and I am talking about a tourist bus. I go down the Mereenie Loop Road nowadays and see AAT coaches and Denning buses, licensed to carry 50 or 60 people. That is an accident waiting to happen. It is not just coaches, it is any number of other tourists in large vehicles, even on the bitumen sections of the road leading to Kings Canyon. Government has to be better prepared. There needs to be a bus crash plan, and there needs to be the capacity to respond to a bus crash or something similar on that road, sooner rather than later, because this government faces a very real risk of being gravely embarrassed should something go horribly wrong.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Madam Speaker, first I would like to thank all the public servants in my department for working very hard to complete the Northern Territory Transport Plan. It is a great piece of work, and I wish to express my appreciation of their efforts. They still have work to do: they have to receive, read and assess all the submissions before writing the report.
I would now like to go to my electorate of Casuarina. This is the time of the year when we all have to complete our tax return for the Taxation Department and, hopefully, we might get something back. The Australian Taxation Office held their annual training of volunteers, Tax Help, at my office at Casuarina. Thanks to these volunteers, Tax Help offers a free service to low income earners to complete their tax returns. Thanks to Broni Mudge from Australian Taxation Office in Adelaide for her assistance. I am happy to provide my electorate office as the base for several volunteers to help local people complete their tax returns. I would like to thank Margreet Sadlo, my Electorate Officer, and other volunteers like Beryl Warne, Anna-Maria Rinaldi and Diana Stephenson for doing an excellent job. They still have many clients who need to complete tax returns.
I have two very talented young ladies in my electorate, Simone and Candice Liddy from Nakara, who continue to impress with their achievements in hockey. These sisters were recently chosen to represent the Territory interstate for the second time this year. They have been in Perth this month, competing in the Under 16 Secondary Schools National championship. They are a credit to the Casuarina community. To their school, Dripstone High, their parents and to the girls, hearty congratulations.
Peggy Ang celebrated her birthday on 29 July, but will not disclose which birthday it was. Peggy volunteers with the Senior Citizens Club at Casuarina. She teaches English with the Happy Migrants Social Club, and volunteers her time at the Multicultural Council of the Northern Territory. She always gives valuable assistance to Margreet in my electorate office. Thank you, Peggy, for the help that you give to so many Territorians, and happy birthday.
I recently met with Doug Strain from Masonic Homes, and visited the newly opened nursing home at Tiwi Gardens; a magnificent building. It is a fantastic design by Mr Hully Liveris, a well renowned architect in Darwin. I have to admit, I have never seen such a fantastic development, because you walk in and you do not think you are in a nursing home. You think you are in an exhibition hall because of all the pictures hanging on the wall, the high ceilings, atriums, and gardens. They have services there such as hairdressers to look after the people’s needs. They have a meeting room for the people who come and visit their loved ones where they can have a cup of tea. All the rooms are very well designed to cater for the people with their families and their needs. Doug told me that they will express interest for further development in the area for a day service for people with disabilities. I will certainly support any approach by Masonic Homes to further expand their service in Casuarina because they provide a valuable service to the community.
I also would like to farewell John Burkill, the previous CEO, who worked very hard to make the Masonic Homes Nursing Home a reality. He is going to retire to enjoy his vineyard and travelling and, hopefully, we will see him again because he promised to come back to the Territory to catch that magical barramundi he was never lucky enough to catch. He wants to catch one bigger than six cans of VB, so next time he comes up, we will make sure that we will take him out somewhere to get one, and certainly not at Mr Barra’s shop. He prefers to catch one himself.
Last week, I reported that I attended Indian National Day celebrations. This weekend, I attended the Pakistan National Day celebrations. Both nations were borne on approximately the same day. I was very interested in trying to find information about these two central Asian nations. There is a rich history of the two nations. The region now comprising Pakistan has been inhabited from around 3000BC. Agricultural settlements in the area expanded over time, culminating in the Indus or Harappan civilisation in 2500BC. Later, the arrival of Indo-Aryans saw the demise of the Harappan civilisation. The period of Pakistan’s cultural history between the end of the Indus culture in 1500BC and the beginning of the historic period under the Achaemenians in the 6th century BC is shrouded in mystery.
In the 6th century, Buddha began his teaching, which later spread throughout the northern parts of the south Asian subcontinent. It was towards the end of this century, too, that Darius I of Iran organised Sindh and Punjab as the 20th satrapy of his empire. We all know that the present empire was destroyed by Alexander the Great who also invaded Pakistan, Afghanistan and India. Some of the remnants of the ancient Greek culture still remains in Pakistan; significant are the original, traditional dances. They are in circular form, the same way the ancient Greeks danced. Also tribes in Pakistan have very distinctive cultural links and structure similar to the ancient Greeks because Alexander left behind his army with instructions to marry local women and to establish an outpost of Greek civilisation and heritage in deep Asia.
Dr Burns: Greeks eat curry, too.
Mr VATSKALIS: That is right. We have evidence of Greek culture in India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, starting from Israel and Egypt. The history, of course, of Pakistan changed when, in 700AD, the Moslem army invaded the country and established the first Moslem foothold. The foundation of Moslem rule in India were laid in the early 13th century with extended boundaries, and Delhi became the capital city. Up to 1526, five Moslem dynasties held power.
Of course, the East India Company occupied India and established India as a colony or as an English protectorate. At the dawn of the 20th century, Nawab Salimullah Khan founded the All-India Moslem League, mainly with the objective of safeguarding the political rights and interests of the Moslems. Of course, there were very rough communal riots in the 1920s, despite the attempts of Moslems and Hindus to bring peace between the communities. However, it became a reality that the two groups of people could not live together, and there was the first movement for the establishment of a different country for the people who were of Moslem faith in India.
The name of this country that was flagged was Pakistan, which is actually a compound abbreviation of the letters of the names of the provinces involved: Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, Indus-Sind and Baluchistan. The demand for Pakistan became popular after the World War II. In 1945, elections were called to determine the respective strength of the political parties. The All-India Moslem League swept all the 30 seats in the Central Legislature and in the provincial elections. In 1946, the All-India Moslem League called a convention to reiterate the Pakistan demand in clearer terms. Of course, on 16 August, the Moslems in India showed solidarity to Pakistan. A partition plan for the transfer of power was announced on 3 June 1947. Two large Moslem majority provinces, Bengal and Punjab, were partitioned. If you have seen the film Ghandi, you will have seen clearly the movement of ethnic groups or religious groups from one country to the other. On 15 August 1947, British rule on the subcontinent ended and two new nations were created; one of them India and the other Pakistan.
I have to say that the Pakistani community in Darwin might not be a very big community, but they keep their traditions alive and well. Certainly, it was a great night to celebrate with them the National Day of Pakistan.
After that, I attended a great party: the Filipiniana Senior Citizen Association. If you want to go somewhere and have a good time and a good party, I highly recommend the Filipiniana Senior Citizens. I have never seen so many 70-year-olds and 80-year-olds dancing, drinking and enjoying the night. It was a fantastic night. They had the history of the music in modern times starting from the 1960s and finishing with a fantastic performer who pretended to be Tina Turner singing Simply the Best. It was absolutely fantastic.
Certainly, our government is very pleased to support these groups because we believe that senior citizens have every right to enjoy their lives and we encourage them to be active and enjoy themselves. It was memorable night. I enjoyed it thoroughly. Unfortunately, I had to go home because I had not seen my family for a long time, due to the sittings, but I would go back any time.
Mr MALEY (Goyder): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I place on the record some observations and concerns which became apparent to me during the course of Question Time today.
The Chief Minister, in response to a dorothy dix question about the Labor government’s support for maintaining the two federal seats in the Lower House, answered with a long and incoherent explanation about supposedly what this government is doing to maintain the rights of Territorians.
I was struck by the fact that, on the face of it, there was apparent support. When you contrast that to what is occurring and what this government’s federal counterparts are doing in Canberra; that is, they are not supporting Territory rights, or the rights of Territorians to have two representatives in the Lower House. In today’s paper, there is also a well respected political commentator, Professor Mackerras, who candidly states that the Labor members of the committee investigating this particular aspect are opposed to the amendment. This is David Tollner’s private member’s bill to make sure the rights of Territorians are maintained. So, we have a Territory Labor government publicly trying to hoodwink Territorians, mislead Territorians, when we know full well what their federal Labor counterparts are doing.
I call upon the Chief Minister: let us have a look at the letters that this Labor government has written to their bosses in Canberra, and the letters that have been written to Mr Crean, if any. Let us have a look at the letters that this government has written to Simon Crean, the leader of the Labor Party in Canberra.
We know what John Howard is doing. He is supporting David Tollner; the amendments; and the rights of Territorians. I am going to make sure that this issue is monitored closely. I am going to make sure that some Territorians in this parliament genuinely stand up for the rights of Territorians.
If the Chief Minister was genuine about representing Territorians and genuinely committed to persuading her federal colleagues to support this important legislation which would guarantee those two seats - our two seats - then there would not be an issue. It is simply misleading to try to hoodwink Territorians to think that ‘I will make a few comments through a dorothy dix question’ when we know full well that your federal colleagues in Canberra are undermining these values, these attempts to say that you are supporting Territory rights.
It is an issue that will be closely monitored by this side of politics. We look forward to the Chief Minister demonstrating that her Labor colleagues in Canberra will be supporting this legislation. It is a simple process. If the government is serious about this, then Simon Crean and their Labor colleagues in Canberra need to support David Tollner’s private member’s bill.
Another important issue for Territorians is the construction of the Alice Springs to Darwin Railway. It is in the final stages. It is a significant developmental milestone. The first passenger and freight trains will be an important step in the future progress and development of the Northern Territory. I expect that there will be the usual fanfare, and probably some of the usual dignitaries on the first train. Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, as a true Territorian, you know that there was a train that used to go to Larrimah. There are still lots of people who worked on that train as drivers, operators. These people are scattered across all our electorates. There are a number in my electorate. They are the repository of a wealth of knowledge on the history of our trains, and these type of people should be part of this important event: the first passenger train coming from Alice Springs to Darwin.
They are people like Robin Jessup, who is a fellow from Darwin River and has lived in the Territory for many years. He has wonderful stories about the old days; he knows where the old sites are. He even came into my office and talked about the grave of a fellow who passed away many years ago located about 20 km past the Adelaide River township on the right hand side. He has gone there with a view to locating this site. There are heaps of relics and lots of structures, obviously in various states of ruin and decay, but these are important sites. It is important information and these people are really interested in what is occurring and should play a part in the process.
The subject of illegal dwellings is an issue that has attracted some attention in the rural area. I am not talking about the odd place that is secure but may not technically be up to code. There are some dwellings where people have cleared a block, something has been dumped down, no one is living there and it is presenting a danger. I have had a number of complaints from people. One example is over at Mandorah in the Wagait area. I understand it has been fixed now, and I am not going to go into it because it is subject to some sort of prosecution, but it is an example of how careful we have to be, with the cyclone season coming up, if you live on a large rural property. Unsecured items like sheets of iron are dangerous and, in some cases, there are dwellings that have been dumped in a state of ruin on a property, and they are a danger to neighbours. It is good to see that the authorities are taking an interest in this and resolving some of the more outstanding issues and difficult situations.
Last week, I had the pleasure of attending an agricultural forum hosted by the federal Agriculture minister, Warren Truss. It was a great opportunity to meet the minister and a number of other ministers. It was a day not only hosted by Warren Truss, but he stayed there the entire day. He answered questions. He gave a number of presentations about issues affecting rural Australia. He is an impressive man who genuinely cares about the bush. I also met with a number of other shadow agricultural and fishery ministers - they all go by an array of different titles, but ultimately, its agriculture, fisheries, forestry, those portfolio areas. They had come from various jurisdictions from around Australia.
Obviously, there were some issues that are of enormous importance, particularly to New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria, such as the drought. This drought is, of course, affecting almost all of New South Wales. On the official drought register, there have been no portions in the Northern Territory formally declared within this category, which provides for special welfare payments. I was surprised to hear that because I know that there are some graziers, particularly in the southern part of the Northern Territory, who are doing it tough. It seems the Northern Territory government has not moved to make an application to the federal government to have some portions of the Northern Territory declared subject to this drought, and you will get the safeguards. We are talking a safety net - we are not talking a hammock - we are talking two years at least to make sure these farmers get the support they deserve so they continue to employ and be productive members of the rural community.
Of importance to the Territory was the National Livestock Identification Scheme. Quite frankly, I took lots of notes. I have a number of dossiers on the subject. The heads of various departments came in with white folders full of material. It is a standing invitation to any member of this House, the minister is welcome to talk to me about that material, and I can provide what copies he wants and give him a briefing. It is important stuff I expect would assist the government.
There were issues like genetically modified organisms. There has been lots of debate about this subject, even in this House. There have been petitions and there has been a great deal of concern in our community. I attended a public meeting, hosted by my learned colleague, neighbour and good friend, the member for Nelson. There were a number of scientists who came up and gave their view of what they thought. However, this forum afforded another opportunity to sit down in a very organised and sincere fashion and talk to scientists about the possible safeguards, the possible threats and what the government is doing.
I also have a great deal of material about that. I am mindful of the time, I could spend hours and hours talking about some of these subject matters. I am sure they would be of interest to all honourable members.
Mr Kiely: Do them every night. Do an adjournment every night. Every night, roll it out for two years.
Mr MALEY: I note for Hansard, the rude interjections from some members of the government, in a disrespectful way, clearly demonstrating that they are not interested in the rural area and rural people. I look forward to that attitude being rewarded at the next election.
On another rural issue, the Litchfield Polocrosse Club is hosting its 2003 carnival this weekend at Robbie Robins Reserve. It is a huge event at the same time as the rodeo, so I expect to see many honourable members there. It should be a great event. It is a big two-day carnival. As you know, the Litchfield Polocrosse Club is made up of a broad cross-section of the rural community. Just to name a couple of the prominent members of the club: Pat and Erica Davidge, the founding members. We have Duncan McKenzie, and I am proud to say my team mate – well, they are all my team mates. There is Normie Weave, a really good bloke, and it is good to see Normie’s given up the grog to concentrate on his polocrosse now, and he is playing better than ever. There is Giddy or Riannhon, as we refer to her; Shane Bates; and Cynthia who are the other two recent …
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Your time has expired – oh, no. Keep going …
A member: No, one more minute.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, yes, I realised.
Mr MALEY: We have a number of kids who play. We also have the kids from Duck Creek, an Aboriginal side who all come up. They are a good group; they have a go. We are supporting them and sponsoring them, and we are getting polocrosse into the Aboriginal communities. That is what it is all about, and I will give you a report next week.
Mr AH KIT (Arnhem): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I want to talk about the Panathinaikos Soccer Academy, and their trip to Darwin over the last couple of days. Last night, Darwin hosted an atmospheric, and what will become a most memorable, sporting event, an international soccer match between leading Greek soccer academy Panathinaikos and the Darwin Premier Soccer League representative side.
I hosted a function on Monday evening for the visiting team, along with 200-odd members from the soccer community up at Strangers on the 4th floor. To meet most of those representative players from the club them and their team management was certainly an enjoyable occasion. I also met an Athanasios Kontopoulos who, I am told, is a journalist with soccer in Adelaide.
I was told by John Nicolakis that a phone call was made to determine whether the Greek Orthodox Community, along with the Northern Territory Soccer Federation, was able to raise sufficient funds, and then the government contribute some funds so they would be able to fly into Darwin and play a match against the Darwin Premier Soccer League. What a night it was. Nearly 2000 enthusiastic soccer fans packed Richardson Park to see the two teams fight it out. A great display of skill and young talent was shown from the visitors, but it was the experience and physical strength of the local team that allowed them to run out winners 3-1.
Congratulations to the Darwin Premier Soccer League Representative Team; namely Dave Amidy, Mitch Amidy, Eddie Carroll, Demetrios Dionysiou, Josh Merrit and Manolis Tsirogianis from the Darwin Olympic Soccer Club, Sam Clarke from Palmerston La-Faek Soccer Club, Ilho Park, Albert Serra and Louis Rodrigues from the Casuarina Soccer Club, Steven Kariotis,Vagelis Kavouklis, John Lihou, Stavros Makrylos, Tyso Pedler, Pedro Stefanidakis, Zoltan Takaos, and Jason Williams from the Hellenic Athletic Club. Also congratulations to coach Manuel Lolias and managers Daymon Port and Greg Lambrinos. They did an excellent job in preparing their team for the match last night.
The atmosphere and ambience last night was almost indescribable and, as Sports minister, it makes me very proud to see the coming together of a multitude of cultures, children, the elderly, soccer enthusiasts and Panathinaikos fans wanting to catch a glimpse and some autographs and photos of the young stars. I must say the lads were very compliant and certainly left a smile or two on the faces of several teenage girls who crammed the oval at half-time seeking autographs.
It was pleasing to see the level of comradeship from the Darwin League side, especially the coming together of long time rivals, Olympic and Hellenic. They joined in a common goal - excuse the pun - which was to defeat this young international soccer team from Greece. We were extremely fortunate to have some very talented soccer players in the Top End for these few days after they had played in the International Soccer Challenge in Adelaide the week before.
Visits from high profile soccer clubs to Darwin have been few and far between, but I hope this will be the start of new beginnings for national and international games. If I recall correctly, it has been eight years since National Soccer League club South Melbourne came to the Top End.
I wish to say very special thank you to the Greek Orthodox community for their organisation. They were more than ably led by their President, John Nicolakis. Congratulations must also go to the Northern Territory Soccer Federation for their work to host this special game.
It is important for the whole community that we are increasingly able to host international and national sides, including the opportunity for acclimatisation visits by travelling teams to Darwin for training at our facilities, whether those teams come in from countries to the north, South-East Asia, or whether they are coming to Darwin from the other states and Territories, or even New Zealand.
I am pleased to inform the House that we are continuing discussions with the Northern Territory Soccer Federation over the short, medium and long-term facility needs of the code. I received a submission from the federation last Friday evening and look forward to refining the details of that submission with them in the coming months.
I also congratulate the staff of Darwin Rugby League. The game was held at Richardson Park, and DRL staff did an excellent job of providing refreshments and food for the event. The Northern Territory government, through the ministries of the Chief Minister and Sport and Recreation, was pleased to provide $10 000 in support of the game at Richardson Park.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I will talk briefly on the case that was the subject of a couple of questions at Question Time today; namely the prosecution against Shane Namanurki.
To be frank, I was not terribly satisfied with the Attorney-General’s response in Question Time. I note in particular that he did not know of the DPP’s decision not to appeal that decision and that he was advised in the parliament. I find that rather incredible. I also note that the Attorney-General said, and I quote:
There is no doubt about it, when you look at the statistics in the Territory in relation to crimes of violence, particularly to the person, we are very concerned about the number of them, that the penalties do fit the crime and if you commit a serious crime, you will do serious time. That is a commitment from this government.
That, I suggest, is arrant nonsense in light of the fact that government has not amended the Sentencing Act in terms of increasing penalties or making life tougher for perpetrators of violence. I note that Labor issued a crime protection, punishment and prevention policy prior to the last election, and perhaps I will come back to that shortly. It is probably prudent for me, for the sake of the record, to advise that I have obtained a copy of Justice Mildren’s sentencing remarks. The sentence was handed down on the 5 August. For the benefit of members who, no doubt, would like to rely on something other than the Northern Territory News, let me quote some of the sentencing remarks of His Honour.
You grabbed her by the hair. You threw her to the ground. You began abusing her. You punched her to the right side of her chin and you pulled her down by the hair and punched her to the left side of her cheek. You picked up a long-necked beer bottle and you began hitting her over the head with it. You hit her over the head with it three times until the bottle smashed, causing her to bleed. She tried to get away from you but was unable to do so because you punched her, this time making her fall into the camp fire.
His Honour later goes on:
She was badly injured as a result as she had large areas of burns to her upper and lower back as well as superficial burns to her left side of her jaw and upper left neck. There were also some grazes to the head from the beer bottle and a swollen lip, which presumably she got as a result of one of the punches you gave her.
His Honour then went on to outline the permanent damage and scarring in particular that the victim sustained.
It is not for me in my present position to criticise a judge of the Supreme Court and I have no intention of doing so. However, the sentencing remarks should, I would have thought, alarm most people in the community and certainly members of this parliament. It should also cause some alarm for the government.
I now turn back to Labor’s position paper circulated prior to the election. It is instructive for me again to extract a couple of quotes from this document:
- Labor is opposed to any soft sentencing approach. The community expects those who deserve to go to gaol to be imprisoned as a punishment and as a deterrent to others.
It goes on:
- Labor believes the solution to sentencing concerns is best achieved by community expectations being spelt out in the Sentencing Act in an ‘objects and purpose’ clause. This will mean that judges and magistrates must take note of the community’s serious concern and disgust with people who break into homes, businesses and cars.
I do not doubt for a moment that those people who have had their homes, businesses and cars broken into regard that as very serious. However, I would have thought that we as a community would regard the sort of outrageous violence that this offender perpetrated on this victim to be in a much more serious category; so serious, in fact, that I would have thought that offences to the person would have been covered in the first page of this Labor policy document. Alas, it only refers to those who are the victims of house breaks, business breaks and car entries. In this Labor Party document, it says:
- Labor will amend the Sentencing Act to state expressly that it is the intention of the parliament that the people who commit the crimes of house breaking, burglary, entry and damage to homes, cars or business premises will go to gaol unless extenuating circumstances exist.
I will not labour – no pun intended – the fact that this is restricted to crimes other than violence, but it is incredible that this document does not refer to violence against the person and similarly, does not refer to the sort of violence that is the subject of not just the present case, but cases that occur and go before every court in the Territory every single day. Yet this government does not even refer to it in its plan, and I understand this was Labor’s six-point plan. To say it is disappointing is something of an understatement.
In a broader sense, I ask the question: what message does this send to victims and, in particular, to offenders? If we as a community accept that violence against the person and, in particular, Aboriginal women - and members will recall that last week on General Business Day, I introduced two bills aimed at trying to do something to limit violence against Aboriginal women and children, and to address the increasing problem we have with perpetrators apparently getting off fairly lightly.
I digress. The fact is that we do take crimes against the person very seriously, yet that is not reflected in the actions of this government two years into its term. Frankly, I find the hypocrisy that abounds from the Australian Labor Party NT Branch to be mind-boggling.
I refer also to a debate that we had in this parliament on 27 February this year, and to some comments made by the Chief Minister. The subject of this debate was violence against Aboriginal women. The Chief Minister said in that debate that she would create and amend legislation, including legislation targeting violence in the domestic setting, piloting new programs to assess their effectiveness. The Sentencing Act, as I said, has not, to my knowledge, been amended in terms of taking into account crimes of violence. The Chief Minister, in that debate, said:
- The courts are bound by law to sentence in proportion to the seriousness of the assault. The courts are bound to take into account all of the variables. The seriousness of the physical harm on the victim will determine the seriousness of the charge. Under the Sentencing Act, the courts must take into account the impact on the victim.
The Chief Minister then went on and quoted a well-known case, the judgment of Justice Kearney, the case of Amagula v White in which His Honour Justice Kearney noted that it was important to send a message to Aboriginal women who would be protected against personal violence. This was all referred to by the Chief Minister. Justice Kearney said:
- The courts must do what they can to see that the pervasive violence against women in Aboriginal communities is reduced. There is a fairly widespread belief that it is acceptable for men to bash their wives in some circumstances and this belief must be erased.
The Chief Minister also said that in terms of doing something about this problem, she or her government:
- … could be involved with discussions around what the women think about violence and their views on how to deal with it.
Again, I find that extraordinary. I do not think you need to be very clever to work out, not always but for the most part, victims of violence want offenders dealt with properly and firmly. That is not just the view, I would suggest, of the victims of violence, but it is the view of the wider community. What we have here is a situation where we have government hypocrisy that says ‘we are tough on crime’ but, if one reads the fine print, it only refers to homes, businesses and cars. I find that incredible. The hypocrisy is furthered again by the government that says: ‘We care, we care’. That is not the case. The Attorney-General himself and, indeed, the Chief Minister and, I am sure, other government members have said: ‘Do the crime, do the time’. What arrant nonsense; that is not the case. And: ‘We care about victims’. My challenge to this government is: if it cares about victims, why will it not change the Sentencing Act to actually do something to deal with the perpetrators of this most offensive violence?
I do not have an additional copy with me, but I am very happy to circulate the sentencing remarks of Justice Mildren. This crime is just like so many others perpetrated on a daily basis around the Northern Territory. This one gets into the NT News so we all start talking about it. I check, on a very regular basis, the Supreme Court web site, and I read the judgments. I read the decisions. It is time, to use that old Labor expression, for government to pull its finger out, put its money where its mouth is, and be fair dinkum and say: ‘We will do what we can’. I know it goes against the grain for a Labor government, but it must be tough on crimes against the person. It should amend the Sentencing Act to ensure that sentences handed out, like this one, accord with community expectations, and I will get up as often as I can to implore the government to do just that.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I speak about the land shortage in Alice Springs once again. We have heard recently from the minister that land at Larapinta Stage 4 will be released and he is certain it will be released early 2004. He keeps avoiding the words ‘January 2004’ because we all know that the member for Stuart promised to sell his house if land were not released by the Lhere Artepe by that time.
We all know that Alice Springs is pretty well surrounded by native title land and, as a result, no residential blocks are freely available. I believe there are some eight blocks left that are vacant that are all valued at above $200 000 each. We have been asking the minister to get on with work on Larapinta Stage 4 but, to date, very little has happened. He promised this morning, I believe, that headworks would commence soon, and I look forward to seeing that occur. At least then we will have some physical evidence that something is happening. While it may be the case that headworks might commence, I also know that, through information received from people in the real estate industry in Central Australia, there is no formalised agreement between the government and the Lhere Artepe group on a firm date when land will be released for Larapinta Stage 4.
If there is no firm date for Lhere Artepe to release land, it poses a problem. The allotment that has been provided to the Lhere Artepe by the Northern Territory government could be frozen for as long as Lhere Artepe requires the time to develop that minimum 30 housing allotments. I understand the agreement between the government and Lhere Artepe is that the Lhere Artepe people will be allowed to release the land first before the second half of Larapinta Stage 4 is put out to competitive tender. That causes a lot of worry because that means there is huge potential that there will be no additional residential land released for quite some time.
Already, some 30 tradesman have left Alice Springs and I know that a big businessman in Alice, a developer himself, has already put off 30 of his own employees. That is a significant loss of employment in a small community such as Alice Springs, and this government is still sitting on its hands. I say this because another developer has approached the government, in particular the Minister for Infrastructure, Planning and Environment, for an appointment so that they can discuss development with him. I have spoken to this developer at great length over several years. Recently, he put his application to the Development Consent Authority and has since received approval from the DCA for his development to go ahead. This developer is Ron Sterry and his partner and advisor in the development is Mr David Cantwell. They have approached the government, specifically the minister, seeking an appointment with him to discuss some issue that have occurred following the approval of their development by the DCA.
If I read into Hansard the approval from the DCA, it will give members some understanding of the subdivision that is planned. Apart from the standard conditions that the authority has imposed, it is for an area of land - now, where can I find the total area? - I quote from the Development Consent Authority’s letter:
- Nothing that the concept of allowing subdivision with respect to rural RL1, RL2 zoned land that establishes some areas with concentrations of closer settlement (clustering), including lots that are substantially smaller than the minimum size specified under clause 16.1 of the Alice Springs Town Plan 1992 as amended has merit providing that the total dwelling yield for the subdivision and subsequent development of lot 2406 may be expected to be commensurate with that which could be achieved if the land was subdivided to the maximum lot yield and developed with maximum dwelling density permitted; that is without variation to clause 16.1 lot sizes or clause 17.3 Maximum Densities under the town plan.
The subdivision and development of lot 2406 in the context of its current zoning does not have any undue adverse impact on other land and occupants of that land, recognising that virtually any development of the land may be expected to have some perceived adverse impacts and the authority is satisfied that suitable mechanisms are in place to ensure a reasonable level of control over the development of the land.
A subdivision layout for lot 2406 that includes open space lots, a maximum of 250 lots for single dwelling development and no lots for multiple dwelling and development. The authority may, however, consider a limited increase in the potential dwelling yield specifically to cater for a retirement village subject to adequate demonstration that the overall subdivision design amply responds to land capability constraints and potential amenity impacts for occupants of other properties in the area.
Lot sizes of the closer settlement area should have an average size of 1600 m2. and must have minimum lot size of 1200 m2 including setbacks …
The developers have met with some technical issues with PowerWater. I believe PowerWater insisted that the developers provide them with land for a water tank, access land for pipes and what have you, so there have been some negotiations between the developers and PowerWater. I understand that the developers, through their engineering advice, have concerns that PowerWater might be asking for more than is necessary. I do not want to get into the technicality of the debate here because I am not an engineer but, obviously, there are issues that the developer needs to discuss with government.
For the last 10 days or so they have been stonewalled by the minister or his minders. There is no reason at all that this minister cannot see this developer. After all, the minister has been captured in this building for the last week-and-a-half, he cannot go anywhere because of the sittings, and he could easily have seen the developers. They were prepared to come to Darwin to see him, for goodness sake. I understand that they were prepared to fly up last Monday to see the minister yesterday, but so far he has not provided them with any agreement to see them.
If the minister is listening to this debate, he can contact them quite easily, and I will give the minister the phone number to ring. The number is [telephone number supplied]. If the minister’s office rang them first thing in the morning, I am sure they would be on the plane as soon as they possible to get up here to discuss it with him. I understand that they may have even tried to approach the Chief Minister because she made a promise that if none of the ministers are available, she would make herself available to anybody who needs to speak to government. If that did happen, obviously the developers, again, have been frustrated and it is a pity.
This is one property, actually; 250 allotments is incorrect. This property has a potential of a total of 416 allotments. That is huge. The current design divides the parcel into five parts, and it is proposed for a lower right 4.3 hectare Woolworths store and six specialty shops with car parking; another six specialty shops each strata titled with accommodation above; a Woolworths fuel station with a car park; a retirement village of 40 self-contained units with a 10 bed hospice, doctor and nurse rooms, a common room of 250 m, office and small meeting rooms; an upper central link linking to a residential area with an 80 Crest Holiday Apartment franchise.
Further, there will be, at the far west boundary, housing specifically for the developer himself. In the western precinct of the development itself, there will be 33 x 1500 m house blocks and also eight x 800 m house blocks, strata titled and 14 x 800 m house blocks, strata titled, in the western precinct. In the centre west precinct, there will be 16 x 1500 m house blocks, seven x 800 m house blocks and a centre cluster of seven x 800 m house blocks, and a southern cluster of 14 x 800 m blocks. There will be a centre precinct, and I will not go into detail, but 184 blocks and an eastern precinct with 132 blocks, making it 416. There is also provision for a school for 180 students.
Therefore, minister, this is a very significant development. The developer already has approval from the Development Consent Authority to proceed. All he has to do now is talk through his issues with you, and as the minister for Infrastructure, it is beholden on you to speak to him. He told me this morning that, when he tried to make an appointment, you said you could not see him and you were not likely to see him for at least another three weeks after this weekend. This is a major development for a town that has no more residential allotments available. Why can’t you see him? Why are you stonewalling this developer, whose development would help ease the land shortage in Alice Springs and ease your problem, knowing full well that Larapinta Stage 4 is not going to come on stream for a long while yet? This person can get his land developed fairly quickly. Everything is on track as far as he is concerned. The only problem holding him up is an issue with PowerWater about which he would like to talk to you. It is important that you ring him first thing tomorrow morning, minister, to ensure that he has an opportunity to see you.
Once you see his proposal, you will, I am sure, make every possible avenue open for him to allow him to proceed. If you do not, you will have to carry the ire of the people in Alice Springs. He has already threatened that if this project is frustrated again – he has been trying to do this for a long time - he is going to pack up and go to Queensland and take his money with him. That would be a tragic loss. This man has lived in Alice Springs for a long time with his Japanese wife Naoko. It would be great to see him continue to live in Alice Springs with his family and produce a development that would be very suitable for those of us in Alice Springs.
Ms CARTER (Port Darwin): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I know you will be interested to learn today about the commitment by the government to build the hospice in the grounds of Royal Darwin Hospital.
I have been a member of the Northern Territory Hospice and Palliative Care Association on and off for a number of years now, and it was in that role that I attended the launch at lunch time by the minister on site at Royal Darwin Hospital.
As you may know, tonight there was a meeting held at the Community Centre at Casuarina Square, which had been planned for some weeks by the Hospice and Palliative Care Association to address the growing concerns that they have had over the last few months with regard to the hospice at Royal Darwin Hospital.
However, their meeting this evening was gazumped to some degree by the minister’s sudden announcement earlier today of the site for construction of the hospice. At very short notice, a few people were advised that this announcement was going to be made, and they were able to be at the site when the minister made the announcement. When I attended, the general feeling amongst the group was of relief and happiness that a site had finally been chosen. Some were a little quizzical and concerned about the site but, generally speaking, it went over very well.
Tonight the meeting was held at the Community Centre at Casuarina Square. The member for Nelson and I were able to attend. There were about 60 people who were somewhat concerned that there had been no consultation with them about the site that has been chosen. The meeting ran for two hours and, generally speaking, the only topic of conversation was concern over the site.
Initially, what that group requested is a site near the helipad at the back of Royal Darwin Hospital. It is on the edge of the RDH campus where the bush is. The member for Johnston may sit there shaking his head and groaning; it is obviously putting him out somewhat that members of the community have an opinion different from his and the government’s. I can assure the member for Johnston that the feeling within the group tonight, 60 very well known and caring members of this community, were not happy with this decision.
The helipad site offers some unique attributes. They include the ability to site the complex in such a way that it sits with an aspect looking towards the bush, so that people who might, in their last days, enjoy the ambience of that setting, have verandahs looking into the bush, enjoy the bird life and those sorts of things. It is also an interesting site because it sits near a creek area, and the hope was that the grounds of the hospice would be developed so as to increase that facility so that the creek would be there, people would have a natural water source in the area which they can enjoy. I am sure many of you can imagine how pleasant that would be for the patients and their families to have that sort of a site.
What has been provided as the final offer as a site is a car park next to what is known as the Menzies car park. That sits with an aspect looking at buildings and the tower block of Royal Darwin Hospital. I can assure you that not one person at that meeting, apart from the government representatives, spoke positively of the site that has now been allocated.
The concerns are that the site is small; it limits the possibility of extending the building. At the moment, it is only a 12-bed hospice but, obviously in years to come, there will be a need to extend that building. The concern that it is tucked in tight with what are already existing buildings at Royal Darwin Hospital, that it is going to have constraints upon it with the size of the land. I estimate you are going to need at least 30 car parks specific for the hospice, so they are going to have to be factored into that small parcel of land.
The people at the meeting tonight were not happy. One of the people present is a very prominent member of this community. She describes herself as a member of the Labor Party, and I am sure she is a very proud member of the Labor Party, and she expressed her extreme concerns with this site. At one point she said: ‘Stuff the Menzies car park’. That elicited a huge round of applause from the group. It was the most poignant and pointed comment of the evening, and that was the view of the group in that room this evening.
My view is that the need to go into this car park has been caused by the need to cut costs. The cost cutting is so acute for this project, as we know, $3m was allocated in last year’s budget and was not spent. It has been moved over into this year’s budget. That has been the promise: $3m. $3m in this project buys a 12-bed hospice tucked in close to the rest of the buildings at Royal Darwin Hospital, but it does not buy one bed - not one bed, not one stick of furniture is provided in that $3m. The community has to go out and raise the funds. What an embarrassment if they are not able to raise all of those funds. Maybe we might raise enough for six beds. Does that mean we only open six beds when we need 12? It will be very disappointing. To me, it is extraordinary that no funding has been provided for furniture.
It was a very disappointed group there this evening, and I thought, an interesting quote, you may know that one of the definitions of palliative care is:
- Palliative care is life’s waiting lounge, not to an early flight, but to travel first class.
But not from this minister, I am afraid. She can only offer economy for Territorians. It is a sad loss of a golden opportunity to get it right, a very disappointing experience. This minister can do better. I know the group is going to lobby her to do better, and let us hope that we can see something better. If you are going to build a hospice, if you are going to make that commitment, you need to get it right. If you are going to do it, you are going to make that commitment, it should be done properly.
On another matter, yesterday in Question Time, I asked the minister a question with regards to Royal Darwin Hospital’s airconditioning system in the new wing that was opened. As members know, what I want is the report of a particular test that was done. The minister, in her answer, made some fairly scurrilous accusations with regards to me. She has put it that I was significantly misleading the people of the Northern Territory. She has accused me of spreading a lie with regard to my concerns over this service, and I quote the minister from Hansard:
- It is very disappointing, very disappointing, that the member for Port Darwin would wish to spread such an outrageous suspicion when she knew perfectly well that there was nothing wrong with the new building.
The fact is that I do not know perfectly well that there is nothing wrong with the building. I take exception to this sort of a comment coming from the minister.
For members of this House, the situation is that, around the time of the Katherine show, I was contacted by a member of the community who works in the industry that deals with airconditioning. He had met a man at work a few days earlier who is involved in the testing of airconditioning units. This man had expressed to him concerns about the airconditioning unit at the new wing at Royal Darwin Hospital, which we call the A and E wing. However, it is more than A and E; there are other services in there, like an operating theatre, etcetera.
With that information, which is all I had, I was very concerned. What am I meant to do with that information? What am I meant to do? Nothing? What am I meant to do? Shut my mouth and do nothing? I was not going to sit there and do nothing. I advised the minister. I advised the nurse’s union that I had heard this information. I was concerned about it, and the only way to overcome those concerns is to get the report. I wrote to the minister, and I am going to read into Hansard the letter that I have written to the minister. It is dated 23 July. This is my scurrilous - what was the description here? - misleading statements, spreading a lie. This is what I have apparently done as a result of this letter.
- Minister,
As you know, I was contacted last week and told by a person whom I consider is reliable that the airconditioning plant at the new A and E at Royal Darwin Hospital …
And by that I mean the areas within the whole building:
- … is not safe in that the water in the cooling system is contaminated. I have followed this accusation up and I have been told by an employee …
I am not going to say the name of the company; it is between the minister and I:
- … who did the testing that a report listing the test results was provided to the government’s staff last week.
I could not ascertain for certain which department was provided with the report. It was either the Department of Health and Community Services or the Department of Transport and Infrastructure.
Minister, I am reasonably confident that the new area would not have been opened if there was a problem with the airconditioning.
Hardly misleading; hardly spreading a lie:
- However, given the serious nature of this matter, could you provide me with a copy of the test results from the tests which would have been conducted on or about Monday 7 July 2003?
If you will not provide me with a copy of these test results in the first instance, I will seek them under the new freedom of information legislation.
What is unreasonable about that? I am a member of this community. I am the shadow minister for Health. I have an obligation to follow these things up. You know as well as I do that I cannot just take the word of a minister. I do not mean to be rude there, but I cannot take it with these sort of serious accusations having been made. I am not out there blabbing it willy-nilly around the community; I am seeking this report. If there is nothing in it, if there is no problem at all with the unit, and I have no doubt …
Mrs Aagaard: Get it under FOI.
Ms CARTER: No, I would not say that. 95% of me says it is not going to be a problem, but I have a niggling concern that there is a problem. If there is no problem, I cannot imagine why you would not give me a copy of that report which I will then have checked by a company to inform me as to whether or not it is satisfactory. If it is fine, that is the end of the story. This is my role. This is the role of opposition; we are here to quiz the government on their performance. That is our job. I know you find it uncomfortable; it is annoying to see us doing it, the dreaded CLP. I know you wish we would get back in our box and disappear for the next decade or so …
Dr Burns: I wish you would do a bit more homework and find out what the contamination is.
Members interjecting.
Madam ACTRING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms CARTER: The member for Johnston is piping up with his usual slagging off, and insults comes as no surprise because he is particularly irritated by the opposition having a go, raising concerns, holding the government to being open and accountable. That is all that I am trying to do as well …
Dr Burns: You are a joke.
Ms CARTER: I am not a joke, member for Johnson.
Dr Burns: You are all a joke.
Members interjecting.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms CARTER: If you have nothing to hide, if you have no problem at all, then why not hand over this report so we can settle the matter now?
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, one letter written to the Financial Review and one letter writer to the Financial Review stated:
- Historically, free trade deals have existed since colonial times to assist rich nations plunder the resources of smaller nations.
Tonight I talk about a subject that might not immediately strike members as an issue of great relevance to the Northern Territory. It is the free trade agreement currently being negotiated between the United States and Australia. This agreement has the capacity to affect almost every economic aspect of Territory life and its major industries, and the potential of its assets such as the new East Arm Port and the Alice Springs to Darwin railway. The free trade deal is a topic that has been debated in New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Queensland, but which has been raised rarely in public discussion in the Northern Territory. I believe the government should be looking at it and making some assessment of its potential impact on the Territory’s future development.
Free trade can deliver benefits across the board by allowing economies to focus their resources on producing goods and services where they possess a comparative advantage, and then trading with others for goods and services produced according to their comparative advantages. That is what multilateral free trade can accomplish. The debate and benefits get muddy when you have bilateral free trade agreements. Those in favour of the deal argue it will give local industry greater and more secure access to the world’s largest market, that it will make Australia a more desirable location for US investment, and that it will inject $4bn extra each year into the Australian economy.
On the 10th anniversary of the North American Free Trade Agreement, commonly called NAFTA, between the United States, Canada and Mexico, the former Canadian Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney said:
- The fear mongering of those who predicted massive job losses, the curtailing of sovereignty and a race to the bottom in environmental and social policy have all proved hollow.
He also said:
- Our countries are stronger, our economies more robust, our peoples more prosperous, our social structure is more resilient, our capital market is more stable and our roles in the world more vigorous as a result of NAFTA.
Mulroney observed that Canada’s exports to its NAFTA partners had increased 95% from 1993 to 2001. That is the potential, according to some, but there are plenty who disagree. One commentator conceded that everything is not rosy with NAFTA. He said it could be argued that NAFTA has been directly responsible for the rise of new problems such as environmental damage, the widening of the gap between the rich and the poor, and an increased number of trade disputes. In 1998, the non-government group, Public Citizen Global Trade Watch, said that NAFTA had failed in agriculture, public health, wage levels, highway safety, drug enforcement and the environment. Another study by a Washington think tank found there had been a rise in income inequality, suppressed real wages and weakened collective bargaining.
You would have to ask why Australia needs a free trade agreement with the US. By all accounts, the Australian economy has been out-performing other developed economies in the past decade, including Canada, which has a free trade agreement with the US, recording comparatively strong growth. As one commentator has said:
- Most of the Australia economy is already operating well without being constrained by restrictive trade measures. The deal could make Australia a less attractive and accessible trading partner and act as a break on its economic performance.
In the wider debate that has been going on in Australia, several concerns have been raised and I will repeat some of them here.
The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme is a scheme whereby some medications receive federal government subsidies. The US wants the scheme included in the Trade Deal negotiations. An Australian Institute report in May this year predicted the agreement would increase the cost of prescription drugs to consumers by $1bn a year. At the end of May, the US government said that the scheme would not be changed, but hoped the PBS process would become more transparent. An academic was on ABC radio last month talking about the high profit margins on drugs, a mark-up of up to 70% at the pharmacy, and said that under the free trade deal it could get worse.
Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration has often decided in the interests of public health to set different standards for approval from the US Food and Drug Administration. This would not be the case under a free trade deal. Food and related standards warrant similar caution. For example, the labelling or regulation of high energy drinks or genetically modified crops. 40% of Mexican food imports to the US fail to meet Food and Drug Administration tests but are, nevertheless, imported.
What are we learning from the Canadian experience as part of NFADA with regard to genetically modified crops and quarantine? Are we potentially giving away the right to set and maintain our own food standards and food security regime? What will happen to Australian standards and restrictions?
Another point is foreign ownership regulations. These regulations meant that the federal government could rule against the Shell takeover of Australian oil and gas explorer Woodside. Under a free trade deal, Shell would be able to sue the government for interfering with its ability to operate freely in the market.
There are general provisions aimed at protecting the environment in the NAFTA, but a survey five years ago found that of the 1750 US companies operating in Mexico, none of them were complying with Mexico’s environmental laws, and only 5% were returning hazardous waste for treatment in the US as required by Mexican law.
The Northern Territory Environment Centre says that since NAFTA, US corporations have sued the Canadian, Mexican and US governments for enforcing environmental legislation that affect their financial interests.
The US Trade Commissioner, Robert Zoellick, has suggested Australia’s high quarantine standard could be a means of restricting trade. If anyone saw an SBS program on the US meat industry last month and saw the cross-border checks that are not carried out on cattle coming from Mexico into the States, you would have to worry about our customs and quarantine regimes.
The Centre for International Economics argues that Australia will experience adverse terms of trade movement unless full trade liberalisation is achieved. The US is not proposing full, but phased-in liberalisation.
The question is: who benefits? A US congressman has said that after five years of NAFTA, the results are in: it is bad for everyone except big business. In relation to that, it is interesting to note that a glossy publication launched last month in the United States in support of an Australia-US free trade deal was financed by AOL Time Warner, DaimlerChrysler and the Business Round Table, which represents corporate CEOs, not small business.
With regard to small business, an academic who studied the impact of NAFTA in 1999 concluded that it had brought about the rapid downfall of the quintessential small business. Unable to compete with multinational corporations, few small businesses survived in a free market economy because they lacked mobility, capital and labour. In Mexico, 28 000 small businesses have been forced to close down as a result of NAFTA. This is already a problem in Australia, with independent supermarkets going under to Coles and Woolworths. Our choice is being limited by the day.
Under the US proposals, essential services, like water, education, health and post, are to be treated as traded goods. This means that the ability of the three tiers of government in Australia to ensure equitable access to these so-called goods could be reduced.
The best example of a cautionary tale in relation to a free trade agreement with the United States lies in the deal that Vietnam signed with the US in December 2001. According to a report in the Financial Review in May, the US pushed Vietnam hard for six years to sign the deal. The agreement opened the US market to Vietnamese textiles and clothing and, last year, Americans bought $US1.5bn of them, up from $US50m the previous year. Guess what? The Socialist Republic of Vietnam has made the capitalist Americans nervous about potential job losses in southern textile mill towns. The US government does not like it, and has forced Vietnam to rein in its budding capitalists. It has directed Hanoi to revert to centralised controls to limit growth in this sector, and Americans will only take $US1.7bn worth of Vietnamese clothing this year, when it was on target to export $US2.4bn worth. The Vietnamese government has had to create a bureaucracy to control production and create quotas for exports to the United States. The quotas will all be filled by October, leaving Vietnamese out of work for three months and factories idle. This, in turn, has led to a decline in investment in Vietnam from business people in places such as Hong Kong and South Korea. The US trade deal going wrong for the Vietnamese has now impeded investment from other countries.
What message should this story send us? A free trade deal with the US is a good thing, as long as the US does not suffer. The US will renege on its side of the deal if the other partner is too productive or too competitive or starts to hurt US interests.
What is the response in Australia to the free trade deal? Community support in Australia for a free trade deal with the US has been declining since the plan was announced two years ago. A Hawker Britton poll – that sounds a familiar name – in April this year found that public support has dropped to 48%, down from 60% in August last year. The deal was favoured more in urban areas than in rural, and it could be argued that ultimately, the impacts will be felt more in remote and regional areas than in urban Australia.
An editorial in the Sydney Morning Herald in May commented that Australia would do better to promote more freer trade world wide through forums such as the World Trade Organisation rather than a specific agreement with the US with uncertain benefits. The Australian Productivity Commission analysed other trade agreements and concluded they contract trade rather than expand it, because they tend to divert trade from countries not party to the agreement. This effect is greater than the corresponding increase in trade between the parties to the agreement.
A leading Australian trade expert, Ross Garnaut, argues that free trade deals jeopardise Australia’s chances of sustaining its recent strong economic growth. He said:
- Bilateral agreements are discriminatory and undermine global efforts to free up world trade.
- … the greatest economic benefits from trade reform have come from unilateral cuts to trade barriers and that in contrast, preferential free trade deals between small groups of countries run the risk of diverting more trade than they create and imposing bureaucratic regulations on industry, which reduces efficiency.
The finalisation of a free trade deal with the United States could be debated in the Australian parliament in February next year, but we have had little discussion about it here in the Territory. Another round of negotiations was held in Honolulu last month and the Trade Minister, Mark Vaile, says the talks are on track to be finalised by the end of the year. John Howard says the agreement will forge Australia’s economic future for the next 50 years. That also means that the Territory’s economic future and the legacy that will be handed to our children. We should have a view on it.
Other jurisdictions in Australia have been engaging in this debate. The South Australian government believes that its business will probably be disadvantaged. The Advertiser newspaper said in April that the oil and gas explorer and producer, Santos, remains in Australia because of a government rule which caps the maximum shareholder at 15% but, under the trade deal, the cap would be removed and Santos would be open to takeovers. The Australian Barley Board, which provides a single marketing vehicle for barley producers, would be regarded as a trade barrier and would disappear, with an unpredictable impact on South Australian producers.
In late June this year, the South Australian Premier was in Washington, lobbying US officials to reduce tariffs on Australian wine and motor vehicles. In other words, he was getting his state’s concerns on the trade agenda. What, if any, are the Territory’s concerns? Australian Dairy Farmers have organised themselves into a new lobby group, Dairy Australia, so that their voices will be heard during the trade negotiations. They are seeking fair trade and do not want to wait 10 years for the benefits to start flowing. Who is looking after the Territory’s requirements? As late as May last year, the Queensland Premier, Peter Beattie, had grave concerns about the free trade deal, particularly as it relates to impacts on the state’s beef and sugar industries. However, he has since come out in favour of the deal, after leaders of the two industries said they wanted access to US markets, and he has been convinced of the benefits of the deal by the federal Trade Minister.
A federal parliamentary committee is currently carrying out an inquiry into a free trade deal between Australia and the US. It received more than 160 submissions, and it appears that not one of them has come from the Territory, which indicates our lack of public discussion. The submissions have come from a diverse range of individuals and groups, with all kinds of concerns. I would like to quote from one from a Darryl Nelson of Queensland:
- Under FTA, any Australian law that is seen as a restraint to trade will need to be corrected. For example, Canada’s federal government recently called for strict controls and selected bans on the sale and use of pesticides. One day after the minister presented the code, the US chemical manufacturers threatened to sue the Canadian government if they proceeded with the controls.
I started this speech by referring to the potential effect this deal might have on the Alice to Darwin railway and the new East Arm Port. The vision that has been built around these two huge infrastructure projects is that Darwin will eventually be a gateway for Australia to Asia. If we have a trade deal with the US, you would expect all that increased trade to go across the wharves of the east coast. If that deal reduces trade with the Asian region, as has been predicted by several economists and academics, what future will the railway and port in Darwin have?
The free trade deal is obviously going to have an effect on the Territory, and I urge the government to investigate those impacts, and make its views known before it has all been negotiated and finalised, which could be as soon as six months away.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, soccer is a sport that is deserving of significant attention in the Northern Territory. We are in a region that sees soccer as its main sport. We are seeking to engage our region, and we have hundreds of millions of people just to our north who participate actively in this sport.
In the Northern Territory, we have an active soccer community. We have had the Minister for Sport and Recreation this evening acknowledge to the very significant achievements of the Northern Territory soccer fraternity, particularly the Darwin Premier Soccer League in the recent match against the Greek team that visited us. The victory of the Darwin Premier Soccer League team over the visiting Greek team is a demonstration of the strength of the code here in the Northern Territory.
I noted the minister’s comments with regard to the importance and success of soccer, and I waited for what he had to say with regard to the code generally. The code does need guidance and direction from this minister. I guess we could take a laissez faire approach and wait for it all to work out.
I note the minister has had a meeting with those who are in the soccer fraternity in the Northern Territory, particularly in the Top End. The round table meeting occurred some time ago. It was not until we had Australia play Ireland last night, the Darwin team beat the visiting Greek team, and the Territory Amateur Soccer League visit Western Australia without any assistance from the Department of Sport and Recreation or this government - noting the $10 000 contribution to the recent match - that we had significant attention and activity here in soccer. However, we have no real leadership. There is a need to do more than have a meeting and have the people around that table discuss the future of soccer. It happened some time ago and now we have moved on. I was interested and surprised to hear tonight that the minister is expecting - and I hope that translates into some flow-on action - a report from the NT Soccer Federation. Perhaps it is related to the meeting of some months ago.
What is required is a revisitation of precisely that which was called for back in April: the Northern Territory government needs to conduct an independent review of soccer here in the Northern Territory using someone such as Johnny Warren, who is independent and has a love for the code and the best interests of making sure that this code can go from strength to strength. It is too much to ask for those volunteers who are involved in the code to spend that additional time, without real leadership and direction from the Northern Territory government, to go beyond running their individual leagues and to try to solve their own problems and, at the same time, try to come up with some visionary way forward. It really needs someone outside the code to effect that. That is not a big call because we did have that very same response by the federal minister with regard to the Crawford review into soccer. It was required.
It is quite clear that soccer is a very important code, not just as a way of empowering young people and giving them fitness and guidance, and engaging our indigenous communities and all that kind of stuff. That is really important. We often talk about developing real links with our regional neighbours. There are many opportunities that will emerge if we can bring together, in a progressive and aggressive way, the code of soccer here with a real investment from the Northern Territory government in conducting an independent review. We can focus the energies of this sport and use it as a way of effectively linking into a market just to our north, and a way of engaging. We cannot just have ideas about how we are going to make a railway work and talk about strategies and plans; it is about people and if we can use sport as a way of engaging our neighbours, then we can start transacting business. Once again, I renew my call for an independent review into the code of soccer not just for the sake of soccer, but for what soccer can bring to the Northern Territory.
I move on to another aspect of affairs in my electorate. In this case it is Riding for the Disabled, RDA. I am very honoured to be the patron of RDA, an active group that provides a very important service to those who are disabled in our community. It is a most effective way of reaching out and providing real assistance to a large section of our community who need the therapy that is provided through RDA and the fellowship and support that accompanies it. Riding for the Disabled is part of an international organisation dedicated to providing people with disabilities the opportunity to participate in horse riding and related activities. Nearly 800 trained volunteers assist over 200 adults and 800 children providing therapy and improved quality of life for people with physical and intellectual disabilities. The ability to control a horse as well as one’s own body inspires self-confidence and responsibility.
From the beginning, riders learn balance, coordination and gain self-confidence while receiving therapeutic muscle stimulation. Riding for the Disabled Northern Territory have developed a comprehensive strategic plan. I commend them for the work that they have done in identifying where they are now, and having worked forward a strategic plan which takes them up to the year 2006. It is tremendous to see a community group working together and developing a comprehensive strategic plan that allows them to move progressively forward.
One interesting program that they wish to undertake is the hippotherapy pilot program. Hippotherapy is derived, as most people would probably recognise in this learned Chamber, from the Greek word for horse, hippos.
Dr Lim: Hippopotamus.
Mr MILLS: No, not hippopotamuses. The horse, hippos, combined with the word therapy, meaning the treatment of illness and disability. In basic terms, hippotherapy is the conduct of physio and or occupational therapy treatments while the patient is on horseback.
German studies have indicated that people with neurological disorder resulting in the inability to walk, receive a constant rhythmical stimulus through their pelvis during a hippotherapy session. This can then assist balance, posture, mobility and function. This is a program on which RDA wishes to embark. I commend honourable members to the support for a schools program proposed by RDA Australia, and which should be taken up with encouragement by the local RDA. That is a day where government, independent and Catholic schools will be asked to have a free dress day and the money that is collected from the privilege of wearing special dress would then go to support the activities of RDA.
They propose the date of 5 September. I will be having further discussions with the local RDA to see whether they are prepared to do so and, in the event that they do, I will certainly convey that to honourable members and seek their support and assistance with publicising the event in our local schools.
RDA has an extensive list of past achievements including open days. They work with the Lions Club, they have had NT Championships, they conducted an event recently at the Royal Show, and I was very pleased to be able to judge the best horse that has made the greatest contribution to supporting the disabled in the RDA Club in Palmerston. They know what they need, and their needs are very real. When you visit RDA and you see the love and dedication that the volunteers have, and when they describe their needs, they are real needs.
However, I am sad to say that they have suffered significant funding cuts from Sport and Recreation, and they are battling to keep providing their services to disabled riders, adults as well as children. To have riders from both centres represent the Territory at the nationals every year, the integration of disabled and able-bodied riders, they need volunteers; they need assistance; they need the support of the wider community. More than anything, they need support from the Department of Sport and Recreation, and I urge the minister to consider the plight of those who are working so hard to provide a very important community need in supporting the disabled in our community for the RDA.
They have suffered a significant cut back, and I cannot see how that is something that would resonate very warmly in the heart of the minister when we hear that $10 000 was given to a soccer event, which is probably fine. However, when we talk to the RDA who have experienced these cut backs, as well as other community groups that are filling a very important gap in our community, you simply cannot fund normally and, in the face of the volunteer service of community members, we find cut backs. Hurtful.
I would like to acknowledge the significant work of committee members: Grant Lindsay, who is the Vice-President of RDA and also the Public Officer; Kim Johnson, the Secretary; and Bruce Young-Smith, a committee member; the RDA North committee members are Kim Johnson, the Chairman, Grant Lindsay, the Vice-Chairman, Vivienne Blancy, the Treasurer, and Bruce Young-Smith is also a committee member; RDA Alice Springs committee members are Vickilee Tebeck Chairman, Pamela-Jayne Botterell, the Treasurer, Nick Dyer, Mick Tebeck and Tony Hand are committee members.
In concluding, I acknowledge a wonderful event I attended the other day, The Bowls Club Wedding. It was the Grey Panthers’ fifth major production since the inception of the group in 1988 under the TRACS Incorporated banner. This group of versatile, energetic, imaginative and shameless ladies train weekly under the direction of David McMicken and Merrille Mills – no relation – and had a major input in the scripting, choreography, design and development of this fabulous performance, which I thoroughly enjoyed. The member for Nelson was there, and we had a great night.
It was a TRACS production devised by David McMicken, Tim Newth, Julia Quinn and the cast. The original concept was developed by Merille Mills and David McMicken. It was part of the Darwin Festival 2003. The interesting thing was that this local product, which involves so many of our senior citizens, was recognised and appreciated by people from the Adelaide Festival, who saw the event and thought this is an event they would like to purchase and take to the Adelaide Festival. Hopefully, if they make a plea to the Northern Territory government for assistance, they will be considered and supported.
Mr BALDWIN (Daly): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I give a little wake-up call to the minister for Racing and Gaming. The minister well knows that there has been legislation sitting on the Notice Paper since 7 March 2002. It is the Racing and Betting Amendment Bill, and it deals with some changes that are affecting bookmakers in the Northern Territory.
The proposal of the amendment is to remove the restriction on bookmakers offering odds based on final totalisator dividends. The aim of the bill is to address those restrictions by allowing Territory operators, that is bookmakers, to offer their dividends to match other totalisators around Australia. It is significant to note that, in the second reading speech, the minister said he recently announced the arrival of SportingBet Australia in Darwin and, as we know, is now established here fully. One of their most popular products is to enable their clients to choose the option of taking the final NSW or final Victorian tote dividend. That was what they were offering prior to coming to Darwin. However, under our current legislation, they are not allowed to offer that, and this amendment was to change that to allow it to happen.
We also had our current bookmaker, International Allsports, which has been one of the founding bookmakers of some scale in the Northern Territory, at the time offered a Diviplus product, which pays above the highest tote dividend from tote pools in NSW, Victoria and Queensland. The minister said, at the time, that removing the restrictions that our legislation applies will remove any doubt about the legitimacy of their products, that is, the bookmaker’s products.
The question that presents itself is: are these products still being offered? If they are, do they have the legal surety that they should have; in fact, that the minister has promised to provide? That is a question I would like the minister to answer. I do not know why this legislation has not advanced. Perhaps it is something to do with the racing industry and the minister’s colleagues in southern states not wanting it to proceed, but the minister in his second reading speech noted that there appears to be no basis for the legislative restriction. Its removal will provide punters with greater flexibility and betting options, and is consistent with national competition principles. That being the case, and in the case of our bookmakers, if they are offering these products currently, then surely they should have some legal surety. I say to the minister: he owes the House and those operators some explanation.
The other item of interest I would like to raise with the Minister for Racing, Gaming and Licensing is the issue of bet exchanges. We all know that bet exchanges are something that our bookmakers would like to introduce as a product. They exist in overseas jurisdictions and are proving to be very popular. A lot of work has been done to study them in the Northern Territory. There is no doubt that they can work and will become a very popular product. I know, and I am sure that the minister has no doubt, that our bookmakers and sports betting operators would love to see the legislation being introduced that would allow bet exchanges to operate out of the Northern Territory. There is nothing sophisticated about bet exchanges; it is really a bit like a stock exchange where a bet is posted by a punter from anywhere around the world, it is held by a bookmaker, somebody else takes the bet, it is held and a fee is charged on the transaction of that bet between two individual punters. It is a product that is proving to be very popular and, as I said, I know that our bookmakers and sport bet operators are very keen on it.
The minister needs to give us an update on all things racing and gaming. It has been some time since we have seen any action in that area on legislative changes to keep us at the forefront of the whole industry. We should be proud of where we sit in that industry in a global sense, let alone a national sense. Certainly, we need to remain proactive, as far as introducing and building an environment that allows for good products to find their home here in the Northern Territory.
So it is a little wake up call, as I said, and I would like to hear a reply from the minister.
Dr BURNS (Johnston): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I would like to speak about a couple of events that I attended recently. One was the Sri Lankan Food Relief and Fundraiser that was held at St Mary’s Football Club at Marrara in late July. The occasion was a curry night. It was organised by the Sri Lanka-Australia Friendship Association to raise funds for those affected by the devastating floods experienced by thousands in southern Sri Lanka earlier this year.
Several families from the local Sri Lankan community donated the meals, and I can attest that it was wonderful food - wonderful curries, wonderful condiments. I particularly like Sri Lankan food. There was good fellowship on the night, and certainly, a good spirit as people came together to organise funds and help those people who have been affected in Sri Lanka.
I would like to pay tribute to those who organised the evening. There was Tyronne and Charmaine de Zilwa from Palmerston, Lalith and Heather Ramachandra, Lucky and Mallika Rajaratnam, Athula and Ruvini Koralage, Shantha and Chandrika Munasinghe, Senaka and Rajini Arachichi, and Ranjith and Swarna Ramachandra. My wife and I attended, as did the member for Sanderson. It was great to see him with his daughter, Verity, who was up from Canberra and had a great night experiencing the multicultural aspects of Darwin. She commented on what an enjoyable night it was. There was entertainment and raffles; it was really great. Also present were Claudette and Walter Perera and Karuna and Peter Fernando. I commend the night. I always enjoy the Sri Lankan community and their functions.
On 9 August I attended a social night, show and disco at the Filipino Centre along Baton Road, to support Jessiepher Stephenson, a candidate for Miss Barrio Fiesta 2003. The Mistress of Ceremonies, was Miss Judith Ventic known to everyone here in the House, who is with the Multilingual Broadcasting Service at TOP-FM. Judith is very well known through that. Of course, also Fele Mann, who is part of the Filipino Club of Darwin Incorporated. Fele does a great deal of very hard work for those who are less fortunate in the community, and many community events, and she does a wonderful job. Also there in a ceremonial sense was Jacinta McElroy, Miss Philippines Australia NT 2003, a very beautiful young woman who is also very talented. She did some of the master of ceremonies work, too. She is someone who is developing and growing and is a great asset to that community, as many of the young people there.
Grace was said before the meal and that was celebrated by Brother Danny Asusaar of the El Shaddai NT group. We then enjoyed a beautiful dinner. Fele Mann made welcoming remarks, and a song, Genie in a Bottle, was performed by Jessiepher Stephenson who demonstrated herself to be a very talented young woman. There were a couple of problems with the PA system but, basically, they were overcome and her talent really showed through.
There was a traditional Filipino song, You Are My Love, sung by Joyce Paz. I will leave the spelling to Hansard, but it was Ikaw ang mahal ko, and there were special greetings given on the night by Senator Trish Crossin, myself, Len Kiely and also the His Worship the Mayor, Peter Adamson was present as was the shadow minister for Ethnic Affairs, Dr Richard Lim. Everyone was there; we all had a say and commented on what a great night it was. It was really a testament to the respect in which the Filipino community is held that we attend and we have a great time. There was a song by Jacinta McElroy and a solo musical rendition performed by Nicki Maxwell, Fele Mann’s granddaughter, who then sang a duet with her mother, Edith Maxwell who, in turn, performed a solo rendition.
There was a fashion show by Noni B with a whole range of models, mature women let us say, but they carried the clothes really well and were very graceful. It was great to see that fashion show. There was a dance then performed by Jessiepher, Mannilyn Bueno and Kim Collings. It was a fantastic display of talent and we are all looking forward to the Barrio night, the fiesta night. That is on Saturday week, and I certainly will be attending and I am sure there will be a lot of members present.
There were closing remarks by Jessica Aguilando, Vice-President of the Multi-Ethnic Social Association, and Jessiphier’s mother. There were a number of ticket sellers on the night: Arsenia Woodcock, Vivian Rajala, Benita Bernabe, Jessica Aguilando, Marianne Mannering, Fele Mann, Alita Abery, Rosemary Coffey, Josie Rakauskas, and a number of Jessica’s friends. There were many volunteers who provided decorations, catering, flyers, adverts and program media. They were: Geoff Wood, Jake Shonhann, Judith Ventic, Marianne Mannering, Benita Bernabe, Fele Mann, Vivian Rajala, Arsenia Woodcock, Aleta Abery, Joyce Paz, Jennifer Ann Miles, Mannilyn Bueno, Kim Collings, Rosemary Coffey, and officers and members of MESA and FCD Incorporated.
Mr John Rivas, who is the President of FAANT, and Mrs Apple Crauford were there to assist as well. John was there early to help set up the venue and Apple came a little later to entertain the guests. It was a great night, we are all looking forward to the Barrio and that is next week. I am sure there is going to be a great crowd.
Before I finish, I would like to comment on tonight’s adjournment contributions, particularly from the member for Port Darwin and some of the issues that she raised. They are important issues, as the member for Port Darwin pointed out. One of the issues of the two issues that she raised was in relation to an allegation of contamination of the airconditioner at the new Accident and Emergency area of Royal Darwin Hospital; a very serious allegation. It appears that she heard it from someone who heard it from someone else, and she is doing her job following up on it. But there needs to be a bit more than to say: ‘There is contamination’. Was it bacterial contamination? Was it chemical contamination? This is all a bit vague.
All I am saying to the member for Port Darwin is that you need to burrow in and find out more detail about things before you come to parliament with such serious allegations. That is just a tip for the opposition generally. You have to work a little harder. I will come back to the hard work ethic in a little while.
The other issue that the member for Port Darwin raised was the very important issue of a hospice in Darwin. There is a lot of community interest in that. Let us look at some of the history. I would ask this of the member for Port Darwin: I know that we had it as an election commitment; did the CLP have it as an election commitment? No, I do not think so! They might have had 10 years ago. We also know that the member for Port Darwin went on an overseas trip as part of her RTD, to which she is entitled. It cost around $20 000 for her to go to Barbados and the UK to find out more about hospices. That is fair enough.
There are deep emotions involved with something like a hospice, and it is understandable that people feel very deeply about it. I hope that the member for Port Darwin is not trying to make political capital over those deep feelings that people have ...
Ms Carter: Shame on you for saying that to me as a nurse.
Dr BURNS: I am saying it. I am presenting you with a bit of a challenge, member for Port Darwin. There has been a site proposed, and I am confident that the site will be prepared, there will be landscaping, that it will be a very special place, as it should be. I have seen the plans the Health minister has proposed, with the rooms and the chapel, and I am very hopeful and confident that it will fulfil the wishes and aspirations of people in regard to a hospice ...
Ms Carter: Shame on you.
Dr BURNS: You can say: ‘Shame’. You can say whatever you like. I am making an observation, which is my right in this place. The fact of the matter is that you did not have it. You did not have it as an election commitment. We did, and we are doing it. We are doing it.
Members interjecting.
Dr BURNS: That is the other issue! The member for Araluen raised the issue of crime, and misrepresented it in terms of our election platform. She was reading what we were saying about property crime. If she cared to read more of that document, she would have found references to violent crime. The fact of the matter is that we did have a manifesto with which we went to the election. It was one that was …
Members interjecting.
Dr BURNS: It was one that was worked hard on over a whole range of issues. I have yet to see one policy platform from members opposite. That is the challenge for you: to get out and do it. All you seem to be doing is running around being divided and, in some cases, not all cases, being lazy in the way that you are conducting yourselves.
The challenge is there for you: get out and work hard. We all work hard on this side. We saw today the member for Sanderson, during a second reading debate, provide a comprehensive overview of the Legal Practitioners Bill. Basically, on this side, and on the backbench - and I know about that because I have been there - we do our own work; we work hard.
Members interjecting.
Dr BURNS: In this session of parliament, we have had difficulty getting responses on a whole range of key issues from members opposite. Someone said: ‘Pull your finger out’. I reckon pull your finger out and start doing a bit of work.
Members interjecting.
Madam ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Members, I know it is getting late, but I would ask you to calm down a bit, please. I know that was provocative at times.
Mrs AAGAARD (Nightcliff): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I acknowledge the staff and students of Nightcliff Primary School, who were involved in the organisation of the Nightcliff Primary School Indigenous Culture Day on Friday 15 August.
It was my pleasure to be a guest at this function, and to address the staff, students and many parents who attended. The special day featured Raphael Clarke as a guest speaker. That gave an opportunity for Nightcliff indigenous students to promote their culture and participate in their own activities, promote cultural diversity, break down barriers and dispel stereotypes about indigenous people, and highlight a range of indigenous cultural activities.
It was a fabulous day and activities included Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island dancing, bush tucker tasting, bush medicine, basket weaving, face painting, NORFORCE, Mission Australia, Dij display. There was also Kormilda College dancing, ATSIC was there, Crocodylus Park was doing some things as well, and there was a basketball game. It was an absolutely fabulous day. I have two children at the Nightcliff Primary School and they came home and commented on what a wonderful time they had. I was very sorry that I was unable to stay for the whole day owing to a Cabinet commitment. It was a fabulous day and I congratulate the ASSPA committee, who organised this, plus the teacher involved, Ms Helen Couzens, all of our indigenous kids who became involved in the organisation, and especially the Assistant Principal of the school, Mr Tad Henry, who it is great to see back at the school. He has been off unwell for nearly a year and it is fabulous to see him back. He is a fantastic teacher, and he showed great leadership in this function. It was, as I say, an excellent day, and I would like to say once again that Nightcliff Primary School - and I probably am a bit biased as the member for Nightcliff - is an excellent school in Darwin, and I am always pleased to be there and to be working with the parents and students of the school.
I turn to a significant project that is making a real difference in education in the Nightcliff area. The Northern Territory Education Department introduced the Lighthouse Project into Territory schools two years ago. This project allows some schools to set up classrooms as centres of teaching and learning excellence. They provide a model of best practice for other schools to follow and build upon. The focusses of the Lighthouse Project are student-centred teaching and learning, and innovative technology. The three schools selected as Lighthouse schools were Katherine South Primary, Nightcliff Primary and Nightcliff High Schools.
Teachers who participate in the project have all visited similar schools, some interstate, to learn how to implement the programs. The schools are at various stages in the development of the project. The Lighthouse Project provides an opportunity for teachers from other schools to see the model classrooms in operation through presentations by teachers and the students of the school. Nightcliff Primary recently conducted its first Lighthouse Practicum for teachers outside the school. Teachers from Karama, Manunda Terrace, Taminmin High, Driver, Wagaman and Bees Creek participated over two days.
I would like to make a special mention of the teachers and students who took part in this first practicum. They presented their ideas, information and resources to the visiting teachers. They were from the Nightcliff Preschool, from the Year 5 Munn class; Year 3 Nascimento class; Year 6/7 Winch class; Year 6/7 K Smith class; Year 2 Evans class; Year 2 McKinnon class; Year 4 Van Duren, and Year 6/7 Weir class. These practicum sessions will be held twice each term at Nightcliff primary from next year. As resources become available, the project will also grow to include all of the school, I understand.
An important part of the Lighthouse Project is to provide a continuum of learning from preschool to senior secondary. Nightcliff High School is currently developing its role in the Lighthouse Project, and has had a number of teachers undertake the in-service training. I congratulate all staff and students involved in this very valuable project.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016