2003-02-25
- Madam Speaker Braham took the Chair at 10 am.
PETITION
Public Transport – Continuation of Standard
Public Transport – Continuation of Standard
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 55 petitioners praying for the provision of continuity of airconditioned public transport throughout the year. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with the requirements of standing orders. Madam Speaker, I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
- To the honourable the Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory:
Continuity of bus service.
The humble petition of citizens of the Northern Territory, electors of the Northern Territory, respectfully
request that the Northern Territory government’s transport minister provide continuity of public
transport throughout the year.
The bus service should provide passengers with a comfortable, airconditioned bus all year round.
At present, school holiday, commuters on outbound route 28 Darwin to Palmerston, are receiving a lesser
standard by Buslink than that provided by the Darwin Bus Service in that during the school semester,
the bus is airconditioned and comfortable travelling, which is not the case during school holidays.
It is the opinion of the citizens that the same vehicles should be allocated to the same routes so that there
is continuity of service for the commuter.
Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that review of these services be given due consideration, and
your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray.
MINISTERIAL REPORTS
Visit to Indonesia and East Timor
Visit to Indonesia and East Timor
Mr HENDERSON (Business, Industry and Resource Development): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to provide an overview report to the Assembly on my visits to Indonesia and East Timor earlier this month. The visits were undertaken with the dual purposes of strengthening our links with our closest international neighbours and supporting and building Territory trade and investment with these key markets. In Jakarta, I had a very productive meeting with His Excellency, Purnomo Yusgiantoro, the Indonesian Minister for Energy and Mineral Resources, whose portfolio covers the key area of development projects in oil, gas and mining in eastern Indonesia. Many Northern Territory companies have targeted these projects as markets for their products and services.
Minister Yusgiantoro also expressed his keen desire to visit the Territory to review our project supply capacity, and this visit has been scheduled for April this year. The minister was also impressed with the technology developed by my department in airborne geoscience data collection and analysis for the mining exploration sector, and arrangements are in hand to share this technology.
I also met with the Deputy Minister for Industry Trade to activate trade forums between Indonesia and the Territory to deliver identified trade opportunities to Northern Territory exporters. The Territory enjoys a close relationship with Indonesian Industry and Trade Minister Rini Soewandi, and she is expected to accept an invitation from the Chief Minister to visit Darwin mid-year, hopefully to coincide with Expo.
I also visited the Jakarta head offices of several key corporate contacts including BP who are developing the Tangguh gas project in Papua, and PT Freeport, who operate the world’s largest copper and gold mine in the highlands of Papua.
In Bali, I paid respects, on behalf of the Northern Territory, at the site of the tragic 2002 bombings. I also met with the Governor of Bali, His Excellency Dewa Made Beratha, who sought our assistance under the Bali-NT memorandum of understanding in a number of commercial areas including management systems for Denpasar Hospital, efficiency in cattle breeding, and development of small business. Also, as a result of the visit, detailed planning is now under way between the Northern Territory University and Udayana University of Bali to exchange staff and students, as well as joint marketing for third country international students coming to study at the Northern Territory University.
In Dili, I met with Prime Minister Mari Alkatiri to further a proposal by our Chief Minister for the establishment of a forum of key Northern Territory and East Timor ministers to develop economic and cultural links. The discussion also turned to the plight of the East Timorese residents in Darwin who are under threat of expulsion by the Commonwealth. Prime Minister Alkatiri warmly thanked the Northern Territory parliament for its call on the Commonwealth to allow our citizens to stay. I also had extensive discussions with the Prime Minister in regard to the Timor Sea Treaty. Similarly, I had very fruitful discussions with Minister for Transport, Communications and Public Works, Ovidio De Jesus Amaral, and State Secretary for Tourism, the Environment and Investment, Dr Jose Texiera.
Madam Speaker, a number of carefully chosen future international visits are planned to promote Territory trade and the implementation of this government’s international trade strategy. The Chief Minister will be visiting several key Asian markets in March with representatives from FreightLink to meet with existing and potential clients for the new Darwin port/rail trade route. In March, Minister Toyne will be leading a group of Northern Territory technology firms on a visit to CeBIT 2003 in Hanover, Germany, the world’s largest technology trade display. Also in March, I will be leading a delegation of Northern Territory exporters to the Philippines to pursue trade objectives, including those with the Asian Development Bank and our valuable live cattle exporters.
Northern Territory business expect government to be creating the overall framework and environment which allows them to access international markets. Through the international trade strategy, we are committed to partnering with the business community to grow and strengthen Territory exports.
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, the opposition applauds the minister for finally deciding to use his passport. We know there has been a cultural cringe from the incoming government about matters relating to overseas travel. It is imperative for our future that these ministers travel. We were disappointed when minister Henderson stood up at the NT Expo awards last year - not the last awards but the ones before - and made an undertaking to that audience that he would visit all of our trading partners.
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member for Drysdale referred to the minister as minister Henderson.
Mr DUNHAM: I withdraw, Madam Speaker. Last year, he made an undertaking to visit all of our major trading partners. At Estimates, we found out that that meant Dili and Jakarta. We also found that he made a late trip to Singapore. He has now made another visit to Dili and Jakarta, and while that is good, it is not enough, minister. We understood when there were several of you that it was a difficult thing because you had so much to carry. You are now carrying this very important portfolio. You have to pack your bag and get over there.
We were disappointed, also, that in Bali he made some unfortunate remarks about people making their own mind up about travelling in contrast to DFAT’s advice. My criticism of him was merely that he should have pointed out the DFAT advice, which he did after the event, not before.
We are pleased that the Chief Minister will be travelling to Asia and talking about the port and the rail link. We hope she has some notion of the rail freight rates. This is a matter that local businesses have had some difficulty trying to gauge, and we would expect that it would be a very high matter of questioning among her potential overseas customers for this freight line. If she does not know the answer, I would suggest she does not go. If she does know the answer, it would be very good if she could divulge it to this House.
Mr HENDERSON (Business, Industry and Resource Development): Madam Speaker, I welcome the constructive and somewhat churlish comments from the member for Drysdale.
We are a government that is committed to, and has put targets in place for, the expansion of trade in the Northern Territory with our Asian neighbours. It was one of the most surprising things, coming to office, to find that there was no definitive strategy for developing exports with the Asian region. There was a culture within government for ministers to hop on a plane to various exotic destinations at whatever whim that was chosen to be pursued at the time, with very little in definitive outcomes. We will deliver on outcomes: a 40% increase in the volume and value of non-oil and mineral trade over the next four years, and a 30% increase in the number of Territory companies exporting. It is an issue that is strongly supported by the business community, and if the member for Drysdale was out and about in that community, he would know how strongly supported that strategy is.
Alice Springs Crime Prevention Council
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, earlier this month in Alice Springs, I was pleased to attend the inaugural public meeting to call for members of the new Alice Springs Regional Crime Prevention Committee. I was delighted that about 50 people attended; people who were prepared to put the effort in to make their community a safer place to live.
Through this council, Alice Springs residents will have the opportunity to provide direct input into the crime fighting initiatives and safer community projects. Alice Springs is unique as this crime prevention council has the solid backing of the Alice in 10 Committee which agreed late last year to form a partnership with the Office of Crime Prevention to work towards the establishment of a regional crime prevention council for the Alice Springs region. This means that the information and resources that Alice in 10 has developed over the past few years will be available to the council to assist it in developing crime prevention strategies that will work.
I am pleased today to be able to announce the membership of the council: Tim Hampton of Tangentyere Council; Peter Vaughan, Alice Springs High School; Charlie Larkin, Relationships Australia; Sue Hampton, Hampton Training Services; Fran Kilgariff, Mayor of the Alice Springs Town Council; Karen Walshaw from the Congress; Amanda Bowen from Good Beginnings; Pastor Colin Griffith of the Anglican Church; Colleen Devlin of Centralian College; Paul Robinson of the Chamber of Commerce; John Gaynor, Commonwealth Family and Community Services; Superintendent Colleen Gwynn; Peter Hanson, Neighbourhood Watch; and David Ross of FACS.
ATSIC and the Department of Community Development, Sport and Cultural Affairs will also be nominating members in the near future. There will be many projects the committee can get involved in, and the government provides significant financial support through its crime prevention grants.
The Alice Springs committee has already attracted a grant of $30 000 to develop a Child and Youth Safety Strategy for the region and the Northern Territory government has funded a project officer for six months. I am pleased that Louissa Ellis has been appointed to this position, bringing her extensive experience and contacts to the project. This project officer will consult with government agencies, service providers and non-government organisations to document the work undertaken to date through Safe Families and identify ongoing activities for the strategy.
The establishment of the Regional Crime Prevention Council is a key plank of the government’s six-point plan on crime. I congratulate those who have nominated for the Alice Springs Crime Prevention Committee, who will be working in partnership with government towards a safer community in the Alice Springs region.
Mr BURKE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, on behalf of the opposition I am happy to note the report by the minister. Everyone applauds any initiative that aids in lowering crime and antisocial behaviour in our community, and I have no doubt that the people who are offered membership on that committee will do a good job. The message that the opposition would like to send is that we applaud any aspect of community involvement in policing and dealing with crime; there is no doubt about that. What these committees need to see, though, is support for the initiatives that they themselves propose. I cannot speak about Alice Springs but, in the case of Palmerston, there is a very active committee at work. One of the continuing frustrations of that committee is the lack of support that they get from government for the initiatives that they propose. That lack of support really boils down, at the end of the day, to the simple fact that there is only so much that committees can do and recommend.
The issue of resourcing for police is the number one issue in the greater Darwin area and Alice Springs. It is pleasing to see that the government has finally moved on a review of police numbers and resources. I look forward to the results of that review. I hope that it leads to an enormous increase in resources being made available so that the strategies and initiatives that are proposed by these committees can, in fact, make a real difference. The reality is that we do have a very supportive community in dealing with crime. We do have active members who are well involved in the community and want to get involved on these committees. But, at the end of the day, the government has to respond to the initiatives that they propose in a way that is supported by the community, and respond in a way that has a real effect. The situation, truly, at the moment, to which I am sure everyone will admit, is the effect is simply not there; crime is increasing in the Northern Territory – a sense of lawlessness is there – and it is way past time the government responded to that.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I welcome the somewhat churlish support that has been offered from the Leader of the Opposition. It seems that is their style, and it is rather unfortunate, given that we are announcing some very positive commitments by the community to our programs.
Regarding the resourcing of these crime prevention bodies: $400 000. That is $150 000 more than the CLP ever saw fit to put out in crime prevention grants. There is $100 000 additional to the Neighbourhood Watch groups, and regular and active support from the Office of Crime Prevention for each of these regional bodies. They see their Office of Crime Prevention personnel there at each of their meetings and things are taken straight back to government. We are doing far more on this front than the CLP ever managed.
Ministerial Advisory Board for Employment and Training
Mr STIRLING (Education, Employment and Training): Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure today to announce the appointment of the new Ministerial Advisory Board for Employment and Training. The new board reflects this government’s strong commitment to improving employment and training opportunities for Territorians because we face an exciting time here in the Northern Territory.
Mr Reed interjecting.
Mr STIRLING: If the member for Katherine wanted to close his mouth, Madam Speaker, he might hear some of these exciting developments that are to come: major projects such as the LNG project at Wickham Point, the proposed Alcan expansion at Gove, MIM’s proposed McArthur River zinc project, and a number of major defence projects.
We need to ensure that Territorians have the training and skills they need to take advantage of the employment opportunities these projects present. The new board will play a crucial role in assisting government to ensure Territorians receive the training they need to take up jobs in existing and emerging industries and on major projects. We want to give Territorians tailored training opportunities to match existing and emerging job opportunities, and we want to ensure that the new ministerial advisory board has the expertise and experience to provide strategic advice to government on the development of employment and training policies. That is why we have drawn the new Ministerial Advisory Board members from a broad cross-section of stakeholders and increased membership from 10 to 13. The board now includes representatives from the vocational education training sector, training advisory councils, regional areas, the indigenous community, Trades and Labour Council and the Chamber of Commerce and Industry. They will hold their positions for a period of three years.
I am pleased to announce that Kim Ford will take the position of Chairperson of the board. Kim is the general manager of CSM Technology and has a strong commitment to training. Kim’s management career has been in two areas - tourism and information technology - and in both industries he has been the driving force behind the restructuring of operations to better meet market expectations. Kim has extensive experience in business management and analysis at all levels. He was awarded NT Manager of the Year Chairman’s Award in 1997 for his disaster recovery work with the Katherine community after the devastating floods experienced there. Kim is a highly experienced and successful business manager with a strong sense of commitment to the community.
The other board members are: Terri-Ann Maney from the Northern Territory Chamber of Commerce and Industry; Susan Noonan from the Cultural, Recreation and Tourism Industries Training Advisory Council; Alan McGill from the Human Services Health Community and Local Government Training Advisory Council; Klaus Helms, regional community representative from Nhulunbuy; Roslyn Andrews, a regional community representative from Victoria River district; Julie Ross, regional community representative from Alice Springs; Michelle Adams from the Aboriginal Torres Strait Islander Commission; Jeff Jones from the Northern Territory Trades and Labour Council; Mike Harrison, a vocational education and training practitioner; Greg Gibbs from the Commonwealth Department of Education Science and Technology; Peter Blake as CEO of the agency responsible for industrial development; and Peter Plummer, CEO of the Department of Employment, Education and Training.
The board’s primary role will be to act as a conduit between the community and industry on behalf of the minister. Board members will provide strategic advice to me on a range of issues, projects and programs in relation to vocational education and training, employment and training strategies and training purchasing plans. I am looking forward to working with the board, which will meet for the first time next month to develop programs that will enable Territorians to access employment and training opportunities for the benefit of individuals, industry and the community. I take the opportunity to thank the previous Northern Territory Employment and Training Authority Board for their efforts in advancing opportunities for Territorians in the time that they were in place.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, it gives me pleasure to hear this announcement today. Anyone who has taken an interest in the role of education and the transition of education to the work force – the fundamental purpose of education - will know that it is a fairly complex area. We also know that we are talking of a time when there has been a reduction of funding from the federal government into this area, and we have a bureaucracy there to serve the interests of industry via the education enterprise. In this landscape, we had in this parliament 16 months ago, an announcement that there would be some positive changes made to address the challenges that we currently face - 16 months ago. Eight months later, we had legislation introduced into the House with the full support of the CLP. It took a further eight months before we had the announcement of this body.
It is a critical thing that we do have the mechanisms in place to manage this bureaucracy because, right at the bottom of this, we have the efforts of volunteers representing the interests of industry endeavouring to do their part to make sure that industry is fairly served by the activities through education. Eight months for this board to be announced is long overdue. When we start the statement by ‘demonstrating our strong commitment to education employment and training’, an eight month wait for the announcement of a board which was preluded by the dissolution of the existing NTETA Board really is disgraceful.
Mr STIRLING (Employment, Education and Training): I thank the member for his mostly pleasant remarks, at least initially.
Madam Speaker, I heard him on the radio the other day trying to draw a link between the absence of this board and the collapse of the Primary Industry Training and Advisory Council. I can tell him about the relationship between the Rural Industry Training Advisory Board and the Fishing Industry Training Advisory Board: these two bodies were required to come together when the previous government collapsed the 11 industry training advisory boards down to six training advisory councils. It was never a happy marriage; it was never a happy relationship. Despite our best efforts of trying to get the parties together - meeting separately, meeting together - there were such fundamental differences that the players involved were never going to come together as quickly and effectively as the other five training advisory councils apparently did. The main difference here is we know where we are going as a government with employment, that is why it is an advisory board, not a policy board as they had.
Hay Growing Industry
Dr BURNS (Primary Industry and Fisheries): Madam Speaker, today I report to the House on the launch of a poster for the Northern Territory Agricultural Association Hay Growers Group conducted recently at the Douglas Daly Research Farm in the heart of the Territory’s hay growing country. The hay growing industry in the Northern Territory has developed significantly in the past five years and is now valued at around about $3.8m a year, not including value adding. Further development of this industry will lead to more jobs for rural Territorians and is one step on the road to ensuring that young Territorians, in particular, have opportunities into the future.
The value of this crop to the Territory is expected to increase significantly depending on the development of new markets in the future and increasing live cattle exports into Asia. Currently, the Territory produces around 25 000 to 27 000 tonnes of hay a year for local, national and international markets. This level of production is expected to change significantly in the next five years through initiatives such as the NT Agricultural Association Hay Growers Group.
This group represents a concerted effort by government and the industry to work together to bolster this young but important industry. Specific developments have included work on weed management plans, best management practices and hazard analysis critical point analysis assessments. The development of the group recognises the roles of the major players within this industry in improving production and supply chain practices to become even more competitive. As opposed to the other states, this group is committed to producing high quality hay products in the Northern Territory. This is all part of improving the industry’s capability of identifying weaknesses and improved management through vendor declarations, quality assurance and industry meetings which all equal high quality hay products.
When Top End hay producers agreed to use locally developed, voluntary vendor declaration forms to describe hay offered for sale, it was a major step towards the hay growers’ commitment to satisfy requirements under the new Weeds Management Act. Many hay growers are responding to increasing requests from the market for information, and recognise their obligations under the Weeds Management Act. The success of any voluntary scheme, such as this, will ultimately come from buyers who use them in good faith.
The declaration forms also provide buyers with a formal description of the hay they are buying, chemicals used and other weed management practices. The form will be used in conjunction with a documented weed management plan, which is currently being developed for the hay industry through a series of hay producers’ meetings being convened by NT Agricultural Association and the Primary Industry Group of my department.
The development of the vendor declaration form was a joint effort between the department, the Northern Territory Agricultural Association and the Katherine Pastoral Industry Advisory Committee. The partnership between Territory Primary Industry, the Northern Territory Agricultural Association and my department will continue in order to develop other tools and training programs to assist producers to improve their crop management skills.
I commend the Northern Territory Agricultural Association Hay Growers Group on their initiative. I assure the House that this government will continue to support industry initiatives of this kind.
Mr BALDWIN (Daly): I thought I would respond to this, Madam Speaker, and I am glad to see that the minister has taken the opportunity to bring into the House the work of others; that great organisation, the Northern Territory Agricultural Association. They are a fine group of industry people, very proactive in developing new opportunities for the Territory and assisting not only irrigators coming into the Katherine and Top End region, but now the Hay Growers Group and the work that they are doing. It is great to see that they are getting this sort of response from the minister.
Hay growing is not a new industry. In fact, I was a hay contractor many years ago for quite a number of years and was involved in the early development of hay for the export cattle market. It is something that has developed since that time with a number of cubing plants around the Northern Territory, the Top End in particular, and palleting will be the next advance on that. It is something that the Hay Growers Group is very, very interested in getting some support from government.
The minister mentioned Douglas Daly, and he and the Minister for Lands and Planning went to a meeting last week, and I congratulate them for that - the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries now knows what a Brahman cow looks like, which is great - but there are things that need to be done. Now that you have seen that area, can I ask you to make a commitment to the Katherine Daly Basin project, a great CLP project. You need to do three things: the road from Stray Creek to Ferguson; the subdivision of Douglas; and the commitment to infrastructure in the Flemming township. Now they know what is out there and the potential of what is there, they need to give a commitment to those people to provide funds to move that concept forward from where it is today, which is a great CLP concept and one of the biggest producing areas of the Northern Territory.
Dr BURNS (Primary Industry and Fisheries): Madam Speaker, I generally welcome the comments made by the member for Daly. First, I do know what a Brahman looks like, and I have done quite a lot of cattle work in my time. I have caught my share of …
Members interjecting.
Dr BURNS: … so do not talk about that. I will talk to you about it one night over a beer. I know a bit about cattle - not as much as the member for Daly, but I have branded a few and cut a few, so there you go.
The NT Agricultural Association is a great organisation. We fully support them. As the member for Daly pointed out - the member for Casuarina was there - we went to a meeting of the NT Agricultural Association and a whole range of issues from water to land use to roads were canvassed there and we are very aware of the issues. Many of the things that the member for Daly mentioned are in the province of my colleague, the member for Casuarina, and no doubt he will be speaking about that in further statements.
Ministerial reports noted pursuant to Sessional Order.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise you of the presence in the Gallery of students from the Faculty of Indigenous Research and Education, Northern Territory University, Certificate II, General Education, accompanied by their coordinator, Mr Kevin Kluken. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
KAVA MANAGEMENT AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 132)
(Serial 132)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr STIRLING (Racing, Gaming and Licensing): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.
The purpose of this bill is to amend the Kava Management Act following the national competition policy review of kava legislation. The amendments ensure that kava legislation is compliant with national competition policy principles, as well as providing a greater focus on harm minimisation activities.
The amendments will establish improved administrative arrangements, many of which were requested by industry during the review consultation process. The amendments do not make changes in government policy. The need for amendments to the kava legislation has arisen from the National Competition Policy review which included extensive stakeholder consultation.
Through application of the NCP principles and discussions with stakeholders, it has become apparent that the legislation would be improved by: adding objectives to the act; adding provisions to enable regulation of kava price; extending and clarifying periods for objections; renewing licences for one year from date of grant; formalising involvement of the police and health agencies in the consultation and approval process concerning kava management plans; enabling the minister on advice from the Licensing Commission to determine the number of wholesale or retail licences to be issued; lodging of documents electronically; requiring licence applicants to state what contribution they would make to support harm minimisation activities; and providing greater flexibility in kava packaging requirements.
Before I outline the proposed amendments in detail, it is important to acknowledge the contribution of key stakeholders who have engaged in the legislative review process through either making written submissions or attending consultation meetings. I specifically wish to thank Aboriginal Resource and Development Services; the regional chair and the senior staff from the Aboriginal and Torres Islander Commission East Arnhem office; the Northern Land Council; Northern Territory Police, in particular officers from the Nhulunbuy station; the Department of Health and Community Services, both hospital and health development staff in Nhulunbuy, and the Alcohol and Other Drugs section in Darwin; the Menzies School of Health Research and, in particular, Mr Alan Clough, the Menzies senior research officer based in Nhulunbuy; Miwatj Health and staff from the Lanhupuy Homelands Association; and the Ramingining, Warruwi and Yirrkala councils.
It should be noted that consultation visits were also made to kava-using communities for discussions concerning improvements to the legislation. These visits were in addition to the NCP review public consultation meetings held in Nhulunbuy and Darwin.
I turn now to the amendments. It is the government’s view that an objects section should be included in the act. The reason for this is to make it clear that the government intends to eliminate the black market trade; to encourage harm minimisation principles and other reasonable practices in relation to kava possession, supply and consumption, resulting in a reduced incidence of kava-related health, social and economic problems; to establish mechanisms for regulating the sale and supply of kava with a view to eliminating excessive profiteering from kava sales, and ensuring that, as far as possible, those profits that do accrue from kava sales are used for the benefit of kava-using communities rather than for private gain; and to encourage and empower local Aboriginal communities to become involved through the development of kava management plans in the operation of the kava licensing system within their community.
The government’s view is that it is in the public interest to make the legislation as transparent and as understandable as possible. The addition of a set of objects will also aid the purposes of legislative review and assist the community in its understanding of the intention and purposes of the act.
The objects section refers to harm minimisation. I wish to confirm the government’s view on the importance of harm minimisation principles within our approach to kava licensing. Harm minimisation has been the key principle underpinning Australia’s drug strategy since 1985. Harm minimisation refers to policies and programs aimed at reducing drug-related harm. Harm minimisation aims to improve health, social and economic outcomes for both the community and the individual, and encompasses a wide range of integrated approaches, including supply reduction strategies designed to disrupt the production and supply of illicit drugs; demand reduction strategies designed to prevent the uptake of harmful drug use, including abstinence orientated strategies to reduce drug use; and a range of targeted harm reduction strategies designed to reduce drug-related harm for particular individuals and communities. Harm minimisation includes preventing anticipated harm as well as reducing actual harm. Harm minimisation is, therefore, consistent with a comprehensive approach to drug-related harm, involving a balance between demand reduction, supply reduction and harm reduction strategies, all of which are important in preventing and reducing the harmful effects of kava abuse.
The bill proposes, through provision of a new part in the act, to enable the Licensing Commission to set the price of kava following community consultation. The ability to set the price of kava is needed because there is one wholesale licence for the Northern Territory and one retail licence per licensed area. Without the provision of such a mechanism, there is scope for unacceptable profiteering by licensees. Appropriate community consultation must be carried out and the set price must be consistent with the objects of the act. These provisions will deter licensees seeking or making blatant profits through price mark-ups, and will enable the commission to respond quickly should the world kava price rapidly change.
The bill proposes that a community government council may apply to the minister to declare a part, some parts, or all of the council area to be a licensed area. Currently, a council may only seek to have a part of its area declared as a licensed area. The amendment provides for the option for a part, some parts, or all of the council’s area to be proposed as a licensed area, thus giving community councils greater options in the process of establishing and managing kava licensing in their communities.
The bill proposes that the number of wholesale and retail licences granted under the act shall be determined by the minister on recommendation from the Licensing Commission. The intention of the legislation is to manage kava supply and consumption, not to stimulate growth of the kava market. Within this controlled availability context, maximum weight needs to be given to mechanisms that will support responsible retailing and consumption practices. Regulating the number of licensees provides scope for kava stakeholders, including Aboriginal communities, to exert influence over the licensees to encourage the use of appropriate harm minimisation supply and consumption practices.
In proposing the amendment, the government is not intending to increase the number of wholesale licensees, or the number of retail licensees currently operating per licensed area. However, it does want to establish the option where this could occur if it was shown to be in the community interest. The amendment also makes the legislation compliant with National Competition Policy principles.
The bill proposes that all licences, rather than having to be renewed on 1 January every year, are granted for 12 months from date of issue. There is no regulatory reason why licences need to be renewed on a particular date each year, especially as the act does not allow for pro rata licence fees. Given there may be delays with the issue of a licence due to the objection and hearing processes allowed by the act, licences should be granted for 12 months from the date of issue.
The bill proposes to allow the Licensing Commission to impose conditions on the licence in accordance with the facts of each case and with the object of the act. Under current provisions a licensee is subject to prescribed conditions that the Licensing Commission may impose. Through deletion of the word ‘prescribed’, the Licensing Commission will be able to set conditions other than those set out in the regulations. To ensure that licence conditions are not varied to an extent that is inconsistent with the objects of the legislation, the Licensing Commission will only be able to impose licence conditions that are consistent with the objects of the act as inserted through this amendment bill.
The bill proposes the addition of a provision similar to section 110 of the Liquor Act, in association with section 124 of that act, so that a breach of licence conditions is a breach of the act. Currently, there is no provision in the act such that a breach of licence conditions is also a breach of the act. This is a normal provision of licensing schemes and gives effect to the penalty sections of the legislation.
The bill proposes that the period allowed for objections to be lodged is 28 days, commencing from the date of the first newspaper advertisement notifying of a Licensing Commission decision. The longer period of time was requested by stakeholders who were concerned that persons in remote parts of the Territory had adequate time to prepare objections to decisions. A 28-day objection period is also consistent with other objection periods in this and other acts - for example, the Liquor Act.
The bill proposes that applicants who have not been successful in renewing their licence must, if they wish to seek a hearing, request a hearing within 28 days of the Licensing Commission’s decision. At present, when the Licensing Commission refuses to renew a licence, the applicant may request the commission to conduct a hearing in relation to the application for renewal and the commission must comply with this request. However, the lack of any time constraint on the exercise of such right to a hearing could leave the future successful licensee indefinitely in the dark as to whether a challenge may still be proceeding at some time. A period of 28 days to lodge a request for a hearing is a reasonable period of time within which unsuccessful applicants for renewal should take this action. A period of 28 days is also consistent with the objection periods within the act.
The bill proposes the Licensing Commission to be able to dismiss, without a hearing, objections judged to be frivolous or vexatious. While this is not a common occurrence, a similar provision has been placed in the Liquor Act. The inclusion of this provision in the Kava Management Act would ensure that both valid applicants and the commission are not unduly delayed by frivolous or vexatious behaviour.
The bill proposes that the Licensing Commission be able to consider multiple competing applications for a single wholesale or retail licence. Under the current provisions of the act, multiple applications for the same licence cannot be considered as a pool of applicants. This amendment will enable the Licensing Commission to judge the best of several competing applications for the same wholesale or retail licence once any or all of them become the subject of a hearing.
The bill proposes to expand the licence renewal period to 60 days. The current 30-day period for the renewal of a licence is unrealistically short. The 30 days should be increased to 60 days to enable an appropriate period of time for the renewal process.
The bill proposes that if a licence renewal is under consideration by the Licensing Commission and the licence renewal date has passed, there is provision for a licence to be able to continue until such time as the Licensing Commission decision in relation to the renewal is settled. It is possible that the licence renewal process may take some time, quite possibly longer than two months. Accordingly, to avoid the technical expiry of a licence while an application for renewal is being considered, provision should be made in the act for the licence to be able to continue until such time as the Licensing Commission has handed down a decision.
The bill proposes to remove the prohibition against the challenge to an existing retail licence. As it stands, all a potential new applicant can do in the face of existing retail licences is to object to an annual renewal of it. Success with such an objection will result only in the refusal of the renewal and the relevant licensed area being without a retailer while the challenger then mounts their own application. This existing process prevents a seamless changeover of licensee. By contrast, there is no restriction on applying for the single wholesale licence at any time – that, is while it is still held by somebody else - in anticipation of it becoming available at renewal time. The addition of this amendment places applicants for wholesale and retail licences on the same footing.
The bill proposes that the Chairman of the Licensing Commission or the Director of Licensing may authorise possession of kava for medical, forensic, scientific, education or consumer research purposes. The current legislation does not provide for legal possession of kava outside a licensed area unless in accordance with the licence. Given the importance the range of research and educational activities being conducted, it is appropriate that the Chair of the Licensing Commission or the Director of Licensing be able to authorise the possession and use of kava for these purposes. This amendment does not alter the authority of the Chief Medical Officer to authorise kava research activities.
The bill proposes that documents may be lodged with the Licensing Commission or licensees by facsimile or e-mail. The current legislation only allows for documents to be lodged by post. This change will enable electronic technologies to be used for business communication purposes.
Suspension of sales in emergencies: the bill proposes the addition of a provision similar to section 48A of the Liquor Act allowing for suspension of sales in emergency situations of community unrest, natural disasters and the like. The need may arise for use of a mechanism to suspend sales. Likely situations are community unrest, an adulterated or infected batch of kava product, a community-wide medical emergency and natural disaster. Under these circumstances, government agencies or members of the community have the right to approach the Liquor Commission seeking suspension of sales and this amendment will give the Licensing Commission the power to act, should it deem this action necessary, by suspending sales for up to seven days.
While it is not included in the amendment bill, I wish to inform the House of two changes to be made to the Kava Management Regulations. These changes arose from the consultation undertaken as part of the NCP review process. The first regulatory amendment concerns the information to accompany renewal applications of a licence whereby applicants shall be required to state details of programs and/or activities to be funded by the licensee to make a contribution to harm minimisation practices and responsible kava retailing and consumption. Kava licensing was introduced by the previous government due to unsatisfactory outcomes from the unregulated supply of kava in Arnhem Land Aboriginal communities. A major mechanism of the act is the requirement for kava management plans whereby the community outlines how it wishes kava to be sold, and the support it will provide to facilitate the responsible sale and use of kava. Given the major focus on responsible kava practice, it is the view of this government that licensed applicants should be asked to disclose the particular practices they will undertake to support the legislation’s harm minimisation policy objective.
The other regulatory amendment makes the wholesaler responsible for ensuring that kava is packaged and labelled in accordance with the conditions of their licence. At present the regulations state that the wholesaler must package kava, which rules out the use of pre-packaged kava - that is, kava packaged and/or labelled outside the NT. As packaging and labelling matters are contained in the licensee’s licence conditions, the restriction that the wholesaler must directly package and label kava should be deleted.
It is the government’s intention to continue to address the issues arising from kava use in Arnhem Land. The amendments proposed today will improve the kava legislation so that it conforms with National Competition Policy principles. The amendments also support further harm minimisation activities and more efficient administrative requirements for the licensing process.
Madam Speaker, I commend the Kava Amendment Bill 2003 to honourable members.
Debate adjourned.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS
Take two bills together
Take two bills together
Mr VATSKALIS (Transport and Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, I move that so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent bills entitled Commercial Passenger (Road) Transport Amendment Bill (Serial 133) and Commercial Passenger (Road) Transport (Consequential Amendments) Bill (Serial 134):
(a) being presented and read a first time together and one motion being put in regard to, respectively,
the second readings; the committee’s report stage; and the third readings of the bills together; and
(b) the consideration of the bills separately in the Committee of the Whole.
Motion agreed to.
COMMERCIAL PASSENGER (ROAD) TRANSPORT AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 133)
COMMERCIAL PASSENGER (ROAD) TRANSPORT (CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL
(Serial 134)
(Serial 133)
COMMERCIAL PASSENGER (ROAD) TRANSPORT (CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL
(Serial 134)
Bills presented and read a first time.
Mr VATSKALIS (Transport and Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, I move that the bills be now read a second time.
The purpose of these bills is to amend the Commercial Passenger (Road) Transport Act to implement the second stage of the reforms which my government is implementing for the taxi, minibus and private hire car industries in the Northern Territory.
You are aware of the first stage of the reforms, and that the second stage of reforms was to follow to complete the full package for the commercial passenger vehicle industry. As I have said on numerous occasions, when this government came to power we found the commercial passenger vehicle industry in some disarray. While the previous government’s action in removing control on the numbers of licences had meant that there were sufficient vehicles to meet public demand, the industry itself was suffering from poor returns and poorly trained and motivated drivers. The community was suffering from poor driver standards which, on occasion, challenged the perception that taking a taxi or minibus was a safe way to travel.
This government decided, before we addressed these issues, that we wanted to find out what the industry and the community wanted from the commercial passenger vehicle industry. Also, we needed to find out what could be realistically achieved. To that end, we put in place a temporary cap on taxi, minibus and private hire car numbers from 26 November 2001 to provide some stability in the industry while a full review was undertaken.
Terms of reference for the review were established and advertisements seeking comment were placed in all Northern Territory newspapers. In addition, I met with a diverse range of industry representative groups and individuals. I reject any notion that these changes were made in isolation from the industry. In fact, at one stage I was receiving criticism because it was perceived that our consultation process was too long, too involved and included too many people. What became clear from these discussions and submissions was that the industry was in serious trouble. In addition to industry comment, submissions were also received from the tourism, restaurant and accommodation industries and consumer groups such as the Integrated Disability Action Group and an Aboriginal organisation.
In May 2002, I issued a discussion paper following extensive work by my office and department. Copies of the discussion paper were sent to all stakeholders, including those who had previously made submissions. This generated another, and perhaps even more extensive, series of discussions, with the result being a further 40 submissions. Following the consultation and after extensive consideration of all the options, government decided to implement a number of recommendations. These were made public in the form of fact sheets which can be viewed on my department’s web site if anyone has not already seen them.
The second stage of the implementation of these recommendations is contained in this bill. The bill provides for those measures which the government wants to have in place by July 2003.
I would like to draw your attention to the following key areas which this bill addresses. First, it settles into place the creation of the new commercial passenger vehicle categories: the limousine; the special function vehicle; and the courtesy vehicle. The creation of an executive taxi category was undertaken in the first stage of reforms and those operators in the private hire car industry can now choose the appropriate category that best fits their operation. The industry will have a clear delineation between different types. For too long, the lines of demarcation between each sector has been blurred. Now taxis will operate as taxis; minibuses will operate as minibuses; private hire cars will be either executive taxis, if they wish to ply for hire; or they will become limousines. The existing private hire category will be abolished on 1 July 2003 and the $10 000 entitlement fee will be refunded to its private hire car entitlement holder.
Other changes to be brought in by this second stage of legislation are: the ability for taxis and minibuses to park or stand at bus stops in urban areas outside route service hours; exemption provisions to allow the use of approved vehicles that can seat up to 15 passengers as standard or executive taxis; the ability to set fares and charge for limousines, if necessary, to further ensure a level playing field can be maintained; the abolition of supplementary taxi licence provisions as they are no longer necessary; the inclusion of dispatch networks for codes of conduct; and consequential amendments to other legislation is also addressed.
The director has the power to provide for regional variation in many of these matters under this proposed legislation and, at all times, the board will be expected to provide direct advice to me if there are systems set in place which need refining. We believe that this bill and the one preceding it will deliver substantial improvements to the commercial passenger vehicle industry in the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, this initiative will allow the industry to progress and mature to provide safe and efficient commercial passenger transport for all Territorians and visitors alike, with standards of service second to none. I commend these bills to honourable members.
Debate adjourned.
PLACES OF PUBLIC ENTERTAINMENT AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 125)
(Serial 125)
Bill presented and read a first time.
Mr AH KIT (Local Government): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time. I take this opportunity to introduce the Places of Public Entertainment Amendment Bill 2003. The Places of Public Entertainment Act came into effect on 1 August 1952. There have been a number of relatively minor amendments since that time.
______________________
Visitors
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, could you cease for a moment? I advise members of the presence in the Gallery of Year 6 and 7 students from Katherine South Primary School accompanied by their teachers Shane Pike and Cathy Collins. On behalf of all members, I extend you a warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
________________________
Mr AH KIT: Madam Speaker, the places of public entertainment most frequently requiring licences in the Territory are picture theatres, stage theatres, public halls, community centres, school halls, church halls, public library meeting rooms, pinball parlours, ten pin bowling centres, skating centres, dance halls and adult shops. Premises that are subject to the Northern Territory’s Liquor Act are exempt from the provisions of the Places of Public Entertainment Act. Examples of these exempt premises include a number of entertainment and sporting facilities such as the Darwin Entertainment Centre, Hidden Valley Motor Sports Complex, various sporting clubs, hotels and restaurants. Other Territory legislation impacts upon places of public entertainment in several ways. The Electricity Act and regulations deal with electrical installations and safety standards. The Fire and Emergency Act and regulations promote the prevention of fire and the safety of patrons. The Building Code sets standards for the construction of buildings. There are regulations covering LP gas installations. The Public Health Act and regulations set out health and hygiene requirements, and the Liquor Act enables inspections on premises licensed to serve liquor.
The purpose of the Places of Public Entertainment Act is to ensure that places of public entertainment have proper sanitary arrangements, are protected from the risk of fire, have appropriate fire fighting equipment and provide for the safety, amenity and convenience of the public generally. The act provides a system of licensing for places of public entertainment, provides powers of inspection and prescribes certain matters that must be undertaken by licensees.
As Minister for Local Government, I am responsible for the act, but my powers under the act are given to councils by section 127 of the Local Government Act which states that:
- In the application of the Places of Public Entertainment Act within the council area, a reference to the
minister shall be read as a reference to the council of that area.
Thus, the administration of the Places of Public Entertainment Act within a municipal or community government council rests with that council. Administration of the act in non-council areas lies with the Northern Territory government.
Under the National Competition Policy, the Territory committed to review and, where necessary, reform legislation that restricts competition unless it can be demonstrated that:
(a) the benefits of the restriction to the community as a whole outweigh the costs, and
(b) the objectives of the legislation can only be achieved by restricting competition.
The Places of Public Entertainment Act has been subject to a legislative review by the Department of Community Development, Sport and Cultural Affairs, Local Government and Regional Development Division. It was assisted by an independent steering committee in this task. There was considerably consultation undertaken in the process.
The report of the review of the Places of Public Entertainment Act has been accepted by the government. In summary, the report points out that there are several provisions in the legislation that warrant amendment. The act will be amended to provide for: an appeal mechanism where the minister or council declines to issue a licence; conditions in licences to be the same for all similar licensees; and a review of penalties under the act. Clause 6 of the bill inserts a new provision named ‘Refusal of Licence and Re-application’, which provides an appeal mechanism.
If an application to issue a licence for a place of public entertainment is refused, a notice in writing stating the reasons for refusing to issue the licence must be sent to the applicant as soon practicable. This will give the applicant the opportunity to rectify the matters and to reapply for a licence if appropriate. The applicant is also given the opportunity to discuss the issues with a suitably qualified officer. This will provide an effective appeal mechanism similar to section 14A of the act.
Clause 8 of the bill inserts a new provision: ‘Uniformity of Certain Conditions’. The new provision will ensure that any condition relating to days or hours of operation of places of public entertainment, or the number and ages of persons who may be admitted to those places of public entertainment, are applied consistently across common entertainment venues in the area unless, in the opinion of the minister or council, it is not appropriate in the circumstances to do so.
Review of the current penalties under the act to ensure that they remain contemporary has been undertaken in consultation with the Department of Justice. In addition the Department of Justice also advised that it is undesirable to have general offence provisions such as section 21A of the act, and that it is preferable that the penalty be set out at the foot of each provision that creates the offence. The bill, therefore, repeals section 21A of the act and includes the penalty under each relevant provision of the act.
The Department of Justice also suggested a review of the regulatory offences under section 21B of the act and provided advice on dealing with the classification of regulatory offences. Following this review, it has been agreed that offences under sections 9, 10, 11, 16 and 17 of the act were not regulatory offences.
Only the offence under section 20 of the act, concerning the safety of the public by ensuring that exits are free from obstruction, fits the classification of a regulatory offence. The bill repeals section 21B of the act and amends section 20 of the act to make it a regulatory offence.
Following the implementation of the Tobacco Control Act on 1 January 2003, discussions were held with the Department of Health and Community Services concerning the application of section 20A of the Places of Public Entertainment Act relating to prohibited smoking. The Tobacco Control Act prohibits smoking in all enclosed public areas and, from 31 May 2003, all enclosed workplace areas.
Whilst the Tobacco Control Act does not prohibit smoking on those parts of outdoor public venues which do not have fixed seating, the minister or council could still make non-smoking a licence condition under section 9(1) of the Places of Public Entertainment Act, if necessary. As there seems to be no reason to now retain section 20A of the Places of Public Entertainment Act, the bill repeals section 20A.
The Places of Public Entertainment Bill 2003 prepared by Parliamentary Counsel includes the amendments recommended in the report of the review of the Places of Public Entertainment Act and the additional amendments as discussed with the Department of Justice and the Department of Health and Community Services. In addition, Parliamentary Counsel has also included amendments that insert gender neutral language in the sections of the Places of Public Entertainment Act that are being amended by the bill, which accords with their current drafting style.
Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members.
Debate adjourned.
MOTION
Note Statement - Illicit Drug Use in the Territory
Note Statement - Illicit Drug Use in the Territory
Continued from 17 October 2002.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to join this debate today. It is something that we brought up from the opposition benches quite regularly in the last 18 months or so before the election. It gives me an opportunity today to point out some of the recent remarks of the Leader of the Opposition. There is a little hypocrisy in the way that he changes his message to assumingly suit the audience that he is addressing. He said on ABC radio recently, in relation to the Territory:
- I don’t believe that hard drugs are a major problem.
It is a message that he put out when we were in opposition and he was the Chief Minister of the day. It was a message that we tried to punch home to the government; that there was a serious problem out there. We accused him, from the opposition benches, of being in denial. Those recent remarks on ABC radio suggest that he is still in denial. He is in denial about illicit drugs and their use in the Northern Territory, and their link with property crime.
He also said, in his time as Chief Minister, that the illicit drug problem here in the Territory was ‘minuscule’. It does not seem to us that he is changing his tune at all. Some of the information around Australia stands in stark contrast to those type of statements. The New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research says:
- It is well established that many drug-dependent people resort to property crime to fund their drug use.
The Australian Institute of Criminology’s Drug Use Monitoring in Australia Annual Report 2001 found that 60% of adult males arrested for a property offence tested positive to an illicit drug. The Australian Institute of Criminology says there is a very strong link between opiate use and property crime. Two other organisations of repute, the New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research and the Australian Institute of Criminology, on two occasions, with evidence from police testing of people picked up for property offences, suggested that, in fact, 60% arrested for property offences tested positive to an illicit drug.
Why would the Northern Territory be different? Why would people on hard drugs in the Northern Territory not resort to property crime the same as they do wherever the drug use monitoring in Australia has been tested? It is something the Minister for Health and Community Services is looking at: if we can get drug use monitoring strategies here in the Northern Territory. We would soon find that the same situation applies.
In the Northern Territory News, we see regular reports - almost daily, certainly two or three times a week - where they feature the stories from the defendants charged, going to court, claiming that they stole to support their habit. Does the Leader of the Opposition think these people make this up? Why would you deny it when you see it on almost a daily basis in the paper?
Unlike the Leader of the Opposition, and unlike the position he took when he was Chief Minister, this government is not going to ignore this problem. Our tough on drugs plan includes Drug Courts, which are the next step in our plan, with $300 000 allocated to it over the next two financial years. Instead of the normal court system seeing the same offenders coming before them time and time again on drug-related crime charges, Drug Courts will actually do something different: they will have the ability to order rehabilitation and treatment and take that into account in sentencing. We believe that helping people to tackle their drug addiction will help break that drug-crime link, and that is what this government is keen to do.
I want to look at how the Opposition Leader has tried to be quite sneaky and tricky in tailoring his message, depending on what he assumes his audience to be at any one time. He has certainly been telling two different stories - a little mix and match across the board. Well, you cannot do that. Territorians are entitled to know what the true view of the Leader of the Opposition and the opposition is in relation to these matters.
On 7 February this year, the Opposition Leader was on ABC radio the Morning Show with Fred McCue, and said that he thinks the recreational use of marijuana is harmless. He said:
- There are many people - and I noticed this specifically when I was CO of 2 Cav Regiment - there are
many people that will not drink alcohol but will have the occasional smoke.
He went on, I believe, in that same interview to say it was a lifestyle issue for many people. He thinks drug use is a lifestyle issue for many people and he was happy in that interview to give a clear impression that he did not have a problem with people smoking marijuana. That was on 7 February. A week later, he was interviewed on the ABC’s Stateline program. The Opposition Leader said this:
I discharged two or three soldiers for the possession of marijuana. I never tolerated marijuana in the Army.
I just wonder about the difference between these two statements - one on ABC radio and one a week later on ABC TV through Stateline. Territorians are entitled to know what is the true position. They are conflicting statements; they do not add up. Everyone out there is entitled to know what the Opposition Leader and the opposition really believe, and their true position. Is he in favour of the recreational use of illegal drugs or not? Does he want to try and sneak around and let people know on one hand he does not mind if they have a bit of a puff but, on the other hand: ‘You know, I did have to discharge a few’? In that interview, he talked about the need to get a message to students and young people. He needs to ask himself this question: would he go to a high school presentation evening or assembly and say, as he did to Fred McCue, that ‘We in the CLP recognise that recreational use is harmless’? That is what he said on radio. That is what he said to Fred McCue and yet, later in that same interview, he talks about messages for students.
We think it is time for the Leader of the Opposition and the Country Liberal Party to take a stand. They need to take a stand for the future of the Territory and decide what message they are sending our young people. They need to stand up and condemn the use of illegal drugs. I know he has a sheltered view of the Northern Territory from his electorate down there, but I can tell him what marijuana use is doing in some of the Aboriginal communities. I ask him: if it is so harmless, why, in one calendar year, are 10 young men medivaced to Darwin to the Cowdy Ward for outbursts of psychosis? These are crazy outbursts of psychotic behaviour on the back of this so-called harmless recreational use of marijuana. It is an expensive exercise, medivacing these young guys out of Elcho Island to Nhulunbuy, and then into Darwin for ongoing treatment. That is the harmlessness of some of these substances out there.
There is a strong link between illicit drug and property crime, and we will not ignore that problem in the same way that our predecessors did. This government was elected with a very clear mandate to implement our tough on drugs plan, and we are not afraid of this question. We are not afraid to make the hard decisions, unlike the opposition and, particularly the Leader of the Opposition, who seems to think he can have both ways.
In the debate on drugs, we have a view that you cannot be timid. You cannot tiptoe around the fringes and whisper out one side of your mouth that it is okay, and then send a different message if you are with a bunch of students in a school situation. You have to take a strong line; you have to toe that line. That is what we have done. We do not tolerate drug production, distribution and illegal use, and we think it is time that the Country Liberal Party stood up and said the same.
Ms CARTER (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I am glad to have an opportunity to respond to the minister’s statement. Nobody doubts that illicit drug use causes problems in the Territory, as it does in many other jurisdictions worldwide.
This side of the House welcomes efforts by the government to reduce the cost to our community from the harm caused by illicit drug use. These costs are high and varied. It includes the personal cost to illicit drug users of a deterioration in their health if they should contract a disease such as Hepatitis C or AIDS. It also includes the cost of the trouble they can get themselves into trying to raise the money to buy drugs. Another cost is the loss of social support the user may experience if their drug use causes psychological problems and, of course, the users’ loved ones may well suffer as a result of their behaviour.
The cost of illicit drug use is also borne by the Territory taxpayer who has to pay for programs implemented to reduce the problems; programs for drug users and law and order measures to reduce the availability of drugs. But most importantly, it is the cost borne by Territorians from the criminal activity of illicit drug users. We are told by the government that most property crime in the Northern Territory is perpetrated by people seeking to exchange stolen goods for drugs, or the money to purchase drugs. That being the case, then illicit drug users have changed the Territory.
When I doorknock in my electorate, most people, including fit young men, are locked in their homes day and night. They can be sitting in the lounge room at 2 pm watching the footy, but the security doors are locked. It is sad to see this change in the Territory, arguably brought about by illicit drug users. People worry about leaving their homes. Who will break in? People worry about their children sleeping at home. Who will break in? I worry about fires. I worry about how people will escape their locked cages if a fire breaks out. Many times when I knock on their doors, my constituents have trouble finding the key. So, if this government can reduce the need for people to lock themselves in cages day and night – good!
I cannot think of any society in the world which does not use some form of drug - that is, a chemical which, when consumed by a human, can change their experience of reality. All societies do it and they do it because, for one reason or another, people like to do it. This fact makes it very difficult for authorities such as governments to stamp out drug use.
As a result of research, the authorities around the world are well aware of the harm caused by excessive drug use and the cost of that drug use. In response to this information, in the last few centuries governments have striven to stop people from using drugs in harmful ways, but all this action has been generally ineffectual because people like to alter their experience of reality. They like to, and want to, use drugs.
That does not mean that society should do nothing. Governments have an obligation to strive to educate their people about drugs, to encourage them not to use them, to teach those who insist on using them how to reduce the harm they may experience, to provide assistance for those who genuinely want to quit using a drug, and to take what steps it can to reduce the supply of drugs.
In her statement, the minister made predictable comments about how wonderful it is that the Martin Labor government will finally allow for maintenance pharmacotherapies in the Northern Territory. It is true that the previous government did not introduce maintenance pharmacotherapies where users can choose to access a government-funded source of drugs for as long as they wanted. The reason why we on this side did not provide this service in the Territory was our continuing belief that the provision of such a service can undermine the opportunity for users to successfully cease taking drugs completely.
As you know, we did allow for the treatment of opiate dependence with the use of methadone provided on a decreasing sliding scale of dose so that, over a three month period, a motivated user could be weaned off drugs. However, we questioned - and there was plenty of research available to back up our concerns – the effectiveness of methadone maintenance to help people off drugs long-term. I quote from a speech by Mr Nick Stafford, a project officer with the Gold Coast AIDS Association and Injectors Newsline. In 1996, Mr Stafford, an illicit drug user and participant in methadone maintenance programs, described the relief he experienced while on a methadone program, but felt that it was not treatment. He went on to say:
- To me, it is a label used to convince the general public into allowing something they don’t agree with to
occur; namely the legal selling of opiates to people. To be honest, I think treating opiate dependence by
prescribing opiates is one of the best medical cons of the century. We have managed to swap one opiate for
another and call it treatment, and have the public believe us. It is a remarkable achievement and I applaud
those responsible. And people say heroin users are good scammers!
Another reason why the CLP has never been keen on providing drug maintenance programs is that we are concerned that drug users from interstate may move to the Northern Territory, bringing with them a need to commit crimes to get drugs when they want them. They may come here because they know that when they want a break from the troubles they experience when using drugs, the NT government will support them with a drug maintenance program.
The government has now introduced a drug maintenance program. Doctors will be able to access some newer pharmacotherapies than methadone for the treatment of opioid dependence. These new drugs include Naltrexone and Buprenorphine. These treatments have not been used for very long in Australia so local research on their effectiveness is limited compared to research on methadone. But I know such research will occur and I certainly hope these newer pharmacotherapies are more useful than methadone has been. I hope they are pharmacotherapies which allow people to wean themselves off all drugs so they can be free from the need to front up for doses; to be free from cravings; to be free of a lifestyle that they no longer want to live.
I also hope that, as a result of these new initiatives, the number of crimes committed against hard-working, law abiding Territorians plummets. We are sick of paying the price of a lifestyle choice made by others, who I believe were fully aware of the risks they faced when they first began to use. If the government can reduce crime, good; that is their job.
I have spoken so far mainly about treatment for people wanting to stop using illicit drugs. However, as we all know, prevention is better than cure, and I was pleased to see the task force gave some emphasis to this. However, the report makes scant reference to the Drug Abuse Resistance Education program run by police in many of our schools. This is a program which provides information to students about the problems caused by drug use, delivered by people working for one of the agencies which witnesses, every day, the effects of drug use on our community.
I attended a public meeting held last year during the government’s review of the DARE Program. To say that there was not significant support for the program from those present would be an understatement. One young man spoke on how, when he was a student at Darwin High School, the school-based constable had a significant, positive impact on his life and his decision not to use drugs. It is a real shame that the government has decided to water down the role of the DARE Program at the very time when it could be argued that we need more programs targeting our young people.
In closing, Madam Speaker, I was wondering if the minister in her response could advise whether or not the 24-hour telephone information service for people seeking information about drugs has been set up as outlined in this statement.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Speaker, I respond to the minister’s statement regarding the report of the Task Force on Illicit Drugs. Towards the end of the minister’s statement, she said that this government has never sought to dispute that the primary concern for the community is alcohol. That statement reflects the priorities that have been identified by the Select Committee on Substance Abuse in the Community, of which I am Chair. In our interim report, which is being tabled in these sittings, we will explain the prioritising of our work.
It is acknowledged that illicit hard drug use and the illegal use of pharmacological substances is devastating for individuals and no doubt contributes to crime and adverse health outcomes. However, in the Northern Territory, they still involve a small number. By comparison, the use and abuse of alcohol is widespread and found in all sectors of the Northern Territory community; while cannabis and petrol sniffing is devastating to those communities where it is found. The view of the Select Committee on Substance Abuse in the Community was that there was a benefit in having the task force inquiring into and reporting on illicit hard drug use and the illegal use of pharmacological substances, while leaving the select committee to carry on with its work in relation to alcohol, cannabis and petrol sniffing. That way, there would be information obtained in relation to both areas of concern without duplication of effort.
I wish to particularly respond to the part of the minister’s statement in which she explains that the task force recommendation in respect of the establishment of a coordination unit to develop a comprehensive drug and alcohol strategy, has not been actioned in deference to the ongoing role and function of the Select Committee on Substance Abuse in the Community.
Although a formal position has yet to be adopted by the committee - and I want to make it very clear that I stand here as an individual or the member for Arafura, not as the chair of the committee – I, for one, am of the view that our work on alcohol, cannabis and petrol sniffing should not prevent, in the future, the establishment of a coordination unit specifically tasked with developing policy strategies in relation to illicit hard drug use and the illegal use of pharmacological substances. Clearly, we need to be vigilant here in the Northern Territory to ensure that such problems do not escalate to the levels that they have in the southern states of Australia; and not just in the main cities. It is with concern that I have learnt of the spread of high levels of heroin use in Aboriginal communities, particularly in regional New South Wales. This is not just in the cities of New South Wales, this is out in the regional and country areas. We must not allow that to happen here in the Northern Territory, and early preventative action would be useful.
How serious is the drug problem in the Northern Territory regarding illicit drug use? We have seen from the report that there are up to about 4000 injecting drug users. I know when you talk to different people around the streets in Darwin and from your family networks and others, there are a number of Aboriginal people coming from remote communities who are caught up, or starting to get caught up, in that cycle. So it is a concern, especially when they make the move to go back to their communities.
As regards the formulation of a comprehensive drug and alcohol strategy covering the three substances that our committee is focussing on, I agree with the minister that any move to establish a coordination unit should await at least the submission to parliament of our final report. Our committee looks forward to working closely with the minister in relation to the recommendations that will be set out in that report, which will certainly call for action by her department and amongst other sectors of government.
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, I apologise for my seeming lack of preparation. This is a debate that has been coming on now for some months, and it is unfortunate that the report we are debating, the Task Force on Illicit Drugs, has taken some time to be debated in its finality in this House.
There are many contemporary issues in here. For instance, I note that there is some debate at the moment relating to cannabis. When the Minister for Health and Community Services announced this report, she left out Aboriginal communities and cannabis. In response - as you know, a ready and quick response that we have to give to these so-called mini-statements - I noted they were major omissions. Indeed, so major were they that they were noted even by the report. So the report noted that there is a necessity to travel to Aboriginal communities and talk to them, and that matters relating to cannabis are noteworthy, topical and worthy of debate and discussion in this House.
The Task Force on Illicit Drugs is a fairly praiseworthy document of the previous efforts of the Country Liberal Party government in this place, and so it should be. There have been notable independent analyses of the Territory’s efforts in stemming the problems related to drug abuse, and there have been some notable advances made in this jurisdiction far and beyond that which occur in any other jurisdiction, with a variety of measuring devices we could use.
The debate mostly revolved around methadone maintenance, and it was interesting because it goes right back to the previous member for Barkly, Maggie Hickey’s comments in this House when she talked to then Health minister Reed about methadone maintenance and some of the issues surrounding it. This predates the now infamous statements of Health minister Finch who talked about one-way bus tickets. In that debate, Maggie Hickey recognised that she should at least visit a methadone maintenance clinic. That is probably a starting point for many venturing into this debate.
There are many theories about drug abuse, drug use, the various stratagems to combat it, the ill-defined concept of harm minimisation and how that finds its way into government policy. Issues relating to how some people, who are commentators, are also beneficiaries of matters relating to drugs - and I do not mean that necessarily in an illicit way, but often the commentators have a very parochial point of view and it is necessary to go to a wide source.
Indeed, that is what I have tried to do. I have visited therapeutic communities, detox communities, and a couple of Naltrexone clinics. I have talked to drug users and drug abstainers, people who are in the process of detoxing, and people in the criminal system as a result of their drug-taking behaviours and other attendant illicit activity.
Mr Henderson: And did nothing.
Mr DUNHAM: It is not - I shall pick up the interjection ‘And did nothing’, Madam Speaker. To say that the Northern Territory, as a jurisdiction, did nothing is to fly in the face of independent analyses across the nation that found we were the highest ranked jurisdiction in Australia in nearly every category, except for two in which we were the second highest. These are independent analyses of government effort in relation to deploying the vast amounts of funds received from drugs …
Members interjecting.
Mr DUNHAM: There is an issue relating to attempting to divert the speaker from his - and I recall last week, Madam Speaker, that you did provide some education for me in issues relating to interrupting the flow of the speaker. I would ask that this offensive behaviour be discontinued. This is a most important debate. We could get into the business of saying: ‘You did it wrong, you did nothing, you did not care’, ‘The ALP are the only people in the world with a monopoly on caring’, that ‘the ALP are very knowledgeable about matters relating to drugs’. That is true, I might add, and there are various reasons for that. But the fundamental issue is that this is a debate that should continue before this House.
If interested commentators go back through Parliamentary Record, they will see that matters relating to drugs go way back before self-government. We have been talking about matters relating to drugs, drug abuse, particularly in so far as has affected indigenous people in this part of the world for a long time. It is trite to say that nothing has been done, because a substantial amount has been done.
The whole issue of coming up with solutions is a little more problematic. If you read this report, there is not much new in here. Okay, Buprenorphine and Naltrexone are in here, but they are new pharmacotherapies. They have really only just emerged on the scene, and I applaud the government for using them. We had certainly approved that before we left office. It was a matter that was commented on in the press, and it went to Cabinet, so it is not something I am saying without the support of my Cabinet colleagues. It is a fact of life that we were looking at these pharmacotherapies. They are vastly different, both of them, from methadone maintenance. Methadone maintenance, which has now been embraced by this government, and features through all their debates here as the one shot in the locker of the Labor Party - that they would introduce methadone maintenance - is a matter that is not well understood by them.
I was disturbed to hear that, despite Dr Meadows being involved, and despite recommendations about methadone maintenance, and the minister’s discussions about how GPs had been involved - indeed, I asked her a question. I said: ‘How many GPs are involved, how will it all work?’ and she said: ‘Sorry, that is a secret’. Despite all this, within a very short time, the same Dr Meadows came out and said this is pretty dangerous if you do not train people. Minister, you should get on with it and train people. That is in all the literature. The potential for an overdose is very high when one starts dispensing methadone maintenance. The potential for somebody who has been using an illicit substance to be assessed for their level tolerance to the drug and the potential for intoxication is a very difficult thing, particularly if that person continues to use illicitly. If you look at the proud history of methadone, you will see it is implicated in many deaths - many opiate deaths have methadone as a contributing factor. I caution the minister, therefore, to be very careful about coming up with a trite theoretical explanation that does have a sound basis in the research. I will give her that, which this government looked at and said: ‘No, we do not want to go down that road’. We were happy to debate it and did so on a number of occasions, and I am happy to debate it now. Methadone maintenance, if it is introduced in a foolhardy and cavalier manner, will result in Territorians dying - dying. We are talking about opiate deaths.
In the time when I was Health minister - this uncaring Health minister who did not know much about opiate use - our opiate deaths were two per annum over the last several years, and that is terrible. Two people in the Territory over the last several years died as a result of opiates. That is not something I take any comfort in. However, if you look at the national figures, we were well and truly in advance of the terrible carnage that was being created by drugs throughout Australia, particularly in New South Wales, the methadone capital of the world. These people used to come in here and say - and this report says it – ‘We have to line up with the other states. The Territory’s out of step, we have to line up with the other states’, and in doing so, we are going to embrace this wonderful thing called methadone, a great drug and something that you can give to ...
Dr Burns: You are applauding the fact that there was illicit methadone under you, and you know that.
Mr DUNHAM: I should be careful with my interjections if I were you, sir.
So what has happened is these people have said: ‘Okay we are going to bring methadone in’. There are two issues. The first is you must make sure that this is properly done or people will die. I hope they understand that, Madam Speaker. I hope they understand that, in this area, if you play silly games with something like this in a political way and you do not put the sound foundations of operations in place, people will die. The opiate deaths are measured, and I caution this minister to be very careful about saying she has fixed matters such as this.
I was interested, too, in an article in our own NT News - this goes back some time when we were thinking about debating this. This is October, and I do apologise that it is late, but this debate has been going on that long. It says: ‘Kurt faced heroin crisis down under’ and basically, that good old Kurt Cobain had a problem in that he came to Australia and they said: ‘Look, we will fix you up, sonny; we will give you methadone’, and it is that which started his spiral back into what eventually contributed to his death.
If you read the literature from people who dispense methadone, and practitioners who have an intense knowledge of this substance, and there are many of them - Dr Andrew Byrne, I am sure, has written to the minister; he wrote to me many times. He has published a little publication in which he writes about, by the way, training GPs and the potential for deaths if you do this wrong. However, if you look at that, you should also look at the other side. You should talk to people who have been addicted to methadone which is the inevitable consequence. People who talk about methadone as a maintenance treatment have to be very careful as to how they use that label, and we did. In all our debate we did. It was seen that we had a secret methadone program, but the capacity to withdraw from methadone is very difficult. It can take up to three weeks, it is an immensely difficult drug to detox from because it has a long half life which is the benefit in treating people, but a shocking thing if you want to get off it. It has a variety of other side effects. Its level of intoxication is quite high and, even though people can go about their normal daily affairs, there is no doubt they are intoxicated. It also presents a potential overdose hazard. However, I digress.
If you want to look at the CLP’s position on drug abuse and drug use, the best way to describe it is pragmatic. Pragmatic - that is the word …
Mr Ah Kit interjecting.
Mr DUNHAM: … because what we tried to do is put things into place that work. To laugh in a debate like this shows the level of interest from these people. This is a man who has high levels of problems in his own electorate related to drug abuse, and he knows it, and they are related to the uses of alcohol, inhalants as an intoxicating substance, kava in parts of his electorate, and the use of tobacco. This is a man who represents people who have some serious mortality issues relating to drugs, and he should not laugh.
Mr Ah Kit: I am laughing about how you described your government. Pragmatic, my butt!
Mr DUNHAM: This is not a matter that should create great levity in this House. This is a matter of utmost seriousness and it is almost a standing item; it is something we should revisit from time to time. For those people who ran the myth that the Territory did not appear before the standing committee that looked into this, there is the submission. It is available for people. In fact, I gave oral evidence, as I did to the Prime Minister’s task force chaired by Major Watters. I gave oral evidence and a written submission to that group. The matters I raised were matters that were largely government policy and I was able to debate with them and discuss our rationale for them. I was also able to debate issues of concern with those groups. I do not think it is a wise thing, therefore, given the independent hearty tick of approval for our policies - that we engaged in this parliament and through other devices to talk about this; that we never ever shied away from talking the rationale and the pragmatics of our policy; that this meaningless ‘one shot in the locker’ and ‘Denis Burke is alleged to have said drugs are a problem in the Northern Territory’. I can tell you - and one of the reasons I was out the back - the Chief Minister has said, on record:
- What drugs problem? We do not have a drugs problem.
That could be taken out of context by me, I guess, because she was being a smarty, facetious person and the reality is those words could come from her mouth. Likewise, I am sure my colleague, Denis Burke, would not deny that he said the word ‘minuscule’. He did say the word ‘minuscule’. It is worth reading that quote. It comes from the Parliamentary Record on 8 August 2000, where he said:
- In dealing with drug-related crime in the Northern Territory, we first of all had to get that into perspective.
The Leader of the Opposition, as always, tries to create the emotive situation that drug-related crime is out
of control. There is drug-related crime in the Northern Territory, there is no doubt about that, but compared
with other jurisdictions it is minuscule. The major drugs that we have to deal with are actually prescribed
legal opiates. How they find their way onto the trade is something we really have to deal with. The report of
the Coroner that was brought down some days ago is an issue that is looked at by my office and I am in
consultation with the minister for Health about this issue.
Even though you can say: ‘Denis Burke said drug-related crime is minuscule’, he did not. He said that you have to bear it in perspective, and he was talking about the impact that the use of illicit drugs has on the crime figures for the Northern Territory. If you want to progress that argument – and we are happy for you to do it; and happy that the Attorney-General has said it is a big factor; he said it was over 50% or something - therefore his drug amelioration strategies will be crime amelioration strategies. The nexus that he has created for himself is a nexus that is around his neck because he is going to have to demonstrate these wonderful solutions - the ganja granny, the lady living at Tomaris, the old Nanna dispensing drugs; how she was the one behind the big crime wave in Darwin. This is a nonsense. We all know it is a nonsense. While I would not condone her behaviour, neither would I see her as the Al Capone of Darwin.
This is not someone who the Police Commissioner has on the NT’s most wanted list; the Tomaris Flats Nanna. This lady, if she is the big mastermind behind the Territory’s drugs problems, is now fixed up - kicked her out of her flat, sent her elsewhere, whatever - so we should be seeing a downturn because there cannot be too many Mr Bigs or Nanna Bigs out here. If there are a couple of other Nanna Bigs and you get them – I note you have shut down the famous place in the electorate of Johnston that the member was very keen to shut down to have a big impact on drugs - so we should see that downturn coming, along with …
Members interjecting.
Mr DUNHAM: No, no. It is not a matter of saying whether your constituents agree. It is a matter of saying whether your initiatives are reducing crime. Answer: no, they are not.
Mr Henderson: Answer: Yes! 17% down.
Mr DUNHAM: No, they are not. If the member for Johnston wants to proudly parade around his electorate, swagger around and tell them how he has fixed it up, let him do it. He does it at his great peril because he is going to find that people do not believe him; they do not agree with him.
I have a report from a university student which she is quite happy for me to read into Hansard. It talks about the Hon Dr Toyne and suggests:
- In the Northern Territory about 50% of break-ins and other property theft are connected with illegal
drug use.
She looks at the representation of people in our corrections system and finds that he is not actually right. In fact, he is misleading people if he says that. She goes on to say:
This bill will not reduce property crime.
So, if a university student can do the analysis - Corrections numbers, the reasons they are there, matters relating to their incarceration, the substances that they are variously addicted to - and say:
- Dr Toyne’s presumption and extrapolation of his data is going to be problematic for him …
we will probably find him apologising to this parliament. That is something the government should be doing. They have to be careful about this chest beating that they are doing. I know you have a pharmacy man over there, and I know you have various people who are addicted to various substances, but that is not the point. The point you have …
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member is reflecting, in an offensive way, on the behaviour of members opposite.
Mr DUNHAM: I mean addicted to various legal substances. Okay?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Drysdale, that is offensive to members of this House. You should withdraw.
Mr DUNHAM: I will say that I do not believe there is anybody on the other side of the House addicted to any substances, Madam Speaker.
Ms Lawrie: You have been asked to withdraw.
Ms Scrymgour: He should withdraw. How would you know?
Mr DUNHAM: Withdraw it. Okay, I will withdraw it. I point out to people who smoke – not mentioning anybody in the House, Madam Speaker; I am talking about people who are addicted to nicotine - that it is highly addictive. It is injurious to their health and it is something they should look at desisting from, particularly if they are leaders among their people. It is one of those things that they could send a very potent and powerful message on.
I hope we get a further opportunity to debate matters relating to drugs because there is a wealth of data in here that should be debated, and some of the furphies in here should be recognised for what they are.
Mr BURKE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I intend to be brief in this debate. First, let me say that the opposition and the community welcomes the Task Force on Illicit Drugs report. Any report that looks at this issue is welcomed by the community.
As the member for Drysdale said, it builds on the work that the previous government has done over a great deal of time in dealing with strategies and combating the trafficking of not only illicit drugs, but the use of harmful but legal drugs in the Northern Territory.
The major difference between the Labor government’s approach and the previous CLP government’s approach is clearly evidenced in the report in which, if the government is so keen to verify the authenticity of this report, they should refer to page 36:
- The Northern Territory has not had a methadone maintenance program, since the 1970s.
That is the simple fact of the matter. The big change is that the Northern Territory has introduced and methadone maintenance program under the new Labor government as part of its illicit drugs strategy. That is fine. That is a decision for the government to make based on the research that they have conducted. You are in government, you have been elected by the people to govern, and we can only see the results of that strategy.
I can tell you that the CLP stands as firmly today as it did in the past to say that a methadone maintenance program in the Northern Territory will not achieve the results that you believe it will. If you see it in that context, you can look on the same page in that report with regard to the current situation in the Northern Territory:
- Currently, it is the reality that the use of illicit drugs other than cannabis is not widespread in the community.
In verifying the fact that use of illicit drugs other than cannabis is not widespread, the government has taken a threshold step to introduce a methadone maintenance program which you yourselves know does not deal with cannabis, and will not deal with a range of illicit drug uses that you yourselves have decided to target through this methadone maintenance program.
For the reasons the member for Drysdale has laid down quite clearly, it was always our view - and we hold to that – that a methadone maintenance program brings more harm than good, and we continue to oppose widespread free methadone dispensing clinics in the Northern Territory with no separate strategy of moving a person to an abstinence-based situation. Where we used methadone in the past, it was used very carefully. It was in the hands of only particularly prescribed GPs who were allowed to apply for and then were granted permission by the Chief Health Officer to administer methadone under very strict circumstances on an undertaking that it was an abstinence-based program and, from my recollection, the initial dispensing period was in the order of around about 28 days - it may have been extended slightly from that. To try to suggest, as the government is doing - and the member for Wanguri is on the public record on a number of occasions - that somehow the CLP government snuck in a methadone maintenance program in the Northern Territory without telling the community is a simple lie. It is not true.
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The Leader of the Opposition has just alleged that I have lied in this parliament and to the people of the Northern Territory. It is not true and I ask him to withdraw.
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, you know you cannot make the accusation of a lie except by way of substantive motion.
Mr BURKE: Madam Speaker, I was reading just before - I cannot find it in front of me now - the member for Wanguri’s response to this debate, saying that we would not have put out a press release because we snuck a methadone maintenance program into the Northern Territory without telling the public.
Mr Henderson: No, wrong! Wrong.
Mr BURKE: Unless I am guilty of illogical argument, I cannot express it any other way.
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, you should not accuse the member of lying. What you just did by way of explanation is saying that the member for Wanguri made the statement and, by your inference, you are telling the House what you intend to say.
Mr BURKE: Madam Speaker, I withdraw the word ‘lie’. I simply say that, by his own words on the Parliamentary Record, he has been untruthful to Territorians.
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I clearly recall the debate in this House, and I challenge the Leader of the Opposition – he can do it in adjournment tonight - to bring the exact quote in because I did not say that the CLP had brought in a methadone maintenance program. So, there is the challenge.
Mr BURKE: I accept the challenge, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: I suggest to the Leader of Government Business that you make a personal explanation of your speech to the House.
Mr HENDERSON: Absolutely.
Mr BURKE: Madam Speaker, it is important because, amongst many others, but certainly begun by the member for Wanguri, has been this notion that the CLP had in place a methadone maintenance program …
Mr Henderson: Wrong.
Mr BURKE: … that we deceived Territorians that we had a methadone maintenance program …
Mr Henderson: Wrong.
Mr BURKE: … and all the government was doing was what the CLP had already done. Now, let us get these things clearly on the record, and this is your own illicit drugs strategy report. On page 36, it says:
- The Northern Territory has not had a methadone maintenance program since the 1970s.
That is the flat truth of it.
Mr Henderson: Because you were doling out cheap morphine!
Mr BURKE: You be honest, and tell Territorians that the change in the Northern Territory since the Labor government came to power …
Mr Henderson: Nine times the national average!
Mr BURKE: And you should not be ashamed of it. You should not be ashamed of it because your own Illicit Drugs Strategy report recommends it. What are you ashamed of?
Ms Lawrie: We are ashamed of your behaviour.
Mr Henderson: Bucket loads of morphine.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: Just tell the truth. The truth is there was never a methadone maintenance program in the Northern Territory.
Ms Lawrie: After three months. You are so correct.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Karama, order!
Mr BURKE: You have now decided to introduce it. The reasons we did not have a methadone maintenance program in the Northern Territory is reinforced by your own strategy report which states:
- The sorts of drugs that will be attended to by a methadone maintenance program in the Northern Territory
is not widespread in the community.
That is a simple fact.
You want to know where the Leader of the Opposition stands when it comes to marijuana. I do not know how many times we have to put this on the public record. It was quoted prior to my speaking, however I intend to include it in my contribution. The comment I made with regards to marijuana from the Parliamentary Record of 8 August 2000 is this:
- In dealing with drug-related crime in the Northern Territory we first of all have to get that into perspective.
Of the Chief Minister, Leader of the Opposition at the time, I said:
- … as always, tries to create the emotive situation that drug-related crime is out of control.
I go on to say:
- There is drug-related crime in the Northern Territory. There is no doubt about that, but compared to
other jurisdictions, it is minuscule. The major drugs that we have to deal with are actually prescribed
legal opiates.
Your own Illicit Drugs Strategy report points to that problem. It has been a problem in the Northern Territory for some time. Prescribed legal opiates, such as morphine, are being peddled out there by people who have them legally prescribed. That is something that I was aware of, it has been confirmed in your own report, and I said that in my statement.
- How they then find their way into the trade is something that we really have to deal with. The report of the
Coroner that was brought down some days ago is something that is being looked at by my office and I am
in consultation with the minister for Health on this issue.
I then go on to say:
- We have rehabilitation programs in place in the Northern Territory, but those rehabilitation programs
are abstinence-based programs.
The government has decided to introduce a methadone maintenance program in the Northern Territory. It is going to bring more harm than good, but time will tell.
Ms Lawrie: It works in other jurisdictions.
Mr BURKE: Certainly it has not been the panacea in other states in Australia. You can pick up a newspaper …
Ms Lawrie: It has been saving lives there.
Mr BURKE: Do I have to listen to that whining, Madam Speaker?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Karama, order!
Mr BURKE: Stop whining.
Ms Lawrie: He does not like the truth.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: It has not been the panacea in other states of Australia where illicit injecting drug use is a major problem by comparison with the Northern Territory. When I talked about drug-related crime in the Northern Territory, the first thing that needs to be clearly on the public record is an admission that drug-related crime is a fact of life. However, we have to get drug-related crime in its proper context, and that context is reinforced in this report. The drugs that we have to deal with - and I can say that the CLP government proudly had strategies in place to deal with them - were drugs such as alcohol …
Ms Lawrie: You slashed funding. You slashed funding to Living with Alcohol.
Mr BURKE: I am surprised the member for Arafura seems to be so comfortable about all of this because …
Ms Lawrie: Why did you cut the funding?
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Karama, I have spoken to you once. Quiet!
Mr BURKE: … on any Aboriginal community you would have to be obtuse …
Ms Scrymgour: Comfortable about what? About grog? I have not said anything. I have highlighted the issues of grog the whole time. You like misleading and telling lies.
Mr BURKE: … if you did not sit back in shock at the state that many of those communities are in because of the ravages of alcohol. Alcohol is the number one problem in the Northern Territory, recognised …
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The interjections not only have been frequent and designed to put the speaker off, but they have contained the word ‘lie’ on two occasions now. I am reluctant to pull him up because we are only intruding on the Leader of the Opposition’s time, but I will make sure that he gets an extension. I would ask that the frivolous government objections coming across this Chamber be picked up, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Unfortunately, I did not hear the interjection, so I cannot rule on that point of order, but I ask members to allow the Leader of the Opposition to finish his debate in silence.
Mr BURKE: So firstly, there is an admission clearly - and no one would deny it - that drug-related crime occurs in the Northern Territory. No one would deny that. It is the level of drug-related crime in comparison with the causes of other crime that needs to be seen in context, and that is the way that argument was put.
I have just had placed in front of me, for the record, 16 October 2002, the member for Wanguri said, and I quote in part:
- Madam Speaker, I just – when you are ready – the methadone maintenance program. Since 1996 they did not
get out with a big press release: ‘We are going to introduce a methadone maintenance program here in
the Northern Territory’. They snuck it in under the cover of night because they knew they had to do it.
I will not ask the member himself to get up and make an apology. One of the things you get very clearly with the member for Wanguri is a capacity to lie consistently …
Members interjecting.
Mr BURKE: … and on this occasion it is only …
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! You can only accuse me of lying by substantive motion and we can have that debate if he chooses to.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: You know that, Leader of the Opposition. You do know you cannot do that. You will have to withdraw.
Mr BURKE: I withdraw. All I can do is put forward the evidence. The member for Wanguri might want to collect his thoughts before he jumps up and complains. The fact is you said it and you continue to say it and what you need to do is get the truth clearly on the public record. If you had the courage or gumption in you, you would walk out there and make the admission that you have been running a lie, consistently, that has been …
Members interjecting.
Mr BURKE: … brought to book not only by your own statements, but by this report …
Mr HENDERSON: Madam Speaker, a point of order again! He can only do so by way of substantive motion.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes. Leader of the Opposition, we have done this a number of times this morning …
Mr BURKE: I withdraw, Madam Speaker.
Dr Burns: Well, how do you feel about cannabis? Come on, you have not answered that one yet …
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: He wants to know how I feel about cannabis, and we will move onto that.
So, drug-related crime is a problem. The difference between the CLP position on drug-related crime and the ALP position is that the ALP believes that property crime is caused by drugs to the extent of 60%, based on national data. We believe that is challengeable. We believe it is probably in the order of 20% or 30%. I have said that on a number of occasions. The proof will be in the strength and effectiveness of the strategies through their ALP law and order program. Eighteen months into this term of government, what we do know out there is that there is no confidence, zero confidence, in the way any of your strategies - no matter how fine they are in rhetoric, no matter how many reviews you have - are actually producing on the streets. They are failing miserably. You have a long way to go to drop crime by 60% by the end of this term in government, which is what you said you would do.
Mr Henderson: Never said that. Never said that.
Mr BURKE: If we look at the fact that the Labor Party has decided that the number one evil in the Northern Territory is marijuana, their own report shows that marijuana is definitely a concern. Other illicit drugs are, by comparison, not widespread in the community. Marijuana is the number one concern. The government is so concerned about marijuana use and its harmful effect on individuals that you need to stamp it out. Well, the first thing, if you are going to stamp it out, you need to see the people who use marijuana, or have used marijuana, for the criminals they truly are. These are the people you reckon are a cause of crime in the Northern Territory if they use marijuana.
I suggest that a large number of members of this parliament, at this point, would stand up and walk out the door. However, I can tell you one who could sit here and stay, because I have never smoked the stuff. I have no idea. I do know that a lot of members of our community and, by admission in the debate here, that at least three members of the Labor Party in this parliament smoked it - by their own admission. Are you a cause of concern and criminality in the community? Should we ensure that anyone who has smoked marijuana in the past should not qualify to be a member of parliament? Are these people such criminals and so harmful to the community that we have to really deal strongly with them? That is the context in which I said we have to get marijuana use into perspective.
Everyone would agree that anyone who trafficks in any drug - I do not care whether it is someone booze running and marking up booze; someone is running cigarettes; wine from Darwin to Alice Springs - get into them; they are trafficking. But when it comes to marijuana use, the use that is, unfortunately, a fact of life for a number of people in the Northern Territory and has been for some time, we have to see where that harm sits in its context.
If the government believes the context is wrong, the first thing you need to do is change the law. It has been the CLP’s position that, for a person who uses marijuana, through education programs we would try to say to them that is no good for them, it is bad for their health and, sadly, too many people still use it. But you have to get the context of the criminality of the use. The context that the CLP put it in was this: that for a small amount of marijuana used for personal use it was an on-the-spot fine.
Mr Henderson: Wrong. It is traffickers.
Mr BURKE: The government clearly does not agree with that; the government clearly believes that recreational use of marijuana should be far more heavily penalised. Well, the member for Wanguri says they are only picking on traffickers. Well, if you are only picking on traffickers, why are you so quick to jump on the Leader of the Opposition when he says that recreational use of marijuana does not cause the harm …
Mr Henderson: Ever heard of supply and demand?
Dr Burns: It causes a health hazard.
Mr BURKE: Causes a health hazard! Well, penalise it more. If you believe that the recreational use of marijuana needs to be strengthened regarding our strategies to stop it, go ahead and do it. I suggest the first thing you should do is change the Criminal Code.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Members of government, order.
Mr BURKE: When one looks at marijuana nowadays, it seems to be, first, a growing concern in the community, and second, increasing evidence that hydroponic marijuana plants perhaps are more harmful. I do not know, but there is this notion that they are and that notion needs to be explored. If the government believes that two plants are too many, change the law. It may be that, in the days when that law was constructed, there were two spindly plants in your backyard and that was the way marijuana was seen for personal use. I am being told that nowadays there are hydroponically grown plants that are thick and bountiful in the amount that they can produce and, therefore, are an encouragement for people to traffick. If that is the case, the government should look very closely at the law. But in a press release from the minister, he has said:
- The law will not be changed. Since the Labor government came to power, the law will not be changed. We
have done nothing to change what the CLP had in place with regard to marijuana for personal use.
What are you going on about? If personal and recreational use of marijuana is not harmful in your opinion, what are you going on about? If you believe it is harmful, if you believe that the hydroponic plants are harmful and will lead to trafficking, change the law, make the law stronger. Stop people from having any. Get a person who is caught for a number of grams of the stuff, and make sure that they are penalised harshly. That stops the use and stops the trafficking. But you do not have the courage to do it. The only courage you have to do is pedal lines to try to justify bringing in a methadone maintenance program into the Northern Territory and - get ready for it - free heroin injecting rooms will be the next one.
Mr Henderson: Wrong!
Mr BURKE: Then you will trot out some evidence based on some New South Wales study that says its good, it worked, it is in New South Wales. You believe that we are out of step with other states of Australia. We have to come into line with other states of Australia. We will look forward to seeing what laws do actually come into place in the Northern Territory. If you believe that recreational use of marijuana has changed, it is harmful, needs to be stamped out, well, change the law.
Madam SPEAKER: The member’s time has expired.
[Editor’s Note: Debate continues later this day.]
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I provide a personal explanation.
Immediately prior to lunch, the Leader of the Opposition accused me of saying that the Country Liberal Party administration had secretly introduced a methadone maintenance program. In essence, a methadone program is related to a reducing program of methadone use for addicts, whilst a methadone maintenance program is designed to stabilise addicts.
In the course of debates in this parliament, I have argued that the previous government had in place a methadone program. The Leader of the Opposition asserted prior to lunch that I had somehow misled Territorians by stating that the previous government had a methadone maintenance program. In an effort to prosecute his point, the Leader of the Opposition produced a copy of the Parliamentary Record from 16 October 2002 and purported to read from it a section quoting me. We have the Hansard rushes here. He quoted me as having said on 16 October:
- Madam Speaker, I just – when you are ready – the methadone maintenance program. Since 1996 they did not
get out with a big press release: ‘We are going to introduce a methadone maintenance program here in
the Northern Territory’. They snuck it in under the cover of night because they knew they had to do it.
That is the accusation that the Leader of the Opposition alleges I said in this House. It was my recollection that I did not utter the words attributed to me by the Leader of the Opposition. Over the luncheon adjournment, I checked the Parliamentary Record and the section that the Leader of the Opposition purported to quote from.
Madam Speaker, it is with deep regret that I advise that the Leader of the Opposition did not faithfully quote to parliament what I said. In fact, he inserted a word into the quoted passage, a word which suited his argument but was not, in fact, in the Parliamentary Record.
In truth, what I said – and this is faithfully recorded in the Parliamentary Record for 16 October:
- Since 1996 they did not get out with a press release: we are going to introduce a methadone program here in
the Northern Territory. They snuck it in under the cover of night because they knew they had to do it.
The quote does not contain the word ‘maintenance’, Madam Speaker. I thank you for this opportunity to correct the record. I suggest that all members of this House be vigilant when it comes to accepting at face value material presented by the Leader of the Opposition.
MOTION
Note Statement - Illicit Drug Use in the Territory
Note Statement - Illicit Drug Use in the Territory
Continued from earlier this day.
Mrs AAGAARD (Health and Community Services): Madam Speaker, at the outset I thank all speakers for their contribution and I would also like to thank Dr Valerie Asche, who headed the task force, and members of the task force who did an excellent job.
Particularly this morning, we have had an extraordinary level of debate in this House. At one point I wondered whether people were high on the hot air that was coming from the other side. I would particularly like to pick up on a point from the member for Drysdale who claimed it had been such a long time coming that he was able to speak. It was totally up to him whether he spoke at an earlier time or not. He had every opportunity. We had four speakers from the government and, for whatever reason, he chose not to speak earlier in the debate. If he wants to speak, he should get up, particularly given that he was at the time the opposition spokesperson for health, and one might have expected that he would have spoken earlier in the debate.
Let me quote from the media release from the Australian National Council on Drugs from 2 October last year:
- The Australian National Council on Drugs (ANCD) has thrown its considerable support behind a Northern
Territory government announcement to implement a range of programs to address drug use.
Major Brian Watters, Chairman of the ANCD stated: ‘The ANCD has been working closely with the
Northern Territory government since it came to office last year and is very pleased to see the introduction
of a range of programs to reduce and treat drug use’.
Major Watters added: ‘For too long, the Northern Territory has been in a form of denial over the level of
illicit drug use that occurs and this has meant that many communities in the Northern Territory have been
struggling to effectively deal with drug issues without adequate resources or options in place.
‘The availability of methadone, Naltrexone and Buprenorphine, as well as support programs and a 24-hour
hotline will start to bring the Northern Territory into line with the rest of the country’.
This is from Major Brian Watters, a personal friend of the Prime Minister - not exactly a radical when it comes to drug issues. The member for Drysdale must not have been particularly convincing when he gave his report to these people, because clearly, the ANCD, a well-respected group, did not agree with his opinion in relation to the Northern Territory and drug issues.
I feel obliged to dispel some of the myths that the members opposite continue to peddle regarding the perceived notion that we will encourage southern drug users to the Territory to access pharmacotherapies. The Northern Territory pharmacotherapy program adheres to the national policy and guidelines for pharmacotherapies accepted right across Australia. The national guidelines have been integrated into the Northern Territory Restricted Schedule 8 Policy and Clinical Guidelines. Under these guidelines, people on a program in one jurisdiction are not accepted by the service in another jurisdiction unless they are formally referred by their local service or GP. This is one of the issues discussed between patients and their GP or service.
Clients from another jurisdiction are accepted onto the program under specified circumstances. So, the story that the opposition has been peddling is completely mythical and illogical and cannot happen in the Northern Territory. What we do know is that people who want to come here are returning to the Northern Territory for family support which they were not able to receive in the past because of the lack of treatment options. These are the very people the opposition would previously have encouraged to take a bus south for treatment. It is a much better option to be able to be with your family as a Territorian.
Let me reiterate a statement I made in the House on 9 October 2002. This government’s position on illicit drugs is crystal clear. It has no time for those who profit from the misery of others. It has introduced laws that make that quite unambiguous. At the same time, it shows compassion for the distress suffered by people and families and the need for measures to alleviate it. It also recognises the need for a comprehensive approach to prevention and is explicitly linked to the government’s policy statement on supporting families.
I will take this opportunity to advise the House of the progress this government has made in addressing the recommendations of the task force. The final report of the task force was released publicly in September 2002. It contained 51 recommendations across the areas of prevention, education, treatment and rehabilitation. Based on the task force findings, the government prioritised action in three areas: pharmacotherapies; public access to information; and increasing capacity of existing service providers.
In relation to pharmacotherapies, the task force recommended immediate changes be made to ministerial guidelines under the Poisons and Dangerous Drugs Act. Revised ministerial guidelines came into effect as of Wednesday 25 September 2002. This means that maintenance pharmacotherapies have been available in the Territory as of this date. As part of this introduction, the Northern Territory Restricted Schedule 8 Policy and Clinical Guidelines were also implemented. Legislative amendments to the Poisons and Dangerous Drugs Act will be introduced in the April sittings. These amendments provide for a complete control and monitoring system for all Schedule 8 medications including pharmacotherapies used in the treatment of opiate dependence.
The following initiatives have also been implemented to provide extra capacity to handle the new treatment services. The existing public specialist services in Darwin and Alice Springs were boosted to enable them to provide specialist services and to support GPs and pharmacists. New positions have been created in both Darwin and Alice Springs. In Darwin, the additional positions created have been a contract pharmacist, a registered nurse, a psychologist and a part-time medical officer. In Alice Springs, an additional registered nurse was employed as of October 2002.
A project officer commenced a 12-month project in February 2003 to coordinate the future GP and community pharmacy involvement in pharmacotherapy treatments throughout the Northern Territory, and this is particularly in relation to the development of a long-term strategy related to the recruitment, training and retention of GPs and pharmacists. An additional poisons inspector position was created in November 2002 to assist the Chief Health Officer with the new control and monitoring system for all Schedule 8 substances. A total of $412 000 has been allocated for the 2002-03 budget, with the full recurrent effect in out years being $431 000.
Let me again quote from my earlier statement:
The task force documents the evidence that Buprenorphine is a safer and better option than methadone for
most clients. It has a lower risk of overdose, is easier to withdraw from and because of its longer action,
the vast majority of patients can take a dose every two days instead of every day. Buprenorphine is therefore
the preferred option and will be the front line pharmacotherapy. However, there are a small number of
clinical indications including allergy to Buprenorphine with methadone as an alternative. Doctors will
therefore be able to prescribe it on the basis of accepted clinical guidelines.
This is just another indication of how misleading the CLP can be. Throughout this debate they continued to talk about methadone and methadone maintenance when we have clearly said that the front line option is Buprenorphine except for particular clinical situations where methadone will be used for maintenance.
At present, there are 56 patients - 33 public and 23 private - receiving Buprenorphine maintenance treatment; and 38 patients - 31 public and seven private - receiving methadone maintenance treatment in the Northern Territory. Further pharmacotherapy training for general practitioners and pharmacists has been organised to take place. In Alice Springs, this is occurring this coming weekend, 1 and 2 March, and in Darwin it will be occurring from 5 to 7 March. A Clinical Advisory Committee is to be formed to provide a panel of experts to advise the Chief Health Officer on matters relating to the prescribing of Schedule 8 medications and other restricted medications under the Poisons and Dangerous Drugs Act. Expressions of interest will be called during March, with the committee due to be operational by April 2003.
The second priority was an increase in public access to immediate information on what kind of health and support is available. To this end, we have established an Alcohol and Drug Information Service. This service will be a confidential alcohol and drug counselling and referral phone line and, I am happy to say, will commence operating from tomorrow. Such telephone services are available in all other Australian jurisdictions. The service will be a 24 hours a day, seven days a week confidential telephone service to provide counselling, support and referral for people seeking help, families seeking support, the general community seeking information, and service providers seeking assistance. A separate service called the Drug and Alcohol Clinical Advisory Service will also be available specifically for service providers. This is important because it provides health and welfare professionals with a telephone consultancy service to assist with the management of drug and alcohol problems in the community.
The third priority - increasing the capacity of the existing network of service providers to meet contemporary illicit drug issues - is an important one. In the time frame available, the task force was unable to establish a comprehensive understanding of the adequacy or effectiveness of existing treatment services available across the Territory, given the majority have historically had a service background of predominantly alcohol treatment. It was, therefore, recommended that a mapping project be undertaken to establish an accurate picture of what is available, the exact kinds of interventions and intervention models being used, whether interventions that are known to be effective are being utilised, the additional training required and where redirection of funding and major redevelopment may be required.
My department has commenced this review process by a complementary services development project. This project will look specifically at the needs of government priority areas relating to young people and families. Seventeen of the task force’s 51 recommendations relate to this area. Those attending the consultations expressed strong support for activities and strategies to prevent or minimise harm to young people from drugs. There was also widespread recognition of the importance of the family environment and the impact of early childhood, and frequent demands for more services to identify and support families who need help well before a child reaches school age. Both the task force and supporting families are explicit that responses in this area must be integrated and inclusive, and involve young people in the context of their families, peer groups, schools and communities. The task force espouses an approach that promotes the overall health of young people. Supporting Families states that to make a real difference, services for children and their families need to work together, rather than treating each issue as a specialised problem as too often happens now. The government remains absolutely committed to this most complex and important area of work.
I pick up on a few of the comments, in closing, in relation to drugs and property crime. This document, Tackling Drug-Related Crime, which has been brought out by the government, is a very informative document which outlines the absolute link between drugs and property crime. It says:
- The New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research says it is well established that many
drug-dependent people resort to property crime to fund their drug use.
It also says:
- A published study of the Australian Institute of Criminology on 4 May 2000 stated: ‘There is a very strong
link between opiate use and property crimes. Of those detainees whose most serious charge was a property
offence, 43% tested positive for opiates. The link between drugs and criminal offending is very strong for
all crimes’.
And:
- The Australian Institute of Criminology also reported in several jurisdictions where surveys were recently
done, 86% of adult males detained on property crimes tested positive to a drug of some type, excluding
tobacco and alcohol.
Those are fairly clear indications that there is a significant problem in relation to drugs and property crime. The things that we have been doing as a government, as a whole, have actually stopped a lot of the drug issues in the Northern Territory. We are very committed that, over the next few years, there will be a significant decrease in this very, very difficult problem for the Northern Territory.
Once again, Madam Speaker, I thank members for their contributions and I commit the government further to working in this very difficult area.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
COMMERCIAL PASSENGER (ROAD) TRANSPORT AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 112)
(Serial 112)
Continued from 27 November 2002.
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, though I am new to this shadow portfolio area, it would be a rarity for a member of this House not to have had significant consultation and lobbying from the commercial vehicle sector, be it taxis, the hire car sector or minibuses. In fact, I was a member of Cabinet when some of the CLP initiatives went through and those debates, and the legislation that flowed from them, are well and truly on the record, as are the significant funds that went to the buy back of the licence plates so that anomaly in this industry was removed. It was a government initiative to do it, and it was a government initiative to see those who ran the business - bought the car, cleaned the car, drove the car - were the major beneficiary rather than someone that owned a little piece of tin that hung off the front. It was a pretty brave move, and no other jurisdiction had gone that way, though many had considered it and are still considering it.
The issue is, if you look at what the ACCC and others are saying: what is in the best interests of the consumer? If government is to legislate, it must do so in the best interests of the health and safety of the community, otherwise it should probably exit from some of these areas of legislation where it is merely intruding on business and corrupting good business practice.
I shall not go back to the past because it is well and truly on the record. It has been widely canvassed and debated and, in fact, it was implemented. I do not think it is necessary for us to do a total excursion into history. What is more important is to look at the words of the current minister in the second reading speech where he outlined a number of problems, including dress and behaviour of taxi drivers, problems with their levels of income and other problems.
What he has paraded before us is a bill, which is a package of measures in the first of two parts of amendments, the second parts having been introduced to this parliament this morning. That is probably how we would enshrine the opposition’s contribution to this debate. We will be talking about what it is the government is doing, whether the prognosis for success, in particular those areas the minister has outlined, is good or not, and we will be leaving it for them to do what is their prerogative; that is, to govern, to introduce legislation and to introduce their own platform mandate and policies.
It is our belief, from the outset, that this is not a well thought out suite of legislative options. Notwithstanding, it is their prerogative to do it, it is our prerogative to point out that there are some substantial pitfalls in it.
In the first place, the minister parading a variety of letters and meetings and working parties as consultation is a sham. They are not just my words, they are the words of people who have faxed me. This particular fax, for instance, went to the Hon Clare Martin, Chief Minister, the Hon Kon Vatskalis, Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, Mr Denis Burke, Leader of the Opposition, the Hon Loraine Braham, the Hon Paul Henderson - and that is certainly the case with the many letters we have received. Madam Speaker, I assume you are in that category also of somebody who has received letters trying to put some sense into the debate, alerting the minister, and his boss, the Chief Minister, to the fact that any description of the word ‘consultation’ is a pretence, and making some reasonable suggestions about how to reconfigure the industry.
I will record that many of the people that have contacted me did not like the propositions that we put in place and did not like the landscape that had been inherited from the CLP. Notwithstanding that, it remains our position.
I will first move to the private hire business which is probably the most affected by this bill in front of us, in that it is most likely they will be the ones to go out of business. It is most likely the people driving around in luxury cars at the moment who have a highly satisfied clientele, who have a market niche that does not overly intrude in the affairs of the taxi industry or the minibus industry, that has none of the problems described by the minister in terms of dress, attitude, behaviour, and today does not have a problem with income maintenance which seems to be a portion of the governments bill: to provide some sort of a comfort level that people’s incomes will remain at a certain level.
There has been an unfair assault on this industry and I have talked to many of the people who are operational in it. In the first place, it is a rare thing for a government to ban an efficiency technology. This government has banned, prohibited, the use of implements, particularly mobile phones, that would render this an efficient industry. Why would you do this? Why would you say to an industry: ‘You have to go back to tom-toms’, other than to upset the playing field, to create an uneven playing field.
It is tantamount to insanity to expect these people to run a business in the way that has been enshrined in this legislation, and many of them see the writing on the wall. They are not happy with how they have been singled out, particularly since they were not described as the problem by the previous government nor this government. Yet it is here that the brunt of this legislation will be borne.
The options that are available for them are both pretty much non-viable. One is that they can call themselves a limousine. Members who have travelled overseas or know or talk to American people or people from Asia would know what they mean by a limousine, and it certainly is not a Statesman. It is generally a stretch vehicle of the calibre of a Cadillac or a Mercedes or something like that. It is not a very good use of this particular terminology for the sort of clientele, particularly from overseas, who will be using this type of vehicle.
Executive taxi, now that has probably a more appropriate ring to it except that these executive taxis will have a big light on the top of them, will be ranked up with the other battered and torn taxis in the rank and it is not …
Dr Burns: Bit like the shoddy fleet is it?
Mr DUNHAM: Bit like the what?
Dr Burns: The shoddy fleet.
Mr DUNHAM: I do not think they are a shoddy fleet. I will pick up that interjection. I do not believe the people driving the luxury vehicles out there, providing a very good service, are a shoddy fleet …
Dr Burns: You said the taxis were. You said they were ripped and torn.
Mr DUNHAM: … and that is a very sad reflection on the member for Johnston. They are very good fleet of vehicles …
Dr Burns: You reflected on the taxi cabs.
Mr DUNHAM: … and they provide a very good service. It ill behoves him to be calling them a shoddy fleet, Madam Speaker.
However, in the event that some of them take up the second option, which is not the limo service, to rank as an executive taxi, there are problems with how the clientele will approach the rank and see two forms of conveyance available to them: your standard run of the mill Camry taxi; or this up-market car with a big light on the top and a different meter that charges you more.
I suggest that is going to be a pretty tricky proposition for them in a rank where they have ranked on the chronology of turning up to the rank, yet they are going to have passengers discriminating on which type of taxi they will take on the basis that they prefer to grab the cheaper one. So it would seem that for some reason, this group is in the gun sight. The minister has to explain that to them and to us and to the public who use them. The public requires such a service, as they are well patronised, and it would seem that, without the government’s intervention to drive them to being non-commercial, the public would continue to use this form of transport.
I turn to the remedies that are in the legislation about attitude, dress and all this other stuff. Apart from having longer training sessions, they are not going to remedy any of these problems, particularly the issue that the minister and the Labor opposition clamoured long and hard about; that is taxi drivers have to get more money in their hand. If you want to intrude on a business like that, an industry, you have to do it in a much more heavy-handed way than this act prescribes. That is by capping numbers, for instance; creating various artificial barriers to entrants and others; and this act does not do that. This act does not put a ceiling on numbers, and I would be concerned if it did.
The issue for somebody who wants to go into an industry, albeit a ferry service to Mandorah, a backhoe in the northern suburbs or a taxi where you have to outlay a substantial portion of your capital to buy a significant piece of equipment which will yield an income for you, you go to the bank manager, you put up a business case, and you get your loan. Alternatively, if you are cashed up and you want to take the risk, you can do it on your own. If you do it on your own, that is your risk. It is not for the government to say: ‘This poor gentleman is making a venture into this area and there are lots of other competitors doing the same thing, but we think he needs the help of government to make sure he brings home an income’. We do not do that in other industries. If that is one of the major aggravating factors for this government when they undertook to research this industry, I suggest there are other industries out there that have a similar profile of problem; that is, they have a large amount of capital tied up, they compete in a very strenuous, competitive environment, and they would prefer to earn more. One of the ways they could do that is by having various of their competitors exit from that environment. If that is what the government is trying to do with this legislation, they have not done it. If it is how they describe their rhetoric - and it is well and truly on the Parliamentary Record - they are going to have to describe how that will happen.
There is a further matter, too, with the construction of the board. I shall not venture into that area because my colleague, the member for Greatorex, has had a long and very fruitful level of consultation with this area and is most concerned about some issues that he will embrace in his contribution.
In winding up, the salient points are that we believe our policy is on the record; we believe that, had the industry been allowed to stabilise, there would have been a much easier approach from government to analyse this rather than rushing in foolishly. We believe that, in unfairly targeting the private hire people, you have rendered a necessary, warranted and well patronised service into oblivion. We believe that the options you have given them are non-viable for most of them; the problems you have enumerated in the taxi industry are not going to be remedied by this legislation; and the circumstances that will befall the industry, its patrons and the government are well and truly on the government’s head in that this is entirely a matter of its own making. Any little ambitions to talk about black holes, things of the past, and 27 years, are empty rhetoric. If you look at the fact that this legislation is entirely of their own making, you will have ample opportunity to run in the months that are now leading up to the next election and they will be judged on it.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Madam Speaker, I support the initiatives of the Martin Labor government in addressing the serious problems within the commercial passenger vehicle industry. I note the member for Drysdale said in his speech that he did not want to rehash the past. One of the problems we inherited as a government was as a direct result of CLP policies, and those policies resulted in the taxi plate buy back scheme, costing the taxpayer in the order of $27m. I wonder why the member for Drysdale does not want to discuss history or rehash it, and the CLP’s policy is on record.
Only the other day, I spoke to a driver who is earning $5 an hour working an 80 hour week, equivalent of approximately $35 000 a year, and I stand corrected if my maths is wrong. These long hours for small returns with increased family stresses cannot be allowed to continue.
Regular incidents and reports of poor standards of service, poor driver standards and even violent incidents between drivers were regularly seen in the press or witnessed first hand on the streets. This cannot be allowed to continue. This government went into the last election with the clear understanding that we would tackle head on the problems of the commercial passenger vehicle industry. The minister is to be commended on the consultation process he began on 26 November 2001 when he put a temporary cap on taxi, minibus and private hire car numbers to provide some stability during the consultative phase.
The member for Drysdale had the gall to come into this House and say that the government has not entered into a consultation process that is sufficient. Member for Drysdale, how long do you require? I clearly remember 26 November 2001 as one of the first actions that the government took in a positive step towards dealing with the commercial passenger vehicle industry problems. The minister’s consultative process has been detailed by others, but it is worth noting that some in the industry thought the process was too long.
This first stage of amendments are required for implementation on 1 March 2003. One of the key initiatives of the government is the provision for the Commercial Passenger Vehicle Board. This board has been meeting in an interim capacity for some months now and has already, in this short time, provided the minister with timely, industry-based advice. The board has representatives from all sectors of the industry as well as consumer and tourism representatives. Madam Speaker, I am sure you would agree that regional representation that is provided for on the board is critical in providing the minister with Territory-wide advice. The government is to be commended for this move.
This legislation provides for the new commercial passenger vehicle category of executive taxis. This will provide the industry with a clear delineation between sectors, a clarity that is currently lacking. The associated schedule of licence fees will provide the level playing field for which that many in the industry were calling. Minibuses will be able to respond to ad hoc hails previously not permitted. We will be setting maximum seating capacities for standard and executive taxis. This legislation will ensure that an individual taxi or minibus is registered in the name of the licence holder.
The consultative process consistently highlighted concerns with vehicle standards. This government is determined to improve standards and ensure vehicles are maintained to the approved standards that will result from this legislation. I am sure, Madam Speaker, you would agree with this new direction. The legislation provides an upfront annual payment of any new taxi or minibus licence. This, along with driver training requirements, will mean that new entrants will be meeting standards set by government, standards that are higher than existing standards. I believe the training requirement is approximately 78 hours, and I know many in the industry are happy with that result. All drivers will hold an identity card. Far-reaching legislation such as this will inevitably give rise to many questions.
In closing, I would like to alert members, the industry and the public to the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment web site www.ipe.nt.gov.au where a comprehensive list of frequently asked questions and answers will be displayed, I am led to believe, very shortly. I have personally found those frequently asked questions most helpful.
Madam Speaker, I commend this bill to the House, and convey deep respect for the minister and all the work he and his staff have done behind the scenes.
Mr BURKE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I do not want to speak too long as I was hoping the minister might provide some clarification before the bill moves to the second and third reading. It seems to me that the one thing necessary with this legislation is clarification. It is one thing to say that a discussion paper went out and we consulted widely with the industry, but this parliament is the place to get clarification on a whole range of issues which are being attended to by regulation, the nature of which few people seem to be clear upon.
Like my colleague, the member for Drysdale, I have consulted widely with the industry and one thing that does appear certain is that with the exception of a taxi industry - because the taxi industry are fairly comfortable; they are probably grinning like Cheshire cats because the taxi industry has essentially everything it wanted. What has worried me, though, is that in a system of fairness and equity, and a system that proposes to improve the situation as it currently exists, I would have thought that we need to pay some attention to ensuring that the other operators in the industry get fair treatment and, certainly on the face of it, that does not seem to have occurred at all in this legislation.
I have a number of questions in my own mind as to how this new system will operate, but this parliament should be able to look at this legislation and have a clear picture of how it is going to operate. There are two pieces of legislation in front of me; one establishes a CPV Board, the other one comes up with a whole range of penalties if you do something wrong. The actual methodology of how this system is going to operate is not clear in the legislation.
In the second reading speech for this tranche of legislation, which sets up a CPV board and provides for some training and an identikit for drivers, which is the one we are debating today - and before I go on, it raises the question: I do not understand why this is coming through in different tranches. Why was it not cobbled together properly so that the parliament, with this important piece of legislation, could have a very clear picture, as it passes through the parliament, what new regime is going to be implemented in the Northern Territory? That certainly is not the case. One has to wonder about the intent of it. It seems that the authorisation for the new category of executive taxi starts on 1 March, therefore there is a rush to get the legislation through to enable that regime to come in place. I know that one driver has already purchased 10 of those executive taxis for use in that market. I would hate to think that the parliament is trying to keep up with certain individuals in the industry, because if it is, we are doing something drastically wrong and, I might add, my information - I hope I am wrong - was that those 10 vehicles were purchased interstate which says something in itself.
The minister, in his second reading speech, said, and I quote in part:
- Whilst the previous government’s actions in removing the numbered control of licences meant there was
sufficient to meet public demand, the industry themselves were suffering from poor returns and poorly
trained and motivated drivers. The community was suffering from poor driver standards which, on
occasion, challenged the perception that taking a taxi or a minibus was a safe way to travel.
A couple of points there: the actions of the previous government, no matter how you try to spin it, did result in a better service to the consumer overall, in that there was a wider range of fleet availability. As a consequence, some sectors of the industry were extremely happy. You can go right across the whole industry. When we changed it, the private hire cars were unhappy, and some of them went out of business, the minibuses were unhappy, and some of them went out of business, and the taxis were unhappy because of the buy-back regulations that we had in force. But the focus was squarely on providing a better service to the consumer and, overall, Territorians benefited. I can remember the days that you would stand outside Darwin Airport and, if you were on a late flight, you just stood there. There were no taxis available and certainly no choice.
What do we have now as a result of the CLP changes? Taxis hated it; minibuses hated it; private hire cars hated it, and all have learnt to live with it, grudgingly. But, in particular, the taxis owners have been most upset about that regime. When the regime came into place, my understanding is that in the greater Darwin region there were about 100 taxis left on the road. Currently, if you walk out there, there are about 180 taxis on the road. So the industry was deregulated but the industry was irresponsible in the way, I believe - competitive forces are one thing, but the taxi industry allowed itself to get into a situation where there was an oversupply of taxis on the market, and that oversupply led to drivers who could not make a quid, which is a major concern. The fact that you could not make a decent living out of being a taxi driver led to a lowering of the standards of the people who are actually driving those cars in every respect. It is one thing to say that the CLP was responsible. If you sit down and think about it, a great deal of responsibility rests with motor vehicle registration and the transport area, public servants. It should not have been allowed to get to the standard that it did and I am disappointed - and it is a comment in the industry, that they are disappointed - that the focus of the public servants who were charged with those responsibilities seemed to focus on onerous red tape and bureaucracy rather than focussing on the industry as a whole and how it was developing in the Northern Territory.
It is a great sadness that the government has been forced to move to change it. I understand the politics of it; you can make as much hay as you like out of the politics of it. It was a great sadness that the deregulated industry had to be moved back into - with government trying to fix up the cause for which all sectors have some part to blame, but primarily the industry could not manage itself.
That leads to the CPV Board. If ever there was an opportunity to give some authority and responsibility back to the industry, it should have been through the CPV Board. The CPV Board was given good representation, representing both ends of the Northern Territory so that the issues that concern Alice Springs and Central Australia are the responsibility of a board that understands those issues down there, and the industry in the northern region is also attended to. That CPV Board should have been widely representative of the industry. I forget the exact composition of the board now, but I know that it is widely representative of a number of people who are not in the industry; who have particular issues that, of course, are important but do not need to be physically present on the CPV Board. It should have been a representative group of both ends of the Northern Territory and representative of the three major sectors of the industry itself.
This legislation deals with driver training and all that sort of stuff, and that is good. It should be the responsibility of the CPV Board and it should be the responsibility of the bureaucracy to ensure that that happens. It is disappointing and an opportunity lost that this CPV Board has an advisory role in itself. I do not think it is going to be satisfactory. Because of its composition, it is going to be dominated almost entirely by the taxi industry. Sadly, that seems to be the intent of the government, and we will just have to see how the service and range of services to Territorians is provided in the years to come. That is something that we will not know until this new system settles down.
In the face of the Yellow Pages Survey and others that are coming out with attention to small business - if ever you saw an industry that is small business, it would be a private hire car. Most of those blokes and ladies own a car, maybe two cars. They cannot base through any network. The only way they could do that is if they subcontract to a bigger operator. They have made a living by a simple strategy, and that is having good cars, a good standard of vehicle and a high quality of service so that a person who calls for a private hire car knows that they will get something better than a cab. The reason people want something better than a cab is because the cabs have not been able to provide the service that they should have provided. There is a separate niche there which is not private hire cars. You can call it ‘limousine’, and the member for Drysdale said that is the wrong word, but it falls into that category. There are large organisations, corporate bodies, people who have executives who travel regularly to the Northern Territory, they are not on-the-spot hirers at the airport. They want bookings made and they want the car available - sometimes all the time when they travel - and there is a place in the market for one organisation. I will name it in this Chamber because I think they do a great job: Molly Corp have themselves organised to attend to that customer niche.
For those who would normally travel in cabs, they will continue to travel in cabs. But there is another group of people - I believe a large number of Territorians - that ad hoc look to private hire cars for a whole range of reasons. I believe there is a need in the Territory for a lot of those cars because I know that Comcar will not take anything with a dome on top of it. Comcar will not take anything with a plate at the back that says ‘private hire’. They have to be plated non-specific. I might be wrong in that regard. However, Comcar alone has now gone straight to one organisation. Private hire cars are finished as far as I can gather. It seems that, in attending to these issues, the minister and the government have been unfairly partial to one sector of the industry and, at the same time, will drive out of the industry - frankly, you will see it faster, I am sure the government knows; certainly Territorians will see it faster - as soon as these executive taxis hit the street, that will be the end of the private hire cars.
Molly Corp will still be there because they are organised to do it. I do not think the private hire cars will be there. If one looks at the range of issues that the government had to deal with, and then asked how they dealt with them, they have attacked and decimated the one group that - sure, they needed to improve in ways and how they took their bookings so that it was not intrusive to taxis, I understand that - was meeting the customer and consumer expectation. They were available at the drop of a hat, they had a good clean car, they were a safe driver and that is what the public wanted and it was pretty cheap.
Thus, this legislation is clearly unstoppable. This legislation will come through in tranches and we will get some idea of what it is supposed to be about. Subject to the minister’s comments, I might say more. I hope I am wrong, but it seems to me that if ever there was an example of a government saying to themselves: ‘Where do most of the votes lie? We will go with that mob’, this is it. I do not believe that is going to attend to the issues in the Northern Territory in the long-term. Worse than that, if you look at the private hire car industry not as cars, not as a problem, but look into the eyes of the people who actually own and drive them, you see that these are not statistics or fluctuations; these are people trying to make a quid. You have decimated them and driven them out of the business.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Mr Deputy Speaker, I am surprised that the government does not have more support for the minister’s legislation. I share the minister’s sentiment that the commercial passenger vehicle industry plays a key role in our community as small business people providing transport in, normally, a safe environment and fairly efficient manner. That is the key to the other side of politics wanting to ensure that commercial passenger vehicle industry performs well for Territorians.
In our time in government, we wanted to make sure that there were enough cabs out in the streets to provide good service for Territorians; that is the ultimate aim. While we deregulated the industry, we thought we did it with the intention that it will be cheaper for a person to get into the industry, not having to pay upfront lease costs to licence plate holders who end up charging literally extortionate amounts of money to have somebody lease their plates so that they can operate a taxi. We achieved that to the extent that, yes, there were 180 taxis out on the streets, and people in the Territory got a taxi service when they wanted one.
The minister said: ‘The CLP did it all wrong. People are earning only $5 a night’. That is what you call a free market enterprise. You make a choice to go into an industry, you make what you can out of it, whether it be a service station, a supermarket, a corner store or selling newspapers. You make your choice. You look at the market circumstance and you decide: ‘Yes, I am going to take my risk and I will do it.’ The way the CLP did it allowed somebody to get into the industry at a lower cost, and that was why people went into the industry in droves.
Now the minister says: ‘You have to take pity on those people who cannot earn more than $5 a night’, so this government is now coming in and saying: ‘We will guarantee you an income.’ Tell me, minister, in your response, how are you going to guarantee their income? If the taxis and the PHs or the limos and the minibus numbers do not decrease with this legislation, will the income be any different? No, it will not. What has happened, instead, is that it has upset every sector in this commercial passenger industry - every sector.
I will go through one sector at a time to show the minister where he has gone wrong. Let us start from the top and work our way down. The board: for a long time, industry has told the minister: ‘We need proper representation. We need representation that is relevant to the region that the commercial passenger vehicles are operating in’. I said in many adjournment speeches, and during briefings with the minister’s office, that there needs to be two regional boards: one for the Top End that might take in from Elliott north; and one for the southern half of the Territory, from Elliott south, if you like, but predominantly Alice Springs and Tennant Creek. The Top End would be Nhulunbuy, Katherine and Darwin. That would allow a better representation of the local interests, not only in industry, but the consumers as well.
At the moment, the composition of the interim board includes only three people from outside Darwin; the rest are up here. Of the three people from Central Australia, one is a taxi representative who now sits on the board, one works in Tangentyere Council, so I assume the minister picked him because he may represent Aboriginal interests and Aboriginal consumers in Central Australia, and the third comes from the tourism industry. In Darwin, they have a minibus operator. Talking to other minibus operators, both in Alice Springs and Darwin, they feel that this representative is probably not the one that you would pick because he has only been in the minibus industry for six months. He would have no idea about the depth and complexity of minibus operations. But he is there on the board. So you see, just from that alone, there is inadequate representation both from the southern region, as well as in the Top End.
Mr Henderson: What type of board did you have?
Dr LIM: What he should do – and I hear the member from Wanguri interject – is to have two boards. Understand that you need to have more consumer representation on the board than industry representation, and that is what the ACCC would like to see happen. You could still have four members of the industry in either region on each of the northern and southern boards, plus, say, five consumer representatives on those boards, and have a common chairman who will travel to both boards, sit on both boards, and by doing that, have a common interest, a big picture perspective. That would allow a Territory-wide perspective with local flavours. It would make it more sensible, and the minister should seriously look at that because the industry really wants it, and they have said it over and over again, not only to me, but to many people, including the members opposite and the minister.
Let us come to private hire cars. At the moment, there are some cars that are operating as limousines; they are a very specialised service. There are others who have been operating as de facto executive taxis using mobile telephones and two-way radios. That group have been complained against by the taxis and minibuses. We have those two groups and the limo group that has been operating has operated well right along, and they have refrained from operating as de facto taxis.
The PHs that have been operating as de facto taxis have stretched the legislation a little, I believe, and, as a result, have brought a lot of the antipathy of the other sectors of the industry against them. With better policing, I am sure that could be controlled. However, there are a lot of people in the Territory who choose to use those cars rather than taxis. The minister has, instead, pushed them down into the executive taxi level with this legislation.
Coming down to taxis, you now have two strata: the executive taxis and the standard taxis. It is a concern, the taxi operatives will tell you, that a person who buys one of those you-beaut luxury cars would not be prepared to damage those vehicles by placing a taxi dome on top, or by putting two-way radios or some form of communication inside their cars. That will cost them a lot of money to repair eventually when they want to sell the vehicles. Furthermore, if you are a PH at the moment and decide to be a executive taxi, not only do you have to put the dome on top of the car, and have a meter and two-way radio in your car, you have to set up a base. That is an expensive operation, just to set up a base.
The minister needs to think about how he is going to enforce that: how he is going to make a business person who currently runs PH cars set up a $15 000 to $100 000 base, depending what sort of base you set up, to run the executive taxi. It is going to be expensive. If you are a passenger and you walk out of an airport to a taxi rank, and there will be a bank of taxis there, and you see a standard taxi, an executive taxi - but you do not know, you are new to Alice Springs or Darwin - and you jump into the taxi because you just take it by the ranking. You would not know whether you are paying the normal rate or the higher rate until you get to your destination and you see your bill seems to be higher than what was suggested by the introductory video that was on the plane. Then, you suddenly find that you were in an executive taxi when your choice would have been maybe in a standard taxi, or vice versa. So there is a need to somehow distinguish those two types of taxis. Adding a label ‘executive taxi’ is not good enough, because it could be yellow top taxis or blue top taxis or white taxis or Darwin taxis. A person looking into an executive taxi would think it is another company. It does not tell you that this taxi has a different level of service than a standard taxi. You might have to have different ranks. That needs to be looked at.
What is concerning the taxi industry at the moment is that the PHs that the minister wants to push into the executive taxi group might not want to go into that group. Instead, they will try and hide as limos and still work as de facto executive taxis. Unless the minister can promise that he will have a very strong police force of inspectors out there to ensure that they do not operate as de facto executive taxis, it will continue to happen. It comes down to policing ultimately, and I am not sure whether the government can do that.
Let us come to minibuses. The minibuses have three years in stepped increments to reach the normal licence fee that is equivalent to taxis. However, the taxi industry will tell you right now that their problem is that many minibuses are operating as if it were three years hence, yet paying the cheaper rate at the moment. That causes a lot of anger within the taxi industry since the minibus operators are currently paying only about $4000 or $5000 a year and can operate as if they were a taxi, without a meter, and they are being hailed off the street which is not the intention of the legislation.
Minibus operators will tell you that they cannot afford to pay $16 000 or $13 000 as the full licence fee - it is too expensive and they could not pass on that cost to their customers. It is a problem. Somehow this government has upset all three sectors of the industry; it has introduced a system about which nobody is happy.
Training is a real issue. The member for Millner said he approves of the 78 hours of training for taxi drivers. That is great. Think about it: in Darwin and Alice Springs, training has to be outsourced to a training organisation that is not within the commercial passenger vehicle industry. It means a TAFE College, essentially. Do you know what training costs? $20 an hour. To train a taxi driver, it is 78 hours at $20 each, which is $1560. Tell me which taxi driver is going to be able to afford that, first of all. The industry is already screaming about a shortage of good drivers, and here we are putting a ceiling so high that it is almost impossible to reach. It is not going to make it easy for people to get into the driving industry. At the moment, the Alice Springs Taxi Group charges only $250 for training and they have a very good standard of training. They are accredited as a public trainer and, I believe, that theirs might be the program that is going to be taken up by the board to use as the model. So, if a company like Alice Springs Taxis can charge training at $250, why are we now forcing people to pay $1500 for the same sort of training?
I have spoken about the minibus phasing-in over the three-year period. It is not going to be done on a level playing field where taxi drivers are concerned, so the minister must address that also.
It concerned me last year. I spoke at length about how many CVLs the minister was issuing in Alice Springs and he could not, or refused, to tell me. I have learnt since that there are now 15 minibuses in Alice Springs, five CVLs of which were released late last year.
Mr Vatskalis: Sixteen, actually.
Dr LIM: Sixteen. There you go, even more. That is more than we have in Darwin. Darwin has 15 minibuses, and Alice Springs, a community of a quarter the size of greater Darwin, has 16. It is amazing.
There could only be one reason that the minister released those CVLs late last year: to allow those people to get in on the grandfather clause when this legislation cuts in on 1 March. I cannot see any other reason. Is the minister now supporting some people within that sector of the industry? The minister will have to explain his actions. It is a worry when, instead of doing the right thing by the industry on the whole, he is cherry picking himself, supporting some and not others. He has had letters from companies - of which I have copies here - asking for an explanation which he has never bothered to respond to, that I am aware of, and letters that I have seen recently do not explain the intention of the government.
I am concerned about the government telling PH operators or limo operators that they cannot use mobile telephones. The control of mobile telephones, as far as I know, is a federal jurisdiction. I can carry a mobile telephone in a car just like anybody else. If I choose to use the telephone to answer a call, as long as I am doing it hands-free, surely I can. There is no law to say that I cannot. It could be my wife asking me something. Who is to know? That is the practicality of it.
The other thing is that if I were a limo driver driving you, Mr Deputy Speaker, to the airport and Madam Speaker was coming off the plane and needing my service to bring her back to Parliament House, surely she should be able to ring me direct to say: ‘I want to be picked up at the airport; I am making a booking now,’ because she is booking with me. Why should I have to drop you off at the airport, go all the way back to where I normally operate from my base, pick up another fax or a message from my answering machine that Madam Speaker had just rung asking to be picked up from the airport when I, in fact, was there 10 or 15 minutes ago and could have picked her up on the spot? It does not make sense. It does not make commercial sense.
The practical way would be when I am driving to the airport with my hands-free telephone, I respond to a call from Madam Speaker saying she wants to be picked up from the airport. I will drop you off, take your fare, pick up Madam Speaker because she has made a booking with me, and bring her back to Parliament House. That would be the practical way to deal with a simple booking. But, no, you cannot do that. Again, I ask the minister what authority he has to prevent a car driver from using a mobile telephone? It does not come under NT jurisdiction, as far as I understand.
There are many questions the minister has raised in this legislation. It cannot help the industry one bit. The board itself - right from the very top - has problems and, as you go down the ranks of the levels of commercial passenger vehicle operations, the problems continue to occur. The minister spoke about the powers of the board. I hope he will seriously consider changing the composition of the board and to introduce a southern region board. He empowered the board to do certain things which he alluded to during the statement he delivered the day before he delivered the second reading speech. However, clause 15 which refers to section 74 of the principal act, deals with the director who has powers to do certain things which subsume the powers of the board. Who has the powers: the director or the board? Minister, you need to amend that because it is quite wrong and, if you are going to go into third reading, we will debate this line by line if you wish.
There are issues in the legislation that are particularly wrong. Your premise that you want to control income for operators is entirely wrong. You cannot be doing that because you cannot guarantee what they are going to earn in the industry. All we can do is to make sure that Territorians get a good service from these vehicles. That is all. The rest is up to them as private operators.
Mr VATSKALIS (Transport and Infrastructure): Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to respond to the comments made by the members of the opposition. What really surprised me is the complete ignorance about the proposed bill. The members for Drysdale and Brennan can be excused because they did not have a briefing, but the member for Greatorex had a briefing. Obviously, he refused to listen to what the officials from the department and my office had to tell him.
Let us start at the beginning. What we see here is not a common position because the member for Drysdale is telling us it was a grave decision and we stand by it. Then we have the member for Brennan saying that it is the industry’s fault: ‘We did a really good thing, it is their fault and the public service’s fault. But, do not worry because what we did, we did for the benefit of the taxi industry’. The member for Greatorex is telling us that the taxi industry hates us because what we did has been really badly for them. So it is a good idea for them to get together and sort out their position, then come back to us with the common position and tell us what they really think about the industry, and whose fault it is.
One thing that becomes apparent is that they were arrogant and they are still arrogant. Instead of sitting back and having a look at what they did and saying: ‘Well, let us have a look, just in case we made a mistake. No. It is not our fault; it is the industry’s fault’. Okay, you freed the industry because there are restrictions under the National Competition Council, and I accept this. That is why we have removed the cap and we can continue. But if you decide to provide a good service to the consumer, and you wanted to have enough cars up there to respond to the call by the consumers, why do you think that we are putting an extra 80 cars out there that will need drivers? Where are they going to find these drivers? What would be the level of training of those drivers?
I had the personal experience of a guy at the airport and he did not know where Nightcliff was. He wanted me to show him where Nightcliff was and he was going to drive there! Do I have to remind you of the headlines about the sexual harassment of women? Do I have to remind you that taxi drivers were actually waiting outside women’s homes? Do I have to remind you that a young student was sexually harassed by a so-called taxi driver? That was the level of service that Territorians had after you freed up the number of taxis.
Do I have to remind you that the Territory is the only jurisdiction in Australia to allow minibuses to operate without any taxi meter? I have never seen anywhere any commercial passenger vehicle operating without a taxi meter - not only in Australia, but also in New Zealand. When I mentioned it to officials from different departments, they were surprised. They could not believe that a decent government would allow people to operate without a taxi meter and to carry passengers. The only jurisdiction is the Northern Territory.
Let us take, one by one, some of these issues raised. First, the drivers’ income. Of course it deteriorated. Of course it went down. The member for Brennan himself admitted that from 100 taxis, they went to 180. You had 180 taxis on the road and everybody was battling for the dough. I have friends who were taxi drivers who refused to drive taxis, especially at night time, because it was not worth the bother. They were not going to drive taxis for $3 or $4 an hour.
The cap: why did we not have any problems with taxis when we imposed the cap temporarily for the industry to sort itself out? We did not have any problems. All of a sudden, with the cap, we did not have any further increase. Yes, we had some whingeing because people wanted to take advantage of the cap. We refused; we stood firm. We are going to remove it now because that was a promise we gave. It is going to be removed when we introduce the legislation.
Consultation: we had 35 submissions. We went back again and we spoke to the industry. I personally travelled to Uluru and spoke to people working in Uluru. I met with people in Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, and Darwin. In the second round, we received a further 77 submissions. We had people who met with department representatives, officers of my department and myself. We took into account everything they said to us. We had minibus drivers telling us what we should not do; taxi drivers telling us what we should do, and we had private hire cars expressing their concerns. We sat down and decided we had to sort the industry out.
The industry was in a mess; you cannot deny that. It was in a mess and something had to be done not only because of the income issue, but also because of consumer security. The member for Brennan said you have to take into consideration the health and safety of the consumer. There was no guarantee for the health and safety of the consumer after what you did.
There are questions about the minibuses, the private hire cars, the limousines, the executive taxis, and what will happen. It is very clear that they have not seen the discussion papers - and the papers we actually put on the web page of the department - because these papers clearly outline what everything will be. Some of this will come in the second round of the legislation that will be discussed in Alice Springs in April.
Let me take you through it. Minibuses: we have minibuses here operating without any taxi meters, charging whatever they like, whenever they like. I had complaints about minibuses where people hired a minibus and it smelt of urine. I had complaints about minibuses where a group of people took a minibus and every one of them was charged $10. I am not saying everybody does that, but there are people who did it because there was no control of minibuses. We consider it unfair for a minibus operator to pay $7000 a year in Darwin for a CVL and compete in the same market with somebody you force to pay $16 000 a year. If you think this is a level playing field well, I am sorry - it is not. So a taxi driver pays $16 000 a year, a minibus operator pays $7000. Did you ever catch a minibus? Did you ever catch a taxi? Have you ever asked them about what is happening out there? I doubt it very much. Obviously, the private hire car is your preferred mode of transport.
Let us go to private hire cars. After you freed the numbers, private hire cars in Darwin have gone down from nearly 60 or 64 to 40. Why have they have gone down to 40? Because, obviously, there was unfair competition out there by many sectors of the industry, and these people could not compete. There are now 24 licences sitting out there unused.
As for the mobile phones with the minibuses, if you knew the legislation you would know if any private hire car uses a mobile phone for bookings - that is under the current act - you are right, it is illegal. Yes, he could use the mobile phone to ring his wife. Yes, he could use the mobile phone hands-free to speak to some friends. But your act specifies that using your mobile phone in a private hire car to take bookings is illegal.
You specifically brought the example of going to the airport, where Madam Speaker is, and she wants to hire the private hire car to come to Alice Springs. She can do that. Under your own law, the private hire cars are allowed to have one base and one sub-base. If the sub-base is at the airport, they are allowed to pick up Madam Speaker and bring her to Alice Springs but, using the mobile phone to ring from the Alice Springs airport for a minibus in Alice Springs to come and pick her up, under your own legislation, is illegal.
You asked about the private hire cars, and the member for Greatorex expressed the concern about which will be the limousines and which will be the private hire cars. Let me tell you what will happen with private hire cars on 1 July. They will disappear. There are not going to be any private hire cars. They have to make a decision whether they want to be an executive taxi or a limousine. If they want to be an executive taxi, they will get their $10 000 entitlement back, they will keep the white colour, they will keep their car. They can have a communication network in their car including a mobile phone. They can have a data screen. As for the big dome you mentioned on the roof, no. The department is currently having a look at what is current around the world, and there are specific magnetic domes - very discreet size, specific size, specific colour - that the people can put up and remove. So it is not going to be a monstrosity on top of their car.
As for their meter, I am aware there are meters - and I have seen them personally - that can be unplugged from the dashboard and hidden, and that nothing will change in the dashboard of the executive taxi. It will still be a luxury car that Comcar can hire. The only way you can tell that it is an executive taxi when the taxi meter and dome are removed will be the different number plate. Actually, it will indicate that this is an executive taxi.
As for the limousines, let me tell you about the status of the executive taxi. There is discussion in the department, and with the board. The basic model we will consider for an executive taxi will be a Fairlane. However, a limousine will have to be the top range of Fairlane or Holden, a stretch limousine or some luxury imported cars. So, depending on where you are, this is the kind of car you provide. But let us go back to the limousines. On 1 July, if you decide you do not want to be an executive taxi, and that you want to be a limousine, then you get back your $10 000 entitlement, you pay $1200 for a limousine CVL and you operate as a limousine.
What benefit will the executive taxi get? Okay, they are paying $16 000 a year. What do they get for it? They can rank; they can take hails; they can go to the casino, the airport and to hotels; and they can pick up clients. That increases their client base, something they are not allowed to do now under your own legislation. Under your own legislation, a private hire car could not go and rank at the casino or at the Darwin International Airport. Under your own legislation, they cannot rank at the Saville or the Beaufort, unless that was a sub-base. Now they can go anywhere and keep clients.
How do I know it is a private hire car? Well, I agree with you - some people might come from interstate or overseas. First of all, the number plate will be different. Second, the car will be different - it will not be your average Camry; it will be a Fairlane. Third, the moment you get into the car and sit down, there will be an indication on the dashboard in front of you telling you that this is an executive taxi. In addition, my department is going to commence an advertising campaign at the airport and the port to advise tourists who are coming here that there are four levels of commercial vehicles in the Territory: standard taxi; executive taxi; limousine; and minibuses.
As for the fairness and equity, there was no fairness and equity under your own plan. Standard taxis were complaining that minibuses were operating without any taxi meters and paying about half of what the taxi was paying. Private hire cars, because of the competition, were breaking the law. Even an operator from Alice Springs who wrote to the newspaper complaining about what an unfair government we are, stated clearly in his own letters that he was using a mobile phone to take clients. That was pointed out to you as being illegal by the department and in my own letter.
Regarding the allegation that the board is not representative of the regions, the board that is in place now is a temporary and advisory board. As for regional representation, there are three representatives from Alice Springs: a consumer representative, a tourism representative and a business representative. Of 11 people on the board, excluding the chairman, we have three from Alice Springs. Darwin and Katherine together have 140 taxis. Alice Springs has 38: 25% of the industry is in Alice Springs. Taking Tennant Creek and Alice Springs together, they have 41 - still a quarter of the total taxi numbers of Katherine and Darwin. Where is the logic of having a board in Alice Springs and one in Darwin? We have brought the board together and we have direct video links to Alice Springs every time the board meets. It has operated very successfully.
Dr Lim: You have not been reading the letters to you to see there is not good representation.
Mr VATSKALIS: I have read the letters. They tend to come from the same operator all the time.
Let us go back to the limousines and the use of mobile phones. Currently, there is one business that operates as a limousine in the Territory - that is Molly Corp, as the member for Brennan correctly specified. The other private hire company is Darwin Private Hire Cars. I extensively questioned the owners of Molly Corp, and they told me they do not use their mobile phones for bookings. He showed me the schedules. The person at the base takes the phone calls and there is a schedule that is written down the night before for every day, and it is handed to the drivers. This is how limousines should operate in the Territory; this is how limousines operate anywhere else in Australia. I cannot see the reason why it should be any different in the Territory. Yes, the limousine driver can have a mobile phone. Yes, he can speak with his wife, his friend, but he cannot use a mobile phone for bookings. What is the point, then, of a taxi owner paying $16 000 when he has to compete with a limousine person who pays $1200 a year and, at the same time, operates exactly like a taxi?
Dr Lim: The taxi driver pays $16 000 a year? What are you talking about?
Mr VATSKALIS: If you had bothered to listen to what my departmental officers said when they briefed you, you would know that limousines will pay less than one-tenth of what a taxi owner will pay.
Nobody can deny – and you heard it from the taxi industry themselves – that the taxi industry was a mess. It was a mess. I admire the member for Drysdale; he has guts. Yes, it was a brave move. But then, it was the industry’s fault, said the member for Brennan. Well, it was not the industry’s fault, it was somebody’s responsibility to fix the industry. It was the government’s industry …
Dr Lim: Open market.
Mr VATSKALIS: … it was the government’s – oh yes, yes, I will take that interjection. You said before: ‘If you cannot make money in the open market, do not drive’. Then you come back and you say: ‘The poor people of the minibus industry, you charge them too much, they cannot operate’. Go and tell them that you have publicly stated in parliament that it is an open market: if you cannot make money get out of it.
Dr Lim: It is government fees you are charging. It is government fees.
Mr VATSKALIS: No, you said it publicly and you will see on reading the Hansard. You stated: ‘It is a free market. If you cannot make money, get out of the industry’. We do not believe that. We tried to protect the industry and the consumer. We have really delineated the different sections of the industry. We have provided the incentives and the training regime for the people who are going to drive taxis to be well trained and educated and treat the public like they should be treated.
We know it is a difficult situation. You did not have the guts to provide the solutions; we do. We are prepared to stand by our legislation. I am pretty sure that the industry will operate effectively. Until now, we have heard a few comments from private hire operators mainly - most likely because they are not fully informed about the whole regime of the legislation. I will make sure my department’s officers visit Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Katherine and Darwin to explain every single bit of this legislation so there are not going to be any more fears about the new legislation with regard to the commercial passenger vehicles.
Certainly, there will be more discussion in Alice Springs and I am looking forward to it. I am really looking forward to it.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr VATSKALIS (Transport and Infrastructure) (by leave): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be read a third time.
Mr BURKE (Opposition Leader): Mr Deputy Speaker, through you to the minister, you do not have to go into committee if you do not want to.
Mr Vatskalis: We can.
Mr BURKE: It is all right. I will speak in the third reading and the minister can answer. I wonder if the minister might spend a little time just going through the booking procedure. What constitutes a booking? There seems to be some confusion there. We seem to have clarified in your mind the fact that under no circumstances can a booking be taken by mobile phone by a limousine.
I wonder if you would define for us now what constitutes a booking. I will give you an example: if a limousine is parked somewhere and a person walked to that limousine and asked to be taken from A to B, would that be illegal? If, in the same instance, the limousine driver got out of the car, spoke to the person away from the car and then walked back to his car and the person got in the car, would that be a legal booking or an illegal booking? It seems to me that the whole issue of bookings and pre-bookings needs some clarification because that seems to be one of the central issues as to whether or not this new regime will work.
I admire your confidence, minister, in saying ‘Under no circumstances now are mobile phones used’. I hope you are correct in that regard. But I also understand from your comments that, under no circumstances will any limousine be able to operate other than on a pre-booked service whereby that manifest is provided to the driver for the day’s operations and, if they do anything other than that, it is illegal. Could you clarify that?
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: The minister can only speak once, so does anyone else have something to say?
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Mr Deputy Speaker, I raised this question earlier in my second reading on clause 15 which refers to section 74 of the principal act. In section 74, which replaces the old 74, it refers to ‘the Director’ in many instances. The powers that the director has, according to this amendment, are quite similar to some of the powers of the Commercial Passenger Vehicle Board. I would like to know who has the power, and I would like to know if the board makes a decision on a driver, for instance, can the decision of the board be countermanded by the director? If it can, then the board no longer has any powers. So, who has the power to look after the industry: the director or the board? In the minister’s speech, sometimes he referred to the board as being advisory and, at other times, he talked about the board having power. So it is not clear to me, with this amendment, who has the power and who does not.
Let me see if I can find the relevant section. The minister’s statement:
- The board will provide advice to the minister on all policy and regulatory matters, will oversee reform of
the industry to guide future direction of the industry, to administer regulations of the industry, to ensure
all industry and consumer interests are represented in ongoing industry development. In particular, the
board will be responsible for overseeing entry standards for drivers and operators, training requirements,
vehicle standards and age limits, provision of disabled access for wheelchairs, standards for network
licenses including complaint management and driver management processes, codes of conduct for drivers,
operators and networks. The board will also have the power to determine whether drivers, networks and
operators meet fit and proper requirements for accreditation, accredit training providers and suspend
drivers, operators and networks for breaching regulatory requirements and approved codes of conduct …
Mr VATSKALIS (Transport and Infrastructure): Mr Deputy Speaker, with regard to the first question from the member for Brennan, I would like to advise that limousines are introduced at the second stage of the legislation to be debated in April. It is not introduced under this packet of legislation. I am quite happy to respond to it, but you have to bear in mind it is not under this legislation.
Mr Burke: It is yet to be passed.
Mr VATSKALIS: The second packet of legislation was introduced yesterday to be debated in April. The limousines are not introduced under this packet of legislation, okay?
Mr Burke: But you can talk about it.
Mr VATSKALIS: I can talk about it, but I am saying that I do not think it is proper for me to speak about legislation that was introduced yesterday and has yet to be debated.
Mr Burke: Just for clarification, Mr Deputy Speaker, the issue of pre-booking is mentioned in this legislation and the definitions, so it seems to me that it should not be a problem.
Mr VATSKALIS: I doubt very much if that is actually mentioned in this legislation, member for Brennan. I can confirm it in a minute.
Mr Burke: 4(c). Interpretation.
Mr VATSKALIS: My apologies.
Mr Burke: Okay, let it pass.
Mr VATSKALIS: With regard to the board, I would like to refer the member for Greatorex to section 6B.
- (1) The functions of the Board are …
It is clearly specified in the legislation what the powers of the board are:
(a) to provide the advice to the minister on all matters relating to commercial
passenger vehicles (other than motor omnibuses, tourist vehicles and special
passenger vehicles); and
What the member was referring to was from explanatory notes. What the board has to do is advise the minister on those matters referred to it and the minister then will make a decision on those, and the director, as a delegate of the minister, will exercise his powers. The board’s role is advisory and that is stated clearly in the legislation.
Dr Lim: You mean you misled the House with your statement? I am saying you misled the House with your statement.
Mr VATSKALIS: Have a look at clause 6B of the bill I am introducing. I have not introduced a bill that contains what you just referred to. I introduced a bill that says the function of the board is to provide advice to the minister on all matters relating to commercial passenger vehicles. The matters you have ….
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! If the member for Greatorex wants to allege that my colleague has misled the House, he knows the procedure by which he should do it and he should withdraw.
Dr LIM: Mr Deputy Speaker, speaking to the point of order, I quoted from the minister’s speech, from the statement he delivered in November last year, and I read exactly the words that were uttered by the minister in this House. Now he points me to clause 6B which refers to the functions and powers of the board. They are contrary points and, therefore, I do not see any point of order.
Mr Deputy Speaker: If you would like to move a substantive motion, you may, but I am asking you to withdraw it.
Dr LIM: Withdraw that the minister misled the House?
Mr Deputy Speaker: Yes. There is a process for that. This is not the time.
Dr LIM: I will withdraw that. Mr Deputy Speaker, I have made my comments. I withdraw the comment.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MOTION
Note Statement - Crime Prevention Initiatives
Note Statement - Crime Prevention Initiatives
Continued from 19 February 2003.
Ms CARTER (Port Darwin): Mr Deputy Speaker, we all know that law and order issues are a major concern to Territorians, and that their concern is growing. So far, Labor’s crime prevention initiatives have not had any positive impact on crime. Every day, we are confronted in the press with stories of robberies, bashings, rape and murder. In the last few weeks, we have had headlines from the Northern Territory News such as ‘Thieves targeting inner city homes’, ‘Gang breaks teen’s jaw in thrill bashing’, ‘Street kids target tots’, ‘Rugby family bashed by kids’, ‘Cop memo reveals staff crisis’, ‘Sex attack on teen’, ‘Woman bashed to death on road’, ‘Husband’s machete attack on wife to show that he cared’, and ‘Attack victim flees’. These are just the big ones that made it to the paper. What about the hundreds of crimes which happen but which, more and more, people know it is pointless to report because nothing will happen? The police are understaffed, the court system is too lenient, the criminals are too young.
I must make a point on young criminals. We are told that they hunt in packs. Their favourite locations include the cinema at Palmerston, Casuarina Square, Karama shops and the petrol station there and, of course, the Darwin CBD. My understanding is that small children under the age of 10 years front up to a person and begin to abuse them. When that person responds they begin an attack and, by using a mobile phone, call in reinforcements who are ready, waiting in the wings. Scores of teenagers then arrive to overwhelm and bash their quarry. I assume the motive is to alleviate boredom and have some fun. By the time the police or other help turns up, the damage is done.
I am told some bashings at the Palmerston cinema complex happen in the foyer and the deed is over in seconds. The young criminals then run off and nothing is done. If the police are able to apprehend someone, their age precludes any action.
What is happening to this world? How bad does it have to get before the government gets tough on the perpetrators of violent crime? How much does the community have to endure? Because of the way the government collects crime statistics, it is very hard to use them as a true reflection of what is happening. I have been told by constituents that, when they have been broken into, they ring the police but it is difficult to get anyone to show much concern about their fate, and sometimes no police come out. Also, my constituents are concerned that the crime is not recorded on the statistics because no further action was taken. Therefore, some people in the community are becoming dispirited. They wonder if there is any point in reporting what happens to them. They know the police are overworked and, from time to time, they feel that because their security screen door was jemmied and only $20 taken, they will not call the police; they will just get the door fixed.
I have some concern about how well the crime statistics reflect reality. Certainly, despite all the government’s claims that crime is decreasing under Labor, many of the people I talk to are not convinced. It would be great if the government could provide a table showing how many crimes are committed in a certain category - for example, break and enter - then show on the same table how many resulted in a person being committed for trial and then what sentence they actually received. So if they got six months but it was fully suspended, that sort of information is on the table. It would also be great if the data could be broken down to reflect various locations in the Northern Territory. People want to know what happens to criminals: are they caught; are they punished; is there any deterrent?
I have been told that the Magistrates Court in Darwin is very busy at the moment. In fact, a friend who works there reckons it is the busiest they have ever known it. Does that mean that crime is up, that even though the police are unable to respond to some reports of crime in a way that keeps the public happy, a significant number of arrests are happening and people are finding themselves in court? Then what happens to them? How are the gaols and juvenile detention centres going? Are they full or empty? Given the number of cases in the courts, do we need to build bigger gaols? Or is there a pressure on magistrates not to sentence people to gaol as there is no room for them? I ask these questions on behalf of Territorians, the people I am here to represent.
My friend who works at the Magistrates Court has given me some court lists and we have talked about them. These lists are available to the public via the Internet. My friend told me that what they have seen over the last year or so is an increase in the severity of the crimes committed, and a fall in the age of the people accused of these crimes. In a nutshell, it appears that criminals are becoming younger, and the sorts of things they are doing are becoming more serious.
On the court lists I was given was for Thursday, 30 January this year, the crimes being tried included: aggravated assault; assault on a member of the police force; drink driving; entering a dwelling with intent; stealing; unlawful use of a motor vehicle; possess, carry, use, control of weapon; unlawfully cause grievous harm; demand with menaces; possess a dangerous drug; armed with an offensive weapon; unlawful damage of property; receive stolen property; and assault on a female, offender a male. Although the list does not indicate the age of the accused, one thing which struck me was the number of times people had been charged with aggravated assault. It would be interesting for a researcher to examine whether or not the rate of assault was increasing in the Territory, and why.
Despite what the government tells people, we are concerned about crime in the Territory. We think it is getting worse. A constituent recently told me that:
- They …
They meant the police and the government:
- … bang up a few signs …
Meaning drug houses:
- … and think they have solved the drug problem. But they …
The dealers:
- … are just home delivering now.
This emphasis by the government on cannabis use in the urban areas is, I believe, a smoke screen. Labor is desperate to look like the CLP because they know our tough action in crime was popular in the community amongst the majority, the hard-working, law-abiding Territorians. The dilemma for the Martin Labor government is that they cannot bring themselves to touch the socially and economically disadvantaged, the group from which most criminals come, so they go hard on drugs in a desperate effort to shore up support for the next election.
Well, good luck to them. I can guarantee the CLP will have plenty to offer then, and I reckon that what we will have to offer Territorians will look pretty good, given that by then they will be sick to death of soft Labor action on crimes, the things that really concern the average person.
Dr BURNS (Tourism): Mr Deputy Speaker, it was very interesting for me listening to the Leader of the Opposition last week in adjournment debates reporting to parliament on his trip to New York. I was particularly interested in the two instalments that he gave. Of the statements that he made, one of them I agreed with, the other one I disagreed with. The one that I agreed with was when he talked about people responding to the fact that there was no visible crime in the area. If people were panhandling, if there was graffiti, or if there were broken windows in an area, just the appearance of crime - even though it might be small things - being cleaned up is very important as a measure of whether crime is occurring. But he also said that should be the major measure of crime activity rather than statistics and figures.
Whilst I agree that the sort of observations citizens and police make about the appearance of crime in a neighbourhood is very important, I also think that we should not lose sight of the importance of crime statistics and measuring crime. The members opposite have outlined possibly some of the problems inherent in measuring crime. I will come back to that issue about the appearance of crime because the Leader of the Opposition challenged members opposite to put up their hand if they thought things were getting better in their electorate. I put up my hand. I am standing up here today to talk about why I put up my hand and to put some detail into that. I will come back to that, but I am just flagging that as a direction in which I am headed with what I have to say.
Second, some of the problems that are being outlined regarding crime and itinerancy, antisocial behaviour, and youth out of control and delinquency, have been around for quite some time. I went through the Parliamentary Record in relation to my predecessor, the member for Jingili - and I am not having a shot at my predecessor …
Mr Dunham: But …
Dr BURNS: Wait a little while to hear what I have to say to illustrate that antisocial behaviour or youth disruption around places like Casuarina, has been around for some time.
It was a problem that he had to try to address as the member for Jingili. I will compliment him as the member for Jingili. He was instrumental in setting up the Wagaman Residents Group, a very active group which still meets in my electorate office, and that group has been able to achieve quite a lot. Local residents taking action is very important, I believe, in addressing issues relating to crime.
Just listen to what I have to say, please, member for Drysdale, and you will see where I am going with it. This is from a debate on 5 June 2001. It was a ministerial statement on law and order, the term given then by the Opposition Leader who was then Attorney-General. The member of Jingili said:
- I have an area adjacent to Casuarina Square and with the advent in the last years of development of the
cinema complex and the gaming machine parlour and other things on the Trower Road side of Casuarina
Square, it is something of a magnet to the juveniles in the northern suburbs.
He then goes on, as I have said, to talk about the Wagaman Residents Group which he was instrumental in forming, and that is still a very active group. In recent meetings of that group that I have been able to attend, they have been reporting a decrease in antisocial behaviour in that area, even on weekends when it should be expected, like when there are late night pictures on at the Casuarina cinema. They have a system: if they see something happening, they are on to the police and the police come and address those issues. The youth in the area have the message that, if they start to loiter and play up in that area, there is going to be something happen. That is an important issue.
The member for Jingili also talked about itinerancy in the area around the Airport Hotel and the park opposite the Airport Hotel:
- Another issue in my electorate is itinerant people, as has been talked about by a number of members …
He talked about people camping in the area, the Airport Hotel and he said:
- … and it is a major problem. I have been in close consultation with the police and the Night Patrol
and their services have been very welcome.
He goes on to talk about police staffing and police response:
- People do complain about response times at times, but again, the staffing of the police during the
day, and particularly in the early hours of the morning, if there is an incident police have to prioritise
these incidents and respond accordingly.
This was talked about in 2001 so a lot of the issues were identified long before the change of government, and they were a focus for the previous member. He also talked about drug houses, and Foils at Moil was one that was talked about:
- I have also worked with my colleague, the member for Sanderson, in relation to antisocial houses and the
one in particular that dispensed drugs. I have one in my electorate that is well known. This is a house within
which people have absolutely no regard for the law to reside. We have had over the period of the last few
years countless raids on these premises. We have had a number of arrests at these premises and police
have brought as much pressure and as much weight to bear on residents of these premises as is possible
within the letter of the law, yet they continue on. They almost thumb their nose at the law because they
have no regard for it.
This was something that I came into contact with when I doorknocked the area of Foils at Moil. I encountered a lot of anger in residents there that the previous government and the police, I guess, had not been able to close down Foils at Moil. Now, the debate that I am quoting from here, from the member for Jingili, was a prelude to a debate on 4 July. A bill introduced by the previous government just prior to the last election, the Public Order and Anti-Social Conduct Bill. That was flagged as being the panacea to address this whole issue of antisocial behaviour, whether it be youth in the area of the Casuarina complex, itinerants in the area of the Airport Hotel, or drug houses.
That bill was passed, but the previous government was voted out and now they are in opposition. We, as candidates associated with the then opposition, came to government with a platform about drugs in particular, and about solving drug issues. We have moved to implement some of those things. That has been discussed fairly widely in the debates about the Task Force Report on Illicit Drugs that was tabled by the Minister for Health and Community Services. I do not want to go over too much about that, but it is important that this link between drugs and crime is put into perspective - and the level of drug use in the Territory - because what I have heard from members opposite is really a denial of the level of illicit drug use in the Territory.
I refer them to the 2001 National Drug Strategy Household Survey that was carried out by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, published in August 2002. It is for the period of 2001. Table 6 of this report is: ‘Recent illicit drug use: proportion of the population aged 14 years and over, Australian states and territories, 2001’. I am prepared to table this if necessary. This was the election year. For marijuana and cannabis, the proportion in the Territory was nearly 25% at that stage. The Australian average was 12.9%. As you can see, use in the Northern Territory was by far and away almost double the national average. That was something that was conceded by the Leader of the Opposition earlier today. He went on to deny that really any other drug class was a problem in terms of illicit drug use.
We move down the list: amphetamines. In the Northern Territory, the proportion is 6.3%, the highest in Australia, and the Australian average is 3.4%. Pain killers and analgesics: 3.8%; the Australian average 3.1%. The only place higher was Western Australia. Hallucinogens: the NT proportion was 1.7%, second only to the ACT, 1.8%, and the Australian average 1.1%. Injected drugs, here is a very important one: the Australian average, 0.6% - 0.6%, and the Territory proportion, 1.9%, three times the national average. So it is absolutely facile and stupid of anyone to come into this place and argue against the published evidence and say: ‘Oh well, we might have a bit of a problem with cannabis but, you know, everywhere else is all right’. It is not all right. I could go on.
Here is a very interesting one. Methadone: 0.3% for the Territory; 0.1% for the rest of Australia, and that really ties in - and I have quoted from this article before, and the sets of articles in the Medical Journal of Australia, 20 November 2000. A lot has been said in this place about the diversion of opiates, particularly morphine, and I have spoken about how that was probably worth millions, probably over $10m a year. I was challenged on that by the member for Macdonnell, and I showed him my figures, and he has not come back to me since about it. But the thing about it that is often missed – and this article deals with it – is methadone tablets. Not methadone syrup which is used for methadone maintenance or methadone withdrawal, it is methadone tablets, the 5 mg and 10 mg tablets. The Territory had the highest use of methadone in Australia during this very period when the former government said we were not having a methadone maintenance program. There was a de facto methadone maintenance program using methadone 5 mg and 10 mg tablets, and their use was significant.
Mr Kiely: So who lied?
Mr Dunham: Well, if you are talking about lies, it is probably him, mate.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, on both sides, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: That was provoked by the interjection from the government side.
Mr Dunham: I will withdraw mine; you withdraw yours …
Madam SPEAKER: Let us make sure we do not have any more of those provocative comments.
Mr Kiely: I did not call anyone a liar. You did.
Mr Dunham: ‘Who lied?’, you said.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, continue.
Dr BURNS: Madam Speaker, here is a graph that is lifted from this article by Berbatis et al, volume 173, page 524, which clearly shows - I put a green arrow there – in 1993 this escalation of methadone use above the Australian average, which is down here. There is this game going on with both methadone and morphine which was ignored by the previous government. It is very important that I make these points about illicit drugs and the problems. We released our tough on drugs strategy in August, and then amended the Misuse of Drugs Act.
The former member for Jingili tried to close down the Foils at Moil for many years. I do not doubt his sincerity, and that he tried hard, but in his six years there, he was not successful. My information is that before Foils at Moil closed earlier this year, it had actually been in operation for well over a decade. I can tell you that neighbours in that area were absolutely offended. They were asking questions about the propriety of how that could happen, about the law, about these people snubbing their noses at the law. As I said in my adjournment the other night, Foils at Moil has closed. If you are talking, as the Opposition Leader has done, about appearances, I would like to read an e-mail that I received from a constituent - not a party member, just an ordinary person:
- Job well done.
- Dear Chris,
Congratulations to you and all your colleagues in your results with Moil Foil. The work you are doing
with the itinerants is also appreciated, as we all like to be able to go to shops without being harassed.
I notice that after we spoke the last time, the patrols commenced with vigour inside Casuarina Shopping
Centre by uniformed police.
- HUGE electorate issue is law and order, as I am sure you are aware.
Yes, I am aware; members opposite are aware. I know in my electorate - that is why I put up my hand when the Opposition Leader asked - I am getting runs on the board because Foils at Moil is gone. You know, the only person who has ever complained to me is a self-confessed supporter of the CLP. I will not go into the details about that. This person came up to me at the markets and he was angry. ‘So you have closed our shop’, he said. ‘You have closed our shop’. I thought: ‘What is going on? The shops at Moil are not closed’. Then he said: ‘No, Foils at Moil’. And he was angry. So ...
Mr Henderson: Good riddance!
Dr BURNS: Good riddance, yes. I have had many accolades for closing that. Itinerancy and antisocial behaviour are very important issues, and I have been active in that regard, as has my predecessor, the member for Jingili. However, in addition to what he did, liaising with the police and the Night Patrol, as everyone knows, we have increased the hours of the Night Patrol and put considerable extra resources into this whole issue of itinerancy and antisocial behaviour.
I have also taken the trouble to go and speak to the licensees. As a result of a conversation I had with the licensee of the Airport Hotel, they have changed their policy in that their take-away is strictly a drive through. They said they would not serve anyone on foot any more. Hey, presto! There is quite a big difference as everyone can see.
Mr Dunham: That is working. That is definitely working, that one!
Dr BURNS: Let us just test it out when the weather clears up a bit. I believe there has been a significant beneficial effect. But let us just see what happens there. I am not saying the problem is solved, but I am just saying it is interesting.
I have also been talking with the itinerants around the Moil shops and there continues to be a serious problem around those shops in itinerancy and antisocial behaviour. I stood at the door at the Moil shops the other morning at 10 am with an Aboriginal leader of this particular Port Keats group. We had been discussing this for some time. I spoke to the group about my concerns, and the concerns of neighbouring people in the area, that people are being injured, and there have been some deaths in that area. I also told them that I realised that they have problems back in their home community, but they are not going to solve them by drinking in Darwin. The community leader then delivered what I had to say, in language to them, and completely affirmed what I had to say. Now, that is communication. I am trying hard, and the residents, as indicated by that e-mail that I read out, know that I am trying hard.
It is a very difficult issue and the minister has also flagged that it is not going to be cured overnight. Certainly, the supply of grog is a problem and we, as a community, have to look at the number of outlets that there are for liquor and the hours that they trade. However, that is only just a part of it; there are a whole range of other things that we have to look at to try and reduce antisocial behaviour.
In conclusion, it is a pleasure for me to talk about my electorate this evening. I am not pretending that the electorate is crime-free, that there are no break and enters. But I have illustrated by local action, by people keeping their eyes out, by police being vigilant and having a local member who is very interested in the issue, that things can get better. As the Opposition Leader flagged, if people see a crack house close down, that improves the neighbourhood. Similarly, if they see Foils at Moil close down they feel better about that, too!
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I respect much of the contribution from the member for Johnson, though we are having difficulty in defining what really is the issue here. A part of the contribution illustrates the problems with crime and the ascending levels of crime as justification for the strategies that are employed. That is the same message from this side. It becomes an issue of our attitude towards crime.
In defining the argument, it appears to be quite clear that the strategy, from the point of view of government, is to endeavour to paint - cleverly, I would have to admit - a picture that members on this side of the House are of the view that drugs are not a big issue. Quite the opposite. They are a profoundly serious concern to our community. What we are talking about is defining the issue and our response to that issue.
When it becomes a war of words and the crafting of cleverly presented perceptions such as your strategy, it is self preservation for political ends rather than taking a genuine approach to the issue of crime to apprise yourself of what really is happening and then respond to that issue. I admit that it occurs on both sides, but the community deserves a lot better in being very honest with what is happening in our community and then having a genuine and proactive approach to dealing with that.
There are serious problems in the community, and how do we address those? The six-point plan would receive a round of applause from anyone, for any political party that would articulate such sentiments. It is a bit like having rules on the classroom wall and saying: ‘This is our behaviour management policy. Three cheers for the behaviour management policy!’ while the kids are running amok. The issue is: how do you manage that group of people? How do you actually influence the behaviour of the people you are endeavouring to affect? That is the issue, not the two-point, six-point, seven-point or the nine-point plan. The issue is: how do you influence the behaviour of people? Honesty is a good place to start.
The first issue I would like to raise is that we have had crime forum meetings in Palmerston. They were convened for a genuine reason: the constituency was concerned and very angry about crime. The first comment I received from the other side was now we have taken an interest in crime as though it is some stage managed event. Certainly not. As the former speaker, a local member, has responded to issues in his own way, the electorate will decide how effective it has been. It was this and other local members in the area who responded to the voice of concern that was rising up in the community. It is important simply to respond to them and to see what sort of difference we could make. We can make a difference when we deal honestly with the issue before us.
We had at that meeting, our third meeting, representatives of the Attorney-General who told us that certain things would occur. We crafted up some positions that we wanted to be developed. Some of those have been responded to, and we acknowledge and respect that. But there are other aspects of what we have placed before government - because effectively as a group of people we can only go so far - that have not been taken on board. We have not really heard back. I am not interested, as the local member, in continually gathering people together to hear what they have to say and make them feel that they have a real part to play, when that can be an activity in itself which creates the impression of some kind of progress. Activity is not necessarily the objective here. In fact, it is not the objective. The objective is to reduce crime.
There are certain things that we, as a crime forum, and concerned citizens of Palmerston, wanted to see addressed with real grit and some moral character with regards to dealing with juveniles and their families. We have had the announcement that there will be School Attendance Officers and we are grateful that one will be allocated to Palmerston. We do not criticise the appointment or the provision of that valuable resource but, ever since this has been aired - and you have had a reasonable amount of air play on this: the commitment, the allocation in the budget, a number of references to it over time, and I still I do not believe the position has actually been filled physically at Palmerston - questions have been asked all the way along. Give us some detail. How does this actually work? What is the relationship of this person to the other management structures in the school environment? What sort of powers does this person have in dealing with the parents who are the ones consenting to non-attendance at school? We know there is a relatively small group, but this position is there not to create an effect of some activity; it is to make a difference. The questions that we have asked with regards to what sort of powers will be given to a person who stands in the position of being a School Attendance Officer is critical. Otherwise, it is another step in the right direction, but does not seem to have the edge that is required.
We can see that crime has reduced in Palmerston, but we have made a rod for our back. Because we have been an active community, we have had a crime prevention committee going for a number of years in Palmerston run through the mayor’s office which has been well supported. We have had the Palmerston Crime Forum which started as a response to a number of house breaks-in Palmerston last year, and we have a very active Palmerston Regional Business Association. We are a fairly cohesive community which takes issues seriously and takes a proactive response to them. The problem is that it has been perceived, because we speak up about crime and try to make some progress on it, that Palmerston has a unusually large crime problem. The crime figures do not actually demonstrate that. They would support the argument that the incidence of juvenile crime, house breaks and so on, is greater in the northern suburbs than it is in Palmerston. However, by the positive activity of residents in Palmerston, we seem to fall prey of the stigma of having a higher incidence of crime. I dispute that, and the figures support it.
Just going further, at a public meeting a little while back, we floated the idea of a positive response to crime at the Palmerston boat ramp. As a community that works well in who relates to whom and which agency should be taking carriage of this, the Palmerston Crime Forum took the position of canvassing a solution, then, once that solution had been ticked off by community consultation, handed it across to the Palmerston Town Council and received some airing in the media. The Palmerston Town Council then made application to the minister responsible for the allocation of funding to upgrade boat ramps in view of issues of crime at the boat ramps. It was a very well consulted, well considered and well supported proposal, but it was not supported by government, with a fair bit of fanfare and strange behaviour here from members of government, as though something had been amiss in the paperwork when, really, it was a very politically influenced response to the activity of Palmerston residents. They will not forget it and that issue remains on the agenda. I am committed, as well as other Palmerston members, to make sure that does not happen again, and that Palmerston residents are fairly, squarely and genuinely responded to without the side show that occurred in this House.
I would take issue with the alternative education site. Once again, a cleverly constructed phrase that indicates ‘site’ as in a location. For those community members who go about their daily business and endeavour to make progress with their own agendas and who also have concerns about crime, they would sense perhaps we are talking about that sort of thing that we need: a school especially designed and resourced to attend to the needs of those kids who are falling out of the control of classroom teachers, who are wandering on the street, and is like an alternative school. Cleverly constructed, an ‘alternative education site’ is referred to.
On closer inspection, there is $500 000 allocated to this. The site, once again, is ill-defined. What is this ‘site’? With $500 000 attributed to it, those who are unable to go further than just acknowledge the reference to this initiative of government will think that is a step in the right direction. Perhaps it is. But calling it a site creates the impression that it is some sort of new construction, new building, when it is probably just a special program run in an existing school. So that is quite a clever and inflated description of an activity which is a fairly mild response to an incredibly serious problem that the Palmerston Crime Forum, in fact, has called for. I would have to say, with the little information and definition to what this actually is, we are underwhelmed by the lack of information.
I turn to the Palmerston Crime Forum and the Palmerston Regional Business Association. Members opposite would be aware that the visitation of crime upon business has become a concern among the members of the Palmerston Regional Business Association. Two years ago, they started up a scheme, Business Watch. Through Business Watch, an aspect is keeping an eye on each other’s property and having a sense that we are all in this together, let us watch out for each other. Fine stuff, modelled on Neighbourhood Watch, with the tree so that you can phone up people and pass messages through the system. That was put in place, and credit to Sergeant Rod Strong who developed the model with the Palmerston Regional Business Association.
One positive aspect of this has been attention to the way that you present your building, and consideration to design and the lighting of places that may provide refuge and give opportunity to those who are intent on lawlessness. That has been positive, but average citizens find it hard enough to be involved in Neighbourhood Watch, businesses even more so because they do not actually live in their business premises. The issue of crime has re-emerged. How much crime is there? If we do not talk to each other, we do not really know.
At a business meeting not long ago, they asked to look at this question and a survey was sent out. There are 303 members of this business association, and I believe it was early last week, or late the week before, that a survey was sent out. Of those 300 businesses, I believe there were just short of 100 responses, which is very good when you consider a whole range of businesses caught up in there. And do not be misled into thinking it is only Palmerston businesses; it is Palmerston and regional and I believe that 100 of the members are actually Darwin or Winnellie-based. They were asked these questions:
- In the last 12 months, in the course of business, have you suffered any vandalism or burglary?
50.6% of them said yes, they have. The next question surprised every one of us who had a look at these figures:
- In the last 12 months, in the course of business, have you or any of your staff been assaulted?
27.6% said: ‘Yes’.
Mr Kiely: What was the definition of ‘assault’, by the way?
Mr MILLS: It was physical or verbal. Question 3:
- Have you caught any shoplifters on your premises?
17.2% said: ‘Yes’.
- Do you have trouble with juveniles or itinerants hanging around your business and harassing or
scaring your customers?
24% said: ‘Yes’.
Now, those figures can be viewed in different ways. Some members on that side may have received this survey because, perhaps, some of them are members of the association. Interestingly though, question 5 was:
- If you have encountered any of the above, did you report it?
22% said: ‘Yes, we reported all of them’, but over half of them said no, they had not. I will be honest with you: some of them would have felt that the size of the crime did not warrant the amount of effort put into it, so they just let it go. But there are others who commented by saying: ‘What is the point? What is going to happen as a result of that?’. Over half of those who had a visitation of crime upon their business did not report to the police. There were a range of responses. The strongest response was: ‘What is the point?’.
This is quite important when we consider our response to crime figures; the level of reported and unreported crime. My belief is that unreported crime in our community is on the increase because people think: ‘What is the point in reporting the crime? What is actually going to happen?’. That goes back to our initial concern in response to this - and it is not to pass poor judgment upon the work of the police in this respect - the resourcing and the equipping of the police to attend promptly to crime and to restore the faith and confidence in our community in their attitude towards crime. They need that sort of back-up; they need to be able to understand they are not alone in their fight against crime.
That brings me to the position that I started with: attitude to crime. It is critical that our community feels that they are supported in their stance against crime. If we run around the community and say: ‘Let us all get together and have community groups and then, as a community, we will together provide the solutions’, if we are not careful with that, we can mislead people and create the impression of activity. What we need is strong leadership to say that, if there is crime, we are darn serious about it and, in fact, we are very angry about it. Crime figures can be interpreted one way or another and, if they do not look like they are going too well, let us all be honest about that and get on the front foot and get darn angry about it. Let us not have political debates about the definition of crime and our response to it, how wonderful our strategy is and how appalling the strategy of the other mob was. That is ridiculous! It is not making much difference to the people out there whose insecurity in regard to crime in the community is rising. Maybe it is, maybe it is not. My belief is that the level of crime is increasing in the community. I suspect it is, but what is increasing to a larger degree, is the lack of community feeling and confidence with linkages from agencies letting the average citizen know that their contribution is a meaningful one.
We do have a long way to go in making and influencing a positive effect on the incidence of crime in our community. Let us not hold ourselves back to raise certain points – six-point plans, etcetera - as being the end in itself. The end is a genuine reduction in crime in our community.
Debate adjourned.
TABLED PAPER
Remuneration Tribunal Determination -
Report of Overseas Travel, Member for Brennan
Remuneration Tribunal Determination -
Report of Overseas Travel, Member for Brennan
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I lay on the Table the report submitted by the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Denis Burke, MLA, on the overseas study visit to Africa and the United States undertaken pursuant to paragraph 9.2 of the Remuneration Tribunal Determination.
TABLED PAPER
Auditor-General’s Report, February 2003
Auditor-General’s Report, February 2003
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I lay on the Table the February 2003 Report of the Auditor-General to the Legislative Assembly.
MOTION
Print paper - Auditor-General’s Report, February 2003
Print paper - Auditor-General’s Report, February 2003
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I move that the February 2003 Report of the Auditor-General to the Legislative Assembly be printed.
Motion agreed to.
MOTION
Note paper - Auditor-General’s Report,
February 2003
Note paper - Auditor-General’s Report,
February 2003
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the report.
I thank the Auditor-General for his report dated February 2003. His report contains a number of comments on issues relevant to agencies within my portfolio. The report includes comments on audits of the books of the accounts for the Major Events Company and Hidden Valley Promotions.
Going first to the Major Events Company. Major Events is a government-owned company established under the Corporations Law. It is subject to the accounting rules and regulations that apply to all registered companies. Major Events is funded by the government and receives its operating funds at the start of each financial year. The report notes that, in the year to 30 June 2002, the Major Events Company provided funding totalling $652 225 to events other than the V8 Supercars. It is also observes that on 30 June 2002, the company’s liabilities exceeded its assets by $65 874. It further comments on the company’s reliance on the government for ongoing funding.
The role of the Major Events Company is to attract and promote headline sporting and entertainment events for Territorians. It is pleasing to see that in 2002, the company supported a wide range of events that were conducted in centres right across the Territory. These included the Main Event, Grease, the Tennant Creek go-carts, the Finke Desert race and the 60th Anniversary of the Bombing of Darwin. This government works closely with the Major Events Company and sees them continuing their role, not only in bringing major events to the Territory, but also by assisting the development of local artists, talent and events.
The Auditor-General correctly notes on 30 June 2002 the company’s liabilities exceeded its assets by $65 874. On 30 June 2002, the company had not received its funding for the financial year 2002-03 but was able to meet all liabilities as and when they fell due for payment. The company was solvent with a healthy balance of cash in the bank. It should also be noted that an independent audit of the company’s books and accounts for the year ending 30 June 2002 resulted in an unqualified audit opinion.
Another aspect within my portfolio on which the Auditor-General comments is Desert Knowledge. The report includes comments on an audit of the performance management systems in the Desert Knowledge Project, DKP. DKP is a government initiative in association with several Aboriginal, local and Commonwealth government and non-government agencies. It is a program for social and economic growth that will build improved livelihoods for people in desert areas. A major function is working to identify and develop commercial opportunities that arise from the Territory’s desert environment and the skills and know-how that stems from living and working in that environment. The Auditor-General notes that the project is in its establishment phase and that its performance management systems are not fully mature and need to be defined and developed. Comments have been made on the lack of quantified key result areas and measures of success in the draft business plan, and the need to implement an output based management system.
The report observes that the project is progressing well with numerous targets being achieved, but indicates that it is not clear how, what and when the potential benefits are to be realised for Territorians. Being in its establishment phase, the Desert Knowledge Australia management team has been focussed on steps required to consolidate the project as a sustainable development. This is a new area of endeavour which aims to identify commercial opportunities for further development through development of networks and partnerships. An early success of the DKP has been to facilitate a partnership of institutions across Australia to secure Commonwealth approval and funding for a Desert Knowledge Cooperative Research Centre. The submission to secure Commonwealth funding for this project was a significant undertaking that required considerable research and the development of a sound business plan. This plan included a well-developed performance management plan.
In December, I was delighted to announce that this submission had been successful and the Cooperative Research Centre would receive funding of almost $21m over the next seven years, a significant proportion of which will be spent on research and development in the Territory.
A more recent development is the Cool Communities Project that already involves over 110 households in Alice Springs. These families are working together to improve efficiencies in energy and water use and development of better recycling. Local businesses are also contributing to the program which will bring significant benefits to lifestyles in Central Australia.
The Auditor-General’s comments on the need for effective performance management systems have been noted and will be addressed by the Desert Knowledge Project.
Debate adjourned.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Economic Development
Economic Development
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, economic development is our most important issue because it provides employment for Territorians. Jobs are what bring people to the Territory and keep Territorians, including our young people, here where we need them.
Creating jobs is our top priority. We are planning for the jobs of the future by putting more resources into education and training. However, to improve living standards now, we must focus on fast-tracking economic development projects for the benefit of the whole community. Our economic and social planning go hand in hand. As part of a whole-of-government plan, this government is focussed on improving our schools, our university and our hospitals, and protecting our natural environment as well as our unique lifestyle.
These measures will boost the Territory’s attractiveness as a place to live and work. They will also ensure that all Territorians have equal access to the jobs and business opportunities the future will bring. From the time of our election in August 2001, my government has set a course for economic growth and development. With a population of around 200 000 - the figure is subject to dispute, but it is only a fraction of most states - occupying one-sixth of Australia’s land mass, there are big challenges in providing sustainable jobs and services to all.
This task requires a long-term perspective and an integrated governmental approach, and it requires close cooperation – indeed, partnership - with our business sector and trade unions. That is why our plans to build a better Territory were put to an Economic Development Summit soon after our election. It was a forum for Territorians to voice their views and put forward their ideas for development. We as a government took on those ideas in drawing up an economic development strategy. That strategy was released last year and now forms the backbone of the work of all agencies in the NT Public Service with regular reporting to this House.
My statement today builds on the work of our summit delegates, the continued contribution of Territorians and the hard work of our public sector. It will provide Territorians with a snapshot of our major plans through this year in economic development, particularly in regard to major projects.
Before I outline these plans, I would like to announce an important process to streamline major projects and to cut government red tape. We have learnt from business people that dealing with a wide range of government regulatory bodies in the past has often proved frustrating and can lead to needless delays. Today I announce the establishment of seven whole-of-government task forces covering the following developments:
the LNG project at Wickham Point;
the proposed Alcan expansion at Gove;
MIM’s proposed Macarthur River zinc project;
the AustralAsia Trade Route, building on the Adelaide to Darwin rail link;
two major construction projects in our Defence industries;
the Stokes Hill Wharf redevelopment; and
the Darwin Convention Centre.
The twin aims of this plan are these: to help fast-track major projects and to maximise local content and jobs for Territorians. The government task forces will be a one-stop shop for each project. They will help prepare for new opportunities and add vigour to the development of new and existing industries. Project managers will be assisted in compliance with Work Health and safety requirements and in getting to the nub of our regulatory and approval requirements. The task forces will also help government gear up for project infrastructure needs. The task forces will work in parallel with any environmental assessments being undertaken by government, and in no way preempt our rigorous environmental processes.
They are established to ensure if and when environmental and corporate approvals are given, maximum benefits will accrue to the Territory in the way of job opportunities and business spin-offs. These task forces will demonstrate the professional investment management approach by the Territory government and will be a key component of our investment facilitation plan to be announced in the near future.
Overall, the benefit of this approach is to manage the coordination of a potential $5bn - that is a conservative figure - in new investment coming our way and to assist the government’s economic development agenda. The task forces will comprise a small team of expert officials reporting to the major project group of key development CEOs under the head of my department. In other words, we have $5bn in major projects we have been working hard to attract to the Territory, and this is a way to extract maximum benefits for Territorians. We want to drive these projects to make them happen.
Turning now to individual projects. The attainment of gas onshore remains one of our very highest priorities. It underpins all the other developments we want to see here. Some time ago, my government established a three-point strategy for this campaign. First, secure the Wickham Point LNG project; second, prevent Sunrise Gas being developed offshore by a floating LNG installation that would take it away from the Territory; and finally, but just as importantly, we want to drive the development of smaller fields in the Timor Sea such as Blacktip, Petrel and Tern, among others, and they are very much in the news at the moment.
This strategy has been very much a partnership effort with important input from Team NT, our alliance group of business, industry and unions. I would like to pay tribute to all of its members, but particularly Bruce Fadelli and Steve Margetic who have devoted so much of their precious time and so many hard earned resources to this strategy. They, like all of us, know that gas will be the catalyst for a step change in the Territory economy. The Timor Sea gas province has almost three times the gas the North-West Shelf had when it commenced. The production value of the province has been conservatively estimated at at least $100bn.
These numbers are truly massive, but even they do not convey exactly why we want this gas onshore in Darwin. Gas provides cheap and clean power and is a primary input into the manufacturing processes. In other words, it allows the creation of a broader economy that most importantly will generate jobs for Territorians. I am convinced that the first plank in this strategy will be delivered in a matter of weeks with the commencement of the construction phase for the Wickham Point LNG plant. We are only awaiting the signal from the federal government covering treaty arrangements and the subsequent sign-off of ConocoPhillips. This is a $1.6bn project, providing more than 1000 construction jobs and cementing our position in the world energy market. Its start will also herald the 500 km $1bn Bayu-Undan pipeline to connect this field to this project. This pipeline will be the hub and focus of further development of the Timor Sea gas province, in effect opening it up and putting it on the international energy map. Once that first Timor Sea gas enters the pipeline, it will change the whole dynamic of the regional energy market.
The announcement late last year by Sunrise Joint Venturers that they had not yet found a domestic market has opened up new options. We always suspected that this project, a massive $7bn in capital expenditure, would require a long-term effort to develop. We will continue to seek out customers and work on the regulatory environment to foster development of the field. The giant resource is still out there and its time will come. We are continuing to see the smaller fields developed, the third, but just as vital, part of our strategy. Santos has told us that they are well advanced with Petrel/Tern, and Woodside is talking of fast-tracking work on the Blacktip project, with more than 1 trillion cubic feet of gas - and we know that the Blacktip developers, among others, have been talking to Alcan. These fields are good fits for these expansion projects, and my government will continue to work with the operators to discuss piping gas onshore in the near future.
Two weeks ago, there were two very significant announcements, in fact milestones in the industrial development of the Territory. Mt Isa Mines announced that the feasibility study into the expansion of the McArthur River Mine was under way. We expect a final investment decision for the project towards the end of the year, committing the company to a $1bn expansion, creating an additional 270 permanent jobs during operations, and upward of 1000 during construction.
Our largest single exporter, Alcan, made a very similar announcement just two days after that. It had started its feasibility study into a $1.4bn expansion of the refinery at Gove, with a final decision expected early in 2004. I discussed this project late last year when I met with senior Alcan officials in Montreal, and I am very pleased that they have now taken this step. We expect the construction phase to generate 1200 jobs, and Nhulunbuy to be boosted with a further 300 permanent jobs when operational.
Both these projects show that the economic development of the Territory is not simply based around Darwin. Our regions will also see a major boost as we work to develop the Territory - a very important part of our planning in our economic development strategy. These two major resource proposals are a major vote of confidence in the long-term future of the Territory, and I expect every member of this House will take a keen interest in the year-long feasibility studies and environmental impact assessments that will be undertaken in tandem.
In general, the resources sector is one of our most important and we must continue to work towards new greenfields projects, in addition to the expansion of existing mines that I have just mentioned. One such project was last week’s news that Olympia Resources had signed an agreement with the Central Land Council, granting the company access to the Harts Range garnet project, 130 km north of Alice Springs. Olympia is currently in the final phase of its feasibility study, but the signs are positive that a suitable plant can be constructed to produce a garnet concentrate for $12m to $15m. All going well, up to 100 000 tonnes of garnets could be shipped through Darwin for worldwide distribution, with 25 permanent jobs created at the mine and several more associated with transport of the resource and, of course, utilising the rail.
Turning to exploration for future mines, after a virtual five-year freeze on the granting of exploration licences under our predecessors, under this government there has been a big turnaround. Up to 340 000 km2 has been opened up since we came to office. With 648 exploration licences currently granted, this is the highest level in the Territory since 1996.
The Alice Springs to Darwin railway project continues to march towards completion. Much of the civil work is complete, and we expect track laying to continue throughout the year. The completion of what I like to call Australia’s steel spine will be a milestone for the Territory, but is only the first half of the game. We must also build an entirely new industry around this remarkable infrastructure if we are to truly benefit in terms of jobs and business opportunities.
Late last year, I announced we would establish a new $9m Darwin business park, set between the East Arm Port and the Trade Development Zone. We have set aside 40 hectares of land for the first stage of the park. This area will be used for the rail head, passenger terminal, freight handling interchange, and new value-adding industries. Already, major Australian freight handlers have expressed a desire to be part of the business park, and we expect our call for expressions of interest to generate enthusiasm from business here, interstate, and overseas. These new value-adding industries are the cornerstone of the project to bring Darwin and the railway into the international trade network between Australia and our northern neighbours.
Industries such as pre-retail handling, automotive and textiles are all expected to generate new jobs through the establishment of this new trade link. In March, I will lead a delegation with our freight partners, FreightLink, to Hong Kong, Singapore and Malaysia to sell the opportunities created by the rail to manufacturers, freight specialists, shipping lines and potential investors. I will invite them to visit the Territory to inspect our world-class infrastructure, and to participate in a major freight symposium planned for later this year.
Following discussions with South Australian Premier, Mike Rann, we have also established a working party of senior officials to ensure that we coordinate our marketing efforts and maximise the freight on the railway, particularly by diversion of freight through South Australia and new bulk freight opportunities.
I turn to another important industry: tourism. During my Asian visit next month, I will also be meeting with senior management of the major airlines in the region. We must get new services to allow our international freight, leisure and business tourism activities to flourish. I will be speaking with Malaysian Airlines, Silk Air and Cathay Pacific about the opportunities to strengthen their services in the region through Darwin.
I will also speak to them about our commitment to the Darwin Convention Centre. Currently, we have PricewaterhouseCoopers working on the most comprehensive study of the best model for a centre including scale, location, ownership mix, market niche, economic benefits and new revenue streams for our economy, and government will be making a decision on this in the next three months.
Turning to the long-awaited wharf precinct, we have announced we will proceed with this project after it had been left to sit on the shelf by our predecessors. Over the course of the last 12 months, the Minister for Transport and Infrastructure has undertaken an extensive series of community consultations to establish the vision of what should proceed at the wharf. Once government has finalised some threshold decisions about what land is available and what current usages must stay in place, a public announcement will be made. I expect to be calling expressions of interest this year for development of the site.
I have spoken of the many large projects that represent the steel, bricks and mortar of development. This has been the traditional way it has been done in the Territory, but my government is also working on other levels. We are pursuing a new dimension for the Territory: the knowledge economy. Our goal is to see the use of the knowledge that we have developed about living in the deserts and in the tropics to good economic effect and to capture the innovative research efforts undertaken by so many Territorians.
The recent successful bid for Commonwealth funds to establish the Desert Knowledge Cooperative Research Centre is the first instalment on this vision. This project is worth $94m over seven years. It will be part of the Desert Knowledge vision that also includes a Desert Knowledge Statutory Authority and the construction of a $15m Desert Peoples Centre just beyond The Gap in Alice Springs.
In the tropics, I have just received the Collins Review into research and development and that will feed into the imminent launch of the government’s tropical knowledge strategy. This will include as its centrepiece a major symposium later on this year to draw the world’s focus to the knowledge economy in the Top End.
The collective impact of the Defence sector on the Territory now exceeds $500m a year. It is a very significant component of our economy and one with real scope to attract further investment and to redirect expenditure into the Territory. I have asked minister Henderson to bolster our efforts in this area to secure more jobs for Territorians in his role as both Minister for Business, Industry and Resource Development and in Defence Support. When I met with the US Vice Admiral Timothy Le Fleur, Commander of the Pacific Naval Fleet, late last year, we spoke about what the Territory could offer the US Navy in terms of extended shore visits, R and R visits and general supplies. He was most complimentary of what we had to offer.
There is also an important opportunity emerging with the Air ‘87 project for new helicopters for the Australian Army. The Australian Defence Force has purchased 22 Tiger Armed Reconnaissance helicopters, with 16 to be based at Robertson Barracks. The federal government will spend upwards of $100m on a new base, and when I spoke with Eurocopter officials in Paris, they estimated that each year the repairs and maintenance program alone will cost upwards of another $100m. These helicopters will be built in Brisbane, opening up many opportunities for new business partnerships. Robertson Barracks will need another $70m in infrastructure to deal with the new helicopter program. The Bradshaw training area will receive $55m over the next two years. Defence Housing infrastructure is to receive another $130m in the Territory over the next three years, and the arrival of new patrol boats in Darwin commencing in 2004 will be a major boost to local businesses. There are big opportunities in maintenance and repairs over the 20-year operational life of the boats.
My government will continue to seek out new investment for the Territory and actively facilitate these projects when under way. We will also need to continue to provide the basic infrastructure to allow this to happen. When you look across the harbour, you can see the next stages of the East Arm Port development and the construction of the road and services to Wickham Point. These two projects, along with the Royal Darwin Hospital, form the mastheads of a record capital works program delivered by my government this financial year with well over $400m on track to be spent.
We have done that and still maintained our deficit reduction program through tight fiscal management to ensure that the Territory can pay its way today and, importantly, pay its way well into the future, despite the fiscal legacy of our predecessors.
I should keep in mind the very positive comments coming recently from Australia’s leading economic forecasters about the long-term economic future of the Territory. Access Economics and BIS Shrapnel both forecast a positive future for the Territory over the next five to 10 years. In its December quarter report, Access Economics predicts an average annual Territory economic growth rate of a very healthy 5.1% for the five years to 2006-07, substantially higher than the forecast for Australia as a whole and for each of the other states.
The BIS Shrapnel study, called ‘Engineering and Construction in Australia 2002-17’, this week predicts a decade of strong construction growth in the Territory from 2006. The study says engineering and construction in the Territory is in the early stages of what they are calling ‘an extraordinary boom’ which will stretch through most of the decade. These economic forecasts are a vote of confidence in our potential prosperity, but we must make this future happen. There is a competitive market for every new investment, and although we have some great advantages in the Territory, these opportunities are not going to fall into our laps. What this government is about is building the partnerships to ensure we achieve our very great potential.
Sustained economic development and the expansion of our economic base are an achievable goal. Our challenge is to keep the steady momentum, and I give my commitment that this government will do exactly that, and we will do it by involving Territorians every step of the way, as we have done from the start.
Madam Speaker, I commend this statement to the House and I move that the statement be noted.
Mr BURKE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I make some comments on this 23-page litany of the government doing nothing and hoping that things will just fall into its lap.
There used to be a time in the Northern Territory when Territorians prided themselves on being different, and the Territory was seen as the land of opportunity. In many respects, the pride in being Territorian remains. That is something all of us would like to hold on to but, when it comes to opportunity, those opportunities are almost going out the door. Some time ago, when I was Chief Minister, we commissioned a study around Australia to determine what things could be done in order to market the Northern Territory both to Australians in other parts of Australia and overseas, in order to entice them to come to the Northern Territory. I remember also the Labor opposition at the time derided that whole effort as being nothing more than a political exercise in order to advance the CLP.
It is interesting that the results of that strategy, in fact, were the background of the Chief Minister’s presentation today with the logo of the Territory. If one looks at the ads that are being run in the papers nationally, the logo, ‘The Territory: the difference is opportunity’ is well and truly there. If one talks to government bureaucrats, you will find many of them involved in getting trade and investment in the Northern Territory carry a business card which has on them ‘The Territory: the difference is opportunity’.
If we look at the 18 months of Labor government, it is hard to define that any more. When we did the strategy and the surveys around Australia and in the Northern Territory, there was no doubt that Territorians had this clear perception that they were different from other Australians, and it was reinforced by other Australians’ perceptions of Territorians being different. When you dug down into what that difference was, there was a feeling that if you came to the Northern Territory, there was more opportunity for you. No matter which way the government tries to spin the results that are there today, the last 18 months has really been 18 months of squandered opportunity. It has been 18 months of the government not having a vision as to where they want to take the Northern Territory, and very much a government that has heralded and coasted off the achievements of either previous governments or the investments that have been made by others in the Northern Territory that have been nothing to do with this government at all.
The real challenge now is to see how this Northern Territory government can try and get any capital out of the sorts of investments that are possible and to see whether or not these things will come to fruition to the benefit of Territorians. If you look at the Yellow Pages Business Index that has just been released for this quarter, it really is a litany of failures. That is shown very clearly in the Yellow Pages Business Index. Let me remind Territorians what today’s survey said about the Territory economy in the past three months. It says that business confidence declined noticeably, sales declined substantially, employment dropped significantly, profits weakened further this quarter and support for the Northern Territory government declined significantly. Now, those headlines are bad enough, but the contrast between the Territory and the rest of Australia reveals an even bleaker picture.
The Executive Summary of the February 2003 Yellow Pages Business Index begins by noting that it has recorded a noticeable increase in business confidence coupled with improved perceptions of the Australian economy, both in the short-term and over the coming 12 months. In the main, sales and profitability have strengthened considerably. Contrast that with the business index fact sheet on the Northern Territory where it says business confidence within the Northern Territory’s small and medium enterprises sector declined by 12 percentage points this quarter to a nett balance of 37%. This was by far the worst result of any state or territory and went against the national trend.
The survey says perceptions of the current state of the economy among Northern Territory’s small and medium enterprises declined by 6 percentage points during the quarter, from a nett balance of 20% to 14%, and this result contradicted a national trend where perceptions rose from 12% to 18%. Sales declined 26 percentage points during the quarter from a nett balance of 19% to minus 7%. This again represented the single lowest performance of any state or territory and underpins the lack of business confidence being experienced in the Northern Territory. Expectations for the next three months are much more positive. Territorians still believe in the Territory, but not in the government. Profitability declined 15 percentage points during the quarter from 1% to minus 14%. Those are all direct quotes from the survey.
Employment recorded a nett balance result of minus 12%, making this the worst result of any state or territory, and the state government of the Northern Territory recorded a significant decline in their approval rating within the small and medium enterprise sector with support falling from a minus 4% to minus 20%. If we look at the words, ‘worst result’, ‘contradicted national trend’, ‘lowest performance’, ‘significant decline’. The only bright spot is that sales expectations for the next three months were much more positive. However, that is only true for about a third of the businesses that were surveyed. The other expectations are that only 10% think they will increase their work force. A little over a third are hoping for an increase in profitability, and only 14% expect an increase in capital expenditure. That last figure contrasts starkly with the 41% of businesses expecting a decline in capital investment in the next three months.
It is an appalling report for the Territory, a scary report for any Territorian, and an indictment of this Labor government. What do we get in reply from this statement from the Chief Minister, which totally ignores small and medium enterprises and talks about tomorrow, not today? We all welcome these major projects that will come along, and we hope that one day that they will happen. But we have to ask ourselves: who will be around to benefit from them? The Chief Minister today presented a long report on the failure of her government to achieve anything in their first 18 months. She said nothing that will give Territory businesses any confidence for the immediate future. She offered them no hope that the government has any idea what to do to stimulate the economy, to give it a push along, to prevent more businesses leaving and more Territorians joining the jobless. The Chief Minister began with the truism that economic development is our most important issue because it provides employment for Territorians, yet she refuses to acknowledge that unemployment is rising and both the work force and the population are declining.
If we look at the ABS survey on population, there are some indisputable facts. First fact: the ABS says since the Martin government came to power, there has been a nett loss in overseas migration for the first time since 1976. Fact: while nett interstate migration has been negative since 1997-98, it increased by 65% in the first year of the Martin government. Fact: the Territory was the only place in Australia to have a declining population in the latest figures released by ABS. Fact: the work force is declining. In April last year there were 101 000 Territorians with jobs; in the latest figures for January this year there are only 98 200. If you look at the raw ABS figures, it is even worse with only 94 500 with jobs. Fact: the number of unemployed is increasing. ABS trend figures show it has risen every month since July. Fact: the work force is shrinking. There are fewer in the work force than there were when the government changed hands, and that is despite the extra 1400 jobs created by the railway.
Fact: public service numbers have fallen by more than 400 since the change of government because of the Martin government sacking or pushing out public servants they do not like. How many of them and their families have had to leave the Territory? That policy of the Labor government alone is sufficient to cause the population to fall enough to cost us half our representation in the federal parliament.
The Chief Minister talked about the long-term perspective - an integrated governmental approach and close cooperation with business people and trade unions - then cites the Economic Development Summit of November 2001 as the beginning of this government’s economic strategy. Members might ask: ‘Whatever happened to the economic summit?’ We were going to have quarterly reports on developments and, in fact, we got one. Now any mention of it has disappeared from government web sites. If you were lucky and went in search of it a week ago, you would have been told it had been removed, now you do not even get that message. I guess it is symptomatic that the Chief Minister says this statement today builds on the work of the summit. The summit has disappeared and nothing has materialised about its recommendations, except that every so many months the Chief Minister trots them all out again as brand new initiatives. This time, she says, we are going to fast-track them and give them their own little task forces. One wonders what has happened to the task forces and working groups that were previously announced. If we keep fast-tracking these projects like the Martin government has in its first 18 months, then we should all join small and medium enterprises in worrying about our future.
You have to ask what is the Office of Territory Development all about? Was it not strategically placed in the Chief Minister’s Office to fast-track and cut the red tape for the major projects? It is interesting, if one looks at these task forces, that there does not seem to be any role for the ministers in this fast-tracked task force world. Indeed, the more one looks at this government, there seems to be no active role for the ministers. We have heard often and long the Health minister decrying any responsibility she has for the work of her department. That seems to be parroting of government policy because, if you want to drive these projects along, I would have thought that you have the ministers responsible to be directly involved in driving them not, as what seems to be the case, overworked CEOs being called as part of task forces and being given a name - task force - in order to delay any decision of government for another 18 months.
It is interesting if you look at the strategies that have come through, if we just turn to gas. The Chief Minister has a wonderful way of changing her position. She states in terms of the gas strategy, the priorities were these:
- First, secure the Wickham Point LNG project. Second, prevent Sunrise gas being developed offshore by
a floating LNG installation that would take it away from the Territory.
Third, but just as importantly:
- … drive the development of smaller fields in the Timor Sea such as Blacktip, Petrel and Tern, among others.
If you had been honest with Territorians, you would have known how problematic it was. If you had been honest with Territorians, you would have recognised that Sunrise, whilst important, demanded an incredible effort - more than some group called Team NT; more than pillorying companies like Woodside and Shell - and you might have got somewhere. It is an indictment of this government that they say that they gave it their full effort. This government never laid one dollar on the table. I never saw any submission from government as to how they were going to make this thing a reality, yet they can turn around and say that this was their major strategy. Well, it was not. And if it was, you failed. You should be honest with Territorians that Sunrise - and listen to the rhetoric of the Chief Minister: ‘I still have faith in Sunrise, it will happen one day’. Well, we all have faith in Sunrise, and it may happen one day.
It is galling to hear you now talking about Blacktip, Petrel and Tern, among others, as important fields in your calculations when you scoffed at the fact that they could be a consideration as you drove for the great Sunrise achievement. Whilst I commend the efforts of business which did everything they could as being part of Team NT, there was nothing more that business could possibly have done. What it needed was more than rhetoric from this government. It needed real commitment and, in fact, it needed real dollars.
The railway: it is good to see that as railway construction is almost complete, the government is now going to put some sort of a group together and go and help FreightLink in some tangible way to get business on to that line. To stand in this Chamber today and suggest that this is wonderful, they have been in government for 18 months and are finally going to get off their backsides and do something about getting freight on to that line, is a damned indictment. To say in the ministerial statement that you are going to look to redirect – we are talking to Premier Mike Rann - it says:
- We are talking to Premier Mike Rann and we are looking for complementary strategies to get freight on to
that line including getting more freight to come through South Australia.
Well, I wish we had thought of that; that somehow the freight had to come through South Australia to get up to Darwin on a railway line. It begs the question: how else is that freight going to get up to the Northern Territory? What happened to the partnership agreements that were begun years ago with South Australia and the Northern Territory? What has the Northern Territory done with partnerships in rail with South Australia? Has that just been rebadged? Is this just some new rhetoric now? Am I wrong? Is there a lot of work that has already been done or is it as this ministerial statement says, that there is now consultation with Premier Rann to establish a working party of senior officials to ensure that we coordinate our marketing efforts and maximise the freight on the railway?
It does not need another $250 000 to have the same consultancy group come up with the same answer because that is all you will get. They will not make the call for you, and if any government expects them to say: ‘Yes, you should’ or ‘No, you should not’, the government should not be sitting in government, anyway. It is a marginal call and this government should have made it by now and should not use the excuse of using a consultancy firm to spend a large amount of taxpayers’ money to go through the same exercise which, essentially, because it is the same firm, is nothing more than a cut and paste. It amazes me why the same consultancy firm was picked.
I would have thought that with the enormous amount of work that has been done already on a convention centre, if the government had concerns about whether or not it would go ahead with the project, it would have picked another consultancy firm. There are plenty in the market that have expertise in that area and I would have thought, if you wanted some value at all, you would have compared reports and noted where some aspects of any report were weaker than others. To go out and get the same firm and spend an enormous amount of money is nothing more than a waste of taxpayers’ money. There is no sense saying that, since 11 September, things have changed. Since 11 September, things have not changed in convention market. If things had changed in the convention market since 11 September, how come Alice Springs is doing so well? The convention market looks for safe venues and amenities that are new and enjoyable. I do not believe that there is anything that has happened through 11 September that has changed that situation. In particular, there are new routes being opened up by Australian Airlines, for one, that would offset that sort of comment any day.
The issue of a convention centre is simply this: if the government believes in it, it should have moved ahead on it by now. It is an indictment that, after the economic summit, when it was listed as one of your highest priorities, you have sat on your hands and have done nothing for 18 months. Now, when you have been gingered into some action, you are calling for the same consultant to produce another report so you can think about it. What you are doing, essentially, is buying time.
The Wharf Precinct: the CLP left this item on the shelf. The CLP was moving forward determinedly on the redevelopment of Stokes Hill Wharf and, again, you said that you would have a review immediately after you took government. It was a high priority of the economic summit. In fact, I believe it was the highest priority of the economic summit. The Chief Minister said she would report on it after 12 months and, after 18 months, all we see is that it has fallen into the morass of one of these other task forces and the Chief Minister is pleased that she will call for expressions of interest at some time in the future.
I tell you what: to call for expressions of interest to my mind is very worrying. I say that in this context: I spent a lot of time thinking about Stokes Hill Wharf and the redevelopment. It is very important for the Territory’s future, but the thing that has to be realised is that you only get one shot at this sort of thing. If you get it wrong, you get it wrong forever. It seemed to me to be critically important that the threshold decision in the first place, once the decision to go ahead with Stokes Hill Wharf occurred, would be to set up some corporate body to oversee the whole development. It needed to be taken out of the direct involvement of Cabinet, except for obviously some involvement, but not as the ultimate decision-making body. It needed to be done in such a way that was not just responsive to developers, because developers will come looking for the optimum advantage for them and not necessarily looking at the future for Territorians.
The model that I was always attracted to was the Cape Town waterfront development model. I spent some time looking at that model. If you look at the report I gave on the overseas trip, one of the things that I have reported on is how that model is set up. I hope that we do have a different colour of government when we do have to make these decisions. However, if not, if this Labor government moves ahead with the Stokes Hill Wharf development, it would be a sad day if expressions of interest go out, some developer comes up with a great concept and the government commits to that concept. It needs to be set up, owned and managed as a single entity which is a government owned corporation. That is the way the Cape Town development has been set up and is run.
I would like to cover some of the things I reported on because it is important to get this on the record when we talk about the Stokes Hill Wharf redevelopment. The successes of the Cape Town model are these: the waterfront is owned and managed as a single entity; Victoria and Albert Waterfront Pty Ltd. V and A is a government business enterprise. Investment is available in the total concept, but portions of the development are not sold off. The final area of development, which is occurring now, residential will be freehold through strata titling, with the V and A corporation maintaining a strong and probably controlling interest even in the residential developments. The top management team are independent of government, they are focussed, they are multiskilled and committed, and the managing director and most of that team have been with the project since its inception.
One of the successes of that project is the commitment of the team. That is why I believe that any consideration for redevelopment of Stokes Hill Wharf needs to be seen in terms of what team do you put in there at the outset to make this thing happen? The Cape Town working waterfront has been maintained as a priority. Development was concentrated in one area initially, and then expanded steadily outwards. They researched extensively the experience of other cities to find a recipe that fitted them. Tenant and business mix has been extensively researched along with a comprehensive year-round entertainment and promotions program. Parking for those who come by car is generous and attractive, and there is very good public transport. Most importantly, they focussed that development with the most important client being Cape Town people themselves. The fact is that it is geared for them first and foremost, and tourists like it as well. The place is clean and safe and, in fact, the V and A company pride themselves on maintaining an environment that is safer, cleaner, more attractive than Cape Town generally, and that is one of the great reasons for its success.
To hear the Chief Minister say that first, they have done nothing in 18 months, and second, they are looking for expressions of interest from a developer is very worrying.
I will leave it to some of my colleagues to talk about tourism, but it was not so long ago that the business minister and the new Tourism minister went over to talk to airlines Cathay Pacific, Silk Air, at least - I am not sure if Malaysian was included. There does not seem to have been any tangible outcome of that visit. I note that the Chief Minister says that she is now going over to see those same organisations. It is indicative of the fact that, sooner or later, we are going to ask for some sort of success. The government simply cannot point to it. The government can say it is great that the Army has decided to put the Tiger helicopter in Darwin, that Defence might decide to do some of its servicing in Darwin, that the Bradshaw training area is going ahead, and that Defence might be looking to put more Defence houses on the land. I want to know what the government is doing, tangibly, to make these things happen. Buildings for the Tiger helicopters will be constructed very shortly, and to say at this late stage that the government is only now considering to set up a task force to look at the whole range of developments is very worrying.
The other thing that is worrying is that, throughout this ministerial statement, there seems to be nothing that is directed to what is the real issue out there: that Territorians and Territorian businesses are hurting. I believe, in many respects, that they are tired of hearing about gas. I believe the confidence that gas from Bayu-Undan will come is there, but they are tired of hearing about how great a future it is going to provide for them, particularly when they know that, in the early years, all of that gas will go offshore. What they want to know is: what are you doing about the cost of living now? What are you doing about their business when, if you look in the Winnellie area, for example, large business with large sheds, many of which employ numbers of staff, have now been reduced quite dramatically? In many cases, it is mum and dad trying to keep their heads above water and keep that business going.
Territorians have had the greatest impact on taxes and charges from this government as opposed to any other government in the past. There was nothing in the ministerial statement to say what this government is going to do to ease the burden on Territorians and on small business. It has been a lost opportunity, a demonstration of a government that does not know how to govern. They certainly know how to spin the story, how to put out the good PR, how to say what they are ‘gunna do’, and how to set up reviews and committees and come up with a new name. People are sick of hearing about reviews and committees: ‘What will we call it? Think of another name, what can we come with? We will call it a task force this time. We will have another look at it and call it a task force’. Well, Territorians want to see action; and they want to see action now. This ministerial statement is an indictment and a litany of failure.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister and thank her for her important update on progress with growing development opportunities in the Northern Territory.
I wanted to touch on a couple of the tired old truisms coming from the Leader of the Opposition. What he neglects to mention anywhere, in squaring up the debate on this, is the situation that he left the Territory in. He, as Chief Minister, oversaw a budget blow-out in 2000-01 of $275m. Does he think that does not have to be paid for? Does he think that does not add the legacy of the burden of debt for future Territorians? Does he think that does not restrict the ability of government of the day to bring on new initiatives? Does he think that does not restrict the amount of money a government has to spend? Of course, we saw when we came to government that it was going to be headed - probably a conservative figure - to another $126m deficit. He has the hide to stand in here and say: ‘You know you could have got Sunrise, it would have taken a bit of money. But you did not put any money in’. How much? Does he know what the gap was? Does he know it was probably in the order of $US800m? Did he want to double overnight the existing Territory debt of $1.5bn so that we would be up for $3bn debt in order to have to carry Sunrise in on our own at a cost of some $US700m or $US800m?
Very easy, from opposition, to make these glib statements and just slide over the top of them. Toward the end of his contribution, he did make a comment about the cost of living. It was something that the member for Greatorex was on about the other night. I do not have the figures with me, unfortunately, but I will get them and put them on the record. From memory, when last the grocery prices survey that was done under the CLP, the gap between Cairns and Darwin for a full grocery basket list under the survey was $6.36 or $6.46. The last one done under this government, the difference was $1.64. If that is not a measure of closing the relativity and the gap in living costs, I do not know what is.
The establishment of the Major Projects Group to oversee the seven whole-of-government task force groups will ensure that these extremely important economic development opportunities are given maximum attention. Both the Under Treasurer and the CEO of DEET will be represented on the Major Projects Group, and I expect to be briefed by them on progress of the various projects on a regular basis. As shareholder minister for the Power and Water Corporation, I will be taking very keen interest in future gas supplies. Securing affordable gas is essential for future economic development in the Territory, and gas requirements for the Power and Water Corporation are likely to be an important component of onshore gas demand that will ensure the development of Timor Sea gas deposits.
The proposed substantial upgrade announced by Alcan, involving a $1.4bn expansion of the refinery at Gove, will be a huge boost for the East Arnhem region and the Top End. The Treasurer’s role in ensuring that economic development can happen is to ensure that the economic and fiscal frameworks that operate in the Territory are effective and responsive. That means not getting the budget into an unsustainable position which is what we were told by the former Under Treasurer some three days after forming government. His opening line was: ‘The budget is unsustainable’. ‘How can that be?’, we said. It was only some weeks since the Assembly had passed the budget headed for a $12m deficit. ‘Oh, no’, he said, ‘it is unsustainable’. So that is the role of the Treasurer and it was a role failed by our predecessors because they took their eye off that bottom line. There was no discipline in holding agencies and government spending to a given deficit figure. ‘What the hell? Spend it. We will adjust it to the bottom line and that will add to borrowings’.
The 2002-03 budget commenced a process of improving and simplifying tax arrangements in the Territory and a significant number of legislative changes were made to simplify and reduce taxes on business; particularly small business. Taxes were cut on franchises, franchise stamp duty was removed on corporate reconstruction allowing more efficient business structuring, and hiring duty was reduced. Concessional stamp duty arrangements for principal place of residence and improved concessions for first home owners provided a boost for the housing market and resulted in a greater inducement to settling in the Territory or to upgrade dwellings. Payroll tax arrangements have been brought closer to those in the states, with base broadening measures providing capacity to reduce the payroll tax rate.
Further changes to improve the competitiveness of the Territory’s taxation arrangements can be expected in the 2003 budget. The Taxation Administration Act is currently under review. A consultation draft of a new Taxation Administration Bill has been released for public comment. The new act will result in greater comparability between different Territory taxes and will simplify current administration practices. The public liability crisis that has affected business across Australia in the last year has been an important issue for government. Whilst the Territory has not seen the very large public liability payouts that have received considerable notoriety in the southern states, business has been faced with higher premiums. The Territory government has been an active participant in the national public liability reforms and these sittings will see a large part of the Territory’s legislative reform package being debated.
Government has responsibility for ensuring the necessary infrastructure to support economic growth, and the 2002-03 budget provided for a substantial increase in capital works expenditure. The completion of the East Arm Port is now in sight. The road, water and sewerage infrastructure to support the LNG development at Wickham Point is under way. The Alice to Darwin railway is ahead of schedule. These major infrastructure developments will support economic growth into the future.
Another key role the government has in ensuring the right environment for economic development is for its own fiscal house to be in order. The government introduced the deficit reduction strategy in the November 2001 mini-budget.
Mr Dunham: Not working.
Mr STIRLING: It is not working, I hear, Madam Speaker. I tell you it is working a hell of a lot better than when you tell Territorians that the deficit is going to be $45m and you come in at $275m, a $130m more than you said that you were going to spend. I tell you it is working a bit better than that because Territorians expect discipline from their government. Part of the reason they threw the CLP out on their ear was the fact that they could never trust the Treasurer or the government to deliver on what they said they were going to do in fiscal terms. They were sick of being belted around the head by the ever-increasing levels of debt, where we finished up paying half a millions dollars a day just in interest payments on the debt outstanding, because they continually ran it up.
Our government’s intention is for the budget to be in balance by 2004-05. We have confirmed the deficit reduction strategy from the November 2001 mini-budget in the 2002-03 Budget. This, along with the economic growth associated with the major projects that the Chief Minister outlined, will set us on a prosperous path for the future.
I will also outline what the government has achieved and what it will continue to ensure in respect of jobs for Territorians. There are a number of ways in which employment can be boosted, including the creation of jobs through economic development - on which the government has taken a strong and proactive approach - job creation schemes and the levering of job opportunities for Territorians which has been a focus of this government. We are in the business of building Territory jobs for Territorians, ensuring our people have the opportunity to access the benefits that those economic development projects will bring. But jobs for Territorians will not happen by accident, and a collaborative and strategic approach is required. It is not good enough to have a one-dimensional approach to employment. Along with sound economic management, for which this government is building a solid reputation, we are also working to ensure Territorians have fair opportunities to access jobs.
We have developed and started implementing far-reaching strategies to maximise the employment potential of Territorians. We are finding ways to match the demand for labour with the supply of labour. By May of this year, we will have completed the first top to bottom, comprehensive analysis of Territory labour needs for today and the future. The study will take in all six Northern Territory regions as defined by the ABS, and will tell us where we can anticipate skill gaps in the future, and the type of training Territorians will need to do to win future jobs. The study by the South Australian Centre for Economic Studies uses academically sound methodologies to cross-check and verify the information collected.
The methodologies consist of economic modelling based on ABS data, surveys, questionnaires and face-to-face interviews with a wide cross-section of Territory businesses, communities and other stakeholders, to ensure the best possible and most reliable information is collected on which to forecast the future skills gap. We are further enhancing this process by closely linking and coordinating the proactive activities of the Office of Territory Development with the planning activities of the Department of Employment, Education and Training. Those two organisations have forged strong ties and the positive results are already starting to flow.
Because of this close collaboration, DEET has been able to provide a training plan for potential jobs on the construction of the Wickham Point LNG plant. Like all plans, it is a work in progress that will be altered to meet the needs of the Territory. A project labour market analysis has been done and very specific employment talks will soon commence with the construction company managing the project. The government has identified $300 000 for this financial year for construction training for work linked to the LNG plant project, or to backfill skill gaps in the wider construction industry once the project commences. The funding has been specifically identified for this project and comes on top of existing funding commitments for training in the construction and trades area.
The Top End is not the only region to benefit from this government’s ongoing commitment to jobs for Territorians. Late last year, we made a commitment to fund the Indigenous Employment Challenge, an employment project that has arisen from the Alice in 10 initiative. The Indigenous Employment Challenge, a community developed and driven project, will receive $101 000 to assist in the establishment and operation of the Footprints Forward shopfront that will link 100 Central Australian indigenous people with jobs, employment and training-related services over the next three years, something our predecessors never seemed able to bring themselves to do.
Another innovative approach that is leading to increased job opportunities for youth is the commitment this government has made to develop Pathways from School to Work. In addition to the existing vocational education training in schools, we have introduced a successful Training for Remote Youth program and are working to increase the number of school-based new apprenticeships. There are numerous examples of successful program outcomes. They include overwhelming demand and high participation rates for these TRY programs in these remote communities. They are targeting the 14 to 19-year-old group, often overlooked by other training programs, and evidence indicates that these TRY programs have been successful in re-engaging those at-risk youths for whom school no longer had relevance. The mainstream form of schooling simply did not suit, and they are getting them back into those basic skills – literacy and numeracy - education and training programs.
TRY programs have enabled schools and communities to develop appropriate accredited training tailored and responsive to their community needs. TRY programs have targeted the development of work skills appropriate to those required by local industry and enterprises within their own community. The emphasis that TRY programs place on developing meaningful partnerships through the tripartite framework - community, schools and the registered training organisation - has acted as a catalyst for initiating and developing a coordinated and cohesive community approach to training and community capacity building and development.
The government is working to increase the number of school-based new apprenticeships available to Territory youth. The Department of Employment, Education and Training is negotiating $200 000 for the Enterprise Careers Education Foundation to employ a project officer to develop policies, procedures and protocols and to improve the marketing of school-based new apprenticeships to parents, employers and students alike. We aim to increase the number of school-based new apprenticeships from 12 in 2002 to 150 by the end of 2004. Coupled with the Commonwealth’s commitment to Group Training Northern Territory for 50 school-based new apprenticeships, of which 75% will be indigenous, we can anticipate outstanding improvement in this area.
I am pleased to advise that the overall trend for apprentices and trainees - or new apprenticeships as they are now collectively called - is showing improvement. From March 2000 to June 2002, the apprenticeship and training figure increased by 100 to 2300 apprentices in training by the end of the second quarter 2002.
Jobs just do not happen. I have instructed the public sector to develop a railway exit strategy for Territory workers so that the skill sets of those people currently working on the project can be aligned with new projects coming on, such as the Wickham Point development. The government is also reviewing the current apprenticeship policy linked to procurement, so that training opportunities are available for Territorians on capital works projects funded by taxpayer dollars.
Small business will stand to benefit from the government’s employment bonus scheme with the advent of the first ever labour market forecasting for the Territory. The Department of Employment, Education and Training will be able to determine how the $500 000 available is best made available to small business in the Northern Territory to encourage the uptake of apprenticeships, particularly in those identified skill shortage areas.
A sound economy, a continuing commitment to building more jobs - that is what this government has promised and that is what we will continue to deliver over the remainder of this term.
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, T S Eliot wrote:
- Between the idea and the reality, between the motion and the act falls the shadow.
It is not a bad quote, actually, and it was used as a preface for the document Building a Better Territory.
Mr Stirling: You have used it before.
Mr Wood: I quoted it.
Mr DUNHAM: It is a very interesting quote because what we are trying to illuminate here are some of the shadows; the difference between some of the facts peddled out by the government, and some of our take on them. There are some independent observers, like the Yellow Pages index and indeed the media …
A member: Access Economics.
Mr DUNHAM: Access Economics, apparently, is an independent observer. We should, in a debate like this, look to some of those people and some of the things they have said.
However, first, I give their government two tips. The first tip is that it is a little bit like Alcoholics Anonymous: first you have to admit you have a problem, and having admitted you have a problem, you then have to work out a solution strategy; then you have to put it in place, and then see if it works. It seems that what this government does is admits it has a problem and describes a solution strategy. They do not make any effort to try to put it into place, nor analysing whether it is working or not. What we have here is a partial admission of a problem, and a partial admission of the fact that there is a solution strategy. So, tip No 1: get on with the work, put some things into place and see if they actually bear fruit; see if things happen.
Tip No 2 is that it is very difficult in debates like this to actually engage with some of the things that are said. I have written down a sequence of notes here, for instance, from the last speaker and I could debate him on probably a dozen where I believe his idea of reality and mine are very different.
So, the second tip is that I would revisit this debate, and these budget documents and other documents prior to the Estimates Committee, because we will be testing some of these figures, and we will have an expectation that, if you have said things in this parliament that are wrong, you will be accountable for that. If you are entirely confident with some of the things you have said in this parliament, by all means go ahead; it is a powerful and strong position to take. But please, prior to giving evidence - sworn evidence, evidence that we would expect to be entirely truthful at the Estimates Committee - come back and read what you have said. Read through these statements and some of the budget books - particularly for the Chief Minister - and read through this blueprint of hers called Building a Better Territory. This is awash with missed deadlines and things that were seen as a good idea and are now no longer spoken about. Probably at the top of that list is Sunrise gas; a very noisy first term top-of-the-agenda issue, and something that is slowly slipping out of the rhetoric.
What was once the big icon with the Chief Minister’s stamp of approval on it is now starting to slip out of the rhetoric. That is part of the spin doctoring that is taking place. It is easy to see that you should jump off that somewhat slippery stepping stone, particularly when you make statements of the type, for instance, that are in this book. At page 29 it deals with Sunrise gas, and says:
- Sunrise gas to shore. Ensure …
Not try, not facilitate, not give it a burl, ensure:
- … that Sunrise gas comes on shore by 2007.
We know that will not be achieved. The Chief Minister has admitted it will not be achieved and it is a laudable and courageous thing to do. But it has mucked up, because there is no way in the world this government can ensure that will happen. In fact, it has done very little apart from some public posturing and rhetoric, as a government, to do that ensuring.
Only recently - and we are talking about the Australian Financial Review of Monday 13 January - we were still talking about Sunrise. She was talking about the great stamina needed by - this is very sycophantic journalism Jill Margot put into this article. Anyway, she talks about the major setback that occurred last month but she is going to just keep going for it because she wants Sunrise to come onshore. Now, it is all very well to change your public posture on this but, unfortunately, as politicians, people write down what you say. They write it down in a thing called Hansard, they write it down in documents like this. We can actually track the changing point of view of this Chief Minister and her Treasurer who have inherited these various positions that they now want to abandon.
It is particularly interesting to go back through the budget books. There is some wonderful stuff in here, particularly when you are starting to talk about economic growth. I quote now from Budget Paper No 2 of the 2002-03 budget, at page 18. There is a summary of economic growth. If you look at the terrible CLP era, you can see that gross state product was growing pretty well, actually - 4.7%, 6.1%. There was a downturn in 1999-2000 and that is in here. It talked about the Defence impetus slowing in construction. But let us get to where these dudes are, 2001-02:
- Pick up in onshore activity, household spending, rail-related investment surge. Headline GSP reflects sharper
than expected fallback in offshore oil production, weak population growth, and setback to tourism.
We are talking about 2002-03 budget; these are the pages. We were talking about GSP growing at 3.7%, a figure that I note has been picked up by the journalist in the Australian Financial Review. GSP is growing at 3.7%, and this is the comment:
- Upswing to strengthen. Private consumption and non-residential construction investment drivers.
Population growth pick up and a likely rebound in the number of international visitors to boost tourism.
That is the year we are in now. I would like to see some of those things coming true. The Treasurer who introduced these, the current Chief Minister, also estimated that GSP would grow at 5% in her mini-budget. She was questioned on it - actually, the Under Treasurer was also questioned - that 5% seemed fairly bullish. That year we came in at 1.7%. That is a pretty big mistake to make, thinking you are going to grow at 5% and coming at 1.7%. They are now telling us it is going to be 3.7% this year.
Let us look at some of the other things that this fiscally transparent document tells us about - population. We have a little quote here from the terrible CLP years:
- The Northern Territory recorded the highest population growth of all jurisdictions over the five years
to June 2001.
Oh, well, we did not do too badly, I guess. In the year we are talking about, and I am quoting again:
- The Territory’s population growth rate is expected to strengthen during 2002-03 to 1.2%, although
remaining relatively weak in historical terms.
This government had the full belief that the economy would swing upwards, population would swing upwards, there would be a growth in confidence. We know that to be way, way out. Not only is confidence plummeting, our population is exiting. Some of these things that the Chief Minister promised us in this statement, having deadlines turn up and bells ring, have not actually happened. We are now in a situation where business is turning its collective gaze to the government and saying: ‘Can you please do something? Can you please look at some of the big drivers of our economy?’.
What are the big drivers of our economy? Mining, and it features largely in this statement by the Chief Minister. The statement mentions minerals and mining, and we can go to budget papers on that. In Budget Paper No 5 of 2002-03, there is a chapter on mining and there is even a map. If we start at the top, we can see some of the resources. On this map is Batchelor magnesite. Well, that is not going to happen. That was something that we looked at in the start of the financial year that is now dead. Brown’s cobalt nickel. I do not think that is going to happen. Tom’s Gully gold. No. Ranger Jabiluka uranium. Well, that is also becoming problematic. We can go down the track a bit, McArthur River lead, silver, zinc. Yes, that looks good. Gove bauxite alumina. That looks good. Merlin is there. Well, they have closed that, too. Harts Range is there with the garnet sand. So some of these things we have known about for awhile. Mereenie oil and gas is there; there is a downturn also.
So, we have a few resources here, and we know we are resource rich. We know we have had difficulty accessing land and, although those opposite would portray this great growth since 1996, anyone who has been reasonably close to the mining industry will know that there has been a very salient issue that has to be taken into consideration about that time; and that is a thing called native title. Native title was a very big problem for mining explorers and developers; it was a big problem for governments. It was a problem that governments should have worked on quickly and the fastest in the nation was the Northern Territory government. We were the first to have a solution on the table of the federal parliament, the very first. Surprisingly, it had the support of those opposite who were then in opposition.
We had moved very fast, faster than any other jurisdiction, and remember this 30% of GDP, so we were pretty serious about it. Then it stalled in a variety of political devices. The fact that some of those floodgates are opening, it is not necessarily something that is attributable to the current government. There were actions that were happening in the previous government. There were also some issues that were resolved through the process, albeit flawed, that we have now available to us and some of those log jams have been solved. But the Native Title Act pales into insignificance compared with the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. The government is pretty silent on that. So, while you are out there saying how good you are going with native title, please tells us about the Aboriginal Land Rights Act.
There have been applications stalled for many, many years under this act. We know you are doing a submission to the federal government. We know you are saying to the federal government there are things we would like you to change. Can you tell us? Can you tell us what they are? We would like to see some of those things for the benefit of Territorians, particularly now that you have discovered miners as a friend …
Mr Ah Kit: Almost 700 ELAs. No more log jam.
Mr DUNHAM: I would be quiet if I was you. The reason I would be quiet is last time you had a go at miners, you were sacked. The last time the member for Arnhem stood up and said detrimental things about the mining industry, his leader, the current Chief Minister, sacked him the next day. The next day she said: ‘You have been so naughty, so terribly naughty about this industry that you cannot do your job any more and you are going to have to sit on the backbench in opposition’. So I would be really careful if I was him about engaging in this debate because …
Dr Burns: He is in government now.
Mr DUNHAM: He is in government. Now that he is a friend of the miner, I hope that the submission to the federal government is very eloquent about the difficulties we have had with the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. If Labor believes that this is a very good act, as they sometimes say, they can expunge ‘Northern Territory’ out of the back of it – the brackets – and substitute ‘Australia’.
We now have Labor governments around Australia. It is a fairly simple thing for them to go to their mates in Queensland and Western Australia where mining is also important and say: ‘Listen, you guys, you are missing out on a great thing here. We have a wonderful asset here in the Territory called the Aboriginal Land Rights Act and we think, Mr Beatty and Dr Gallop, that you should bring it into your jurisdictions because it is a wonderful, wonderful piece of legislation’. If you do not do that, you are really not standing up for the best interests of Territorians. It is either a good act and you Labor state leaders drop it everywhere, or it has some flaws and impediments - and I can quote from Premier Goss who said it was ‘divisive and counter to development’ when he looked at the Territory as a model for Queensland.
We want to know what you are going to do about it. Do not keep saying there are several hundred percent of exploration applications that have been approved under the Native Title Act. We know that. There was a log jam, a massive log jam. The log jam was cleared during our day and there has been a gradual approval of those, but they are not the way we should be doing business. This parliament knows that. We have debated it, we have had an act of our own parliament that went to the federal parliament. Its defeat in the Senate was because of a betrayal by the Labor Party. If they had adhered to the advice from here, they would not have betrayed the Northern Territory in such a manner.
If we look past mining at some of the other issues, particularly some of the issues about which the Treasurer spoke, we can see, for instance, that he wants to talk continually about this big gap that he inherited which is now $275m. This is a debate that we can have every day, but he knows full well that the money he received from the Commonwealth - the $149m which is in these documents and which was not calculated by the fully costed Access Economics report - would certainly render that figure into oblivion and put him in a better position than the previous budget.
He waves his arms around and says: ‘What are you trying to say? That we should have spent that on Sunrise?’ There are two ways we can look at that. This budget and the so-called gap and all that stuff came down well before the Chief Minister’s rhetoric about helping Sunrise in here. Either she has tricked us into believing ‘I have understood the gap, it is sitting there and we have a great difficulty with funding anything in the future; but Territorians, I am going to go out and get you Sunrise’. Either that was a cunning trick, or the black hole and the gap were never there in the first place, which is certainly my proposition.
He talked about the cost of living and said: ‘I cannot put my hand on it at the moment, but I am sure if you went to Cairns you would be paying more for your groceries’. Well, it is in the budget documents and it is a fairly simple thing to find for the Treasurer. If I were the Treasurer, I would have documents like this close to my desk. He could have gone to Budget Paper No 5 on the Territory Economy, and I quote again:
- Budget paper No 5, 2002-03. Territory consumer prices …
Let us talk about the bad, old CLP days.
- In 1993, the Committee on Darwin study compared the costs of living for wages and salary earners in Darwin,
Perth and Sydney. The study concluded that overall, Darwin prices were higher than in Perth and Sydney by
6% and 3% respectively. An update of this study using CPI data suggests that in March 2002, the gap
between Darwin and Perth had narrowed to 2.8%, while Darwin overall prices were 1.6% lower than Sydney.
That is pretty interesting, isn’t it? Darwin consumer prices lower than Sydney. We could go to Cairns; Cairns is in here. It does mention that there was a study called the Grocery Price Survey, and it compared selected supermarkets in Cairns, Mt Isa and other areas, a basket of foodstuffs and, yes, it does find that the average cost of a basket was 2.1% more expensive than Cairns for this period, a similar differential to the previous survey period. In other words, it did not grow or fall, and the report considers why that might be the case - higher operating costs, climatic extremes, storage, transportation of goods as well as the small market size and less competitive pressure on these centres. So, if the Treasurer wants to talk about the difficulties he has, he should go to his papers and have a look at them. He will find that there are some answers there.
Gas for the Power and Water Corporation: the Treasurer has been duplicitous in the extreme in going on public radio and talking about holding gas prices without saying the word ‘domestic’. Domestic - that is the promise of the Labor Party, and we can see ample evidence that the price for commercial is under review. It is under review for a lot of reasons. One is that there is pressure on the cost of energy, particularly since very cheap energy from the big fields to our north might be in some doubt and they might be some years away.
I am pleased he is talking about Blacktip, and I am pleased he has taken a leaf out of the Leader of the Opposition’s book and looked at some of the other resources to our north that might be available to be harvested for our domestic gas. But it still leaves some significant problems for the Power and Water Corporation. It leaves some problems in association with the unit price of that gas; how much you are going to get it delivered for; what you do with the pipeline from Palm Valley/Mereenie; and what your markets are. In saying Alcan is interested, of course Alcan is interested. It is interested in the cheapest fuel it can get. The cheapest fuel it can get is cheap Kuwaiti crude oil, and the extension that it is thinking about has been predicated on continuing the supply. The Treasurer is the member for Nhulunbuy; he knows this. Not only have they briefed them, not only has it been in public commentary and documentations, but he knows that if they can get cheap gas there, they will use it. Do not assume it is going to happen unless you can get it there on an economic proposition.
He talks about the wonderful budget that dropped lots of infrastructure in place; first home buyers and all that stuff. It is not a matter of dropping infrastructure in place. We have seen that with the Accident and Emergency facility at Royal Darwin Hospital. The issue is to use it, as is the case with Royal Darwin Hospital.
I could speak for much longer on various issues that are in this statement, but it is merely empty rhetoric. It is full of platitudes and I caution the government to look at it very closely before the next Estimates Committee.
Mr VATSKALIS (Transport and Infrastructure): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on development opportunities. It is really surprising what a difference 18 months in opposition makes. All of a sudden, whatever has gone wrong in this place, it is the Martin government’s fault. On 20 August 2001 everything was perfect. On 21 August 2001, everything went bad. The reality is that is far from true. Things started going bad long before August 2001. Earlier today, I had a look at the business confidence diagram for the past 10 years and, to my surprise, business confidence was quite high in 1997-98 and, all of a sudden, it started fluctuating in 1999 and it started a downward trend. At the same time in early 1998-99, I realised that the diagram of the construction index last published by the Territory Construction Association also showed a downward trend.
Now, what happened in early 1999? My understanding is that Denis Gabriel Burke became the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory. Things seemed to be going well when his predecessor, the Hon Shane Stone, was Chief Minister. However, when the now Leader of the Opposition took over as Chief Minister, things started going from bad to worse. According to Territory Construction Association’s diagram, things started to go after the elections. Yes, we understand there is a problem with business confidence, but you cannot blame it exclusively on the Martin government. There are number of other factors that nobody seems - from the opposition, at least - to want to talk about.
Let me remind him about some of the issues that he mentioned before. Population loss: I recall very well in 1999-2000 that a number of people left the Northern Territory because there was not enough work in the Territory, something I spoke twice about to Denis Burke, the Leader of the Opposition. I forewarned him but he did not want to hear about it because he was concentrating on the railway and the Sunrise gas project. In 2001, I remind the Leader of the Opposition, there were advertisements placed in interstate newspapers trying to hire formwork workers to come and complete the Mitchell Centre. So the loss of population, professionals, and tradespeople in the Territory is not new. It did not just happen last month, or in the last six months, or last year. It happened long before the Labor government came to power.
He also mentioned about other opportunities, about our focus on Sunrise. He was focussed on Sunrise. He was pretty confident that Sunrise gas would come to Darwin. He did not want to talk about anything else. He did not want to talk about Blacktip. I do not recall the name Blacktip until Sunrise gas all of a sudden was coming to Darwin, and Blacktip was a name we all became aware of. The reality is that the Martin government has tried to attract as many investment opportunities of these gas fields in the north, including Blacktip. I travelled to Perth and visited Woodside Headquarters. I had a personal briefing about Blacktip. I also had a personal brief about Sunrise and Bayu-Undan. My colleagues and I have worked very hard to secure the economic development of the Territory.
I arrived in Australia in 1983 and lived in Perth for a number of years. Looking at Western Australia history, what we see today in the Territory reminds me very much of what happened in Western Australia in the 1960s. In the 1960s, Western Australia was on the brink of big development with the discovery by Hancock of the great iron ore deposit at Mt Newman, the discovery of gas fields in the north-west, and starting to put in place the iron ore industry, the mines, the infrastructure of the railway line and, certainly, the big ports in Dampier, Port Headland, Karratha and other places in the north-west.
This is where we stand now. However, there is an uncertainty because of the lack of ratification of the treaty with East Timor. Hopefully, it will happen very soon. Of course, there is this lack of confidence by business when things are a bit uncertain. We are still on the edge; which way is it going to fall? This way or the other way? The reality is that things are going to go ahead. Strategically, the gas fields in the north are very important for Australia. In addition, the development of these gas fields and the associated industry is also very important to Australia. In the last 30 to 40 years, we have lost a lot of our construction industry ability to South-East Asia and Australian industry has lost a lot of the manufacturing sector. It is about time we reversed the trend for the sake of Australia and our future generations.
This government - myself and the other ministers - were not only focussed on the big projects. Certainly, we want the big projects, but we are not going to repeat the mistake that the CLP made in the last two or three years: focussing on the big projects and forgetting the small projects, the small contractors. They paid for it, and they paid for it dearly.
It is great for Sunrise to come to Australia, it is great for Bayu-Undan to develop. We are taking the hard decisions. I personally have a black name because I approved the Wickham Point LNG plant. I was accused of bulldozing the mangroves to put in the road. However, thanks to the Leader of the Opposition, he admitted that he actually programmed it. But we were the ones who renegotiated the penalty with Phillips - not the penalty that was in place before, the one that Phillips has to pay now if that plant does not go ahead and we have put in this road to Wickham Point for nothing. The penalty we renegotiated is much higher than the CLP had negotiated with Phillips. However, Phillips was prepared to negotiate this penalty because they are pretty confident that the LNG plant will happen.
We are the ones who approved the light industrial area at Wickham Point to support the development of the harbour. Some in this House probably do not like this, but the reality is we are prepared to take these hard decisions because we want the development of the Territory. Development of the Territory does not only mean to bring more industry to the Territory which brings more wealth to Territory, but it means more jobs for our own children. Every year, we see our children finishing university and going somewhere else to get a job. Every year, we see young Territorians working somewhere else and achieving a lot. People admire them for that because, yes, we are different. We live in an adverse environment and we have to learn to create innovative solutions to the problems we face every day in our lives – be it cyclones, drought, fires, or the climatic conditions of the Territory. Young Territorians leave this place because there are not many jobs.
The reality is the CLP was in power for 27 years. I am not going to start blaming them; that it is their fault or anything. However, my question is: after 27 years in this place, where is the industrial development in the Territory? In the past 10 years, we have had the significant development of the Defence Force. My question is: where was the CLP to encourage industry that we needed to settle the Defence Forces? Any other city in Europe or America that has a significant build-up of Defence Force attract a significant array of businesses that will support the Defence Force.
From my own experience, every time we have to repair or service a tank or a heavy vehicle, we have to load it onto a TNT trailer and send it down to Melbourne. Every time we have to repair or service the avionics of the jets in Tindal, we have to send them to Williamstown. Every time we have to repair the patrol boats, they have to go to Fremantle. After 27 years; where is the industrial development? I am not talking about light industrial, I am talking about heavy industrial development for the Territory.
We have a lot of minerals. Everybody keeps telling us that there are so many minerals in the Territory, we are wealthy in natural resources. Where is the processing plant? Where are the factories that process these minerals for export in South-East Asia or in other areas in Australia or the world? Or even the heavy infrastructure for loading ships? There is none. A lot of announcements, but no action.
Every year before elections, we had a series of big announcements. In the 10 years I have been in the Territory, I have heard these announcements every four years, but nothing happens. If the announcement became the reality, nobody in the Territory would be unemployed, be they in Ngukurr, Gove, Yuendumu, Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, or in Katherine. People would be fully employed. But none of these announcements became a reality. They were good enough so the CLP would be re-elected, but nothing was the reality. The CLP kept telling us how good they were for the Territory, how they supported the mines, mineral explorations, the pastoralists. Where is the infrastructure? Where are the abattoirs? Where are the processing plants that will process our meat and export it to countries which have a great demand for good quality beef, and beef that is not affected by mad cow disease or by other problems? There are not any. There were a few of them in the Territory, but they are all closed down. Oh, yes, that was the unions’ fault. Well, I am sorry. Other states have abattoirs and unions, and abattoirs and processing plants still operate.
One thing I would consider in the Territory is not only the big plants but also the small contractors. The small builder, the small painter, the person who actually fixes the road - we have forgotten them. In the context of the CLP, they appear to have forgotten them completely because when we came to power and opened the budget books, we found that if we had not added $10m extra by September 2001, none of these people would have jobs. We put $10m just to have the brick pavement from Darwin to Katherine, the Stuart Highway, to be repaired, having animal kills removed from the road, fixing the rest stops, painting police stations, the schools. The small jobs, repairs and maintenance, there were not any. In May 2002, we injected $4.5m into minor new works. I went to Palmerston to a meeting of the Palmerston Business Association, and there were people there complaining bitterly about the lack of minor works. I personally showed them the figures and they believed me: it was not the Martin government’s fault, it was our predecessors’ fault.
I am not going to accuse anybody about the black hole or anything else. I do not have to. There was a well known professor who came here and found out what was happening. That is widely accepted now, not only by Labor people, but by a lot of people in the Territory - apart from the ones who wanted to close their ears and eyes and not believe anything.
When we came to power, we found that we had a capital works budget where the revote figure was higher than the cash allocated for work. That meant before we spent a dollar for repairs, maintenance, or construction of new works, we had to put money into big projects like the railway, the port, the hospital. We had to reverse that, and we did it successfully. We made the largest cash injection into capital works in the history of the Territory in our August budget last year: $200m in government capital works; $100m in power and water capital works in repairs and maintenance; $120m to repairs and maintenance generally - $430m. $400m that went to the big companies, in some cases, but it also went to the small contractors. I recall very well when I would not go to the coffee shops, the cafeterias, or the Galleria, because there were many people sitting around doing nothing, complaining bitterly about the lack of work. I am very pleased to say that I now go there, and I feel very lonely because people are out there working, and the only time they go there is to have a quick meal, a quick coffee, and off they go again. Yes, it is not an excellent indicator, but it is a very good indicator for me because Darwin is a very small town and we know what everyone is doing.
In addition, I am closely monitoring what is happening out there. I have asked my department to provide me with a monthly update of how much money we are spending and where this money goes to make sure that everything goes according to plan. Regular reports are made to Cabinet to provide information of how repairs and maintenance, capital works and minor new works are going. I am very pleased to say that for the month of January, the combined capital works and minor new works is sitting at approximately $10m greater than last year’s equivalent expenditure. Capital works is approximately $20m higher than last year, and minor new works are approximately $7m higher than last year at the equivalent time. We know that we can put money into the economy and, of course, it is not going to hit the ground immediately, it is going to be a lifetime. But again, this money is going out and we see the results; we see people who actually have work; they can put bread on their tables.
I extended the program for capital works by $18m to get work under way on the building of the railway stations and the development of the East Arm Business Park. This will be a major job creator. Proof of the impact that this is having in the Territory you can see in the document that the Chief Minister tabled last week, the Territory Construction Association Construction Index. You can see the upward trend for the period since August 2001. These are not Labor Party statistics; it is not Cabinet or government statistics. That is the Territory Construction Association’s statistics. It is an independent organisation, and the statistics are pretty truthful.
The wharf precinct: the Leader of the Opposition told us about how wonderfully he did when he was the Chief Minister with the wharf precinct; how they went to Cape Town and had a look at the wharf and they came back. Yes? What happened? ‘We will put it on the shelf’. We had complaints, not only from people in Darwin who were not consulted about the wharf precinct, but also people who were very keen to participate in development of the wharf precinct; but nothing happened. They complained personally to me. It is a big project, that is true. Our estimate is about $700m over 10 years and we have to proceed carefully.
We went out there and had a look because your grandiose plan was a lot of open space, brickwork and car park. That is not what the people of Darwin want. The people of Darwin want something that will look good, that is not going to compete with the central business district, and which will be utilised by many people. Yes, they want open space, but they want something tropical, and we heard their comments. In order to get the best out of the wharf precinct, I travelled to Western Australia to look at some models; how similar projects were developed in Western Australia and in Sydney, Melbourne and in other cities in Australia. I have brought back some ideas and some models which I am putting to Cabinet, and Cabinet will soon make a decision about how we are going to proceed.
I agree with what the Leader of the Opposition said about the developers getting their hands on the wharf and developing with their own ideas and vision. No. We want to maintain our own vision, the vision that the people of Darwin told us they want to have at the wharf precinct. That is what we are going to do.
Convention centre: if it was so good, why didn’t you do it? If it is such an important project, why didn’t you bite the bullet and say: ‘Yes, it is marginal, but we will do exactly what we did in Alice Springs. We will inject so many million dollars’? I know very well you had a proposal by developers in Darwin incorporating another site very close to parliament, but you said no. Why did you say no? How can you stand here now and say to us: ‘Why don’t you do it?’? This government is going to look carefully into it and we are going to make a decision, and that will be very soon, and that convention centre will be owned by this government.
In addition, a number of other projects were put in place. Very recently, I believe yesterday, I announced the Leanyer Recreation Park, a $2.5m opportunity for local business. Some of the equipment, yes, will come from overseas because there are only one or two companies specialising in this kind of equipment, but the construction and the landscaping and everything else will be done by local business - an open and transparent process, not by mates, not your mates, not anybody’s mates; but it is going to local business.
Other projects include the Leanyer School upgrade, $1.3m; $3m dollars for the construction of a basketball court at Marrara; $2.3m upgrade in the Parap Primary School; $2.1m at Nhulunbuy High School for a multipurpose hall; the Darwin Hospital Hospice, $3.5m; the Kintore Police Station, $1m; sporting facilities expenditure, $800 000 at Traeger Park and $5m in Marrara; remote community census, something never done before, $10m. Is our money spent in Darwin? Is our money spent in the Territory? Is our money spent outside the urban centres? Is our money spent everywhere in the small communities? This is what it is all about. Not only focussing on the big projects, but also considering the small contractor, the small people out there and how they are going to put bread on their table.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I concur with the words of the minister about small business, because part of what I have to say today is about that. One of the things I am always reminded of when I hear all this talk about big development, big projects, is Humpty Doo rice, Tipperary sorghum, Scott Creek sorghum, and there was a minister here, Mr Poole, who told me we were going to have five million pigs ...
A member: We did not believe that, either.
Mr WOOD: No, pigs did fly, in this case, but he had a project where the Taiwanese were going to come here and develop a pig farm with five million pigs. I sometimes think: ‘Has the Territory changed at all?’ We heard great plans about the Daly River and then a whopping big flood comes through and those plans go out to sea with it. I hope some of these big plans do come to fruition because they will certainly help the Territory, but I wonder sometimes whether we lose sight of the little people in the process.
To start off from another point of view, I am certainly no great economist, as my tax person would know when they see my shoe box come in. However, I picked up two documents today: one is the Territory Economic Review and the other is the Yellow Pages Business Index. When you read these you would have to say, honestly, that things are not really good at the present time in the economy. I was speaking to a business lady from Humpty Doo this afternoon and her sales are down quite a bit; people do not have money. There might be other reasons for that - like we spent it all at Christmas and are still trying to pay off the credit card; it is the Wet Season, the rain is pouring down and people are not doing quite as much work - but there is a feeling that things are not good at the moment.
When you look at the Territory Economic Review, my little summary of it is that retail turnover is level or there may be a slight rise. Tourism fell, and there are reasons for that. New motor vehicle sales tend to be flat. Non-residential buildings are rising but residential has only a slight rise. Residential building approvals are down, though the forecasts are that that might change. Employment is about level, but unemployment has risen, and there is a slight drop in job vacancies. So, if you looked at that, you would have to say: ‘Things are not too good’. Then you open up the Yellow Pages Business Index - and I concede that this represents peoples’ expectations - and I must admit I have not really looked at one of these before. It certainly does not give you a good outlook. It says:
- Small and Medium Business Outlook - Northern Territory.
sales declined substantially.
employment dropped significantly.
profits weakened further this quarter.
support for the Northern Territory government declined significantly.
For sure, that is peoples’ outlook and perceptions, but if you match it with the Treasurer’s Report, no matter what you think, things are not looking real good at the moment. To be fair, the government faced some major problems when it took power. We can argue about the black hole – we will not go back into that. They have received some money in the last budget which I would have thought offset some of that black hole, and I would be a strong supporter …
Ms Lawrie: What, instead of health or education?
Mr WOOD: There is still $75m or so that was a bit of a bonus given in there. I would have thought that was the opportunity to remove that levy on registration which, even though the government said in its budget would not affect small business, that is exactly what it did. I will argue until the cows come home that putting a levy on a one tonne ute is putting a levy on small business. Go and see how many people drive one tonne utes for their own small businesses. I believe that was a mistake. If you want to send the right signal, remove it. Do not wait for the third year; remove it now.
There have been problems. No one could deny that Ansett, HIH, the Bali bombings, 11 September and delays in gas coming onshore are certainly making it hard for the government, and I appreciate that. I am not here to say the government is not trying. The minister spoke before about the things that he is doing. For sure, they are doing their best. For some reason, small business is saying: ‘We still think the outlook is pretty gloomy’.
Perhaps I read it the wrong way, but maybe one of the reasons is that the government has not been able to sell itself as a government that small business can believe in. In other words, it might be doing all the right things, but the CLP government was in power for 25-odd years, and it certainly was a promoter of business, so business has aligned itself over that time with the CLP. Along comes the new government, and I would say it is natural that business would be a bit wary of whether this new government would help them. There is an issue there that business does not have confidence in the government, and the government has to go out and show that it can do the same job as the previous government did.
Ms Lawrie: No, we want to show them better.
Mr WOOD: Well, you might show them better, but what I am saying is that business is not confident that you can do it. If you want to change business around, you have a bit of catch-up to do.
To return to my starting point, my concerns are that in all this big hype - and reading the Chief Minister’s statement on economic development, there are a lot of big issues in here. Some of it really is not of the making of the Territory, of course. Some of these are Commonwealth projects, some of them are private projects, and about some of them, we live in hope that they will happen. However, to me, I have always felt that small business is what keeps the economy ticking along, and that is the one you have to keep going. Big projects come and they go. Tipperary sorghum probably helped the economy for about a year and then, when it all went rotten on the wharves of Darwin, that was the end of it.
Ms Lawrie: 80% of our employers are small business.
Mr WOOD: Yes, that is right. Perhaps government has to look at how it can encourage - especially the little entrepreneur, the one person business - to make sure that its departments do not stifle them too much. Sure, you have to have some regulation, no doubt about that. The reason I raise that is there is a small company that just started up recently in my area. It is called Aqua Green. I have the beautiful booklet – I will read the front cover:
- Aqua Green produces aquarium plants, native Australian fish, native Australian vertebrates and frogs
for the ornamental aquarium and pet trade.
Ms Scrymgour: That picture looks like a marijuana plant.
Dr Toyne: They will be happy frogs.
Mr WOOD: This picture, if the camera picks it up, is not a marijuana plant. It happens to be a native aquarium plant. This gentleman - his name is Dave Wilson; I spoke to him today about introducing this - has services within the Darwin area to provide a freshwater aquarium, marine aquarium and pond maintenance service. They design recirculating systems and a water quality and maintenance schedule to achieve most small aquatic habitat objectives, and they give advice to the government on those things.
What I thought I would do is read a letter he has written. I realise it is reasonably long.
Ms Lawrie: Does he manufacture cane toad fences?
Mr WOOD: No cane toads in here, this is genuine Northern Territory plants.
I will read this just to give you of an idea why we have to encourage small businesses and not put too much in their road. As I said, you have to have some regulations, you have to be careful. This is letter he wrote to the Chairman of the Territory Aquaculture Development Advisory Committee, and the issue he was writing about was barriers imposed to the development of the culture of aquatic plants and other ornamental aquatic organisms. In his background, he said:
- I would like to thank those in DBIRD who have been helpful during the last difficult 18 months. If it
wasn’t for …
He mentioned three people here:
- … who actually helped with Aqua Green’s problems, I probably would have quit.
- As far as can be ascertained, Aqua Green is the only legal aquarium plant producer in the Northern
Territory.
- In May 2001, I departed a good job managing the aquatic life exhibition at the Territory Wildlife Park,
after a verbal assurance that I would not need an aquaculture licence to grow aquarium plants.
Anyone who has seen the aquarium at the Wildlife Park would know that the people that were involved in that knew their business:
- Shortly after terminating my employment with the Wildlife Park, I found myself wading through all the red
tape to obtain an aquaculture licence. Somebody changed their mind or read the legislation. After jumping
through all the hoops and having the zoning on my block changed, then it was decided that because we have to
have an aquaculture licence, then we should also sell the small native fish that we use to control insect larvae.
It took seven months to get approval for one species of small native rainbow fish to be named on my licence.
- I found that Weeds Branch advised the NT Aquaculture Centre and licensing staff that all aquarium plants
were weeds, that they all were potentially invasive plants. Then came a list of plants that were to be allowed.
These lists were made up without too much consultation with industry and were very restrictive. I am grateful
to the Seafood Council for helping out with an attempts by DBIRD to stop me selling native plants interstate,
even though they were naturally occurring in the sending territory and the receiving state. It appeared that
no water plant expert was consulted until the intervention by the Seafood Council.
He discusses the problems he has had in establishing this business, and it is an important little business. He has 880 m of ponds and out of that, he has produced $63 000 worth of invoices to local industry in Howard Springs. He has just started up:
- Aqua Green receives requests from overseas regularly and directs them to its main buyer in Queensland who
has experience in the export of ornamentals. Aqua Green has arrangements with central Arnhem Land
traditional owners to market their aquacultured small fish using their language name for the area as a
description of the fish. We pay a small royalty and are allowed each year to collect some fresh broodstock.
They are very grateful to be involved in the sustainable use of the resources from their land. They
receive acknowledgement of where the organism originates and a small return.
So you can see from this one little business, he has created quite a bit of enterprise. He recommends that DBIRD, the department, be more encouraging towards newer, small scale types of sustainable land use and sea use; that the office staff encourage new types of small business regardless of their personal opinion; that the government provide enough administrative staff to process paperwork quickly; and that the appropriate expertise be sought outside the department if not available within the department. They are his recommendations for trying to make things for small business a little better. I know today that the rhetoric will all be about big business. Big projects are important, but here is just one example. If we can encourage more of these little enterprises, all the better.
On a couple of other issues, if the government is looking to fast-tracking development - I hope it will not look at Middle Arm at the fast-tracking - there is definitely potential with developing the wharf. That has a lot of scope. It has been hanging around for many years. I know someone talked about having a chair-lift from the wharf up to the top of the escarpment. Some people might not like it but, if you are also trying to develop tourism and you have a lot of elderly people from ships who cannot get around so easily, it could be done. Maybe it has to be done discretely. I am not one of those who believes in ugly scars, but there are plenty of ugly scars on the escarpment anyway in the form of high rise buildings, but that is another issue.
The concept of including the convention centre down that way, at the wharf, would be a very good idea. What better place for a convention centre to look out across the sea, especially if you have a boring speaker! That would be ideal. I would encourage the government, if they are trying to help the economy in a stagnant phase at the moment - and we have no guarantees that some of these big developments will come, even though we are hoping – they could try to fast-track that.
I hope that government encourages more and more small businesses because, in the end, they are the lifeblood of the Territory.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, when the Chief Minister brought on this statement today, I wondered what I could contribute to the debate from within my portfolios, particularly being Minister for Justice and Attorney-General. What does that have to do with economic development? It has a lot to do with it. There are lots of things that my work and the work of my agencies contribute to the general climate that business operates in within the Northern Territory.
Like the member for Nelson, I would like to give particular emphasis to small business because it is recognised as the predominant part of the NT economy, whether they are small pastoral, horticultural, agricultural, tourism or retail concerns or in service delivery areas. It is a diverse sector of our economy, one that requires government to provide a helpful climate around the business activities they are pursuing. In terms of direct sponsoring of small business issues, it is fair to say that the government has a secondary role of support rather than a direct role of shaping the industries that these businesses are involved in.
Looking at areas within my portfolio, earlier today we heard about the Retail Tenancies Discussion Paper that is going out which will lead, in the May sittings, to the introduction of a Retail Tenancies Bill. This is a crucial area both for landlords and tenants within the retail sector. If you took an average retailer in, say, Casuarina shopping centre or down our way in Yeperenye or Coles shopping centres, one of the key areas that they need to have some certainty about is not only the rents being paid for the space the business occupies, but also the conditions of occupancy and any potential change in occupancy. We deal with many of those issues in the discussion paper to give greater predictability regarding what the agreement is between the landlord and the retail tenant; we look at the question of what money is passed across to the landlord; what processes can be followed when rent is going to be varied. All of those things are going to create a more certain climate for those retailers to operate their businesses in and give significant new protection to their interests within that relationship with the landlord.
We are, unfortunately, having to take this step, as was pointed out earlier today, some many years after the rest of the country moved to provide that certainty to small business elsewhere in Australia. I look forward to meeting with small business operators, retailers, throughout the Northern Territory as part of my contribution to the consultations, along with the Minister for Business, Industry and Resource Development. I would certainly say to retailers: this is the time to sort this out once and for all; let us have some certainty.
Looking at the other areas of legislative reform I am currently pursuing, one of the key areas is consumer affairs as regards the operation of businesses within the Northern Territory. It might seem to be a contradiction in terms. The popular view of consumer affairs is that we are protecting the interests of consumers from unscrupulous forms of business practice but, in fact, pretty well all business sectors that I have discussed these issues with, including those directly represented on the Consumer Affairs Council, want to have this cleaning up carried out, whether it is in the fairly public recent events within the motor trade industry, or whether it is in guaranteeing the integrity of a product within retail outlets in a broader sphere of business activity.
It is good for business to have a good reputation and, if the Office of Consumer Affairs can intercede to remove unscrupulous or incompetent operators out of a sector of business, it can only benefit that sector in the longer run. That is how we are seeing the operation of the reforms that we are carrying out within the consumer affairs area, and we have probably produced more change and improvement in that area in some year-and-a-half since we got to government than was done in the last 27 years.
As a commitment to wider consultation, I am also releasing issues papers on the regulation of land, business and conveyancing agents; canvassing the idea of a Territory Bond Board; looking at a discussion paper on motor vehicle dealer registration; a discussion paper on vendor disclosure; the earlier one that I have mentioned about retailed tenancy; and a paper on the modernisation of the Disposal of Uncollected Goods Act. All of those reforms will clean up areas of current legislation and regulation of business activities. It will give a much cleaner and more certain environment for those areas the subject of discussion papers. I look forward to progressing all that reform by the end of this year. We should be able to move on in those very important areas of real estate, motor trades and so on.
One of the other areas that I can directly contribute to is the crime prevention climate in which small businesses particularly are operating. Small businesses are, by definition, more vulnerable to both antisocial behaviour and criminal behaviour within the community. They are also affected, not only in the more direct sense of an attack on the integrity of their assets and the stock that they might have as a basis of their business, but they are also very vulnerable to the general climate that would exist around, say, a retail centre, places where hotel-motel accommodation is operating, and the general town environment that is going to attract, for example, tourism into a particular part of the Northern Territory.
Business, particularly small business, needs a stable, social climate free of antisocial behaviour and high levels of crime to operate successfully. We have recognised this by being very careful to include business in the crime prevention councils that are being set up regionally around the Northern Territory. We are very aware of the need to involve the Office of Crime Prevention and Neighbourhood Watch groups in looking at ways of crime-proofing neighbourhoods and business areas including central business districts.
We are also being very mindful of the interests, particularly of small business, when we are talking about the type of law reform that we have already brought in as part of the six-point plan in crime; namely, the provisions for aggravated property crime and, specifically, the provision for a new offence of business invasion. The type of serial invasion and theft from businesses that we saw in Darwin late last year, prior to those offenders being apprehended and charged, are exactly the types of offences that we had in mind when we framed the aggravated property crime laws and the business invasion law.
The message we want to put out very strongly through these new offences and the types of sentences they can carry is to stay away from our small business premises and keep your hands off stock and other assets that a business requires to continue its operation. We have repeatedly indicated the strong relationship between a drug habit and serial property crime to the extent that the drug laws have now made it harder for people taking property to drug dealers and exchanging it for drugs. We want to take some of the pressure off businesses as a result of these types of offences.
As well as the law reform we have done, the Police Commissioner has also instituted a program of intelligence-based policing. That has targeted a lot of the types of offenders that I am talking about, in drives such as Ranger and Spitfire which have been very successful innovations in the way that our police are operating to apprehend and remove serial offenders out of our communities and, particularly, the business community.
Above the level of the individual offending and crime, we also have a number of community initiatives. I point to things such as the Tennant Creek substance abuse initiatives, the equivalent of that in Alice Springs, the more recent itinerant initiatives here in Darwin and, alongside that, the juvenile justice initiatives that we are implementing in Alice Springs currently. Again, these are all aimed at improving the general social climate in which small business is operating so that business people are not having to deal with this type of very debilitating offences, and the general effect that antisocial behaviour and these sorts of offences have on the success of the businesses in their place of operation.
Moving now to the my other area of portfolio responsibility which is communications, I would like to refer back to the actions I have taken to date in supporting the ICT industry here in the Northern Territory. In September last year, I was a proud co-sponsor, along with the minister for Business, of an information and communication technology forum for industry and government participants. This forum was a follow-up to the Economic Development Summit that was held soon after we came to government. It was the first time the ICT business community has come together with government to plan the future of their industry. It was an absolutely exciting event. I had great pleasure in attending the second forum in the series, and it is very clear in our ICT industry here we have a very active, creative group of business people which is full of ideas and energy to grow their industry and are very open to a strong working relationship with our government. We welcome that and we are certainly going to be moving forward in the relationship that has been established within those forums.
As an enabling industry, it is well placed to develop useful applications for some of the new industries such as oil and gas which are emerging here. It is also well placed to develop content that can support new and existing industry, as well as the government’s remote service delivery through telecommunications. Discussion at the forum also highlighted the need to produce, attract and retain appropriately skilled professionals who can participate in, and drive growth in the Northern Territory’s ICT industry. The creation of jobs for Territorians is one of the top priorities for the government and I am pleased to be working with the industry in this important area.
A combined ICT industry and government group with six ICT industry members, three NT government members - DCIS, DBIRD and OTC - and one Commonwealth government member, Austrade, has been working to implement the outcomes of the forum. It was also clear from the forum that the NT’s ICT industry can further develop its export capacity. One of the priority outcomes from the forum was to seek and identify global markets for the export of the Northern Territory’s ICT products and services. With this in mind, I will be leading an ICT delegation to the CeBIT Trade Fair in Hanover in the middle of March to explore international business and export opportunities at the largest IT trade fair in the world. The Department of Industry, Resources and Development are working with Austrade to identify business opportunities which can be taken up during that trip. I look forward to giving a detailed report to this House after we return and I look forward to some tangible outcomes for the Northern Territory ICT industry from our attendance.
I would like to close my contribution to the debate by looking at some of the areas in Central Australia we have been working on. The Centre is a small business community - in so many cases very small businesses, often single persons or family owned businesses. We hear from the business people down there the priorities are: reducing crime and antisocial behaviour in trading and retail areas; a second domestic airline into Alice Springs, which has certainly been talked about a bit in these sittings; ensuring the interest of consumers are looked after fairly and equitably; putting in place excellence in training to assist employers to access trained staff; successfully concluding negotiations with native title holders for the release of land; developing infrastructure such as roads; and stimulating new economies through Desert Knowledge Australia. That is a pretty wide brief for us to work on and I am certainly looking forward to continuing to work with the business community in Alice Springs towards those ends.
I will say a little bit more about Desert Knowledge, I believe Desert Knowledge will provide stimulus for Central Australia to look at new industries for the 21st century, or new ways to develop old industries. They recently had a huge win in obtaining over $20m in Commonwealth funds for the Cooperative Research Centre. The headquarters and the key node of its activities will be in Alice Springs. It will provide a national and international focus for Alice and the Centre. It is almost impossible to imagine how many different areas that Desert Knowledge will lead us into over time – it is everything from primary industry to tourism, to new forms of service delivery and management support for our own communities and our own local business and clients. However, it will also lead, ultimately, to the ability to export a lot of that activity to other jurisdictions and, potentially, overseas. It is an extraordinarily exciting development in the Centre. We will just have to wait and see where it does lead to, but I there are some brilliant starting points for it.
Training: I was proud last month to be present at the launch of the expanded higher education program in Alice Springs to be delivered by the NTU at Centralian College. These programs mark a milestone in improved access to quality education for Territorians in Central Australia, and is just one example of the investment in education and training this government is making. At the other end of the spectrum of education, the government has also invested in Nyangatjatjara Secondary Aboriginal College at Yulara. Educating remote students is a real investment in the future of Aboriginal communities. We have to work very hard with business to enhance the skill and education levels of our own people so that they are available to the work force in various areas of business in the Northern Territory itself.
Local recruits are the most stable recruits. We are constantly outlaying on re-recruitment and relocation of skilled people, so if we are going to get beyond the high turnover of people coming into the Northern Territory business sector and work force, this is the way we have to go. It is a harder route, but it is one that I strong support. I encourage business, particularly small business, in promoting our own training and induction of people into our work force.
Mr REED (Katherine): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I take the opportunity to contribute to this debate because this should have been a very important statement, one that was a bit of a landmark in relation to the government’s position regarding support of business and industry across the Northern Territory. However, sadly, the Chief Minister has failed in that regard. She will be judged to that extent by business and industry.
The Chief Minister seems to overlook that there is more than big business in the Northern Territory, and that the core of the business community is supported by small business. I respectfully suggest to ministers and the Chief Minister that next time they go to Alice Springs, or as soon as possible, instead of jumping in an aeroplane, they jump in a car and drive down the track. On the way, allow a day or two to be able to stop off and talk to business people. That would provide them with an opportunity to change their point of view and outlook in relation to the business community. They would find that statements by some ministers over the last year or so that certain sectors of the business community are going gang busters and everything is going well, would be quickly put down.
I took the opportunity to drive to Alice Springs earlier this month and, in doing so, spoke to business people along the way. I regularly speak to them, of course, in Katherine and Darwin, but I do not often get the opportunity with the smaller businesses down the track in Tennant Creek and Alice Springs. There was a very consistent message, response and demonstration that the government should be much more concerned about the economic circumstances in the Territory than they currently are. The message very clearly was that business, particularly small and medium businesses, are doing it very tough. On a number of occasions I was advised by small business proprietors – and to clarify the type of business that I am talking about, a business that might comprise a husband and wife, a family business, and that business might employ two or three part-time people and a couple of permanent staff. In too many circumstances, I was advised that the business was now being run by mum and dad and that they were finding it very difficult to put in the hours and to keep the business going. However, they found it necessary to do so for a number of reasons. One was the increasing impost by this government on their business and the increased take of taxes and charges. The other was what was, if not considered a fact, perceived to be the lack of interest this government has and the lack of support it provides for small business. Another was that they had absolutely no confidence in the future.
It was for that reason that, as their staff left, they were not being replaced. They were not sacking people, but they certainly were not replacing them, and they were not replacing them because they had no faith in the future. They have no belief that the policies of this government are going to deliver them better times in the short-term and, as a consequence, they are knuckling down. They are in the trenches, in effect. They know, or at least they feel that if they do employ replacement staff, then conditions are not going to improve and they are not going to be in a position to be able to lay those staff off easily. Or they do not want to face the dilemma of having to do so if things do not improve. They clearly do not believe that they will improve.
Some of those businesses them might only employ one or two people, and they might be part-time employees, but those employees all contribute to the economy, and they all put in their effort to sustain and contribute to the community in which they live. Their community, and in turn the Territory, is much the poorer for their going and for their losing their job. Once they lose their job, sadly, many of them are going. We have seen a demonstration of that as recently as last week when the ABS reported that 2800 more people have left the Territory than the number that has come to the Territory. They are indisputable figures. The government might place some scorn on them, and might not accept them, but the ABS is the final arbiter in population assessments, and we should at least take them seriously.
That is the broad picture that the government is missing and has not been touched on at all in the Chief Minister’s statement. Small business has been completely forgotten. As the member for Nelson quite rightly indicated in his contribution to this debate, it is small business that keeps the Territory going between the large projects. The Territory does have a boom and bust cycle, and it will continue to until the population grows further; until we can develop an industrial base. We must have a government that recognises those circumstances and does something about them. This government is failing on all counts in that regard.
They can convince themselves with these wonderful words and the establishment of task forces as much as they like but, in driving down the track and talking to business people across the Northern Territory, ministers and the Chief Minister would find that their much lauded round tables have come to nought. People who have taken a lot of time out from their businesses and contributed a lot of effort to participate in the round tables are enormously frustrated. They are not getting access to ministers, and if they do get access, they are not getting answers. More frequently, they approach a minister’s officer - and some of them have gone to the extent of actually coming to Darwin to speak to ministers - only to find that they can get no further than an advisor, and that those advisors will say anything to get the particular business representative out the door.
Those high levels of frustration exist. They will continue to grow, I suspect, at a rapid rate because, whilst the Chief Minister can get up and wax lyrical about all sorts of committees that she has established - we have had the Economic Development Summit - people are aware that the much lauded economic summit has produced nought. No benefits have come from it and, indeed, it has been such a dismal failure that business people now looking for its progress on the government’s Internet site cannot even find it. It has been removed. That, in itself, has sent a very serious message to the business community. Notwithstanding all the effort, and hype that came out of the economic summit, it has evaporated into thin air having produced nothing, and all of the effort that everyone put into it amounted to nought.
The round tables, as I have just said, are having the same effect. I have to say, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, that a number of the people that I spoke to were from your constituency. I could not understand that you and other members of the government in your constituencies are not receiving the same message, yet there is not one indication in the statement of the Chief Minister that government is receiving a message of that kind. That is to say that the rhetoric is king. You have all been consumed by the rhetoric of the Chief Minister and other ministers with business portfolios, and you are not hearing the message of the business community; you are not hearing their concerns or responding to their needs, and this statement is only going to make it worse.
In speaking to people trying to find out what the core issues that concern them are, you get a number of very familiar responses from people in business communities 1000 km apart. They are separated by 1000 km, they might be in completely different businesses, but they are giving you the same messages as this:
- If I hear that the government has established another committee or is going to conduct another review, I will get
on a plane and go and try and choke the Chief Minister. We are sick up to here with reviews and committees. Hundreds of them have been established at great cost, none of them have produced anything.
That is the level of frustration that exists in the business community across the Northern Territory. You talk to them, then, about other issues that you think might be of interest to them. Well, what about gas? You might introduce the subject of gas: ‘What do you think of gas?’.
- Gas! Don’t come to me talking about gas. I turn on the television, the Chief Minister has a microphone in front
of her from the interviewer and she is asked about the state of the economy. And what do we hear? Gas, gas,
gas, gas, gas, gas, gas, gas, gas, gas and the Chief Minister goes off the air. We have also had it up to here
with gas.
Gas is very important, but gas is not going to solve, in the view of the business community across the Northern Territory, the ills of our economy. The economy is very sick and one panacea is not going to fix it. One gas project which, as good as it will be and as hard as we in government fought to achieve it, will not solve the ills of the Territory in economic terms, job creation or in business confidence. It is going to be very focussed on Darwin and you will find, when the project occurs, that many businesses will not benefit at all. Some will benefit to some extent, some will benefit in a very big way. It will be a project that will be very beneficial, which will serve the future of the Territory well and place us in a new direction. However, it should not be seen as the cure for all ills, as the Chief Minister keeps trying to present it.
To further confuse the matter, when the Sunrise joint venturers made the announcement that they had not yet found domestic markets; if that was not information the business community wanted to hear, they certainly did not want to hear what the Chief Minister said. She panicked, and off she went on a tangent appearing on television news again, not only talking gas, gas, gas, gas, gas but even getting so desperate as to say: ‘We are going now to talk to the New Guinea gas suppliers so that we can get New Guinea gas across to Borroloola and into the Northern Territory’. Well, if that did not send an earthquake through the business community - or if the government does not think it did - then ministers and the Chief Minister in particular, should have another look at what she said on that occasion, and the impact it had on further lowering the confidence of the business community in the Northern Territory.
That panic act, that ‘I will grab any project as long as it has gas written in front of it to get the Territory out of trouble’, did her enormous harm. It demonstrated her inability to govern. It demonstrated the Labor Party’s inability to take the reigns of government and to steer the good ship, the Northern Territory …
Mr Henderson: Are you going to run again? I hope not.
Ms Lawrie: No, he is retiring.
Mr REED: I am hitting the point, because the interjections are starting. … to steer the good ship Northern Territory into the future and to give Territorians some hope for the future - a very important point.
The Chief Minister, on page 10 of her statement, made reference to the feasibility study into the expansion of the McArthur River Mine and that it was under way. That is good news, and it was foreshadowed when the mine was opened. It should not have come as a surprise to the Chief Minister. In fact, when it was foreshadowed in years past, the Labor Party, then in opposition, opposed that expansion because they did not think it appropriate for a river to be diverted for a mine pit. However, of course, in government today, it is more politically correct, in their view, and more appropriate for them to be able to support it.
Nonetheless, that project is in the stage of a feasibility study. That is to say, it is some years out. The same applies to the Alcan project at Gove. A final decision is not expected until 2004, some years out in terms of actually happening on the ground. What the Chief Minister has overlooked in her statement is that business in the Northern Territory today - and it is not just small and medium businesses but many large businesses - are struggling to get together the pay packets of their staff this week. This week they are having that difficulty. Many of them will not survive until 2005, 2006 or whenever these projects come to fruition. Their problem is survival today and into next year. That is the situation that they face, that this government is ignoring.
The Chief Minister made very brief reference to tourism, on page 15 of her statement. She made very brief reference to it because she is on the nose in the tourism industry and so is her government, and more particularly, the Minister for Tourism.
Mr Kiely: They love him!
Mr REED: I have talked to the members in the tourism industry - and they certainly do not love him, to pick up the interjection. Again, the response that you will get - and the Chief Minister should talk to business people down the track instead of jumping on an aeroplane to go to Alice Springs. Perhaps for the April sittings, she could drive down and talk to people along the track and get this information for herself. She will find that the tourism industry will tell her that they have had to endure three ministers in 18 months and that the last minister she appointed is just a dill and incompetent. The only thing he knows about tourism is he went on holiday once.
In the tourism industry, which employs more people in the Northern Territory than any other industry, they are very much aggrieved that they have had to deal with three ministers in 18 months. Not only that, the last minister appointed is at the bottom of the rung, the least influential in the Cabinet, yet he is responsible for an industry that employs more people than any other in the Northern Territory. That is why there is a very brief mention of the tourism industry in the Chief Minister’s statement. There is another very salient reason, and that is that in the Treasurer’s Mid-Year Report - and this was just quietly released; in fact, you will remember that the Treasurer did not even know that it was released - the tourism industry has now found that it has had a cut of $2m over the next three years. This is a $250 000 cut this financial year over and above the cuts they experienced in the budget, and that it has become less important in the eyes of this government than it formerly was. So, if you think the tourism industry is happy with their current minister or this government, then you are more out of touch than anyone could ever have assessed.
The situation is that we have a tourism industry that is now in a position where they hope the forthcoming year is going to be a good one. One would have to say the prospects are not good. Regional tourism associations do not know how much money they are going to get for the forthcoming year and they are left hanging; not knowing how much to commit to promotional activities because they do not know how much money they have because of the incompetence of the junior minister running the portfolio. That is another indication of the paucity of commitment and action that the Chief Minister did not demonstrate in her statement.
It is an indictment of the Chief Minister and this government that the best thing that can come out of a statement in the dire economic times that we currently face, is seven new committees. Well, they are not going to sustain industry and business.
Mr HENDERSON (Business, Industry and Resource Development): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, it is good to see that the member for Katherine is still participating in debate in this House …
Ms Martin: Only just!
Mr HENDERSON: He very rarely gets to his feet these days, and when he does, talks about …
Dr Lim: Not true, not true.
Ms Carney: Do not tell porkies, Paul.
Dr Lim: Porky pies. Porky pies.
Mr Kiely: Have a look at the record then.
Dr Lim: The minister can say porky pies without any problem. Porky pies!
Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker! The member for Greatorex very well knows that there is a standing order preventing the inference of lying in this Assembly and ‘porky pies’, as we know, is a colloquialism for ‘lies’. I ask that he withdraw.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Continue, minister.
Mr HENDERSON: Thank you. I certainly touched a raw nerve. I am sure that, if we were to go back and do a score card of how many times the member for Katherine has contributed to debate in this House, he would be found to be one of the worst performers …
Dr Lim: Best in the Chamber.
Ms Carney: Hello! You are from planet what?
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Members for Greatorex and Araluen, order!
Mr HENDERSON: … and when he does, talk about Mr Doom and Gloom. He really should be ashamed of himself. One of the responsibilities we all have as members of parliament is to faithfully represent our constituents and talk truthfully about what is happening, not only in the economy, but across all sectors of the community, and put some facts in the comments we make.
All we had from the member for Katherine was a deluge of unattributed innuendo and comments that were not specific in any industry sector at all. You could not tease out of the contribution from the member for Katherine, even apart from tourism, what sectors of business he was talking to up and down the track, and the doom and gloom,. It was unattributed and has contributed nothing to this debate tonight. If he was to have said that the business proprietors to whom I spoke were in the primary industry sector, the mining sector or general retail sector and it was in Katherine or Tennant Creek, you might have had an idea of what he was talking about, but it was just a general sledge.
The difference between this government and the previous government is that we are looking to the future and not to the past. I can recall, in my short time in this parliament, two years in opposition, when we had economic growth rates here in the Northern Territory that have never been seen before. We had, in the 1999-2000 financial year, an economic growth rate of zero.
Ms Martin: 0.01.
Mr HENDERSON: 0.01 – I am sorry, Chief Minister. I should not have been so churlish. We had the lowest economic growth figure since self-government. Time after time during Question Time, we would ask the then Chief Minister and Treasurer what they were doing to stimulate the economy and not once – not once – would they acknowledge that the economy was in trouble. Not once would they indicate: ‘Yes, we have a serious problem on our hands’. The difference between that side and this side of the House is that we are open with Territorians. We have come to government and acknowledged the state of our economic difficulties and we have set about, with rigour and vigour, building a future for the Northern Territory, and not to rely on the hype, the glossy brochures that everything was well with the world and ‘Re-elect us and the good times will continue’.
That was one of the reasons they were kicked out of office. The people of the Northern Territory were sick of the arrogance of members opposite in stating that there was nothing wrong with the economy, that the good times were here and they were continuing to roll. We will not play that game. We have not played that game, and we have acknowledged that we do have problems with our economy and we are doing whatever we can to fix those problems, as well as repairing the appalling state of the budget that was bequeathed by the previous government when we inherited an unsustainable budget.
Let us just look at some key indicators. When we came to government, unemployment was at 7.8%, yet there was no problem with the economy, according to those opposite. It is now down around 5.8%. Not good enough, we accept that, but a significant improvement on what we inherited when we came to government. The work force has grown by some 1800 people and, yes, we have had a nett migration loss this year, but there has been a nett migration loss from the Northern Territory every year since 1997. The underlying trends are showing, in all of the economic indicators, that the corner is being turned. It is nowhere near good enough. It is nowhere near good enough, but to stand in here and say it is all doom and gloom and there is no light at the end of the tunnel, and everybody is packing up and leaving the Territory because there is absolutely no confidence in the Territory’s future - the only person who does not have confidence in the Territory’s future is the member of Katherine. He is the only one in this House who has no confidence in the Territory’s future. The Territory does have a very, very bright future. That is why we are all here representing our constituents.
Before I do get to my contribution, it is Parliament’s General Business Day tomorrow, and the fix from members opposite is always spend more money - government must spend more money. Well, when those members opposite say that we must repeal the HIH levy and the motor vehicle levy, and reduce taxes and charges, that comes at a cost. That is spending money, and they have not stated anywhere how they would finance those revenue-raising measure cuts. It is so easy from opposition to say: ‘Spend more money’. Well, that was certainly the history of the CLP. Whenever they were in trouble, it was whack it on the Bankcard. But Territorians know that the Bankcard was full. We are paying interest rates to the extent of $500 000 each and every day. Any government can look good spending money. But the previous government has been caught out, and the member for Katherine was part of the deception that was perpetrated on the people of the Northern Territory prior to the last election. It is something that I believe the people of the Northern Territory will never forgive him for.
Moving forward to more positive comments, I speak in support of the statement on our bright economic future delivered to this Assembly by the Chief Minister today. The Chief Minister has painted a comprehensive and exciting picture of the major projects that will underpin economic development for Territorians over the coming five years and beyond. In supporting her statement, I propose to focus on the mechanics of our strategy to support and encourage economic development.
Our core principle is fiscal and economic responsibility, something that those members opposite know absolutely nothing about. If they were directors of companies, they would be in breach of the Corporations Act and up before the courts. As federal Treasurer, Peter Costello, their mate, often reminds us: deficit budgets lead to ever bigger taxes. Some people never learn, like those opposite, but we will bring our economy back into the black after many, many years and we are delivering jobs for Territorians.
The first key strategy I want to talk about is our debt reduction strategy. In committing to this strategy, we are planning for the long-term economic wellbeing of the Territory, and we are already starting to reap the rewards of this approach. Our business people demand it of their directors and managers, and we believe this government must display the same level of responsibility with economic management. We do not apologise for that. We confronted and are steadily addressing a major challenge. Servicing our accumulated debt costs Territorians over $500 000 each and every day - that is nearly $4m a week - and that the nett debt plus unfunded employee entitlements are $3.5bn on the Bankcard and rising. Not a shred of evidence from those opposite as to how they would service that debt by increasing government expenditure. I am very proud of the fact that this year we are tracking to come in with a budget deficit significantly lower than we anticipated in the 2002-03 Budget.
Talking about perceptions, I recently had the opportunity to meet with a group that included most of Darwin’s bank managers and we had a very informative session. One thing that really struck a chord with me was the extent of interest in, and optimism about, the economic prospects for the Territory down south. While some people in the Territory seem to be stuck in a rut, like the member for Katherine talking the economy down, we are poised for huge economic activity over the next five years. People need to get out of their gloomy mood and help to encourage and support Territory firms as they grasp these enormous opportunities.
Our second strategy for driving economic development is by way of clear and focussed development. As members know, we have acted quickly since we were elected in mid-2001 to produce a suite of economic stimulus strategies. Some of these, including the economic development strategy and trade strategy, are already being implemented whilst the remaining few, including the manufacturing industries strategy and the strategy for building local participation, are due for release in the coming weeks. Indeed, some people reflect on 2002 as the Northern Territory’s planning year. Now, with those plans in place as opposed to the ramshackle and ad hoc plans that we inherited, the private sector can drive economic growth in a framework of confidence.
I take this opportunity to highlight the comprehensive efforts we are making to implement our economic development strategy Building a Better Territory since its release last June. Just to highlight a few key milestones in the implementation of the EDS so far - and I challenge members opposite that we did commit to time frames in that document and we are delivering against those time frames. As noted by the Chief Minister, we have succeeded in locking in funding for the Desert Knowledge initiative. We have collaborated with indigenous land owners to open up more than 360 000 km2 of land for mineral exploration in the Northern Territory. We have created Team NT. We have established the Northern Territory Fisheries Forum, and established the Power and Water Corporation as a government owned corporation. We have implemented the Business Case Manager program to provide direct and efficient support for small business. We have collaborated with NT Airports to engage an aviation executive to develop and put business cases in support of improved passenger and freight services for the Territory. We are implementing the recommendations of Learning Lessons, the Collins review of indigenous education, and there are many, many more achievements from that work. All of these initiatives are significant in their own right but, together, they underscore the breadth and depth of this government’s commitment to support economic development.
This leads me to the third key strategy for economic development, and that is the private sector must be the economic driver for growth. That is the thing that members opposite forget: it is private sector investment that will grow the economy; it is not government expenditure funded by debt. That is the key thing. Members opposite need to go back to some basic economics classes to understand that growth comes from private sector investment; it does not come from government expenditure. Certainly not if that expenditure is funded by debt which is the only economic stimulus policy that those members opposite know. The only policy that they have is to borrow ever-increasing amounts of money.
Much of the challenge that confronts our private sector as they contemplate the coming opportunities in gas, mining, trade and Defence support, is just how and where to position themselves to take advantage of realistic opportunities associated with these projects. It would be foolish for us to think that our firms will play a lead, or even a major part, in these huge and complex projects. We have to aim for realistic and achievable targets. Accordingly, this government’s job is to create the frameworks within which the private sector can flourish, to assist with the identification of opportunities, to encourage the marrying-up of project needs with local capability, and to encourage appropriate, targeted training for our workforce.
However, growth has to come from the private sector. I would have thought that, with the conservative tendencies of those opposite – I do not think all of them opposite are conservatives; there are few closet socialists on the other side as well. However, they really have to understand that growth has to come from the private sector. If we want to maintain a competitive tax environment, government business must plateau. The days of relying on government alone are over because, under the CLP that meant ever-increasing debt, ever-increasing interest rates and ever-increasing taxes and charges to pay off the Bankcard.
Having said this, the government does care about Territory business. This is evidenced by the fact that we have moved decisively to help the ailing construction and maintenance sector with $11.5m to help tide the sector over until the 2002-03 budget was brought down. This year, we injected a record $330m cash for new projects into the capital works, minor new works and repairs and maintenance budgets. We are closely monitoring expenditure against this budget to ensure that our promise of help does exist. This is not going to be just another hollow promise like those of our predecessors. In all, we have spent $381m so far, and will fully expend the $432m budget by June.
Our fourth key strategy is to ensure that economic activity and benefit is inclusive of all Territorians. This government is a government for all Territorians. I was pleased to receive a briefing just a week ago from the Territory Construction Association and the Northern Land Council – and congratulations to them both - about a memorandum of understanding they have put in place for the training of indigenous people for the mining and gas sectors. This initiative is exciting and will benefit us all. It is an example of groups other than government taking the initiative within framework set by governments. I commend the TCA and the NLC for that achievement. It really is visionary, and I would urge all members to contact the TCA or the NLC and get a copy of that memorandum of understanding. It is visionary in the Australian context and it just goes to show that our industry associations and land councils and governments are looking forward - looking forward to the future, not looking back wistfully on the past.
We recognise the need to include indigenous people in the economy for their benefit and ours. We will all suffer if we do not create opportunities. The simple facts are that Aboriginal people represent 30% of our population and they own 50% of the land in the Territory. It is time to encourage and support indigenous Territorians as they grasp the significant opportunities available to them. This government is delivering on it by sponsoring a major indigenous economic development forum to be held in Alice Springs on 6 and 7 March this year.
As the Chief Minister has so ably explained, we have been working hard behind the scenes with all of these companies to get that project going. Now it is the turn of the private sector to seize the opportunities that are being created. Having said that, I am keen for my Department of Business, Industry and Resource Development to be involved with the skilling of the work force to be able to make the most of the new ventures being undertaken in the region.
The government has an excellent relationship with the Chamber of Commerce and Industry. I took the opportunity earlier this month to speak to them about the government’s economic agenda for the coming year, and to respond to a detailed action list setting out the Chamber’s focus of its efforts and challenges for government for the coming year. I was pleased to be able to emphasise that many of the initiatives that they see as being important are issues that we also see as being important. In the important areas of developing trade and our manufacturing industry, public liability insurance, taxes, charges and the cost of doing business, retail tenancy, builders licensing, training and small business support, we are delivering.
Let me take the opportunity to focus on one area of crucial importance to small business, and that is our efforts to resolve the public liability insurance problem. This sittings will see amendments to the Consumer Affairs and Fair Trading Act relating to recreational activity injuries to allow service providers to contract out personal injury risks to adults; debate on the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Act which will introduce caps and thresholds to claims relating to personal injury; introduction of two other related bills being Personal Injuries (Civil Claims) Bill dealing with the pre-court processes including mandatory mediation and mandatory exchange of offers; and the Legal Practitioners (Costs and Advertising) Amendment Bill to limit the way practitioners can behave in insurance claim cases.
In mid-year, we will introduce legislation to restructure the law of negligence. All of these measures are designed to increase the downward pressure on premiums. By way of further example, we are currently working with the NT Chamber of Commerce and Industry on two projects:
a retail forum to be held at the Carlton Hotel on 25 March. This will bring together local operators
and producers with the national buyers for Woolworths to help enhance their relationship and maximise
business opportunities with this major industry player; and
winning work from prime contractors on projects in areas such as oil, gas, mining and Defence.
There will be a specific package of measures in this budget to help small business thrive. This year, for the first time, our aim is for all of the initiatives relating to the business sector to be incorporated into the one accessible booklet that will be targeted at businesses. At the same time, we continue to support small business with continued funding for the business enterprise centres, e-business information service, client managers, the business growth programs to put together business plans, a case manager network and the Chief Minister’s Business Round Table.
Before I sign off, the member for Katherine was stating how people who have attended the Chief Minister’s Business Round Table have been absolutely scathing about the process and outcomes. I can say that we conducted an analysis of the last 12 months of round table activity. We contacted all of the people who participated in the Business Round Tables and over 70% reported very favourably that it was a very good initiative from government; that they got a lot out of it and it was certainly something worth continuing. So, the member for Katherine probably spoke to one or two people who did not think it was a worthwhile venture. I can say to this House that over 70% of people who have attended support the initiative and want it to continue.
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, I have listened with great interest to what the member for Wanguri has had to say. It is extraordinary. He actually appears to believe what he says. That is fine; everyone should believe in what they say. The problem is that no one else agrees with him. I completely and unequivocally endorse and support the comments made by the member for Katherine.
What the member for Katherine said is completely true. My own experiences bear that out - the phone calls, faxes, e-mails that come to my office certainly bear it out. The government gets twitchy because they do not like hearing the truth. Small businesses are hurting, and to read the Chief Minister’s statement - quite frankly, I was surprised. When we got this late last night, I thought: ‘This will be interesting’, so I ploughed through it looking for something new, something positive. I am not an expert in business, but as a citizen of the Northern Territory, I was aghast. There is nothing new in this, nothing to invigorate the economy, nothing to provide incentives to small business owners, and the people on the other side should be appalled.
This was the government’s opportunity, in light of all of the statistics in recent weeks and the crisis that is infiltrating certain areas of small business, to stand up and be counted and say: ‘This is what we are doing’. Instead they re-hashed what has been hashed and hashed before by them - and most of them, I might add, are CLP initiatives they rebadged and dared to put in this statement and try to suggest to people that there is something new. It is absolute rubbish.
I am very happy to say that, in my absence from Alice Springs, a new hot water system was required at my house earlier this week. The plumber apparently came round and decided to spend an extra hour-and-a-half telling my partner about all of the difficulties that he and his colleagues in the building industry were experiencing in Alice Springs. I have requested, when I return to Alice Springs and see the plumber to pay the bill, to have coffee with him, so desperate is he to talk to me about the desperate situation in which he finds himself, thanks to this lot on the other side. He blames you. I have a very detailed account of what my plumber had to say about you lot, and he is not happy. This is a man who has lived in Alice Springs for a very long time. He and his friends are all talking about you in quite different terms. For the member for Wanguri to stand up and rattle off all of his diatribe, apparently believing every word of it, is extraordinary.
Having said all of that, my main points relate to tourism. The member for Wanguri referred to this glossy document called Building a Better Territory released in June 2002, as indeed, other members have. The member for Wanguri said that various time lines had been included and this was Labor’s vision for the future – indeed, the Chief Minister said the same thing in this place when she delivered it. I have had cause, of course, as have my colleagues, to go through this document again in light of the Chief Minister’s statement today. It is very obvious that government has not stuck to some of its time lines, and that some of the things that have cropped up in the Chief Minister’s statement did not even appear in this glossy blue document. I will come to that shortly.
The most amazing thing that emerges, from my point of view at least, is that out of 23 pages, one page is devoted to tourism, an industry second only to mining and resources in the income it generates for the economy, and the Territory’s largest employer. It scores one page out of this 23 pages of rubbish. In that one page, or page and a paragraph, the Chief Minister says three things. First, she says that she is going to talk to some airlines. Of course, we all remember that the new Tourism minister went over and carried the books for the previous Tourism minister late last year, and they both travelled to talk to some airlines. They came back empty-handed. It was clear that they failed in their attempts to encourage airlines in Asia to come to the Northern Territory. It is obvious that the Chief Minister has decided that she will now go and give it a go, but this is the first time in 15 months that the Chief Minister has apparently turned her mind to this. It is certainly the first time in 15 months that she has decided to hop on a plane, and I wish her every success in the world because I know how hard tourism operators are doing it and they want better aviation access. The decrease in aviation access to the Northern Territory is 58% since this government came to office. I welcome any efforts the Chief Minister makes to support airlines coming to the Northern Territory, but feel somewhat outraged that it has taken her and her government this long to make it a priority.
The second tourism area that the Chief Minister talked about in her statement is the Darwin convention centre. This is amazing because in Building a Better Territory, released in June last year, under the heading, Priority Actions, it says:
- Continue to promote the development of a Darwin Convention Centre.
If this was a priority action in June last year, I would hate to see the government thinking that something was urgent! Eight months later, and all they say is that they are working on this issue and government will be making a decision in next three months. How long does it take for this government to do anything? What does the government say? ‘We will organise a task force’. For task force, read: review. For task force, read: committee. On and on they go. They are wedded to this document. They said: ‘This is the Labor blueprint’. In fact, it is printed in blue. ‘This is the Labor road map for the future’. Already this is a sham. Many people regard it as a joke and I happen to be one of them.
The third tourism matter that was raised by the Chief Minister was the Wharf Precinct. This is also terribly interesting, Madam Speaker, and I am sure you remember from your time in government, documents released about - surprise, surprise - the Darwin Wharf Precinct. In 1999 plans were actually prepared and, Madam Speaker, I seek leave to table these plans.
Leave granted.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, Madam Speaker. For the benefit of members on the other side, there are plans, pictures, and land was identified. The project was ready to go. So this government comes in here and says: ‘Oh, we have a bright idea; we will do something about the Darwin Wharf Precinct’. Thank God for the CLP because, if the CLP had not been in government, this lot would not come up with one idea. You are just a bunch of copycats. ‘Oh, what did the CLP do? Let us have a look. We do not have any ideas. What did they do? Oh well, the Darwin Wharf Precinct. Better have a look at that’. So off they go and, to make matters worse, in their Labor blueprint, of all of the priority actions, all of the things that are terribly important to the economy and tourism, the Darwin Wharf Precinct is not even mentioned. It is not even there. I have gone through it, and I kept thinking: ‘You missed something member for Araluen, it must be there’. It is not be there; no mention of it. They have the audacity to come into this place and flog an idea to the people out in the streets that this government is coming up with something new.
The embarrassing aspect of all of this is that, in March last year the Minister for Transport and Infrastructure …
Ms MARTIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Would you tell the member for Araluen that if she speaks more quietly we can actually hear her.
Madam SPEAKER: That is not a point of order, Chief Minister.
Ms Carter: If there was not so much screeching from your side, she would not need to.
Ms Martin: I am worried about your voice, Jodeen. You will lose it. Just settle down.
Ms CARNEY: Thank you, member for Port Darwin. The Minister for Transport and Infrastructure took a media pack down to the Darwin Wharf in March last year, had his press conference, trotted out new pictures, new designs of the wharf, re-launched and re-badged the CLP’s Darwin Wharf Precinct, and then no one heard anything. People were talking to me about it, and the tourism industry were asking: ‘Do you know what is happening to the Wharf Precinct, because we do not?’. No one knew anything about it. Then, in light of this economic statement, the government says: ‘Oh, I suppose we had better talk about tourism. Let us do a re-launch of the re-launch, and let us talk about the Darwin Wharf Precinct’. All they can come up with is: ‘We will be making a decision in the next three months’. Well, no doubt that decision will need to be workshopped extensively by the people on the other side, then it will go to the task force – read: committee - and maybe after that they might decide to farm it out for some sort of a review. So, one day - perhaps I will be an old woman - the Darwin Wharf Precinct will be launched. Thank God for the CLP, and thank God for the fact that they had the vision and initiative to think of this project because if the CLP did not, it would never have occurred to this lot.
The Chief Minister’s statement was an opportunity to come up with something new; to say in respect of tourism: ‘We have an idea. The light is on; we can now be clever and creative. We have an idea of our own’. But no. To my surprise and to the surprise of many others, not one original idea - three things relating to the Territory’s second largest industry. While I clearly wish that the Wharf Precinct would get off the ground, for more than eight months nothing has been done. Everything has fallen into a hole, and all they have done is mention it in their statement to be workshopped extensively by the new task force. Apart from re-badged, recycled CLP initiatives, the tourism industry will take no comfort at all from the Chief Minister’s statement. It is an indictment for the members of the other side to seriously believe that members of the tourism industry can take something from this. This is a disgrace and the government should be ashamed of themselves.
Members interjecting.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, the government members all have a collective moan and so they should.
Members interjecting.
Dr LIM: I do not mind being their object of ridicule if that is how they fancy it. But do you know something? Looking through the Chief Minister’s statement with all her minders, all the departments at her disposal, and she produces a pathetic 23-page speech which says very little about what she intends to do. On page 4, she lists a whole swag of things that her task forces are doing. Nothing is going to appear for the next few years, perhaps except for the Wickham Point project, the Alice Springs to Darwin railway link, and the Stokes Hill Wharf redevelopment. Those are the things that the CLP did many years ago. Had it not been for the CLP, the Chief Minister would not have been able to get her name on these projects at all.
It took the Chief Minister, who is supposed to represent the whole of the Territory, at least three-quarters of the speech before she even got to Alice Springs. That is how much she thinks of Central Australia.
Mr Vatskalis interjecting.
Dr LIM: The Minister for Transport and Infrastructure cackles away in derision about Central Australia. That is how he feels about Central Australia. What type of pathetic government is this? It does not care about the rest of the Territory as long as their Darwin is nice and comfortable. That is not the way they should govern Territorians.
Let us talk about Central Australia, because I am particularly interested in what happens there. The economy, obviously, is very important to us in Central Australia. In fact, had it not been for Central Australia, I do not think the Territory would be doing so very well at all. Businesses in Alice Springs, I believe, are maintaining equilibrium, despite what this government has done. Thank God for the expertise and tenacity of business people in Alice Springs, that they have been able to continue on.
Mr Vatskalis: Apart from the plumbers.
Dr LIM: ‘Rubbish’ he says …
Dr Burns: No, he did not say ‘rubbish’.
Dr LIM: People in Alice Springs are not tenacious in their work!
Dr Burns: He did not say ‘rubbish’. Listen up.
Dr LIM: Let me first come to an issue the member for Stuart mentioned earlier: land in Alice Springs. He said he has been working so very hard to try and get native title issues removed from land in Alice Springs. He kept promising, time and time again, that it was going to be there in September, then December, then January, then February. When is it going to be? Who knows? I bet he is not game now to put his house on the line to see whether he will get the land released within a particular date. He does not know, but he keeps making promises which he continues to break. Land in Alice Springs is at a critical point. We have heard previous speeches, including one from the member for Macdonnell, that land prices have now gone well past $85 000 per average block.
I know of a block of land in the Golf Course Estate that has gone from $85 000 to well over $130 000 for a standard 800 m block of land. It is ridiculous that, once you pay that sort of money for a block of land, you then have to spend another $200 000 minimum to get a basic house on it. This government has done nothing about it, absolutely nothing. All they do is make hollow promises that get us nowhere.
Owen Springs Station has been sitting on the minister’s desk for how long? What has he done about it? More consultation. The more he does, the more he wants, or the more he needs. I do not know, maybe he needs more so that he can spend more time reading about it. Tourism groups, the cattle industry, the motor sports industry, they are all badgering to get some land access down in Owen Springs Station. The CLP government bought that property so that Alice Springs would have unencumbered access to land right at our doorstep. Instead, this government has locked it up again for another 18 months, if not longer.
It is time that this government started thinking that there are places outside Darwin that need proper governance. What they need to do now is to seriously look at Central Australia and what they can do down there. We heard the shadow minister for tourism, the member for Araluen, speak about the lack of airline seats into Alice Springs. We have been badgering about that for months. Tourism operators have been complaining about the lack of seats coming into Central Australia.
I was recently at the Old Ghan railway station speaking to the operators there and they have lost 75% of their trade. That is a drastic drop because they cannot get the numbers of tourists into Alice Springs to visit the Old Ghan. It has got to a stage when they are seriously considering closing up shop altogether, and it would be a pity. It is a real valuable heritage site. It tells a lot of history about Central Australia and what the train has done for the town. After all, Alice Springs continues, even today, as the rail head and the Old Ghan was one of the things that opened up Central Australia. If that closes, more heritage is lost to Central Australia.
The Chief Minister talks about how she wants to promote businesses, and she talks mostly about the Top End: about gas, and more gas, and more gas, and eventually gives everybody gas. But what has she done about food prices in the Northern Territory; things that would help make sure that everybody gets fed? Well, make sure that there is food on the table. I remember when she was the Leader of the Opposition and she was screaming away at the media that the Territory Food Price Review Committee should have some real outcomes, and bring food prices down or else it has not achieved its job. She was going to reduce the cost of power so that our food prices could be cheaper. There she sits and what has she done about it in the last 18 to 20 months? Not a thing. She has done nothing at all to ensure that our food prices are lower. In fact, she has made it worse for us. She has removed the quarterly Food Price Review that was done conscientiously and readily by the CLP government, published widely so that people knew where they could shop cheapest and, therefore, stretch their family budgets …
Mr Stirling: A lot closer to Cairns than when you were in government.
Dr LIM: Now, they do not know that. The member for Nhulunbuy cackles on there. He was on the committee and he strongly supported a review. The only thing that he dissented from was power prices, as I recall, nothing more than that. And what has he done about it himself? Nothing! He is now the Treasurer. I would have thought that as Treasurer, he would have done something about it, brought it back as he supported the review report so strongly, but, no, he has not.
Petrol prices is another issue that the Chief Minister spoke so loudly about. She was going to bring in - she wanted the CLP government to conduct a review on petrol prices. She wanted to do that, and what have you done about it, Chief Minister, in 18 months, 20 months? Nothing! You have not uttered a word and the price of petrol in Darwin is well over $1 now and petrol prices in Alice Springs are $1.15.
Mr Kiely interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Sanderson, order!
Ms Martin: Well, it is a very serious issue, the war with Iraq.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr LIM: It is a very serious issue, Madam Speaker, that people are paying over $1.15 for petrol in Alice Springs.
Mr Henderson: And we know why.
Dr LIM: That is right. You know why.
Mr Henderson: Absolutely.
Dr LIM: Then why do you not have the review or tell us why? You do not bother, do you?
Mr Henderson: Iraq.
Dr LIM: In opposition, the ministers across the Chamber were very loud and complaining about it, but once they got into government, they hide behind a wall of silence. If that is what you think is fair, so be it. The hospital is a very needed facility in the town of Alice Springs - and this government just does not care what happens down there. Staff are working back-to-back double shifts, and services have been cut back because there are not enough staff. They are not interested in ensuring that staff are looked after properly. If the staff are looked after properly, not only do we get better care in Central Australia, we have the people living in the town, and that in itself becomes a major economic driver for us. Surely, the Alice Springs Hospital would be one of the biggest employers in the central region. I would have thought that the staff there would be of critical importance to this government but, unfortunately, they have not chosen to look after them.
The Minister for Central Australia took a long time to get around to talking about issues pertaining to Central Australia. He talked about the Desert Knowledge Centre which we all applaud. It is one of the best initiatives that Alice in 10 brought about under the CLP. It continues to grow in magnitude, in importance, in its significance across the whole of Australia. I am glad to see that the Commonwealth government has committed significant funds to the enterprise. I also congratulate the Northern Territory government for committing significant funds to the Cooperative Research Centre as well. That very successful initiative by the Alice in 10 project group is about the only project that has got off the ground since this government has taken over. The convention centre was another, but that was done and open at a time the Labor government was in, and now the Desert Knowledge Centre. But there is nothing else. Alice in 10 has been allowed to languish; there has been no impetus and the Minister for Central Australia has forgotten all about it. I have not heard about a single meeting the Alice in 10 group has had since this government has been in.
Ms Martin: I have attended a number of them personally, Richard. I have been to a number of Alice in 10 meetings, so get your facts right, thank you.
Dr LIM: The Chief Minister interrupts and interjects.
Ms Martin: Well, you cannot just stand there and tell lies! It is crazy.
Dr LIM: Well, if she has been to those meetings, I would like to see some publication. Remember, Madam Speaker, when you were the Minister for Local Government, you used to publish quarterly publications on Alice in 10. You would recall that. It came out under you, it came out under me, but since then, there has been no publication at all on Alice in 10 projects, and that is the problem. This government has done nothing. Again, it has forgotten about the value that Alice in 10 has brought to the town. It had a lot of community ownership …
Ms Martin: What about a CRC with $94m over seven years? Not an Alice in 10 project?
Dr LIM: … and now it has nothing. The Chief Minister can talk about the Desert Knowledge CRC, that was what we started …
Ms Martin: $21m in cash.
Dr LIM: … under the CLP. That is what the CLP started and you are now riding on our shirt tails - and you can laugh about it.
Ms Martin: We did it, Richard.
Dr LIM: I am glad you are enjoying it.
Ms Martin: $21m in cash. We did it Richard, we did it.
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker! In the interests of educating me about interjections and interrupting the flow of the speaker as you did, I would ask you to afford my colleague some protection from the Chief Minister who is being frivolous with her interjections.
Ms Martin: Frivolous?
Mr Dunham: Frivolous! You! Keep your trap shut.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! I am pleased to see that you took notice of my comments. I circulated that to all members, and I hope that they read it as diligently as you did. Now, the member for Greatorex has the floor.
Dr LIM: I will not labour much longer, and give the Chief Minister a chance to rest her mouth.
It is important for the Chief Minister to realise that it is not good enough that she stands up and quotes Access Economics and BIS Shrapnel’s data about the future of the Territory.
Mr Stirling: It is a bit brighter than what they were saying about you blokes.
Mr Dunham: The same applies to you, Syd. You are not supposed to interrupt, mate.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order, thank you!
Dr LIM: Anybody with any slight sense of economics would understand that the future for the Northern Territory over the next 10, 15, 20 years is very bright. It does not need the expertise of BIS Shrapnel or Access Economics to see that. Anybody can see that.
However, what is important is that local business people - people living in Darwin, and around the Northern Territory – say: ‘We do not have any confidence in this government and we are getting out of here’, and they are voting with their feet. That is the reason why we have the receding population: people are moving out of the Northern Territory because they are terrified of the economic circumstance in the shorter term. The shorter term is important because without that, we do not have a longer term. What happens if every year we lose 2000 or 3000 people? In 10 years time, when the predictions of greater economic fortunes come about, there will not be any people here to take advantage of it, and that is the problem.
This government has to do something about it - fix up the economy so that it brings back business confidence for private enterprise because that is the engine room of the economy. Small business people in private enterprise: a mum and dad, and maybe one or two other employees if they can afford that. That is what we need to do. If we do not do that, then there is nothing. It is no good just talking about gas. People in Alice Springs are not particularly interested in that because it really does not impact on them. We have gas down there which is delivering gas to the rest of the Territory, but there is no plan to do it the other way around, and all the Chief Minister talks about with gas is about what happens in Darwin. People south of Darwin, even in Katherine, are not particularly concerned about the outcome because it would not have any impact on them whatsoever.
It is important for this government to realise that in Central Australia, there are separate issues. The Minister for Central Australia is not concentrating on them; he has forgotten what we need in Central Australia. His representation down there on behalf of Cabinet is really poor. People cannot get to see him at all. All they get to see are his minders, and his minders are even becoming difficult to get to, and that is a laugh. There are four or five minders in that office and people are having difficulties getting to see them. I do not know what they do all day - no idea whatsoever.
It is important that the government governs for the whole of the Territory. It is important that they ensure that any economic fortunes that befall the Top End also filters down the track. Something must be done to compensate for the loss of the railhead in Alice Springs. People in Alice Springs are not particularly excited about what has happened with the railway line because we have had it there for 100 years or more. We know what it is like to have a railway line. It is people north or Alice Springs who will find this exciting and interesting. But we want to see this government be more proactive for Central Australia, introduce business, introduce opportunities that Central Australia can capitalise on and, until that happens, this government is not governing for the whole of the Territory.
Mr MALEY (Goyder): Madam Speaker, I had not actually planned to make a lengthy speech on the ministerial statement that was handed down by the Chief Minister. However, after reading through it and examining some of the other material which has fallen to be considered by this Chamber and, of course, the poor old journalists during the course of today, regarding the economic blueprint which this government has for the Territory, it is only proper that I at least record some of my observations and concerns about some of the material which has been proffered to the media and into the Northern Territory public domain.
This morning, there was, at about the same time as this statement was released, a press release from the Hon Paul Henderson, the member for Wanguri, dated 25 February 2003. Along the same theme as the Territory’s economic blueprint, the press release makes a number of assertions and draws a number of conclusions from the Small and Medium Business Outlook of the Yellow Pages Business Index. I will remind honourable members who are, no doubt, aware of the contents of this important press release from the Minister for Business, Industry and Resource Development. He begins by referring to the new statistics that are out. He said:
- I am pleased to see the business community sharing the government’s confidence for the future …
That is a very broad statement. A little later on, towards the bottom of the press release, we see the statistical interpretation upon which the minister relies in coming to that conclusion. He said in the second-last paragraph:
- While business confidence was down on the last quarter, at 37%, it is 8% more than the same quarter
last year.
I had, during the course of the busy agenda this afternoon, the chance to have a closer look at the Small and Medium Business Outlook for the Northern Territory and, indeed, the minister did accurately quote that business confidence was down on last quarter. He said it is currently 37%, but what he has failed to say is that in November 2002, it was actually 49% so it has actually become a little worse. He went on to say:
- The survey also shows the number of businesses expecting to increase their work force jumped from
minus 12% to plus 2%.
If you look at the category Size of Workforce, it states – and that is right, he does say minus 12% - for November 2002 to January 2003, the number of businesses expecting to increase their workforce was indeed minus 12%. But what he has done, he then said it jumped to plus 2%. Well, there is a plus 2%, but that is nothing to do with the actual size of the work force; it is actually the expectation. What this table attempts to do is set out the actual experience for a period of time up until November to January, and then it compare it with the expectations business have for this period. It is difficult to articulate, but at the end of this, I will seek leave to table this document.
For example, it says here that from November 2002 to January 2003, 3% of businesses expected to increase their work force. That was their expectation. The reality was, when they surveyed them, it was minus 12%. What the minister has done is superimposed the expectations, which were never reached, over the statistics which were the actual results and said: ‘Oh, there is going to be an increase’. That is wrong and misleading, and the wording of this press release is calculated to deliberately mislead. The release goes on to say:
- … and the number of businesses expecting to improve profitability increased from -14% to 19%.
If you go to the category of Profitability, it does indeed say that the actual is minus 14%, but there is no expected increase to 19%. In fact, once again, he is comparing expectations with actuals, so we have reality versus this speculation. He has read it wrong again because the expectation for November-January 2002-03 was actually 6% and it turns out the actuals were minus 14%. So there is absolutely no way that the assertions contained in this press release are supported by this table. To send this out to the media, in his position where you would expect the material that he has relied upon to be factual, is disappointing to say the least.
He ends with the overall motherhood statement:
- The overall result of the Yellow Pages survey reflect the tough times business has endured, but the
government, like the business community, remains positive about the future.
There is absolutely nothing to support that assertion contained in this table. In fact, if you read it a bit more carefully, the business community expects that profitability will increase slightly for the next quarter but they say that is because 31% of businesses are going to put their prices up, and it is interesting that that crucial fact has been left out completely.
There is another anomaly which I thought may be worthwhile bringing to the attention of members. The Chief Minister, during the course of Question Time, was asked a number of questions on the economy, of course, and we have exactly the same mistake creeping into her rationale. Once again, we are superimposing the actual figures on what was expected. So here we have a group of figures saying this is what the business community expects, but here are the actuals. There is a massive difference between these two. You cannot say that, because the expectations were a lot higher than what actually occurred, that means there is going to be an increase because those columns are mutually exclusive. Then to go on to say this:
- I would like to say to those small businesses that their disappointment is much greater than ours.
Madam Speaker, that defies logic. I just hope that small businesses, if they had the time, were listening to that response and, if they really want to see for themselves, they should have a close look at the statistics and what the minister and Chief Minister seem to be saying and the conclusions they are drawing, because they are wrong. They are clearly wrong.
I am not an economist, of course, and it is always a huge risk to talk about something you do not know intimately well, so I have been reading all I can. I have done some research on what some of the best economies have done and how they have succeeded, and there is ample material on it. Ireland leads by example. These articles are solely dedicated to economic blueprints and what works and what does not work; there are loads and loads of ideas. If you read the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory’s voluminous statement, and if you happen to have read anything by anyone else about what they do in their countries and the type of real economic blueprints they have, it soon becomes apparent that this is barely worth the paper it is written on.
Just by way of example, the Irish six-year plan - and they have all different sectors - involved genuine spending on wealth creating projects, a focus on technology-related areas - things like creating a $1.2bn technology foresight fund to support pure research in information technology and biotechnology. They actually built a digital village that was designed to attract foreign investors, but the Irish government kept picking the best new trends in technology and then they invested in the infrastructure to implement that technology to bring in the business.
At the end of the day, the proof is in the pudding because it worked; it continues to work. You have a government, it seems - I am not sure what particular political persuasion they are in Ireland, but for what it is worth, they genuinely had a plan. There is no such thing in this document. In fact, I attended the Economic Development Summit the year before last and, hearing several of the comments made by one of the co-chairs - and I have a copy of the very general, albeit motherhood-type statements which were contained in the recommendations or the minute that went to the government. It is fair to say that none of that has been implemented. The government genuinely has not taken on board the recommendations which were made. Now, to a large degree, we are at the stage where the same inquiries will be undertaken by, it seems not one, but several new committees. I would expect the several new committees will probably come to the same conclusions. But then, we are back at square one. what are you going to? What are you going to do help small business?
China’s economic power: there are actually some chunks - whoever is preparing this garbage should really, with all the resources of government, seek the best advice; the material is there. The government can fool some of our media and some of the people some of the time but, at the end of the day, anybody with any nous who does any delving will soon realise that this is nothing more than the rantings of a nosey schoolgirl in something that she does not know anything about.
It is disappointing, to say the least. I do not say that lightly as a fellow who was born and bred here, with all my family here. I want to see the Territory get on. However, politics is one thing and seizing power at any cost and maintaining it might be a motivation but, at the end of the day, you still have to do the right thing by the people who support us here. Unfortunately, this statement simply does not come anywhere near the required benchmark of a responsible, clear thinking and genuine government.
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonnell): Well may you roll your eyes, Chief Minister but, if you hear this message often tonight, then perhaps you will actually start to listen.
Madam Speaker, I also point a few things out to this government and hope that they will listen. I know that all members on this side have tried to point out a few things to this government in an effort to have them listen. There is a fundamental difference between this government and former governments, and the fundamental difference is one of flavour.
It is worth going through a little history to find out how we have come to where we are in the Territory at this point. It is worth going back all the way to 1978 when self-government was granted to the Northern Territory by virtue of an act passed by the federal government of the day. The federal government of the day left the Northern Territory with almost no infrastructure whatsoever. There were two choices that presented themselves to the government of the day: (1) create debt, but through the process of creating debt, pursue the construction of infrastructure that was so sorely lacking as a result of decades of mismanagement by federal government; or (2) softly, softly proceed and develop the Northern Territory at a much slower and more restrained rate. I believe if the latter option had been taken all those years ago, we would be nowhere near the size of the Territory that we are today. The government of the day, and subsequent governments, chose to use debt as a tool, as a mechanism to increase the population of the Northern Territory, and they did so successfully.
When my father moved to Darwin in 1969, and I moved with him, Darwin was little bigger than Alice Springs is today. Darwin is now a city - it is a major city and it sits on the verge of Asia, thus becoming, or having the potential to become, a Singapore or even a Hong Kong of the future. The reason that Darwin is in that position now is because governments had the courage to spend a bit of money in counter cyclical ways. However, that meant ramping up a bit of debt. But let us see what happened as a result of that bit of debt: over those years, the government of the day engaged in infrastructure development and building projects that were good for business locally, and were targeted at the times which were appropriate for sustaining the Northern Territory in tough times, and helping it grow in the good times.
The members opposite will forget this, but there was a time when even the duck pond which is down the road here had heaps of derision poured all over it by a Labor opposition because it was a risk with taxpayers’ money, but it turned out to be a successful venture. Yulara, which is now employing 1000 Territorians will, according to even the member for Stuart, employ Aboriginal Territorians into the very near future, taking the students from a local high school – Nyangatjatjara College, which is an independent school - which was also supported by a Territory government. But all of that occurred because the Northern Territory government was prepared to make a bit of effort. This building was an exercise in counter cyclical spending. It was done deliberately by the then-Perron government to rescue Darwin while it was in a hole. There was a light on the hill, there was still this vision …
Ms Martin: Initiated by the Hatton government. Get your time lines right.
Mr ELFERINK: There was still this vision, Chief Minister. The government of the day had the courage that it takes to make some tough decisions, even make unpopular decisions, and all that the Labor opposition at the time could do was pour their derision over it.
The railway: well, the railway stands as a monument to years of tenacity, primarily on the part of Barry Coulter, a former member in this House who continued to chase that railway when the members opposite had given up on it. The Chief Minister herself, although she has quite correctly repudiated it since then, referred to it as a faded dream - a faded dream. However, there is the difference between the former CLP government and this government: where the former CLP government was prepared to absolutely pursue those visions, those very important light on the hill type projects, the fact of the matter is that this lot would have given up.
There is a new wharf harbour precinct which will have the railway attached to it, and it is going to be three times the size before it is complete, hopefully, and that was an infrastructure project that a former government was prepared to throw some weight behind.
Casinos here in Darwin and Alice Springs were ventures pursued by the former government. A Convention Centre in Alice Springs, pursued by the former government. A private hospital in Darwin which serves the people of Darwin very well. The Sheraton Hotel, very controversial at the time - all sorts of people were prepared to criticise – and, although the Sheraton is not there, the building still is and it is still making money for a very important industry, the tourist industry, because the government had the courage to bite the bullet and make a decision.
Schools had to be built by those original governments and that caused debt, but it also created jobs for people here in the Northern Territory. As the population grew those schools were filled up. The Labor opposition of the day challenged the need for a university - opposed it and said it was not a suitable project and yet, the university stands. It is a well recognised university, it has some internationally famous research coming out of it, especially through the Menzies School of Health, and I applaud those former projects.
This is the flavour of difference between the present government and former governments. The present government is in lock-down mode. It has been in lock-down mode since day one, and frankly, the reason they have done that is because they think that they were not prepared to win the last election. For whatever reason they won that election, it is imperative that they start to find some lights on the hill and start pursuing those projects, because people will vote with their feet. People are not charities, the beneficiaries of those charities being governments. It is the other way around if anything: governments have to look after the people who live within a particular area.
However, how do we attract business to the Northern Territory? Well, we do it by making business, at the outset, feel that it is safe regarding its tenure on land and the environment it is coming into. However, when we hear Palmerston businesses saying that they no longer bother reporting matters of crime to the police because they think it is no use, that sounds like a state of overwhelm. That state of overwhelm is not an attractive environment to create a healthy expectation of business. And yet, we do not see the police numbers being increased. Only now does the Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services agree, eventually, that police numbers have to be increased. But he had to be dragged kicking and screaming to that position.
Economy and safety are inseparable but, unfortunately this government compartmentalises those things, and it is a very serious problem indeed. This government is also so scared of spending money that it starts to shy away from projects. It has abandoned the sealing of the Mereenie loop road, which is such an important project for tourism development in Central Australia. It is just not convincing anybody that it cares about those type of projects. It has abandoned the private hospital in Alice Springs. They say: ‘Oh, no, it is not viable, it is not going to work’. Well, other projects that other governments have done in the past have not been immediately viable, but they work now. Yulara works now, the casinos certainly work now, the private hospital in Darwin works now, the university works. Though they struggle and yes, they have their problems from time to time, but at least there was the courage to make those decisions, not lock things down.
The Leader of Government Business says: ‘It has all to be paid for and we have to manage the economy responsibly and carefully’. If that was the reason for locking things down and getting rid of 450-odd public servants and all those other things, then so be it. But the fact of the matter is that, if you go to the mid-year report from the Treasurer, to page 3, it says:
- General government sector since the budget is an increase in the deficit by $23.1m to $51.6m for the year.
Despite all their cuts, despite attacking the government and the executive arm of government the way they have, and getting rid of public servants, they are still running at a deficit. The Chief Minister herself said how dangerous a deficit was. But where is the money going? The money is going into holes that are not revealing themselves to people of this House or to Territorians. We have a huge budget blow-out coming in Health, yet no attempt to explain to Territorians why it is happening, and no real attempt by the minister in this case, to try and fix the problem. However, we have to create task forces and committees and we have to look into this, and look into that.
This government has to make a decision. How many ministers does it take to change a light bulb? Well, at least two, because you have to start a committee and then you have to have a review process. It is going to take six months to change the light bulb, and you have subcommittees exploring the passive role of the socket. Eventually, government must make a decision. It must make a decision and, unfortunately, that is not occurring whatsoever. All that we are seeing developing so far is the ‘culture of Clare’. The reason that we are doing this is that we are approaching the next election, and we have a Chief Minister excising herself from the responsibilities of government. When she was Treasurer and a new tax had to be announced, was it the Treasurer who announced the new tax? No, it was the Deputy Chief Minister of the time, who has now been given the Treasury. This is a very interesting thing. Why would a Treasurer remove herself from the position of announcing a new tax? For the very same reason that the same Chief Minister takes a sporting announcement, a Bangladeshi test match for argument sake, and places it in her own field of control, removing the sports minister entirely.
What we have is a culture developing around one person and you bet your bottom dollar that, as she excises her way away from all of the bad news and embraces all of the good news, the next election is all going to be centred on one person. It is all going to be centred on one person and the ‘culture of Clare’ is going to be the ultimate monument to the Labor government. What do we have? The ‘culture of Clare’ is what is going to be presented to the people of the Northern Territory.
In the past, we have been accused on this side of the House of being arrogant, tired, lazy and all those sorts of things. Well, here is a fact: arrogance of a monumental level is being demonstrated by this Chief Minister because, as she belts this religion’s faith around herself, people are going to become very jaded. They are going to become very jaded indeed. I can tell you something, it is not going to work.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I was going to try to close this debate in a reasonably sensible way but, after those last comments from the member for Macdonnell - I do not know what he is on!
I thank members for their contribution to this debate. I know that some members here did think through their contributions because talking about the future economics of the development of the Territory is a very important issue.
Ms Scrymgour: Oh, he does not want to hear the truth so he is going.
Dr LIM: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I think the member for Arafura knows very well that she should not refer to the presence or absence of a member.
Madam SPEAKER: No. Member for Arafura, you know you should not do that. Do not reflect on the absence or otherwise of a member of a House.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Madam Speaker, I was not reflecting. I was talking to the member for Macdonnell and he was in the Chamber at the time.
Madam SPEAKER: I am not quite sure what you said, but just remember what I have said. Chief Minister, would you like to get on with your debate.
Ms MARTIN: Well, I was trying, Madam Speaker, to close what I believe is an important statement to the House. I certainly thank members on the government side for their thoughtful contributions. It is a serious issue. The range of responses we heard from the opposition were incredibly disappointing. It made me think about when I was in opposition and whether I sounded like that. It started getting me reflecting: did we sound like that? It was negative, defeatist, and a rear view mirror view of the world - only looking backwards. It was whingeing, whining and carping. There was not a constructive point that was made - not one, and I listened to every contribution. There was not one constructive point that was made.
There was political rhetoric, simply direct misleading, facts from fantasyland, and not one useful contribution to the debate. It was talking down the Territory. Talking down the Territory, one after the other, from members of the opposition. It seems to indicate that there is some level of collective amnesia in the opposition now, that somehow or other there was this view being painted that, when the CLP was in government, everything was perfect - the economy was growing, unemployment was at minuscule levels and that there were no problems being associated either with population or small business. There is this dissociated view of what was actually happening.
It was the CLP in government that gave the Territory zero growth for one year - zero growth. Unemployment under the opposition was at 8%. I do not think it is good enough at 5.9% now; it is not good enough. However, it is significantly lower than when we came to government, but it is not good enough. Yet it is significantly better than when the now Leader of the Opposition was Chief Minister. But it did not reflect at all in the comments he made in this debate. There is no recognition from the opposition about how they left the state of the economy 18 months ago. They lied to the Territorians …
Dr LIM: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The Chief Minister should not be referring to that.
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, you cannot reflect upon the members of the opposition by saying they lie. Withdraw that.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, I withdraw the use of the word, ‘lie’. The truth was not told 18 months ago about the state of the Territory budget. That did not appear in any of the words that were presented by the opposition. There was this collective amnesia - is the best way to describe it - and there was no recognition of the whole range of issues that this government has had to tackle in the last 18 months and, I believe, tackle with great commitment, with a great understanding of the Territory, and a great commitment to growing the Territory and its businesses and jobs.
The legacy of the opposition: decreasing growth, high unemployment, no strategies and budget deficits out of control, growing debt, and a very great disenchantment from Territorians about their lack of leadership and lack of vision. The contribution we heard tonight shows that the County Liberal Party, even in opposition, have not learnt. They have not changed, and they simply have no new ideas.
Mr Henderson: $50 each!
Ms MARTIN: Oh, that is right. The Minister for Business, Industry and Resource Development interjects. We know you are trying the no new ideas but, obviously, the $50 is not working yet because they have an informed debate tonight from your point of view. Not one new idea. And the anecdotals we heard: ‘Oh, I was talking to a business person and they said …’. What kind of contribution to the debate is that? Let us hear some specifics; let us hear what industry they were involved with. We are talking to businesses, we understand that some are doing well, some are not doing well. But what businesses say to us is: ‘Government has to grow the big picture. Government has to get those big projects on board, because they are what will be the stimulator for the small business sector’.
That is what this statement says. To hear one member of the opposition after the next say: ‘What is the point of these big projects?’ and they are ‘ours’ - what extraordinary arrogance! The convention centre was ‘ours’ for Darwin? We started to believe you had actually built it and we are wasting our time. The same with the Stokes Hill Wharf redevelopment – you did it? Did you do it? Do we look out the window here of Parliament House and get it wrong? There is a very significant difference between promising to do things, starting the process and putting out glossy brochures, and actually achieving it. That is what this government is about: actually achieving it.
So is the expansion of the Alcan mine at Nhulunbuy a CLP initiative? I do not think so. Is the proposed expansion of the mine at McArthur River a CLP initiative? No. We look through the list of things that the CLP wipes off the Territory’s agenda by saying: ‘They are ours, and they are not worth much’. Conservatively, $5bn worth of investment into the Territory, and the best we hear from the opposition is that government should not be focussing specific effort in task forces that are going to focus on making sure those projects happen; that somehow or other the best they could do is say: ‘You have another committee together’.
Let me say these are committees that are going to make projects happen. They are going to make projects work with the private sector because it is private sector investment in the Territory that is really going to see this Territory grow, and really fulfil the potential that is talked about by BIS Shrapnel and Access Economics in our growth figures of over 5% for the next five to 10 years. It is that private sector investment and the task forces that we are putting together to make sure they happen and, critically, make sure that there is local content and local jobs, and I am proud of it. If the best we can have from the opposition is to come in here and demean it, then it goes to prove why they are the opposition and Territorians asked us to be the government.
The Leader of the Opposition talked specifically about the convention centre in Darwin, and to precis the arguments he put, he said we should not do any analysis of the current market, or look at what was the most appropriate model; we should just throw money at one proponent. Pick a proponent, throw some money and see what happens. I recognise the previous government for trying to do something about a convention centre. It is not easy, it is a significant taxpayer investment, but we have to get it right. In the last 18 months the world has changed. The member for Araluen did not recognise this changed world. However, we have actually have had two significant changes in the world, specifically when it comes to tourism: what happened in the United States on 11 September and then in Bali on 12 October last year. The status quo that we had grown accustomed to, to a certain extent, has gone, has changed. We have to reconsider how we position a convention centre in the Darwin market. You cannot simply pluck an idea of a convention centre out of the air and throw money at it. It is a very important project; we have to get it right. The fact that we had an opposition, when they were in government, that talked about a convention centre does not mean that the CLP own the project. This is a project for Territorians, specifically people in Darwin, and it is one that we are going to progress. I am not pretending it is easy - I believe it is difficult - but we are going to progress it.
The member for Drysdale spent a considerable time meandering on about mining, and pretending somehow or other that the CLP had a great record on mining. I sat in here, session after session, to hear the then minister for Mines proudly say: ‘Over 900 explorations sitting on my desk’, finding reasons not to move them forward, and yet, a mining minister is a disgrace when they sit on that level of exploration applications, knowing the time frame it takes from initial exploration to getting a mine up and running. We are turning that around. We have seen significant growth in mining and exploration: 340 000 km2 of land opened up in 18 months. We are starting to see real investment in exploration and we are proud of it. But to try and listen to members of the opposition - specifically the member for Drysdale - rewrite history and try and pretend that there was some reason other than petty, stupid politics that those mining applications and exploration applications were sat on, is simply gross hypocrisy. We have had an increase in the last 18 months of over 300% in exploration licences and this is the new way of doing business in the Territory.
We are not sitting around behind political excuses and rhetoric, we are doing it. We are facing the issues that are involved, whether that be native title or land rights - the whole range of issues - and we are dealing with them. We have seen a sea change. You only had to attend, as the member for Goyder did, the AFANT AGM, and see the recognition that, to sit down and talk about access to new fishing areas was the way to do it. That compared so starkly with the CLP’s failure to get increased fishing access. This is the way this government will do it. But have no doubt about it: it has taken a lot of work to get to this stage; a lot of mending of bridges from the politics that was played for so many years by the Country Liberal Party.
We have seen, in speaker after speaker tonight from the opposition, that the CLP want to go back to their old ways, that they are through the rear view mirror. They have no vision for the Territory, they have not learnt, they have not changed and, despite their $50 a good idea, they have no new ideas, no policies.
This government has very positive plans for the Territory; we are determined to build a better Territory. Our announcement today of the fast-tracking with seven major task forces will do that. It is positive, it is moving forward and we will see that investment come into the Territory. It will make a difference, both in the big projects and also for the many thousands of small businesses across the Territory. We are proud of it, and proud of the statement we made today. If you listen to the contributions from this side of the House from each of the ministers, we fleshed out all the aspects of our vision, of how we are going to tackle economic development. It is through education, and lots of other aspects. It is a whole-of-government approach to building the Territory and we, on this side of the House, are very proud of that, and will continue to do it despite the negative carping of the now opposition.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr STIRLING (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, Rosie Pearson, a staff member of Yirrkala School in my electorate, has been offered a place at the National Aboriginal and Islander Skills Development Association Dance College in Sydney. I congratulate Rosie on her success. I know she is looking forward to this fantastic opportunity. The philosophy of the NAISDA Dance College incorporates the belief that dance is a key form of cultural, spiritual and political expression. The dance college seeks to encourage dance as a professional career, as well as an educational tool.
In 1989, NAISDA established the Bangarra Dance Theatre, and I know that it is Rosie’s dream to dance with this prestigious indigenous dance company. She will have the opportunity to work with some of the best tutors in the dance business. Yindharama Maymuru-White will also travel from Yirrkala to tutor students in Yolngu dance styles. Rosie has the full support of her family and friends in Yirrkala and Nhulunbuy, and has strong support networks in Sydney. I congratulate Rosie and wish her every success.
Recently, the member for Macdonnell stated in the Assembly that Docker River School has a teaching establishment of three, but there are only two teachers there at present. He also stated that a teacher’s aide was taking classes. The agreed staffing figure for Docker River School for 2003, based on the demographic projection, enrolment at February 2002, and the principal’s projection, was 52 students. Accordingly, as per formula, the school was staffed with a teaching principal and one teacher. The first enrolment and attendance return on 21 February 2003 indicated the total enrolment was 60 students. This would entitle the school to be staffed with a teaching principal and two teachers. However, the return indicated only 20 students attended on that collection day. The teaching principal has further advised the average attendance for the first four weeks of the 2003 school year was 22 students. The highest number of students attending on any given day was 31 on 19 February.
Mr Geoff Hobson, principal of Alice Springs West, visited Docker River School on 24 February to discuss staffing needs. He will discuss staffing needs for the school with Mr Russell Totham, upon his return to Alice. Mr Hobson advised that two assistant teachers were working with a small group of early childhood students in a room adjoining the classroom in which the teaching principal teaches. The concertina partitioning is left open during lessons in order that the teaching principal may provide adequate supervision of all students.
I hope that goes to the core of the concerns by the member for Macdonnell. It does appear that his information certainly was in part correct. But there is a fuller story to tell. I hope that puts the record straight and would be happy to take any further queries from him on that point.
Mr BURKE (Brennan): Madam Speaker, on Sunday 23 February, I was privileged to be part of a congregation that farewelled Vicki Lay. May I say at the outset that it was a wonderful outpouring of emotion for Vicki Lay. There had to be at least well over, I would have thought, 700 people at that funeral. It was a very tough funeral for everyone to get through. It was amazing, from my point of view, to be part of that group of people that had the opportunity to farewell such an important Territorian, but also to witness the regard with which she was held within the Territory community. Certainly, it was from all stratas of Territory life, from the highest to the lowest - the Chief Minister was there. It was also interesting to see many of the ordinary Territory families who thought it was important to show their sympathy to the Lay family on that particular day.
Vicki Jung Nhuc Jap Lay was born in East Timor on 5 July 1952. She was the second oldest daughter of the well known and highly respected Jape family. Right from the very beginning, Vicki played an important role in the growth and development of the Jape family business in East Timor. This activity was disrupted at the time of the invasion of East Timor and Vicki, who lost her home and business, fled to Australia to seek asylum with her husband, Kivi. Kivi and Vicki had to start their lives again in Darwin and worked in some very ordinary jobs to kick-start their prospects in their new country.
By 1976, Vicki had become the backbone of a new business venture importing goods from South-East Asia, a business that quickly expanded to the importation of exclusive Asian foods for the increasing Asian and European clientele in Darwin. The Lay family’s company kept on growing with Vicki working very long hours, and she was very active in developing the business. In 1984, Vicki and Kivi bought out their main opposition, Darwin Importer Service. This expansion enabled the business to become major suppliers and distributors, and they soon expanded their customer base to include major retailers such as Coles and Woolworths.
By 1988, thanks to Vicki’s commitment, the company was a diversified wholesaler and a distributor to government agencies, and to the mining and hospitality industries. Twenty years later, the company was dealing in over 6000 lines including the supply of Northern Territory crocodile meat, seafood and Asian kitchenware and other food and commodities. All this success, following a difficult beginning 27 years ago, was a tribute to Vicki’s ability to communicate with staff, customers and family. Her eldest son, Pedro, spoke at the funeral - and I might add to watch her son stand and deliver his eulogy on behalf of the family was testimony to the strength of character of not only him but also the strength of the Lay family in general. It was a courageous and wonderful thing to watch him speak. He said at the funeral service: ‘No matter how hard the situation got, Vicki always had the strength to carry on’. He also said that living in a family of 10 brothers and sisters, she perfected her role as a peacemaker.
Vicki was a wonderful human being, and as Pedro also stated, she worked hard in the family business, not for material success but to be able to nurture and bring up the family. Sadly, on 14 February 2001, Vicki was diagnosed with cancer. She never gave in to the cancer and fought without complaint until the end. This has been a very sad chapter in the lives of Kivi, Pedro, Yolanda and Chris. Vicki will be sadly missed. I offer my condolences and the condolences of all members of the CLP parliamentary wing and our party, to the family.
There is one issue I wanted to raise this evening. I raise it because I wrote, some time ago on 8 November 2002, to Mark Crossin, the Director of the Work Health Authority, Department of Employment, Education and Training. I raise it because I would have thought a letter from the Leader of the Opposition to the Chief Executive Officer of the Work Health Authority, on an issue that concerned a Territorian, an issue that I thought was important enough to write to that CEO, could have at least warranted a reply. I emphasise that it was dated 8 November 2002.
It regards a Mr Robert Teakle - who is not a member of my electorate, but lives in the rural area - and a TIO workers compensation claim reference 60088071. I say that only to save you doing the search. The issue was something that I thought needed attention, not only from a legislative or compassionate point of view, but also the simple fact that there is a Territorian who has fallen between what seems to me to be two regimes. He is a truck driver who drives for a South Australian company and travels regularly, on a weekly basis, between Darwin and South Australia. His primary employer is a South Australian company, but that company, in its operations, spends a lot of its time moving produce from South Australia to the Northern Territory. But it is true to say that the company is a South Australian based company.
Mr Teakle is a Territorian and was injured in South Australia and, from that injury, he has sought to claim workers compensation. The employer has workers compensation insurance in both South Australia and the Northern Territory. From my investigations, I am firmly of the belief that the employer has done everything possible to ensure that his employees are adequately covered in both states. But, in the case of Mr Teakle, because the employer does not have a so-called depot in the Northern Territory and is, therefore, not classed as a Territory-based company, Mr Teakle does not qualify for TIO to be responsible for his workers compensation insurance. I add as a rider that, in the case of both these insurance companies, I would have thought that there is a duty of care, at the very least, to ensure that employers and the employee understand where the limitations on their cover actually arise because, in claiming against TIO for which he is covered by his employer, TIO has replied by saying that he does not qualify for workers compensation. The TIO reasons for this decision are:
- There is no evidence that you sustained an injury out of or during the course of your employment.
That is a general disclaimer if these things actually go to court, because the real reason why he is not eligible is that:
- … if you did sustain an injury, the relevant injury occurred outside of the Northern Territory …
And:
- … your employer was not carrying on business in the Northern Territory at the time the relevant
injury occurred.
Essentially, there are three bases you have to tick: it has to be work-related, it has to have occurred in the Northern Territory or, if it occurred outside the Northern Territory, your employer has to be a Northern Territory-based firm. Because he is a Territorian, he ticks that. There is no question that it was work-related and he ticks that. The employer is a South Australian-based company without an actual depot in the Northern Territory, cross. And because the injury occurred outside the Northern Territory, cross - we are not liable, go and see someone else.
Mr Teakle is also covered by his employer in South Australia, and the South Australian CGU decision essentially says that, in South Australia, CGU workers insurance with regards to the same claim covering this gentleman by his employer, the decision is: claim denied.
- On the factual information to hand the situation is that you are a resident of the Northern Territory but
were injured whilst in the course of your work. Your employer is based in the state of South Australia.
This act applies to a worker’s employment either within or outside the state if there is a nexus between
the worker’s employment and the state.
I am just reading inter alia here but it gets the message across.
- Please note that there requires to be a nexus or a link between your employment and the state. We take the
view, in the circumstances, that you spend more than 10% of your time in employment in both South Australia
and the Northern Territory and therefore conclude you are usually employed in two or more states.
However, pursuant to section 6(2)(b), the worker also needs to have a base in the state of South Australia
to be covered by the act.
This poor guy has a home in the Northern Territory; he does not have a home in South Australia. So because he does not have a base in South Australia, he does not qualify:
- Furthermore, with respect of Part 2, CGU are of the opinion that you do not regularly travel between a port
or other point of embarkation in the state of the place of employment.
So, therefore, he does not travel between his home, or his so-called base in South Australia, to his regular point of employment. His regular point of employment is here, where he drives his truck on behalf of his employer. The reality is, though, that he weekly travels from the Northern Territory to South Australia on this sort of work. CGU says:
- Having considered all this, your claim has been rejected, namely that you have failed to meet the coverage
of employment under the territorial provisions of the act.
Okay. On the face of it, I write to Mr Crossin - and I seek leave to table that letter.
Leave granted.
Mr BURKE: I recount the issue and essentially say to him: ‘Whilst Mr Teakle’s employers had similar insurance cover for Mr Teakle in South Australia, he has been ruled ineligible there because he is a resident of Northern Territory’. So the rub is this, as I said to Mr Crossin:
- As far as I can ascertain, even though both Mr Teakle and his employer have tried to ensure adequate cover
was provided because of interpretation of the work health legislation in both jurisdictions, he is said to be
ineligible from benefits from either jurisdiction.
I hope the Work Health Authority undertakes to represent Mr Teakle and to obtain the workers
compensation benefits he rightly deserves. As a Territorian he has done the right thing, he doesn’t have
the means to pursue this independently in the courts. It seems to me that this case provides an ideal opportunity
for the Work Health Authority to represent a Territorian and to also clear up any legislative anomaly which
may persist between jurisdictions.
He did not even have the courtesy to give me an answer. This is supposed to be the party that is concerned about Territorians. I just find it disgusting. It took a lot of effort to get a mediation between Mr Teakle and his wife, and TIO. …
A member: The Chair is there.
Mr BURKE: I can look wherever I want.
TIO have decided, clearly from their own interpretation of the act, that they are not liable. CGU has given him the flick and said: ‘There is our decision, you are gone’. This is a worker, covered by a union. He goes to see his union and the union says: ‘Not interested, go away, all too hard’. I write to the Work Health Authority, your Labor mates …
Mr KIELY: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! I do not think that he should be bringing politics into the matter of the TIO.
Mr BURKE: I can say what I like, sit down!
Mr KIELY: Says who? How about him ruling? You do not run this show.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Member for Sanderson, resume your seat.
Mr BURKE: Mark Crossin used to represent the Teachers Union in the Northern Territory. He now represents the Work Health Authority and is an expert on union issues. I write to Mark Crossin and I say: ‘Will you look at this case, will you consider that there is a problem here, the man does not have the means to pursue this through the courts. He does not have the means to sue his employer, which is his only avenue’.
Surely, at a ministerial level, between these two insurance companies we can get some sort of mediation on this issue and find out where the responsibility lies. Is it sufficient in any government, both Labor, that you can sit back and just ignore a situation where an ordinary Territory family has been put through this duress - they have been putting up with this issue since about June last year - take no notice of representations from not only a local member but also the Leader of the Opposition, and do nothing? If this is the way that this Labor government treats ordinary Territorians, no wonder ordinary Territorians feel that they cannot get any representation at all, and not only through ministers. When it comes to the CEO of organisations, not only are their issues ignored but the rightful representations of the members who are elected are also ignored. I do hope that something can be done. I hope that, by raising this, someone takes some notice so that the Teakle family can get some rectification of the gross injustice that has occurred.
Dr TOYNE (Stuart): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, anyone interested in sport in Central Australia and, indeed, probably across the Northern Territory, have been aware over the last few years of recurring problems in the conduct of Australian Rules football in Alice Springs. There are two competitions - the town competition and the communities competition - operating in Alice Springs. Both have been conducted under the control of the Central Australian Football League. Until 2003, the CAFL has been a body broadly representive of five clubs involved in the competition in the town of Alice Springs. These clubs are Pioneers, Rovers, Wests, Souths and Federals.
It is well known that finding individuals prepared to devote the time to the running of sporting clubs is becoming increasingly difficult. It is doubly difficult to find administators and directors for sporting leagues. I pay tribute to the voluntary efforts of the outgoing board members of the CAFL, who have worked dilligently to hold together the increasing complex organisational task of running both competitions. I mention in particular here Cal Dean and Steve Menzies who have put in a huge amount of work. It is their generosity that has allowed the league to avoid collapse in the last couple of years.
Members would be aware that the organisation of Australian Rules football has been reformed over the last few years. The AFL, as a national body, now plays a significantly greater role in the development and presentation of the game across the nation. In Darwin, this has led to the formation of the AFLNT, which is now a very professionally run outfit. All of those who witnessed the way the All Starts v Carlton game was organised and conducted two weeks ago, would agree that the AFLNT is able to present a quality sporting product. Chris Natt and his team deserve great credit for the way in which the game was presented to the public.
I was also encouraged on the same night by the praise given to the Traeger Park surface by Carlton officials, and would love to see practice games in Alice Springs once the Traeger Park upgrades are completed.
Under new arrangements operating across the country and under the aegis of the AFL, football competitions now operate in a tiered arrangement. The AFL is the senior body; the AFLNT is a subsidiary body operating under delegation from the AFL. Under this system, the CAFL is a subsidiary body operating, in turn, under the delegation from AFLNT. It is because of this arrangement that AFLNT was able to diplomatically intervene in the CAFL at the end of the season 2002. The AFLNT made it clear that they were looking to a new set of operating principles in Central Australia to ensure that the football loving public in the region could look forward to attending quality football matches in a safe and enjoyable environment.
The AFLNT then advertised for a new board for the CAFL. This board would retain some features of the old arrangements such as directors representative of the clubs, and some AFLNT appointed directors. This has now happened and we now have a new board for the CAFL under the AFLNT appointed presidency of Mildy Raveane. Mildy brings great skills in corporate management to the voluntary position, and has extensive contacts in the business sector in Alice Springs. The board is continuing membership of League elected directors Steve Menzies, Richard Hayes and Cal Dean and is thus able to draw on the best experience from the past. Three additional members, Mike Bowden, who has VFL, VFA and Victorian country football experience; Mark Loader, a former player in the CAFL and an accountant in Alice Springs; and James McKenzie, a young local lawyer with a passion for footy, have been added to the board.
The tasks before the new board of the CAFL are enormous. They have to re-instil confidence in the hearts and minds of the football public in Alice Springs that football is, indeed, the great game that we believe it to be. This will be no easy task. The conduct of players and supporters at games over the last five to 10 years has deteriorated. Some spectators now feel unsafe when they come to the footy. Swearing, fighting, abuse and racial intolerance has been known to occur. The quality of the football is also under scrutiny, although last year’s grand final was a great contest and did great credit to all involved. It was probably one of three or four games through the entire year that met the standards we expect of our great game. Too often, games were marred by the fact that many players were doubling up from the B grade just minutes earlier, or from community games the day before. Too often, excessive alcohol consumption by a few in the crown marred the enjoyment of the game for the rest. Frequently, undisciplined behaviour of the players on the grounds spilled over the fence to spectators and supporters who became involved in unseemly fights and verbal abuse. Sadly, umpires were often subjected to violent verbal and, sometimes, physical abuse.
These are some of the challenges facing the new board. As well, there is the whole question of the viability of some of the traditional clubs in the CAFL. Both Rovers and Federals held their AGMs late last year in an effort to stave off collapsing as incorporated bodies. West Football Club has expressed reservations about being involved in the competition for the new season 2003. Souths have had difficulty in remaining solvent over the recent years and even my team, the Pioneers - very successful on the field - have had difficulty in getting a strong AGM and committee together.
As pointed out before, the new way of seeing football operations is to understand the idea of subsidiary. But what of the remote communities operating in the country cap under the control of the CAFL? It seems that there is scope for some type of representation by directors of these clubs in the operations of the CAFL, if the CAFL is to be a legitimate agency responsible for the staging of their competition. Should there be some consideration of some teams from the community competition playing in the CAFL competition? How many teams should be allowed in the country cap? How is the junior development to be fostered in the town where it has been reported to me, many parents are unwilling to let their sons play Aussie Rules? How is the promised $5m from the Northern Territory government for upgrading of the Traeger Park to be utilised in the best way to promote sport in general and football in particular, in Central Australia? How can the improvements brought about by alcohol restrictions be applied to the football scene? As you know, we have seen through restrictions on availability, and because of the application of complementary measures, a definite reduction in alcohol-related harm across the town in general, but alcohol still appears to be a problem at Traeger Park.
These are some of the questions facing the new board. I am very confident that the new board has the experience and the intelligence to address these problems. I know it will take hours of work in consultation with every sector of the football public. I certainly wish them all the best and hope that, next year at this time, I will be able to report on successful operations of the CAFL in the interest of all Central Australians.
Mr MALEY (Goyder): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I place on the Parliamentary Record a topic which is dear to the hearts of many Territorians. It relates to fishing. It will affect, of course, the many members of the Amateur Fishermens Association of the Northern Territory, as well as every person in the Territory who goes fishing and who considers themselves a regular fisherman. I am told that can include up to 45% of the non-indigenous population.
The Labor Party, prior to the last election, made a number of promises as, indeed, do all political parties in the lead-up to an election. One of the core promises relating to fishing, with a view to courting the amateur fishing vote, was that if the Labor Party were elected they would close the Adelaide River and also Bynoe Harbour.
They were the promises that were made. They had made the inquiries; you would assume they had consulted. They said publicly that if they got in then amateur fishermen would be better off. Primarily, the Adelaide River got most of the publicity; it would be closed. Indeed, there was a headline in the local paper. The CLP had made a similar promise a few days prior or at pretty much the same time but, at that stage, the Labor Party certainly had the upper hand; they had the headline. They were going to, if voted in, ‘Close the Adelaide River.’ There were some vague references to doing what they could to improve access, and that is the type of consultation which the Chief Minister and the new minister for fisheries spoke about. But there were a couple of core promises, and core promises which have been publicised fairly heavily and certainly talked about in fishing circles.
It has been just under two years since that election and, unfortunately, those two core promises have not been implemented. It seems they are no closer to being implemented. That was one of the issues raised at the annual general meeting of the Amateur Fishermens Association. The minister for fisheries proudly talked about the positive response which he says resulted from conversations he had with people. He referred to an article that was in the NT News. One commentator spoke positively about some of the things that the minister and the Chief Minister had said.
However, to those Territorians who are keen fisherman like myself, the free Fish NT, February 2003 issue which came out in the Sunday Territorian contains a whole heap of really interesting material. One of the writers is a fellow by the name Matt Flynn who I am told is one of the fellows who works for the Northern Territory News. He writes: ‘Political talkfest – just a fishing expedition’. He goes though and, in fairness to him, summarises the meeting. What he does say - and this is really the point which amateur fisherman are trying to make and which the government refuses to accept:
- Politically speaking, little of excitement came from Chief Minister Clare Martin and Fisheries
Minister Chris Burns.
There is a little spiel about dialogue but it goes on to conclude this:
- … but, Dr Burns would not say when the Adelaide River would be closed to commercial barramundi netting,
one of the key election commitments made by the Labor government before it won power. He spoke only of the
‘new’ negotiation process.
Then:
- … Dr Burns conceded that there would not always be agreement between the parties and said he was prepared
to make the hard decisions …
I commend him for agreeing to make the decision but, as this writer says:
- … but just when that hard decision would be made on the Adelaide River was not clear.
The article then goes on to say:
- There was some feeling at the meeting voiced by Chris Makepeace that it has taken a long time just to get to
this new stage of consultation.
So, it is the second AGM and the second time that the Labor Party have been in power, the third fisheries minister and second time the government has stood up and said: ‘We are going to form a new committee’. I want to be clear on this: I am certainly in favour of negotiating with all the stakeholder regarding the other areas and creeks and rivers and coastlines because, ultimately, the Territory is for all Territorians and fishing is a common law right. However, those core election promises are not the subject of negotiation because the Labor Party has said: ‘We are going to close that river’. There is no point forming a committee, which will cost money and have a full-time person, if that is the only issue we are going to discuss, when the minister said at that meeting: ‘No matter what the recommendation is, I am going to close that river’. He gave a guarantee, to his credit, that that river is going to be closed.
All I am saying is: when is this going to occur? That is the question which the fishermen want answered. That is the question which the amateur fishermen who were at that meeting really want to hear an answer to. It is not good enough to say: ‘Oh, we are two years into a four-year term and what we are going to do is form a committee to examine whether or not we are going to carry out our election promise’. It is not logical. I understand the committee could address other issues such as access, but the very specific promise, the core promises which were made and guarantees that were given, are really outside that process.
We have heard the Chief Minister, in a very lame way, in closing that last statement, talk about the negotiation process and somehow imply that the CLP and I are not supportive of at least some sort of process. Well, process is process but there are core political promises, core undertakings that were given and, in my view, should be complied with.
On another matter, polocrosse is a sport which is played in a number of rural settings across the Northern Territory. The Northern Territory Polocrosse Association and the competition it runs has produced a number of quality polocrosse players. There have been, in the past, polocrosse players who have, albeit come from a fairly small jurisdiction like the Northern Territory, have gone on to represent not only their state, but also Australia.
I am proud to say that there are two more young people who are products of the Northern Territory Polocrosse Association and the competition they run, who have been selected to represent Australia in the Under 21 mixed polocrosse team to tour Canada in July 2003. They are Matthew Deveraux and Allyson McKenzie from the Palmerston Polocrosse Club. Indeed, that is the old polocrosse club I used to play for. It seems that with the very general support of Australian Fuel Distributors, who are a consistent supporter of sporting achievement and the endeavours of rural people - and really, credit where credit is due, they have really come to the party here and have helped the dream of these two young people come true. I look forward to getting the results of their endeavours when they come back from Canada after representing Australia - they go there in July but they return in August, I understand. I look forward to reporting to all the members of this House the outcome of their endeavours.
Mr AH KIT (Arnhem): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, a couple of weeks ago, Darwin witnessed something more than a football match when the Carlton Football Club took on the Aboriginal All Stars. When they ran out onto the Marrara Oval, we saw more than a celebration of Australia’s only true national game. We saw a vindication of the Northern Territory as a place where dreams can come true in ways that, perhaps, the rest of the nation cannot. We saw a record crowd of people all in the once place, enjoying themselves, enjoying each other’s company. They were from all walks of life and from the whole range of our multicultural society here. In actual fact, we saw reconciliation in practice.
We were speaking in this place earlier today about drugs. I tell you now, truly, to be at Marrara that night was to enjoy the kind of high that no drug can supply.
As you would know, it was a game that had held promise since the inaugural All Stars game in 1994, and one that had been promised to us for a year. We could not pull it off last year, because Marrara just was not up to scratch. It was a great disappointment. However, thanks to a great effort, Marrara Oval has been turned into a playing pitch that is now acknowledged as among the best in the country. Yes, it took money - $1.3m - to get us there but, more to the point, it took a lot of hard work and dedication. There were many doubters, not least among some elements within the media and the sports community, but we made it. We have achieved a great investment for the people of the Northern Territory. And we will continue to reap the benefits in the coming years, with further national and international sporting events featuring at Marrara, from this week’s Wizard Cup fixture, to the upcoming Arafura Games, through to international cricket.
We all know that the All Stars ran out solid winners, and I will speak about that in a moment. First, I would like to pay a particular tribute to Carlton. As we know, they have had a pretty rough year of it. One of the oldest sides in the national game, with one of the proudest records, was in the doldrums. However, on their visit to the Northern Territory, they showed the true grit and dedication that was to their great credit. Coming from Melbourne, they spent the best part of a week in and around Alice Springs, in country that perhaps seemed hot and hostile to them. Nevertheless, the whole team pitched in to promote the game and give Central Australians an invaluable experience.
As well as visiting every school in Alice Springs, they held workshops at six remote communities in the region. They must have won an enormous fan base on this visit. I know from speaking to Carlton people that they carry great memories of their visit. Those memories can be summed up by that magnificent colour photograph carried on the back page on the NT News a couple of days before the game, with Carlton players having a kick in the red dust of the footy oval at Papunya, with the beautiful MacDonnell Ranges in the background. Then, when they hit some really mongrel humid weather in Darwin, the Carlton crew continued their work of goodwill, turning out with the All Stars on the morning of what was, obviously, going to be a tough game, to the family fun day at Gardens Oval. They did not have to do it, but they did it for the good of the game and for the benefit of the 700 kids who turned up at Gardens Oval that morning.
On behalf of the Northern Territory, I extend my warmest thanks to the players, officials and coaches of Carlton for their fantastic effort. That effort extended to the footy field that night. I know I predicted a 6-10 goal victory for the All Stars, but Carlton never lay down in the face of what Denis Pagan described a few days later as the ‘fastest side anywhere in the AFL’. He also said: ‘We will not face a better side this season’.
Congratulations are clearly well deserved for the coach of the All Stars, ‘Magic’ Michael McLean, and his selectors, Maurice Rioli, Russell Jeffery, Chris Lewis, Michael Long and Mark Motlop. The All Stars - the ‘Brotherhood’ as they call themselves in the pre-game preparations - were unbeatable that night. With only one practice session together the night before, they played as if they had been doing it together for years. In a sense, as Aboriginal people, they had. The effect of their playing was perhaps best described by Nicholas Rothwell from The Australian:
- And what a dance they saw unfold before them: the All Stars, clad in a strip of black, red and gold, seemed
like darting birds of paradise upon the field, skipping and weaving through the blue Carlton ranks, passing,
kicking, marking, scoring almost at will.
There are many people to thank for the success of the night. Obviously, I would like to thank ATSIC and the AFL, the major sponsors of the event. The AFLNT, through people such as Bob Elix, Chris Natt and Tianee Burton, deserve special mention. The Northern Territory Major Events people were critical in its organisational skills for the opening ceremony. The Australian Broadcasting Commission already covering the match, was called in at less than 24 hours notice to provide live cable coverage - a real tribute to the pool of skills we have here with the ABC in the Northern Territory. Most of all, I want to thank the people of Darwin and of the Territory who came to the game in such numbers and in such good heart.
Yes, we should have All Stars games here again, and a lot more often. I will be writing to the AFL and ATSIC to suggest that we have these games here every second year. As far as I am concerned, the Aboriginal All Stars games should stay in the Territory - this is where they started, this is where they have demonstrated their success, this is the cradle of that success. To have the games rotated to other venues would make as much sense as moving the Melbourne Cup from Flemington to Doomben. This is where they belong.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Macdonnell.
Dr Lim: Oh, come on! Gees, I have been standing here - ah, this is bloody useless! This is not right, not right.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Greatorex! Member for Greatorex, withdraw that.
Dr LIM: I will withdraw that. All right, just go ahead.
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonnell): Mr Deputy Speaker, I will be quite brief. The issue I wish to raise tonight deals with the pool at the Areyonga Community which is a community in my electorate. The Areyonga Community worked long and hard and, through their own means and savings and through their own abilities inside the community, were able a few years ago to build their own pool without any specific or specialised grants. I now know that the pool at the community of Areyonga needs minor repairs in the order of about $25 0000. I notice that the government is quite inclined to support communities, recently supporting the Santa Teresa Community with $35 000 for their pool. I look forward to the day that the Chief Minister will supply an amount of some $25 000 to support the people of Areyonga with their pool.
It was interesting to note that, when it was shut down for a very short period not so long ago, skin sores increased in the community and it had a drastic effect on the health of some of the kids there. So, there is a very real health benefit to having an open and working pool. I am sure that the minister will be keen to support a pool in Areyonga the same way that they supported the pool in Santa Teresa.
The second issue that I wish to raise very quickly is the answer provided by the minister for Education in relation to Docker River. The only thing that arises out of his answer, which I am grateful to him for, is that there seems to be a sharp decline in the number of kids attending the Docker River School, thus causing a drop in the establishment of the teachers who are there. I ask the minister to turn his attention to the reasons that may have caused the situation to occur. I hope that the minister would be inquiring as to why such a large drop in school attendance has occurred. I look forward to the results of his inquiry.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Mr Deputy Speaker, tonight I speak on several important electorate matters. I have just found out today that, unfortunately, a good friend of mine, and many other residents of the Millner electorate and Darwin as a whole, has recently passed away. His name was Ted Morton. Ted worked for the Northern Territory Public Service in records management. Ted’s family resides in Adelaide and have taken on, as you would expect, the funeral arrangements. I am led to believe that Ted will be cremated and his ashes will be sent to his family in Adelaide. A work colleague, who is a relative of mine, will be coordinating a collection on Ted’s behalf at the records office in Casuarina Plaza, the records at Health House, and the registry in the Royal Darwin Hospital. I also understand that a service will not be held in Darwin for Ted. However, I believe that drinks will be held at one of Ted’s favourite watering holes, the Casuarina Club, this Friday after work, to celebrate Ted’s life.
Ted was a really great bloke, a very humorous and kind-hearted man. He was a prominent fixture at the Happy Foodland grocery store in Rapid Creek. All the local residents knew him and often had a joke with him. He was a very kind guy. He sometimes served customers and assisted in the shop, just out of the kindness of his heart because he was friends with the owners. Ted was a stalwart in the AFL football tipping competition at the Happy Foodland which, I believe last year had about 60 local residents participating. Ted was always very competitive over a number of years.
Ted was a real gentleman and a family friend of the Mu family. They had a lot of time for Ted Morton and I know that they will be missing him wholeheartedly. Ted, kindly enough, was a personal supporter of me and I appreciated his support. Obviously, he was well liked and respected by all his work mates. Ted was the type of guy who liked to have a quiet beer, and I am sure that when he goes to the big house upstairs that he will kick back and have a quiet beer, watch the footy on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays, and he will enjoy the big tipping competition up there. I am sure he will be very competitive up there as well.
I also advise that a member of my electorate has asked me, as his local member, to correct the record of this House. On 12 August 1998, the then Minister for Ethnic Affairs and the member for Karama said about this person, that he ‘masquerades under the pseudonym of Dr Prince Roman’. It is my understanding that Mr Ron Mann has changed his name legally to Dr Prince Roman, and I hope this corrects this matter.
I also attended on the last Saturday, 22 February, a funeral service which was held from 9 am to 9.30 am. It actually went for a bit longer than that, because there were quite a few people who wanted to talk about this man. That was a memorial service for Mr Ron Barker. A former Flight Sergeant of the Darwin-based 13 Squadron, he joined the RAAF under aged in 1940, as a Fitter 2E. He served in Ambon when it was overrun by the Japanese and was actually captured. Ron Barker escaped with his life. Unfortunately, nine of his colleagues were beheaded. However, he was able to safely make it back to Darwin. He completed his pilot training and served at Gove and other areas of the Territory.
Mr Barker remained involved with 13 Squadron and was considered to be an iconic figure. He was active and involved with 13 Squadron until his passing. I am also proud to say that the Chief Minister’s Office was able to offer assistance to Mrs de Young, his sister, and his son and grandson who travelled from Tasmania for the service. They spread his ashes at the memorial site there on one of the fighter planes. It was quite a moving ceremony. A number of people spoke in his memory and he was a real character. Also, special thanks goes out to Sandra Lew Fatt who helped organize the special air fare which allowed Mrs de Young to travel to Darwin.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to report on a couple of issues. The Minister for Sport and Recreation was talking about the great football match that we had just recently. It is opportune to congratulate the government on the new surface at Marrara; it really is first class. Everyone was pretty pleased with it, even though the umpires did not want to bounce the ball; maybe it was just too new and had a little sponginess in it. The place looked a picture and I am wondering whether it is time that the government perhaps, instead of contracting out a lot of the greenkeeping work at Marrara, actually employed someone to do it. That way, one could get a specialist turf expert working on the oval plus helping out with the drop-in pitches for the cricket.
On another issue, on Australia Day we had a cricket match in the Howard Springs area. Last year, we had the cricket match on the Cox Peninsula Road, on the Strauss Airstrip cricket pitch. This year we had it in the Howard Springs area and decided to raise money for the ACT or the Canberra Bushfires Appeal. We had two teams: the Volunteer Fire Brigade who dragged as many people into playing as possible, and the Southern Districts Cricket Club. We also had Gupta, our famous bookmaker, who came along to bribe as many people as possible, and did so quite well. We had Rotary doing the bar. We had the fire brigade doing the BBQ, and we had lots and lots of people. We had kids and families and everybody turned up, so it was a great family day. I should tell you that the scores were a bit irregular. The Volunteer Fire Brigade was 22 for 171, and the Southern Districts Cricket Club was 16 for 171. It was a bit unusual that the scores were level, but Gupta, our Indian bookmaker, looked at the scores and felt they needed adjusting so it was a tie. It was a great day, everybody enjoyed themselves, especially the kids, and we made $1060 to go towards the Canberra Bushfires Appeal. It was a great day and I hope next Australia Day we have the same thing.
The member for Goyder mentioned a couple of things, one of them I was also going to mention, because polocrosse is certainly a popular sport in the rural area. One of the people he mentioned I believe is in my electorate, and one is in his electorate. So, I would also like to congratulate Matthew Devearux and Allyson McKenzie for being selected in the Australian Under 21 Polocrosse Team. It was mentioned to me today that sponsorship is pretty hard to come by these days, money is a little bit tight. However, Australian Fuel Distributors, a local company, has come along to the party and helped them with getting them to Canada. We are very fortunate that that company was able to do that, especially in this economic climate. Either the member for Goyder or myself will certainly be reporting on how they are going there. I congratulate both of them and hope they do very well in Canada.
The other issue I would like to raise while the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries is here - I hope that is the right name for it now – is an issue that also the member for Goyder raised: the closure of the Adelaide River and other areas. I sometimes feel that we need a bit of a devil’s advocate in this House when it comes to fishing, because if both sides are agreeing, and I keep getting phone calls from professional fishermen, I wonder who in this House is going to actually speak for them. I like amateur fishing too, but what concerns me is that I hope we are not closing rivers based on political promises. I hope we are basing them on scientific and economic reasoning, because these are the reasons you should be considering when looking at closing rivers or allowing them to be used - for whatever purpose, whether it is commercial or recreational.
It is, possibly, a good time for government to look at employing some sort of independent expert on these matters, because you can certainly pick up the paper one day and you will get the amateur fishing point of view as to why certain areas should be closed. I believe many of you saw a full page advertisement recently from Bruce Wildcard, who owns a large fishing vessel that originally was fishing in the McArthur River. He thought that people are forgetting the importance to the economy of the professional fishing group. Also, there are a number of professional fishing people who live in my electorate, and I know that they have had some concerns. One of those concerns, for instance at the moment, is that most of our fish that we have in the fish shops at the present time is imported, so we are not actually using local fish.
There is a concern. I know there has been much talk: ‘Well, we can get our fish from fish farms’. Fish farms still have a long way to prove themselves; there are some environmental issues with fish farms. I am not sure that necessarily follows that we should not be allowed to enjoy, for those who do not do a lot of fishing, the opportunity to buy natural Territory fish at a fish and chip shop. I prefer to buy our fish; I certainly would not prefer to buy overseas barramundi.
Minister, there really needs to be a step back, sometimes, from the hype, the political rhetoric, I suppose, the vote catching rhetoric that you do here at times. Get people in who are independent, who are not touched by some of this debate, because there are vested interests, commercial interests, in all off this. We would be unbecoming as a parliament if both sides of parliament just agreed that that was the way to go without anything but: ‘That should get us some votes at the next election’. That would be very poor of this parliament.
Therefore, much as I am not opposing amateur fishing, and it is important for the economy, I feel that I may at least have a role here to say I want to hear the professional fisherman’s voice given a fair chance in this parliament so they can put their case. It is easy to say there are many thousands of amateur fishing people; and there are. When you stack that up against say, five, six, seven, 10 professional fishermen, you can see that it is much easier to lobby if you are an amateur fisherman - or fisher - rather than if you were a professional, because you simply do not have the numbers. I know they, at times, have had difficulty organising themselves and it is something they have to look at. However, as I said before, regardless of where the numbers are we, as a parliament, should be careful in our judgments and not get too hung up on political promises and rhetoric. Let us make sure that we do the right thing for a sustainable fishing industry in the Northern Territory.
Finally, I would like to thank the parliament for passing the condolence motion for my father. I appreciate that very much. I would like to thank all those members of parliament who expressed their sympathy for one of those occasions that you know is going to happen, but you never know when it is going to happen. Of course, we all are affected in different ways. However, dads are dads, and it certainly is one of those periods in your life that you probably hope that is never going to happen, but it has.
In the case of my father, he died peacefully. He also had a pretty good send-off. When you have a priest in your family who can do the Requiem Mass, and you have a bishop and about 12 other priests turn up, you have a packed house. I have another brother who is a singer, and his wife is also a very good organist - she is quite a qualified musician in her own right. Of course, all their family are also musicians, so we had a funeral, you might say, that went off with a bang. He certainly had a good send-off.
In fact, we know he is up there because it rained for the first time in Melbourne for I do not know how many months. If you have been to Melbourne recently, it was as dry as a bone, and every lawn is dead. On that day, we got 25 ml of rain. With my dad having been a keen gardener, we are of the opinion he went up there and said: ‘It is about time you put a bit of rain down there because the gardens are looking terrible’. Obviously, the word got around and it rained. So, it was a sad occasion, but it was a great occasion. A lot of people who have lived away from their original home know that it is one opportunity also that you meet a lot of those cousins - first cousins, second cousins, third cousins once removed - that you have not seen for a long time. As I said, it was a sad but a very joyous occasion and it brought us altogether, as we had not seen one another for a long time.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank everyone. I also thank those staff members in the Legislative Assembly who also sent their condolences.
Mr KIELY (Sanderson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, last week Wulagi students in Year 2/3 Burnett were engaged in the CPPT unit of work about letter writing. The CPPT stands for Cooperative Programming Planning and Teaching. The CPPT program is put together by dedicated people, namely Ms Barbara Griffith, librarian, Ms Helen Faint, ESL teacher, in conjunction with the Year 2/3 class teacher, Ms Cheryl Burnett.
As part of this unit of work, the students were encouraged to write letters to people who both have been familiar and unfamiliar to them. My office received 20 letters from these students and their teachers, which I have individually responded to. The names of the students who participated in letter writing are: Jacqui Capitaine, Teneale Ah Mat, Jonathan Modoh, Taylor Wilson, Rebekah Wheeler, Jackson Dellas, Hartlee Bonson, Shalyene Carter, Brady Cook, Jordan Guerreiro, Shaan Mitchell, Tristyn Hawthorn, Stephanie Wedding, Nickolas Horsefeld, Dylan Bin Omar, Gladys, Max Irwin, Liam Wilson, Anelise Davis.
The Wulagi Year 2/3 students went on an excursion to the Winnellie Post Office on Monday 24 February, where they posted their letters and toured the post office ‘behind the scene’ area to witness the mailing process.
In the course of responding to letters, of course, I read them, and I thought they were a pretty good effort by the year 2/3 students. I take this opportunity to read these letters into the Hansard. Starting with their teacher, Cheryl Burnett:
Dear Mr Kiely,
We have been learning about letter writing. I wish to draw your attention to a large pothole forming at the
corner of Jabiru Street and Lee Point Road. I am worried that when I drive to school my car may get swallowed
up. Can you please look into this for me? Thank you.
Yours sincerely, Cheryl Burnett.
Well, Ms Burnett, we are looking into that and I will get back to you with a good result later on, I hope.
Dear Mr Kiely,
We are learning about writing letters. It’s fun. I’ve been playing basketball for six years and tennis for one
month. I have two cats and three dogs. I think my Mum is going to Brisbane with me, Jaye, Carlee, and my
cousin Amy. Jay and Carlee are my two sisters. I have two brothers, Mikey and Broatan.
Yours sincerely, Teneale.
- Dear Mr Kiely,
We are learning about writing letters. I have just started at Wulagi School. Thank you for giving our school
the movie passes.
Yours truly, Jonathon Modoh.
- Dear Mr Kiely,
We are learning about letters. Mr Kiely, can we please have more swings and some more computers? Last year
my dog got run over. His name was Feefee.
Yours sincerely, Jordan Guerreiro.
- Dear Mr Kiely,
I hope you have lots of letters. I love letters. Do you love letters? I do. You have lots of work to do so I can go
and play now and I do like school. Do you like school and teacher?
Yours sincerely, Shaan Mitchell.
- Dear Mr Kiely,
We are learning about writing letters and I have 16 pets. I have 10 fish and two guinea pigs, three dogs and
one bird. I love them very much and they are very cute and I have a brother and sister and I love her very
much and I love my brother very much and I have cousins and nieces and nephews and I love them all very much.
Yours sincerely, Tristyn.
Dear Mr Kiely,
We are learning writing letters. My name is Stephanie. I got a dog. His name is Jack and is white is my dog
and I got budgies. I got four budgies and their colours are blue. My dog is mine. I got a pool and I got a bike.
Yours sincerely, Stephanie.
- Dear Mr Kiely,
I wish I had a pool for the school ground. Please Mr Kiely can you please do it Mr Kiely.
Yours sincerely, Taylor.
- Dear Mr Kiely,
We would like to have a pool and some gloves.
Yours sincerely, Rebekah.
- Dear Mr Kiely,
I wish for a pool to cool us down and a jumping castle. I have a dog and his name is Liam. I am sure that you
have a good job working for the government. I am seven years old. I have a little sister she is five years
old. Sometimes I go for a bike ride to Marrara then I come home. Then I watch some TV for half and hour
and then I go to bed then I get up and I get ready for school and then I have a good day at school.
Yours sincerely, Jackson.
Dear Mr Kiely,
Do you get my letters, do you like getting letters? I like getting letters. I go to basketball. My favourite show
is Cheese TV and ABC Kids and Disney. I like school I have lots of friends. At least 101 friends. Their names
are Melissa and Max and Shaarn. I have lots more friends. Do you like your job? Does everyone like you?
Yours sincerely, Hartlee.
Dear Mr Kiely,
We are learning about writing letters. I am writing letters because I like letters. I write letters to my friends.
But they do not write a letter to me and I wrote a letter to Miss Redwood and she wrote back to me and she
is nice to me and I am going to write another letter to Miss Redwood and she is going to write me another one.
Yours sincerely, Shalyene.
- Dear Mr Kiely,
I wish for a bus shelter, okay? Because when it rains, I get wet waiting for the after-school care bus.
Yours sincerely, Brady Cook.
- Dear Mr Kiely,
I wish for a swimming pool to cool us down because when it is raining it fills up.
Yours sincerely, Liam Wilson.
- Mr Kiely,
Can you get a puppy for the school and can you get some for home? And some dress ups for us and Rita’s
name on them and can I have some tea sets with it and pretend food and pretend coffee stuff and some dress
ups that have our names on and can I have some pretty sox on and can I have some dolls for the chairs and
can you get opening which is things that open and a princess costume for me and can I have some crowns
and princess things.
Yours sincerely, Anelise.
- Dear Mr Kiely,
I think you are doing a good job.
Yours sincerely, Jacqui.
- Dear Mr Kiely,
I got a dog and a cat and a bird and a rabbit and I have a big brother and I am seven years old and a big cat
took the bird.
Yours sincerely, Nickolas.
- Mr L Kiely MLA,
I got a video and I like it and I got it from Video Ezy and I like it a lot.
Yours sincerely, Dylan.
Dear Mr Kiely,
I want a swimming pool so people can swim in it and I want a big machine to give someone a sun screen
and glasses and gloves because on Friday it is Wulagi clean up day and we are going to clean the school
and I want a song too.
Yours sincerely, Gladys.
- Dear Mr Kiely,
We are learning about writing letters. Me and my two dogs and I take them to see other dogs. We went to
the park.
Yours sincerely, Max Irwin.
I have responded to all of these letters. I took great pleasure in doing that. It is quite interesting to see that a lot of the children wanted a swimming pool. Of course, we cannot go getting swimming pools into school - there is the duty of care, the cost of it, it just cannot be done. However, I did write to these children and tell them about the efforts of myself and the members for Karama, Wanguri, Johnston and Casuarina - as a matter of fact, all members on this side - and the work we did to get the money and the plan going together for the new recreational facility which is for all of the Darwin area including Palmerston at Leanyer Recreation Park.
This is going to be a great facility for everyone, but for these kids in particular. They are just up the road; they live in Wulagi. This is something that was a core promise when I was a candidate. We sent out surveys around to everyone in Wulagi and throughout the northern suburbs, asking what they wanted to see happen with the abysmal Lake Leanyer and the tragedies that were occurring down there. It came back strong and hard that people wanted to keep that area. They saw its potential, and they wanted someone to do something about it.
This forward looking government, not like the CLP who kept on looking back - the CLP are stuck there - we looked ahead, and said this is what the people want. We got onto it and I was pleased to be there at the launch the other day saying that Leanyer was going ahead and just what this water park was going to be. It is a great facility, it is going to be opening in December. I hope the kids can wait for it. I am going to find it hard to wait and I know my kids are going to find it hard to wait. That is the message that I have conveyed to these kids at Wulagi who wrote wanting a pool at school.
As well, you might have heard reference to gloves. Friday is clean up day around a lot of the northern suburb schools, and a lot of schools in the Darwin area. I am not sure about down in Alice Springs or Tennant Creek or any other place. I can, however, tell you about the schools in my electorate. The kids get out there and this is the one day of the year where they all pitch in and clean up, pick up all the litter around the place and make their school look sparkling. I have been approached by Wulagi to assist them where I can with some gloves. I am happy to say that I am right behind Wulagi School; it is a place dear to my heart. I had a couple of calls to assist them when I was campaigning and I came through. As a matter of fact, the Chief Minister has made promises to Wulagi School, promises that we will always keep. That is the esteem that the Chief Minister has for that particular neck of the woods. Wulagi is an area I have lived in for 10 years and it is an area that is close to my heart. I am happy enough to chip in and help these kids do a good deed and I am happy enough to sponsor those gloves.
With that, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank the kids of Wulagi for writing to me. I have had a great time writing back to them, and I hope to keep this correspondence going with them, their parents and the school in the future years.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I wish to make a couple of points about my electorate but, before I do so, I would like to share the comments made by the Leader of the Opposition about Mrs Vicki Lay. I, too, was at the funeral service at Amy Johnston Avenue last Sunday morning. It started off with a very, wet, cold, rainy day where hundreds of people turned out to show their respects for Vicki, a very well-known personality in Darwin.
I got to know Vicki because of my connection with her husband, Kivi, and also her brother Alan Jape. Through the two men I got to know Vicki really only in passing when I met her at the Emporium and, very occasionally, when I visited Alan at his home. I was very moved by young Pedro’s eulogy of his mother. He stood there in tears, speaking so highly of his mother and her aspirations when she was alive. It pleases me to see a young man such as Pedro, a product of Darwin, and I look forward to his continuing success in his life, and his young brother and sister as well.
My condolences go to the children, and also to Kivi, whose loss would be very significant as Vicki was very much a partner, not only in his life but also in his business. My sympathies also go to the Jape family, Mr Jape Kong Su, the father, and Alan, Tony, and Connie, who all lived and worked in Darwin for a long time in the Jape enterprises, and are now spread across the continent from Adelaide to Darwin, and also into East Timor. I wish them my most sincere sympathies and I hope that the future turns brighter for them.
In the middle of January this year, a mini-cyclone hit Alice Springs and swept right through the East Side, as we all call it in Alice Springs, which is part of my electorate. The streets that were affected were Mimosa Court, Cypress Crescent, Banksia Street, Burke Street, Plumbago Crescent, Ptilotus Crescent, Spearwood Road and the corner of Cedar Court. The mini-cyclone would have lasted all of three minutes, if that. It came from the north and swept right through in a south-easterly direction, cutting a swathe through the East Side of Alice Springs. I have some photographs which, unfortunately, I have not printed out for the Assembly, but trees were snapped in half, some were uprooted, some trees were felled into carports, and one car was quite badly damaged when a tree fell right across it.
Fortunately, no one was hurt. The fact that there were no personal injuries was purely good luck more than anything else. The storm occurred in the middle of the afternoon when most people were still at work. I happened to be driving between the airport and the town and, hence, I was able to continue driving and went and inspected the damage that the storm caused. There were quite a few people out on the streets checking out their own front yards, backyards and especially along the nature strips where trees had been blown over, completely uprooted from where they were planted. These were quite large trees, some 20 to 30 feet in height, with trunks larger than your thigh.
The town council outside work crew were very quick in their response to cries for help. I know that one tree fell right across the whole of Burke Street, obstructing traffic. The tree literally went from one curb of Burke Street to the other curb. Fortunately, a person in the neighbourhood had a four-wheel drive which could pull the tree off the road in the first instance and, within 24 hours, the council had come along with their wood chipper and literally chewed the tree up to little bits and carted it all away. This occurred right around the neighbourhood over the next day or so and, very rapidly, everything returned almost to normal as though nothing had happened. If I had an opportunity to show the pictures to you, you would appreciate the magnitude of damage that occurred.
Another matter also happened in Greatorex. I cannot remember the date right now, but it was a meeting of the town council’s economic development committee, which I attended with several members of the East Side precinct workshop. We listened to the chairman of the workshop, Mr Geoff Miers, present some information and plans for the development of parks in our area. You may recall that, in June of last year, the Alice Springs Town Council announced plans to sell off some of its parklands as it was becoming a financial burden for the council to maintain. At the time that it announced that it was going to sell off the parks prior to any consultation with the community, it raised such ire amongst the community that the council had to literally put a stop to it, and then proceed with very considered, careful and widespread consultation.
I was one of the people involved in demonstrating to the council that what it announced was inappropriate. There was a meeting of residents around a park in my electorate called Noonie Park, one of the parcels of land that was earmarked for sale. That park happens to be a very small, pocket handkerchief park that was very much used by the community. There was absolutely no reason why that park should be sold off except, I gather, that the council saw that the park was adjacent to a seniors village - if I can call it that - in Greatorex. They may have considered that that would be a good place for an extension of the seniors village from where it is now placed, into the park itself which is adjacent to it.
Anyway, the hue and cry in Alice Springs was quite loud. The council decided to launch an open space action plan - as it was called - and invited concerned residents to attend workshops facilitated by a company called Clouston’s Consultancy. That consultancy highlighted the issues relating to parks. A public meeting was called for various sections of the town. Alice Springs was divided into four sections and, while I attended all four meetings, the only meeting that actually took place because there were sufficient numbers to hold a meeting, was the East Side precinct meeting. The other meetings, while called, were not attended by anybody apart from council employees, Clouston’s consultants and me.
Resulting from the workshop, the East Side precinct work group was formed to address the issue of the 19 parks in the East Side precinct, and then that workshop was to report back to council with what it thought were issues that could be taken up for council to consider when deciding what to do with the parks. Using the Clouston’s Consultancy’s and the town council’s guidelines, the workshop work group went ahead and had quite a lot of meetings - long and arduous but enthusiastic and determined - to produce some outcomes for the parks on the East Side. The work group, as I said, was very successful and, on the night, they presented the plan to the economic development committee. I was there for a large part of the presentation made by Geoff Miers, supported by Julie Brook, the deputy chairperson, and many other members of the East Side precinct work group.
They did a lot of research on those parks, and produced lots of photographs which were presented as a PowerPoint presentation showing current park furniture, facilities, the type of grass or prickles that were growing in those parks, and the lack of shade structures that should be there in Alice Springs - considering that Alice Springs is right smack in the middle of the desert and having so much bright sunlight through the day. The presentation was a good way of showing what the parks are like at the moment and what the community expectations for the parks are.
The presentation also had photographs of some good parks that were in the East Side precinct such as the one along Gosse Street, and then compare all those parks with that one, plus the one that is now on foot which is surrounded by the Kurrajong Drive area and managed by the Kurrajong Area Residents Association. The Gosse Street Park and the Kurrajong Area Park are the good parks in the East Side. The rest are very poorly maintained, very unloved, probably because not many people use those parks. With an awakening that has been signalled by the precinct workshop and also the threat of being sold if the parks are not used, I am sure the community of the East Side will now start to look at the parks with a different perspective and will continue to support and love the park that is in their own neighbourhood.
I congratulate the members of the East Side precinct workshop for putting the effort into this enterprise. It has given the council a lot of food for thought and ideas of how to improve the facilities so that the community can enjoy what otherwise a very barren desert living in Alice Springs. I look forward to great outcomes from the Alice Springs Town Council, and to them putting more shade structures into parks so that people can enjoy the parks even through the day and do what I commenced with them, some two years ago, when I provided them with some funding through the Department of Local Government to erect shade structures in Alice Springs. I look forward to continuing efforts from the town council.
Dr BURNS (Johnson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I know it is late at night and I will endeavour to be as quick as I can. My original intention for adjourning tonight was to set the record straight. We passed tobacco legislation some time ago and, in my speech, I omitted to mentioned some people who were crucial to forwarding that whole issue in the Territory. There is another small issue about someone that I mentioned earlier and probably did not do justice to that particular adjournment.
But I cannot let tonight go. I know tomorrow we are having a general business day. However, I would just like to comment on the atmosphere that was present here earlier during the adjournment debate by the Leader of the Opposition. Those of you who are watching or listening know that I have been somewhat of a student of this Chamber and I endeavour to spend as much time as I can down here, to observe what goes on; to look at the dynamic, to understand more about this Chamber. I will have to also confess that, as a candidate prior to that, I used to listen to Question Time but I did not actually come in here to see the debate; although I have picked up something from Question Time.
What we saw earlier tonight was a flashback. It was a flashback to the CLP in full flight, because there was an atmosphere and a dynamic. I wrote down a few words that described what I felt and it must have been like that when the CLP were in charge of this particular place. The words I have are: arrogant, abusive, overbearing, nasty, aggressive, imperious and dictatorial - in short, bully boy tactics. It is only fastened my resolve to do the best I can in this place, to be the best I can as a member, to ensure that that sort of atmosphere does not invade this place again because, in short, I found it offensive.
I found it offensive when the Leader of the Opposition openly attacked a public servant in a very political way. I can understand the Leader of the Opposition has a work health matter that he wants resolved; he has not received a reply. But at the same time, the way he lowered himself right into a very nasty, political attack on a public servant, I did not appreciate it. But this is part of a wider strategy that I have noticed. I have noticed it in the Estimates Committee and I have noticed it elsewhere in debate. I have noticed it in the Public Accounts Committee, with various CEOs of Health - the little niggly, snide remarks and the put-downs there.
I noticed what happened with the Commissioner for Public Employment in the Estimates Committee and some of the nastiness that went on there. Similarly, with the Auditor-General, just new in the post. It is not appreciated. What we are witnessing is a systematic political attack on a lot of our senior public servants. The police also, and just some of the innuendo around the Police Commissioner …
Mr Kiely: OCPE Commissioner.
Dr BURNS: Yes, I mentioned that. Now, to Work Health. I am putting the opposition on notice firstly, that this atmosphere is unacceptable. The people of the Northern Territory would find it unacceptable, and also their attitude towards senior public servants.
However, I will move onto the main matter that I wanted to talk about tonight. As I mentioned before, this parliament did pass a Northern Territory Tobacco Control Bill and, in my speech, I mentioned a number of people who over the years have supported change in this area. I have to confess that it was brought to my attention that I made some major omissions. I apologise to people about that and would like to set the record straight tonight.
Peter Zeroni, of course, worked in Territory Health Services as the Tobacco Officer for quite some time. Peter was certainly a leading light and showed a lot of dynamism in pushing the cause of tobacco reform and tobacco control legislation in the Territory. Peter now lives in Western Australia and is doing similar work over there. He tells me he misses the fishing here in the Territory. Lee Wood is Peter’s partner. I knew Lee through the Heart Foundation where she worked. She was also someone with a lot of passion about tobacco control issues and she went on to work within Territory Health Services in that area as well. I wish both Peter and Lee well and acknowledge their significant contribution in this area.
Another contributor who was another major omission of mine was Kylie Lindorff who worked as the Health Promotion Officer in the Heart Foundation for some time. Kylie was also very energetic with the Tobacco Control Coalition. Kylie worked with Rowena Ivers from Menzies School of Health on some research projects in Aboriginal communities about smoking cessation. She went on to work for NACCHO, the National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations, with a project looking at Aboriginal tobacco use and remedies for that. That was a national report and very well received. So, Kylie, well done and great acknowledgement for the work you have done. Gloria Markey, also a long serving person in Territory Health Services, has also been involved over the years with this issue. Margot Morrison also worked with the Heart Foundation and with Territory Health Services. So we see people moving in and out of these organisations, but they maintain the passion for what they do.
Finally, I would like to talk about Heather McKenzie. Heather is a great person who lives at the North Beach Caravan Park down in Mylestom in New South Wales, where I was fortunate to spend some leave with my daughter and son. Heather has lived around that area for many years, she was brought up in the Nambucca Valley, Dowraville area to be exact, in a farming area. Heather is a very keen fisherwoman and her father was a great fisherman in the area, and caught many, many heavy jewfish off the wharves in the Nambucca region, some 60 to 80 pounds. He is a legend. Heather told me when her Dad died, he insisted on being buried in his fishing gear. He was a great and fine fisherman.
Heather is just mad keen about fishing. She goes fishing just about every day and every night. She certainly knows how to catch bait, and jig for bait and catch little fish. She helped my daughter bait up her hook and throw it out. She is also a great wormer; she knows how to catch beach worms. Apart from that she also likes a beer. She is a very kind hearted person. Often, with the fish that she catches she will prepare little fish fingers or little appetisers and, when all the old fellas down the caravan park are having a beer, Heather will bring the fish fingers down and we will all have a bit of a feast and a beer and a bit of a laugh.
On Heather’s wall she has a mangrove jack which would have to be one of the biggest mangrove jacks that I have ever seen. She caught it in the area of North Beach. It would have to be a six or eight pound mangrove jack, and has pride of place there. I told her: ‘I have not seen a mangrove jack that is much better than that’. Heather is a fantastic person. She has had a couple of operations on her hips but that does not stop her. She loves to go down the bowling club and have a beer, and be in the raffle, and she more than often wins as well. If I was not spoken for already, I might run away with Heather! Anyway, she is a great person; she showed a lot of hospitality to my daughter and I. I have already told the story about going fishing with her. We went fishless and she caught some nice fish; she gave them to us and we had them for breakfast the next day. Such is the generosity of Heather. She has a great lifestyle, she is a great person and she is much loved in the area where she lived.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016