2003-08-12
- Madam Speaker Braham took the Chair at 10 am.
MESSAGE FROM ADMINISTRATOR
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received from the Administrator Message No 16 notifying assent to bills passed in the June 2003 sittings.
PETITIONS
Speed Limit in The Narrows
Ms MARTIN (Fannie Bay): Madam Speaker, I present a petition from 151 petitioners praying that the speed limit be reduced to 40 km/h in Wilmot Street, Shiers Street, Narrows Road and Fleming Street. The petition bears the Clerk’s certificate that it conforms with requirements of standing orders. I move that the petition be read.
Motion agreed to; petition read:
- To the honourable the Speaker and members of the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory.
We the undersigned respectfully showeth that the speed limit of 60 km/h now extant in the residential
zone of the suburb of The Narrows in the Northern Territory be lowered to 40 km/h. This is due to the
number of deaths caused to residents’ animals and near misses to children playing on and around the
streets bounded by Wilmot Street, Shiers Street, Narrows Road and Fleming Street.
There is concern about the excessive speeds of delivery drivers employed by Domino’s Pizza at Winnellie.
Your petitioners humbly pray that the honourable Speaker and members consider our petition and that the
speed limit be reduced to 40 km/h in the abovementioned streets in the residential area of The Narrows, and
your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray.
RESPONSES TO PETITIONS
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members that responses to petitions Nos 28, 30, 33 and 35 have been received and circulated to honourable members.
The text of the responses will be included in the Hansard record.
Petition No 28
Restoration of mail delivery to Borroloola
Date Presented: 29 April 2003
Presented by: Mr McAdam
Referred to: Minister for Central Australia
Date response received: 11 August 2003
Date response presented: 12 August 2003
- I thank you for your letter dated 29 April 2003 regarding the petition from the residents of Borroloola.
Until recently the Borroloola Post Office was serviced by an airmail service four times per week in addition
to a weekly road service. Due to a commercial decision made by the airline servicing the Gulf region, air
services were reduced from four to two flights weekly. As a consequence mail delivery was also reduced.
As you are most probably aware, mail delivery is the sole responsibility of the federal government. I am
advised that mail delivery to Borroloola Post Office is currently by a weekly road service and a twice-weekly
air service. Australia Post has a Community Service Obligation of a twice-weekly road service to Borroloola.
While this CSO is currently being exceeded, even with the reduction to a twice weekly air service, I have a great
deal of sympathy for the residents of Borroloola.
I was made aware of the reduction in service to Borroloola by Mrs Carol Harris from Borroloola and wrote to
the Hon Senator Richard Alston as the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts on
8 May 2003 urging him to reconsider the reduction in mail delivery service to Borroloola. I am still awaiting
a response from the minister and will write again to him on this matter.
- Petition No 30
Law and Order
Date Presented: 1 May 2003
Presented by: Dr Lim
Referred to: Minister for Justice and Attorney-General
Date response received: 11 August 2003
Date response presented: 12 August 2003
The Northern Territory government takes law and order and community safety very seriously. The government
is committed to reducing the level of crime and anti-social behaviour across the Northern Territory, including
Alice Springs and has a number of initiatives already in place.
Two of the government’s election commitments where its 6 point plan to tackle property crime and its 3 point plan
to tackle drugs and drug related crime. As part of the 6 point plan, the Office of Crime Prevention was
established early in 2002. That office plays a key role in coordinating crime prevention activity across
government, supporting community initiatives and involvement, and reporting on crime and justice statistics.
In recognition of the importance placed upon law and order and community safety, the government has also mobilised from the highest level with the formation of a Ministerial Standing Committee on Crime Prevention
in 2002. That committee meets quarterly to drive crime prevention activities across government. The Crime Prevention Committee of Chief Executive Officers of key government agencies and the Licensing Commissioner
meet monthly to coordinate activities across government. Only by working in a holistic manner across
government agencies like Justice, Police, Community Development, Health, Employment and Education
can the causes of crime be tackles broadly and effectively.
While I respect the views of the petitioners, who took the time to sign the two petitions being addressed today,
I have to point out the view that there is an increasing level of antisocial behaviour and property crime in
Alice Springs is not necessarily correct.
Crime Statistics
- Northern Territory Police record antisocial behaviour as disturbances. Police records indicate there were
908 less disturbances dealt with in Alice Springs in the 12 months from April 2002 to April 2003, compared to
the previous year (April 2001 to April 2002). This represents a drop in incidents of anti-social behaviour of 14%.
Similarly, records for all property offences show that there were 741 less recorded offences in Alice Springs in
the 12 months from April 2002 to March 2003, than in the previous 12 months (April 2001 to March 2002).
This represents a drop in property offences of 18%.
These figures do not support the claim that levels of antisocial behaviour and property crime are on the rise,
however, as pointed out at the beginning of this letter the government does take law and order issues very
seriously and is committed to making the Territory a safe place for all who live here.
Implementing one of the commitments in the 6 point plan, the Office of Crime Prevention publishes crime and
justice statistics. Its Quarterly Crime and Justice Statistics Report was first published in November 2002 with
the third report released in June 2003. For the first time Territorians know the true level of crime in their community down to a regional level and as a government we will be able to effectively target resources where
they are most needed. The reports can be accessed at www.crimeprevention.nt.gov.au
Crime Prevention and Community Safety Initiatives
- The following information provides a ‘snapshot’ of activity the government is undertaking, often in partnership
with the community, to address crime and antisocial behaviour in the Alice Springs region.
The Crime Prevention NT Grant Scheme was launched in November 2002, and provides $400 000 each year for community projects to target crime. Eight projects in the Alice Springs region received funding totalling $147 245 in the 2002-03 funding allocation. The current funding round opened on 1 July 2003, and further applications
from the Alice Springs region are encouraged.
The Office of Crime Prevention has established five Regional Crime Prevention Councils and two Indigenous Councils across the Territory to stimulate and sustain community involvement in crime prevention and to ensure the government remains in touch with crime prevention issues of concern to Territorians. Membership of the councils comprises representatives from the community and all tiers of government.
The Central Australian Regional Crime Prevention Council is based in Alice Springs. This group has received
$30 000 from government through the Crime Prevention NT Grant Scheme to develop a Child and Youth
Safety Strategy for ‘at risk’ and offending young people. This is a direct response by the government to
community concerns regarding crime in Alice Springs, and is seen as a potential model for other regions across
the Territory.
In addition to the Regional Crime Prevention Councils, there are a number of local crime prevention committees
or other bodies with an interest in crime prevention, established across the major centres of the Northern Territory. These include Neighbourhood Watch, business associations and residents action groups. These groups are actively supported by the Office of Crime Prevention and Northern Territory Police and have access to funding for
crime prevention projects through the Crime Prevention NT Grant Scheme. The Office of Crime Prevention will
be encouraging the establishment of local committees in Alice Springs to enable the community to have an
increased involvement and say in community safety.
The Office of Crime Prevention worked with the Commonwealth Attorney-General’s Department and the Australian Institute of Criminology on holding a Crime Prevention Forum in Alice Springs in late July 2003 focusing on producing solutions to crime issues in Alice Springs. Northern Territory Police established a Special Crime Unit in Alice Springs to target property crime. The unit will identify and curtail the criminal activities of recidivist offenders who are responsible for the majority of unlawful entry offences in Alice.
Northern Territory Police also are focussing on alcohol-related violence in public places and the 21 town camps in Alice. The Traditional Owners are keen to work with police and looking at how to prevent Aboriginal drinkers from outside Alice coming into town and causing problems, and how to return them to their country. Police are also assisting indigenous community wardens with the Return to Country program, operated by the Tangentyere Council. In addition, police are continuing foot, bicycle and trail bike patrols in Alice Springs to maintain pressure on antisocial offenders. This has resulted in a decrease of such incidents in the Central Business District and Todd River areas.
Over the past year there have been several short-term operations carried out by police in Alice Springs targeting specific problems, including rock throwing by juveniles, and breaches of the Liquor Act on licensed premises. These have been successful and will be continued to address problems as they arise.
The O’Sullivan report on policing and its Building Our Police Force Plan which the government has committed to fully implement, will see 200 extra police by the end of 2006, including in Alice. Extra police and extra resources will boost the law enforcement and crime prevention work carried out by our police force.
Implementing our 3 point plan to tackle illicit drugs and break the drug-crime cycle, the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Act 2002 commenced in August 2002. The act targets illicit drug dealers, reducing their ability to carry out their illegal activities in residential, commercial or licensed premises. Police declared the first drug house in Alice Springs in December 2002.
Drug Courts have been established in Alice Springs and Darwin with $300 000 funding from the government to enable treatment for addicts arrested for drug-related crimes. The courts will be empowered to order addicts to undertake rehabilitation and treatment programs. A Drug Court Clinician for Alice Springs commenced in mid-May 2003. Three magistrates in Darwin and one in Alice Springs have received intensive training, and the first clients were referred for treatment in June 2003.
In recognition of the role Neighbourhood Watch (NHW) plays in community safety and crime prevention, government funds Neighbourhood Watch $100 000 each year. This is allowing NHW to expand its range of activities with in areas like Crime Prevention through Environmental Design and Safety and Security Audits.
Implementing one of the commitments in our 6 point plan, Victims of Crime NT have been funded to provide assistance to victims of house break-ins and home invasion. These victims are now given prompt, practical assistance to re-secure their premises and assistance to help clean up their houses. Funding in the 2002-03 financial year was increased from $30 000 to $50 000 to extend the service to other parts of the Northern Territory, including Alice Springs.
A new Department of Justice Office will be opened in Alice Springs early in the new financial year, bringing crime prevention officers to Alice who will work with community justice and prisoner reintegration and diversion officers as well as the Central Australian Crime Prevention Committee.
Juvenile crime has been identified as a major problem in Alice Springs and a lot of resources and efforts are
being expended to tackle this issue. The Ministerial Standing Committee on Crime Prevention has established
a Territory-wide Youth at Risk Task Force. Chaired by Northern Territory Police, three full-time senior public servants are working full time on the project and developing a whole of Territory strategy to deal with youth at
risk. The strategy will take account of regional programs and needs and will include Alice Springs and the Child and Youth Safety Strategy developed by the Central Australian Crime Prevention Committee.
A Youth At Risk workshop, convened by Northern Territory Police, was held in Alice Springs on 12 June 2003
with support from the Office of Crime Prevention and the Central Australian Crime Prevention Committee.
The workshop fostered partnerships between government agencies and communities to decrease the risk of
children committing crime. Workshop outcomes will inform the work of the Youth at Risk Taskforce and also
assist with the finalisation of the Child and Youth Safety Strategy for the Alice Springs region.
Government has provided $670 000 for two significant initiatives to address issues of school attendance.
Eight School Attendance Officers will be employed across the Territory to work with those schools most in
need of assistance. $500 000 will enable provision of alternative education for students who are disengaged
from schooling. The first two of the Attendance Officers have commenced work, one of them in Alice Springs.
Since starting work in April, the Alice Springs Attendance Officer has been successful in getting 48 young people
to re-engage in the education system.
Juvenile offending is seen as a priority issue for the Alice Springs community and the Northern Territory Police
are working alongside other government and community based agencies to improve the lives of young people
at risk of entering or already within the Justice system, and to decrease the incidence of crime and disorder.
Police in Alice Springs regularly participate on the Child Protection Committee and liaise with the Youth
Night Patrol to help identify children at risk, and with Family and Community Services, Tangentyere Council
and other youth service providers in to assist these children and their families.
At the community level there are also a number of initiatives, including the Safe Families Project which was developed by youth service providers as a collaborative and culturally appropriate way of working with at
risk young people and their families to reduce opportunities for offending behaviour and deal with underlying family problems.
Real Justice NT, a not-for-profit organisation based in the Territory, has received $100 000 through the Crime Prevention NT Grant Scheme over three years to trial the implementation of restorative justice practices into Territory high schools, including Alice Springs High School. Victim-offender conferencing is used to ensure the offender confronts the outcomes of his or her action through conferencing with the victim and other affected
parties to deal. Reports so far indicate very positive outcomes for Alice Springs High School.
Also supported through the Crime Prevention NT Grant Scheme is the Alice Springs Youth Night Patrol. The
Youth Night Patrol works closely with Northern Territory Police to deal with the large numbers of young people
who tend to be present around the Alice Springs CBD during the late evening and early hours of the morning.
The funding will allow the Night Patrol to extend its services from three to six nights a week, and extend the
number of hours it operates over a three month period. The extended period of operation is due to commence
in early August 2003.
Conclusion
While in no way representing the full extent of the government’s response to crime and antisocial behaviour in
Alice Springs, this snapshot conveys the incredible amount of work being undertaken, both within government
and across the community, to make the Territory, including Alice Springs, a safer place to live.
No government of the day can address the issue of crime and antisocial behaviour in Alice Springs by
itself. Community support and participation is essential. This can be as minimal as making sure victims of
crime report incidents to police or could extend to getting involve in Neighbourhood Watch, local crime
prevention committees, or the Central Australian Crime Prevention Committee.
By working in partnership with the community and by fully implementing the O’Sullivan report, the
government is determined to attack crime and antisocial behaviour across the Territory.
Petition No 33
Rezoning of land on corner of Farrar Blv and Temple Tce for Medical Centre
Date Presented: 29 April 2003
Presented by: Mr Maley
Referred to: Minister for Health and Community Services
Date response received: 11 August 2003
Date response presented: 12 August 2003
- A proposed amendment to the NT Planning Scheme to rezone the land to S1 (Special Site) was on public
exhibition from 10 January to 7 February 2003 in accordance with the requirement of the Planning Act.
I am informed that, on consideration of the submissions, both for and against, the land has now been rezoned.
The Minister for Lands and Planning has amended the NT Planning Scheme to rezone the block to allow for
the construction of a medical clinic with the consent of the Development Consent Authority. This decision
appeared in the NT Gazette on 9 July 2003 and the prospective owner, Danila Dilba Biluru Butji Binnilutlim,
was subsequently notified.
The Palmerston and rural areas have been found to be areas of high need with respect to Aboriginal health.
A Health Needs Assessment of Litchfield Shire in March 2002 also recognised the need for more primary
care services to the area. The need for preventive and promotive health services was also identified.
I understand that Danila Dilba and the Office of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health (OATSIH) are currently negotiating the construction of a health centre. Their decision will be informed by the outcomes of
a strategic planning process currently being undertaken by Danila Dilba. The option of their maintaining a presence in Darwin city, as well as the site in Palmerston, is under consideration.
Although the NT government has provided the land, the responsibility for developing the service rests with the Commonwealth government. It has an obligation to promote access to health services for indigenous people
and I welcome its investment in the Territory. Aboriginal medical services have demonstrated that they are able
to provide services in a culturally appropriate way to those who choose to use them. I understand that there will
be a focus on health promotion and prevention, emotional and social well being and public health.
The nearby Farrar Medical Centre receives assistance from the NT government to enable all patients to be bulk billed during the hours of 6pm to 10pm. This assistance is limited to these hours because, after a trial period, it
was found that the service was under-utilised and costly to implement between 10pm and 8am. This has been confirmed by the findings of a Commonwealth funded After Hours project that investigated GP services
throughout Darwin in 2002.
In 2002, at a further cost of $260 000 per year, the NT government provided additional ambulance services to ensure that emergency access to Royal Darwin Hospital from Palmerston and the rural area has been made easier.
The provision of adequate health services is an important commitment of this government. The petitioners should be assured that services are continually monitored and reviewed in light of changing need and the available resources to ensure quality health care.
Petition No 35
Law and Order
Date Presented: 27 May 2003
Presented by: Dr Lim
Referred to: Minister for Justice and Attorney-General
Date response received: 11 August 2003
Date response presented: 12 August 2003
- The Northern Territory government takes law and order and community safety very seriously. The government is committed to reducing the level of crime and anti-social behaviour across the Northern Territory, including Alice Springs and has a number of initiatives already in place.
Two of the government’s election commitments where its 6 point plan to tackle property crime and its 3 point plan
to tackle drugs and drug related crime. As part of the 6 point plan, the Office of Crime Prevention was
established early in 2002. That office plays a key role in coordinating crime prevention activity across
government, supporting community initiatives and involvement, and reporting on crime and justice statistics.
In recognition of the importance placed upon law and order and community safety, the government has also mobilised from the highest level with the formation of a Ministerial Standing Committee on Crime Prevention
in 2002. That committee meets quarterly to drive crime prevention activities across government. The Crime Prevention Committee of Chief Executive Officers of key government agencies and the Licensing Commissioner
meet monthly to coordinate activities across government. Only by working in a holistic manner across government agencies like Justice, Police, Community Development, Health, Employment and Education can the causes of crime
be tackles broadly and effectively.
While I respect the views of the petitioners, who took the time to sign the two petitions being addressed today, I
have to point out the view that there is an increasing level of antisocial behaviour and property crime in
Alice Springs is not necessarily correct.
- Northern Territory Police record antisocial behaviour as disturbances. Police records indicate there were
908 less disturbances dealt with in Alice Springs in the 12 months from April 2002 to April 2003, compared
to the previous year (April 2001 to April 2002). This represents a drop in incidents of anti-social behaviour
of 14%.
Similarly, records for all property offences show that there were 741 less recorded offences in Alice Springs in
the 12 months from April 2002 to March 2003, than in the previous 12 months (April 2001 to March 2002).
This represents a drop in property offences of 18%.
These figures do not support the claim that levels of antisocial behaviour and property crime are on the
rise, however, as pointed out at the beginning of this letter the government does take law and order issues
very seriously and is committed to making the Territory a safe place for all who live here.
Implementing one of the commitments in the 6 point plan, the Office of Crime Prevention publishes crime and
justice statistics. Its Quarterly Crime and Justice Statistics Report was first published in November 2002 with
the third report released in June 2003. For the first time Territorians know the true level of crime in their community down to a regional level and as a government we will be able to effectively target resources where
they are most needed. The reports can be accessed at www.crimeprevention.nt.gov.au
Crime Prevention and Community Safety Initiatives
- The following information provides a ‘snapshot’ of activity the government is undertaking, often in partnership
with the community, to address crime and antisocial behaviour in the Alice Springs region.
The Crime Prevention NT Grant Scheme was launched in November 2002, and provides $400 000 each year for community projects to target crime. Eight projects in the Alice Springs region received funding totalling $147 245 in the 2002-03 funding allocation. The current funding round opened on 1 July 2003, and further applications
from the Alice Springs region are encouraged.
The Office of Crime Prevention has established five Regional Crime Prevention Councils and two Indigenous Councils across the Territory to stimulate and sustain community involvement in crime prevention and to ensure the government remains in touch with crime prevention issues of concern to Territorians. Membership of the councils comprises representatives from the community and all tiers of government.
The Central Australian Regional Crime Prevention Council is based in Alice Springs. This group has received
$30 000 from government through the Crime Prevention NT Grant Scheme to develop a Child and Youth
Safety Strategy for ‘at risk’ and offending young people. This is a direct response by the government to
community concerns regarding crime in Alice Springs, and is seen as a potential model for other regions across
the Territory.
In addition to the Regional Crime Prevention Councils, there are a number of local crime prevention committees
or other bodies with an interest in crime prevention, established across the major centres of the Northern Territory. These include Neighbourhood Watch, business associations and residents action groups. These groups are actively supported by the Office of Crime Prevention and Northern Territory Police and have access to funding for crime prevention projects through the Crime Prevention NT Grant Scheme. The Office of Crime Prevention will be encouraging the establishment of local committees in Alice Springs to enable the community to have an increased involvement and say in community safety.
The Office of Crime Prevention worked with the Commonwealth Attorney-General’s Department and the Australian Institute of Criminology on holding a Crime Prevention Forum in Alice Springs in late July 2003 focusing on producing solutions to crime issues in Alice Springs. Northern Territory Police established a Special Crime Unit in Alice Springs to target property crime. The unit will identify and curtail the criminal activities of recidivist offenders who are responsible for the majority of unlawful entry offences in Alice.
Northern Territory Police also are focussing on alcohol-related violence in public places and the 21 town camps in Alice. The Traditional Owners are keen to work with police and looking at how to prevent Aboriginal drinkers from outside Alice coming into town and causing problems, and how to return them to their country. Police are also assisting indigenous community wardens with the Return to Country program, operated by the Tangentyere Council. In addition, police are continuing foot, bicycle and trail bike patrols in Alice Springs to maintain pressure on antisocial offenders. This has resulted in a decrease of such incidents in the Central Business District and Todd River areas.
Over the past year there have been several short-term operations carried out by police in Alice Springs targeting specific problems, including rock throwing by juveniles, and breaches of the Liquor Act on licensed premises. These have been successful and will be continued to address problems as they arise.
The O’Sullivan report on policing and its Building Our Police Force Plan which the government has committed to fully implement, will see 200 extra police by the end of 2006, including in Alice. Extra police and extra resources will boost the law enforcement and crime prevention work carried out by our police force.
Implementing our 3 point plan to tackle illicit drugs and break the drug-crime cycle, the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Act 2002 commenced in August 2002. The act targets illicit drug dealers, reducing their ability to carry out their illegal activities in residential, commercial or licensed premises. Police declared the first drug house in Alice Springs in December 2002.
Drug Courts have been established in Alice Springs and Darwin with $300 000 funding from the government to enable treatment for addicts arrested for drug-related crimes. The courts will be empowered to order addicts to undertake rehabilitation and treatment programs. A Drug Court Clinician for Alice Springs commenced in mid-May 2003. Three magistrates in Darwin and one in Alice Springs have received intensive training, and the first clients were referred for treatment in June 2003.
In recognition of the role Neighbourhood Watch (NHW) plays in community safety and crime prevention, government funds Neighbourhood Watch $100 000 each year. This is allowing NHW to expand its range of activities with in areas like Crime Prevention through Environmental Design and Safety and Security Audits.
Implementing one of the commitments in our 6 point plan, Victims of Crime NT have been funded to provide assistance to victims of house break-ins and home invasion. These victims are now given prompt, practical assistance to re-secure their premises and assistance to help clean up their houses. Funding in the 2002-03 financial year was increased from $30 000 to $50 000 to extend the service to other parts of the Northern Territory, including Alice Springs.
A new Department of Justice Office will be opened in Alice Springs early in the new financial year, bringing crime prevention officers to Alice who will work with community justice and prisoner reintegration and diversion officers as well as the Central Australian Crime Prevention Committee.
Juvenile crime has been identified as a major problem in Alice Springs and a lot of resources and efforts are being expended to tackle this issue. The Ministerial Standing Committee on Crime Prevention has established a Territory-wide Youth at Risk Task Force. Chaired by Northern Territory Police, three full-time senior public servants are working full time on the project and developing a whole of Territory strategy to deal with youth at risk. The strategy will take account of regional programs and needs and will include Alice Springs and the Child and Youth Safety Strategy developed by the Central Australian Crime Prevention Committee.
A Youth At Risk workshop, convened by Northern Territory Police, was held in Alice Springs on 12 June 2003 with support from the Office of Crime Prevention and the Central Australian Crime Prevention Committee. The workshop fostered partnerships between government agencies and communities to decrease the risk of children committing crime. Workshop outcomes will inform the work of the Youth at Risk Taskforce and also assist with the finalisation of the Child and Youth Safety Strategy for the Alice Springs region.
Government has provided $670 000 for two significant initiatives to address issues of school attendance. Eight School Attendance Officers will be employed across the Territory to work with those schools most in need of assistance. $500 000 will enable provision of alternative education for students who are disengaged from schooling. The first two of the Attendance Officers have commenced work, one of them in Alice Springs. Since starting work in April, the Alice Springs Attendance Officer has been successful in getting 48 young people to re-engage in the education system.
Juvenile offending is seen as a priority issue for the Alice Springs community and the Northern Territory Police are working alongside other government and community based agencies to improve the lives of young people at risk of entering or already within the Justice system, and to decrease the incidence of crime and disorder. Police in Alice Springs regularly participate on the Child Protection Committee and liaise with the Youth Night Patrol to help identify children at risk, and with Family and Community Services, Tangentyere Council and other youth service providers in to assist these children and their families.
At the community level there are also a number of initiatives, including the Safe Families Project which was developed by youth service providers as a collaborative and culturally appropriate way of working with at risk young people and their families to reduce opportunities for offending behaviour and deal with underlying family problems.
Real Justice NT, a not-for-profit organisation based in the Territory, has received $100 000 through the Crime Prevention NT Grant Scheme over three years to trial the implementation of restorative justice practices into Territory high schools, including Alice Springs High School. Victim-offender conferencing is used to ensure the offender confronts the outcomes of his or her action through conferencing with the victim and other affected parties to deal. Reports so far indicate very positive outcomes for Alice Springs High School.
Also supported through the Crime Prevention NT Grant Scheme is the Alice Springs Youth Night Patrol. The Youth Night Patrol works closely with Northern Territory Police to deal with the large numbers of young people who tend to be present around the Alice Springs CBD during the late evening and early hours of the morning. The funding will allow the Night Patrol to extend its services from three to six nights a week, and extend the number of hours it operates over a three month period. The extended period of operation is due to commence in early August 2003.
Conclusion
While in no way representing the full extent of the government’s response to crime and antisocial behaviour in Alice Springs, this snapshot conveys the incredible amount of work being undertaken, both within government and across the community, to make the Territory, including Alice Springs, a safer place to live.
No government of the day can address the issue of crime and antisocial behaviour in Alice Springs by itself. Community support and participation is essential. This can be as minimal as making sure victims of crime report incidents to police or could extend to getting involve in Neighbourhood Watch, local crime prevention committees, or the Central Australian Crime Prevention Committee.
By working in partnership with the community and by fully implementing the O’Sullivan report, the government is determined to attack crime and antisocial behaviour across the Territory.
MINISTERIAL REPORTS
AustralAsia Railway - Progress
AustralAsia Railway - Progress
Ms MARTIN (AustralAsia Railway): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to inform the House of the progress of the AustralAsia railway. Over 1230 km of track has now been completed since track laying began in April 2002. Track laying across the historic Fergusson River bridge on 29 April and recently passed through Adelaide River and will soon arrive at the Port of Darwin. Completion of construction is scheduled for the end of October with the commissioning and testing phase taking until late 2003. I table the latest railway construction progress map as at 29 July 2002.
The completion of track laying, as I said, is scheduled for the end of October this year. That is ahead of schedule and has been done incredibly effectively and efficiently, and all credit to ADrail for that completion ahead of schedule. In mid-September there will be an historic event in Alice Springs to celebrate the joining of the old and new lines, linking the north and south for the first time. Shortly after this, at the end of September, track laying for the end of the line will be undertaken at the Port of Darwin. Once construction is completed, a commissioning and test phase will begin which includes new locomotive and rolling stock performance trials and driver familiarisation.
The inaugural train on the AustralAsia railway will be a FreightLink freight train departing Adelaide on 15 January 2004 and arriving in Darwin on Saturday, 17 January 2004. Planning has begun in earnest for the arrival of the first train which will feature community celebrations in Adelaide, Port Augusta, Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Katherine and Darwin. Each regional centre will have community-focussed events to witness the arrival of the first train on the AustralAsia railway. The inaugural Ghan service will depart Adelaide on 1 February arriving in Darwin on Tuesday, 3 February 2004. There has been enormous interest in that first Ghan. In the five and a half weeks after tickets have gone on sale, sales have topped $5m and that is for tickets over a six month period. 17 January 2004 will be an historic day for the people of Australia and, of course, the Territory. The inauguration of Australia’s largest infrastructure project will be a wonderful time to celebrate the future of the Territory.
Madam Speaker, I look forward to briefing the House further on first train celebrations and construction progress as the time draws near.
Mr BURKE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, the arrival of the first train in Darwin will be a wonderful occasion for all Territorians and, I daresay, for all Australians. We are not quite sure if the first train will be the Ghan or the first freight train.
Ms Martin: I just said freight. 17 January.
Mr BURKE: The first freight train. The Chief Minister alluded to the arrival of not only that freight train but also the first passenger train, and that will also be a wonderful occasion for celebrating. It is interesting to see that the success of the Ghan, demonstrated by the advanced bookings, is enormous. It will certainly turn out to be one of the great train journeys throughout Australia. I talked to the Prime Minister the other day, and he is looking forward to his first trip on the Ghan and being here on that wonderful day.
The Chief Minister has reported often in this Chamber on construction progress of the railway, which, as we all know, is almost completed. I was at a Palmerston and Regional Business Association meeting on one of the rail crossings at Wishart Road at which a large number of members of that organisation were present and briefed by Duncan Beggs from ADrail on the final progress on the railway. Community interest is very strong.
The Chief Minister, though, might wish to report on where we are going in the Territory in terms of a major project now that this railway is completed. We have heard the announcement of the waterfront development which …
Mr Henderson: What about the LNG plant and the convention centre?
Mr BURKE: … is predicted to commence with some sod turning in 2005. I heard ‘the LNG project’. I doubt that many Territorians would be convinced that the LNG project in itself will provide the jobs that have been lost from the railway. Also coming at a time when, as the Chief Minister well knows, unemployment in the Northern Territory is above 7%. We have had 5000 lost jobs in the Territory in the last 13 months. We need to see the government providing incentives and initiatives so that people are attracted to the Northern Territory and attracted to job seeking. That is one issue which needs to be leveraged off the railway as an issue when the railway is completed.
There is little information and a large amount of confusion as to how freight will transfer from road to rail and the commercial rates that will be applied. I understand that there are some commercial sensitivities in that regard. I ask the Chief Minister, if she is not aware of it, to take some note of the freight forwarders that already exist in the Northern Territory. Some of them are longstanding freight forwarding companies, Territorians well and truly, that believe they are being disadvantaged in terms of their ability to compete with some of the interstate freight forwarders looking to work from that railway.
Also, there is no information yet as to where the land bridging opportunities are going to be in terms of the gateway to Asia. In that context, I might add that if you talk about the completion of the wharf, I want to know when the wharf will be completed in terms of the infrastructure that is needed to support a modern port in Australia. It is one thing to complete the earthworks and associated infrastructure to accommodate the railway. It is quite another thing to turn that port into a modern port with all the infrastructure it needs to compete internationally and with other ports in Australia.
Those are unanswered questions that I ask the Chief Minister to address at some stage.
Ms MARTIN (AustralAsia Railway): In response to what was a reasonably negative and unconstructive response to the rail report was that the Opposition …
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: Madam Speaker, the Opposition Leader knows that as the opposition spokesperson on the railway, he can ask for a briefing on all of those issues. I know that he has had a briefing over the last couple of months from my Office of Territory Development. We are very open with this information. When the member was Chief Minister, he was responsible for the railway. He understands the nature of that railway and the contracts that were entered into. When it comes to what is happening with freight rates, he understands that the operator of the rail is FreightLink – that is what you put in place, and they are responsible for that commercial operation. We, of course, quite appropriately are working with them but this is a commercial operation and they have to make a return.
That is what is happening. We are supporting that happening. If I had another few minutes I could talk significantly about the major projects that are happening for the Territory. Get your blinkers off!
Madam SPEAKER: Chief Minister, your time has expired.
Katherine High School and Group Training
Mr STIRLING (Employment, Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I congratulate the staff and students of Katherine High School for the work being done in conjunction with the local business community. Recently, during a community Cabinet meeting in Katherine, I had the pleasure of meeting with a range of registered training organisations in the Katherine area, in particular, Burridj, an Aboriginal Group Training company which, along with Katherine High School, has grasped very firmly the need to provide students with an education that will prepare them for a working life.
The high school has introduced a specialised program into Year 11 and 12, consisting of relevant apprenticeship training with a registered training organisation. This will include time with a host employer and a school component which will teach Certificate 2, in introduction of vocational, educational, business and life skills module. The program is being developed through discussion between Waikan Training and Employment Services, Burridj Aboriginal Group Training Company, the Northern Territory University and Katherine High School.
A part-time lecturer and a program coordinator have been employed by the Northern Territory University for the delivery of Certificate 2 modules, and the Burridj Aboriginal Group Training Company have retained the services of a trainee mentor and a host employer coordinator. Approximately 20 students, the majority of whom are indigenous, have expressed interest in the program for semester 2 this year.
It is implemented this way:
a three day orientation program for students with speakers from the university, the Department
of Employment, Education and Training, and employer groups presenting information to students;
an interview with the students to determine placement into the program then occurs;
a two-week work experience placement with potential employers, and that will be in occupations
ranging from retail across to horticulture;
a sign-up day on 25 August for entering the contracts of training for those offered a new apprenticeship
place; and
those students not offered a place will continue with the work readiness training program being conducted
by the school.
Negotiations are under way with the federal Department of Education, Science and Training and the federal Department of Employment and Workplace Relations, for possible funding to assist with support for mentoring, employer incentives and administration costs. It is planned to officially launch this on 1 September.
The school, the training organisations and the business community deserve our congratulations. They have a firm grasp of that critical issue of preparing students for work, after their formal education is over, and for connecting employers and students in a practical way that should benefit both. This will mean local students have the opportunity to get real and practical training, preparing them for a role in the Territory’s economic future development.
In the longer term, it will mean more of our local youth will have a place in employment in their local communities. It should have the effect of building local skills in many fields so that the Territory will not be as reliant as it has been in the past to have to ‘buy in’ that expertise and skills from interstate.
I congratulate all involved in this program. It is a sign of the way of the future, where we integrate the more senior levels of high school very closely with the work force through government agencies, the university and registered training providers. I congratulate them and I look forward to, not just watching this group grow to maturity and success over the coming years, but also many others to follow this model.
Mr MILLS (Blain): I welcome the statement, Madam Speaker. I agree with the minister that this is where activity must be focussed in our education structure to allow real linkages with what is occurring in the classrooms and the schools, particularly at Years 10 and 11, linking them to real employment.
The question I ask is in reference to funding for this project. I note reference to federal agencies’ involvement. I would be very interested to know the amount of money that has been attributed to this by the Departments of Education and Employment federally, and what is the contribution by the Northern Territory government.
It is imperative that we spend a lot of time in getting this part of the education equation correct, because the minister and members of government know quite well that the decline in population and the labour force in the Northern Territory can really only be developed, not by importation of skilled labour, but by growing it. Going underneath that, we have to ask the fundamental questions: why is the labour force in the Northern Territory on the decline; and why have we lost 5000 jobs in 12 months? They are fundamental questions which need to be addressed. This is one step in the right direction, of course.
I also ask the minister to acknowledge the increased pressure that this places upon the school itself. It may sound good for those outside the school that these activities are occurring within the school structure, but I can tell you from experience and consultation with those involved in education, this places significant pressure on the managing of education when you have these employment-related additional projects within a school.
Mr STIRLING (Employment, Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his supportive comments. I am aware of those additional pressures that are placed on school staff through programs such as this.
In relation to his question about planning, the bulk – in fact all – of the funding in the first instance is DEET NT, and I can provide further information on that later. The approach to both DEWR and DEST, the federal agencies, are for possible funding to assist with mentoring incentives for employers to take these trainees on, and some of the administrative costs. If we do not get that support, DEET would be more than happy, of course, to continue that. However, it would seem that the more collaboration and cooperation we get from our federal agencies, the more we can spread the dollar.
The question of transition from school to work has always been a problematic one. For many, it is an easy step; they go through school and enter the work force. For some, it remains a very problematic area. The more we can do in this area to ease that transition, the better it is for everyone. Our employment and training advisory council is looking very closely at that.
Status of Exploration and Mining Industries
Mr HENDERSON (Business, Industry and Resource Development): Madam Speaker, I provide a brief report on the status of the exploration and mining industries in the Northern Territory. In recent times, there has been great focus on offshore oil and gas, so today I want to talk about what is happening onshore in the Northern Territory. I acknowledge at the outset that it is a mixed report card bearing some good and some disappointing news.
At Gove, Alcan is undertaking a feasibility study on the proposed major expansion of activities, including downstream metals manufacturing. This proposal involves refinery expansion to increase capacity from 1.85 m tonnes per annum to 3.5 m tonnes per annum, increasing the work force by 1200 during construction, increasing energy consumption and converting the facility from fuel oil to gas, probably sourced from Blacktip in the Bonaparte Gulf.
A number of new projects are under way. Peko rehabilitation projects will process 3.9 m tonnes of tailings at the old Peko mine in Tennant Creek, to produce gold, copper, cobalt and magnetite. The project has a mine life of seven years, a capital cost of $8m, and will employ 25 people.
Giants Reef Mining is developing the Chariot Mine also in Tennant Creek, and will truck the ore to the Warrego Mill for processing. Chariot is expected to produce in excess of 60 000 ounces of gold per year over a 3 year mine life, and employ 25 people. An additional 10 people will be employed at the Warrego Mill. Underground mining operations commenced in June and refurbishment of the Warrego Mill commenced in July. The first gold pour from Chariot is expected in October 2003, which no doubt, will be a great day for Tennant Creek. I look forward to being there.
In addition, the following mining projects are scheduled to commence development over the next few years. Newmont Australia proposes to develop the Minatour deposit in the Tanami and truck the ore to the Granites gold mine for processing.
Olympia Resources is proposing a garnet sand mining operation in the Harts Range area, approximately 167 km north-east of Alice Springs. The company is expected to undertake detailed metallurgical test work and will also complete an environmental assessment and comprehensive market report. A definitive feasibility study is expected to be completed before the end of this year.
The mining industry is the largest contributor to the Territory’s gross state product of 22% in 2000-01. The value of mineral production and processing in 2002-03 was $1.4bn, and the mining industry provides thousands of direct and indirect jobs for Territorians.
However, the mining industry is not exempt from the effects of the ebb and flow of currency values, commodity prices and financing considerations - far from it. These factors strongly influence exploration programs and mining developments. Accordingly, a number of NT projects are on hold pending improved economic circumstances. These include Batchelor magnesium project, the Browns Polymetallic project also at Batchelor, and the Burnside joint venture gold project in the Pine Creek region.
Earlier this year, McArthur River Mines submitted a notice of intent for a proposed major expansion of the mine and processing operations. However, there are recent announcements by the mine’s new owner, Xstrata, that the expansion proposal is subject to review. We are in regular contact with Xstrata and maintain a close watching brief.
We have also seen announcements regarding the closure of the Union Reefs gold mine near Pine Creek and the Merlin diamond mine near Borroloola following the exhaustion of economically recoverable resources. Because of the cyclical nature of the mining industry, new mines need to come on stream and for that we need exploration and lots of it. To assist the industry in its exploration effort, the government recently announced a four-year, $15.2m exploration assistance package, Building the Territory’s Resource Base, which will provide significant additional resources in the areas of geoscientific data, title grants and administration, promotion of the Territory’s exploration potential, and bringing the industry and indigenous people together.
In this first two years of Labor administration, some 600 exploration licences have been issued covering an area of approximately 376 000 km and with a combined first year spend of $23.7m. Most of these licences have been granted following relevant procedures under the Native Title Act. The Territory’s procedures under that act are acknowledged by the Native Title Tribunal as the most progressive and successful in the nation. In addition, we have commenced consultation process with stakeholders aimed at introducing some workability amendments to the Aboriginal Land Rights Act to improve access to the almost 50% of the Northern Territory which is Aboriginal freehold land.
The Territory has been receiving strong exploration interest from diamond explorers over the last two years. It is estimated that diamond explorers currently account for nearly half of the exploration licence applications and grants in the Territory with three global giants of the diamond sector - De Beers, Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton - leading the charge along with junior companies such as Elkedra Diamonds, Flinders Diamonds, Gravity Capital and Ausquest amongst others.
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Madam Speaker, the time afforded me is way too short to cover in any great capacity all of the issues just discussed by the minister. However, I can go on the record to say it is good that the Peko rehabilitation project is going; it is great for Tennant Creek. Giants Reef likewise and the gold pour coming on. It will inject great confidence into that community. Issues at Nhulunbuy with the expansion and the conversion from the bad fuel source they are using now to gas will be good.
However, let us cut straight to one of the main issues and that is ALRA, the Aboriginal Land Rights Act of the Northern Territory. This is an important issue for this jurisdiction. It is an act that only applies in this jurisdiction. I have heard the minister speak publicly about amendments to this act. There is great capacity for this important industry and as the minister rightly points out it is 22% of GDP. It is the biggest contributor to GDP by that ratio of any place in Australia. Mining is really important to how our lifestyle continues in this place because it generates wealth.
One of the impediments to mining is difficulty with exploration. One of the major causes of difficulty is the Aboriginal Land Rights Act. It is important for the minister to bring forth the issues that he would like to amend the act on to this parliament. There is great capacity if he is able to corral and muster his colleagues in federal parliament for us to do likewise with the conservatives and for this act to be amended for the benefit of Territorians. I urge the minister to tell us what those amendments might be and to involve the industry. I know he said on record that the industry has been involved; there is a mixed response to that and from the people I have spoken to they would certainly like a lot more involvement than this government has presented. There should be delegations to Canberra to look to changing this act for the benefit of Territorians, including Aboriginal Territorians, and to optimise mining in this great place.
We know it is highly prospective for onshore oil and gas, and diamonds and base metals. It is important that the Aboriginal Land Rights Act as it exists would not be accepted in any other jurisdiction and it should not be accepted by Territorians, and if it is posed as a great option, bring it in the other states.
Mr HENDERSON (Business, Industry and Resource Development): Madam Speaker, in a spirit of cooperation on this issue, as opposed to the rhetoric, a full briefing is offered to the shadow minister. I know he has been shadow minister now for a number of months, but I have not received a request for a briefing. There are many important issues being proposed.
For the first time, there is an agreed position between the Northern Territory government and the land councils and it is currently with Canberra. There has been full consultation with the mining industry; full and frank consultation. The mining industry did not achieve everything they wanted, but they do acknowledge that it is a significant start.
I urge the shadow minister to seek a briefing, and urge his colleagues in Canberra – this is Commonwealth legislation that needs to be amended – to take note of these proposed amendments and to support them. That is the challenge for the member opposite and I offer him a briefing.
Electrical Undergrounding Project
Dr BURNS (Essential Services): Madam Speaker, I rise to report on progress of the power line undergrounding project. The project, announced by the Chief Minister on 6 August 2002, will result in almost 9000 lots and 16 000 customers in suburban Darwin having their overhead power lines replaced with reliable and safe underground lines.
Before commencement of the work, a new high voltage feeder was required to provide a secure power source from the Casuarina Zone Substation at the corner of Trower and Rothdale Roads, and I was there for the beginning of that work. It is very exciting. The installation of the new feeder was completed in June 2003 and it was commissioned in mid-July 2003. This feeder was required before work could commence on undergrounding residential power supplies in Nightcliff and Rapid Creek.
As sections of work on the distribution network are completed, power supplies will be connected to this feeder, providing residents with improved power supply reliability. Recently, Power and Water awarded a contract to Townes Chappell Mudgway to carry out the design and project management of undergrounding the section between Progress Drive and Woolworths Shopping Centre. This will provide Woolworths Shopping Centre with a more secure and reliable source of supply, and is expected to be completed before the onset of the Wet Season.
This is a very important issue, this part here, Madam Speaker, and I would ask the member for Drysdale to listen carefully. Of the $2m allocated in 2002-03, Power and Water has contributed $500 000 and the government $1.5m. The Power and Water Corporation’s contribution to this project has been calculated by reference to the amount of undergrounding work on which a commercial rate of return is achievable. That is where their $500 000 comes from. As the undergrounding project is rolled out each year, the amount that the corporation can contribute will be determined in the same manner.
Work on stage A, being Nightcliff and Rapid Creek, is now anticipated to commence in Nightcliff in late 2003. A tender to engage a managing contractor for a period of three years has been advertised and closes this week. The function of that contractor will be to have responsibility for the planning and detailed design work through to construction and final handover of the assets to Power and Water.
The tender is expected to be awarded in late 2003 with site works to commence in the first quarter of 2004. The three year contract will see power supplies to over 1500 lots in Nightcliff and Rapid Creek placed underground by 2007. The undergrounding power project will not only provide improved power reliability for residents in some of the older suburbs of Darwin, but will also provide a greater security of supply in the event of a cyclone, and improved community safety.
Areas of Darwin already supplied by underground power have less than one-quarter of the interruptions experienced in areas serviced by overhead power lines. The project is expected to bring similar benefits to Darwin’s older suburbs as the project is rolled out. In 1997, as everyone knows, Power and Water successfully completed a trial undergrounding project when they removed overhead power lines in Bougainvillea Street, Nightcliff. The knowledge gained from that project has assisted and fed into this more recent project.
The Undergrounding Power Project Office, which has been operational since May 2003, has now been officially opened. Since becoming operational, there has been a considerable amount of interest received from residents regarding the project. The recent display at Expo was also well attended.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, I am afraid the time for ministerial reports has expired. We have had our 30 minutes. Remember, we have five, two and one timing. If we do not stick to that time then, of course, we do go over.
Reports noted pursuant to Sessional Order.
DISTINGUISHED VISITOR
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise you of the presence in the Speaker’s Gallery of Senior Sergeant Vince Kelly, President of the Northern Territory Police Association. On behalf of honourable members. I extend you a warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
PUBLIC SECTOR EMPLOYMENT AND MANAGEMENT AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 164)
(Serial 164)
Continued from 18 June 2003.
Mr BONSON (Millner): Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the Minister for Employment, Education and Training. The purpose of this bill is to amend the Public Sector Employment and Management Act to remove the current provision preventing employees from being permanently employed in the Northern Territory public sector beyond 65 years. This is of particular interest to me and my electorate as I have gained a specific section of the community area around Hazell Court and Reynolds Court, as well as other seniors throughout the Millner electorate who fall into this category. I also have two healthy, intelligent parents fast approaching the age of 65, and obviously in these current times, will be intending to work past the age of 65.
The bill recognises that we will be retaining highly experienced and skilled employees. When we talk about experience, as anyone would know, I personally, as an elected member to parliament at 30 years of age, and some of these people we are talking about have another 35 years worth of work experience, and that needs to be recognised. The population is also ageing. It needs to be recognised that people will be living 10, 20, 30 years longer and can productively input into the wider community through work.
Thirdly, of course, as has become a common thing, the Northern Territory public sector will be in step with other public sector jurisdictions across Australia. The Martin Labor government has ensured that the Territory will no longer be lagging behind in this area. Finally, on the issue of discrimination on any basis - race, colour, creed, religion, sex – I believe is not tolerant to members of this House and ageism is just another generalisation and stereotype, and therefore becomes bad legislation. This is an opportunity to fix that.
It is also important to recognise that people in this current environment will need to work longer, I believe, and will have to have the opportunity to earn greater incomes over their period of time, specifically if, for whatever reasons, they have not been able to retire financially secure.
The bill repeals section 36 of the Public Sector Employment and Management Act in its entirety. The references to minimum and maximum retirement ages are removed, as well as arrangements that permitted employees aged 65 and over to be employed on a temporary basis. The bill also converts employees on transitional arrangements back to permanent employment.
I commend the minister for taking steps to bring us in line with the rest of Australia. This is important to constituents in my electorate. Next time I have a community function I will be pleased to show them my contribution on this matter.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, it is the will of the CLP not to oppose this piece of legislation and, in fact, welcome its introduction.
There are a couple of questions that I put to the minister for clarification. I presume he will be able to give us detail on that in reply. It is clear that trends are indicating that, as a nation, we must answer questions that are emerging quite rapidly regarding labour force participation, size of and nature of our labour force changing significantly with baby boomers at the peak age now of 55 years. There is a tremendous change that is occurring right across the face of our working population. It does not take too much imagination to look ahead and wonder what we will actually do in order to fund our pension rates into the future. Will our superannuation be adequate to carry the load for an ageing population with the birth rate declining? Will we have those who are currently in the work force replaced by Australians? Trend analysis indicates no, so we must come up with a solution.
We need to drill down fairly deeply in this issue because, on the face of it, it can easily be passed off as some wonderful benign initiative; to simply allow those who are currently coming to the age of compulsory retirement to continue on. Jolly good for them; they have a lot to contribute to the work force, and true, they have. However, the deeper issues are that our work force is ageing and reducing. In fact, in the Northern Territory, those trend figures indicate that there has been a reduction in our labour force of 5300 people in the 12 months between July 2002 and July 2003.
When you bring underneath that the fact that the population itself has decreased, we have to ask the deeper questions: why is that and how are we going to manage this into the future? In 12 months, 5300 workers who are no longer working in the Northern Territory does put pressure on the issues that the minister for Education brought before the House earlier on: how are we going to grow our work force and get younger participation entry of skilled workers into the labour force? Then, of course, we have to work at the other end and move the stipulation of those in the public service having to retire at 65 years.
We are looking at some fairly significant social issues here. It can easily be passed off as: ‘We know of an older person who would love to continue working, and good for them. We can allow this to happen and what a wonderful government we are’. However, we are really responding to social pressures that we must responsibly consider and follow through to the next stage. The pressures will come on how we actually manage aged involvement in the work force. This is one of the questions I have for the minister: what are the management regimes to allow a person to exit the work force? My thoughts on this are that as a person ages in the work force - and they are encouraged to continue on for the social reasons that I have already indicated - and progress in years, the nature of their capacity to work could well change. Will the public service be able to adapt and modify to allow that ageing work force participant to alter their workload? What sort of structures do we have in place to allow that? We have to be more sympathetic and find different pathways and modification of duties to allow and accommodate that.
The other issue is the performance indicators. I would like a bit more elaboration on how this would be managed and how would we then exit the work force. It is those specific areas, minister, that I would appreciate just some clarification on. I believe that that is probably where the pressure will now fall in terms of management regimes and culture in looking after and responding to the needs of a senior Territorian who is currently in the public service and continuing on beyond 65 years.
The other aspect is that the culture in the work force sometimes does remove the legislative restriction to continuing on, and that is good. But then there is the perceptual and the attitudinal issues that need to be addressed. How do we change the work force to become more accepting, more encouraging and more sympathetic to those who have much to offer but perhaps not in the form of a 40 year old or a 30 year old, so that we can draw out the very best from those who are wishing to stay on? It is quite clear, and everyone would know, that the average age in Australia is increasing as it is in internationally. It is interesting to note that the trend in Australia that participation in the work force of those who are older is actually less than it is in the industrialised world. So, we do have a fair bit of ground to make up. I guess there is a particular issue in the Northern Territory where we, as a maturing community, are starting to understand the needs of senior Territorians in more significant way.
We also know that the cost of health and aged care will increase. We will have to respond and this is the first step in policy in assessing whether our superannuation will be sufficient as our work force ages, pensions will receive additional strains as we move forward, and of course, the real issue of labour supply for industry and our economy. What I see here in this legislative change is a response to the federal government’s inter-generational report which is a good thing, but it is not the end of it as I already indicated. We must keep a watchful eye on how this is managed through and beyond this. I understand the mechanisms would be there in the legislation but I do ask the minister to specifically clarify that aspect of the managing. Just walk through, if you could, a labour market participant in the public service continuing on and how they may have their tasks modified and responded to as the skills they have may not be able to be employed in the conventional way as they continue on into the work force, and at what stage and what mechanisms would be employed for them to depart the work force.
I reinforce that the contemporary issue in the Northern Territory is that the economy and the participation of those in the work force has decreased in 12 months by 5300. The unemployment rate in the Northern Territory has increased by 1.9% in 12 months and the participation rate has dropped by 2.3% in 12 months. These are the real issues that need to be addressed. I guess this is one small way at the end of the equation and allowing those to continue on in the work force, but really it is a short-term fix. This is not going to go to the heart of the issue. Nor will the vocational education training models that were indicated earlier. They will not go to the heart of the issue. They will just find ways of keeping and entering skilled labour into the work force and perhaps extending the useful working life of Territorians.
At a time when we should be having the high-water mark of participation in the labor force, when we have the railway here ready to be adding to our economy, the fundamental issue is why is it that we have the employment rate at a significantly lower rate? Why do we have reduced participation rates? Why do we have 5300 fewer jobs in the Northern Territory in 12 months, when this really should be the peak?
They are the fundamental issues. That is where we are going to be looking for the real fix. As I have already indicated, putting this into the national scheme, the issue of changing the compulsory age of retirement is really in response to social pressure and the changing nature of our society in Australia, and we are just coming into line with what is happening nationally. This will not be the end of it. There will be other policy initiatives that will roll out from this to respond to a change in our work force.
Madam Speaker I commend the minister on this legislation. The government has the support of the opposition.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, I will add a few comments from a medical perspective. I have had many approaches from people in my electorate and in Alice Springs asking me to support the extension of retirement age past 65 years. There was an article published in The Australian probably 12 or 18 months ago which stated that in 1900 the average Australian would die at around 43 or 45 years of age. After the Second World War, with the discovery of sulphur and penicillin, people were living to about 65 years. At the turn of the century, it was anticipated that people will be living probably to about 80 years of age. So, over this hundred years, life span has literally doubled.
Having said that, obviously as people grow older and live longer, and medical care being so much better this last 20 years as compared to the previous 80 years, people can physically perform better, their intellect remains reasonably intact and, as a consequence of that, they remain very productive people in our society. They have the experience gained over 40, 50, 60 years of their lives and they can contribute productively to the wellbeing of our society. For that reason, it is important to encourage senior Territorians to continue to contribute their skills and wide range of ideas, albeit sometimes a little staid as we grow older, to the benefit of society.
It is important also to encourage our 65 year olds to remain in the work force. The member for Blain mentioned our welfare program in this country. Australia is one of a few countries in the world where our senior Territorians are supported by a very strong welfare system and is highly envied by others. However, with the ageing population in Australia, we are going to see more people depending on welfare if they are not self-funded retirees. The bill for the nation is going to be very significant. If we can keep people working well past their 65th year, obviously the welfare bill will be ameliorated to a large degree.
For those reasons, it is important to support the bill. It is great to see that the government has introduced it. I had suggested to the CLP that we should consider this as policy to be developed. It is great that the government has done this. I strongly support it. I encourage our 65 year olds to look seriously at being productive members of our community and contribute their wisdom and knowledge so that we can all benefit.
Madam SPEAKER: Any further contributions from members? Before you do conclude, minister, I am pleased to support your bill also, as it gives me great comfort to not have to retire next week.
Dr Toyne: Happy birthday, Madam Speaker.
Mr STIRLING (Employment, Education and Training): You would be pleased, Madam Speaker, that it has the support of the opposition, and I appreciate that support too. I also say happy birthday for next week.
It does bring me to the point where it is okay for the member for Blain to say we actually support this bill rather than to say we are not going to oppose it. It just seemed to be too much and too hard for the member responsible for this legislation to openly say, ‘Yes, we embrace this legislation, we support it’. The member for Greatorex also made the point that they were going to put it in policy and do it. I am a bit surprised that it did not occur in the later years of the previous government, because certainly I was getting representation, very early after becoming minister responsible for this area, from people who simply did not want to retire. They loved their job, they were good at their job, and nor did the people they were working with want them to be forced out the door simply because they had turned 65 years.
It has taken probably a bit longer than I would have wished to get this in place; there were a number of things obviously that had to be worked through.
Transition arrangements from about September next year have already seen some 19 people who are now 65 years and over out there happily working in the public service who previously would have had to retire, with a few very narrow exceptions to that general rule. It always struck me, I suppose, that no one went to a High Court judge, or any judge for that matter, and tapped them on the shoulder. You are simply not allowed to. They are allowed to go on until either they die or such time as they see fit to put their hand up. Federal politicians go on - Menzies was 72 years. There are any number of examples where this was entirely discriminatory, where there were sections of the work force and the community who simply did not have these retirement provisions.
In the sense of the large chunk of Australian population – that is the baby boomers moving through – it is again, I suppose, a concession to the baby boomer generation, the generation that has really had it all, and will continue to have it all, by sheer strength of size in the population overall. So, it does respond to that, but it does remove that discrimination. If we look across different sectors of the work force in the Northern Territory, even though we remain the youngest jurisdiction in Australia by median age and average age - the average age of teachers is 46, 47 years; if you go through some of the metal trades, they are close to 50 years - there are certain weaknesses in our labour market when you start looking across the age profile, occupation by occupation.
The member for Blain asked some questions in relation to superannuation and how people will go funding their retirement and the rest of their life beyond work from herein. Superannuation will not cover everybody, depending on what occupation or what job they have held, and what level of superannuation they have contributed. Those on lower incomes, with only the minimum legal requirement being deposited into their superannuation account by their employer, simply will not survive without some form of pension benefit from the federal government. However, you would expect that those coming behind us, the generations behind the baby boomers, ought be, into the future, pretty well self-sufficient with the levels of compulsory superannuation. Although you would think they would need to be topped up with the minimum required by employers which now probably needs to be increased to allow …
Madam SPEAKER: Excuse me, we have a stranger in the House. Would you please immediately …
Mr STIRLING: … probably needs to be increased to allow full self-funding.
I will just put on the record some of the overseas longevity studies that have been done in relation to older workers, and picked up by different groups, particularly in England. They actually went out of their way to encourage employers to take these particular older-aged workers on and then monitor them very closely over a period of years from the point of view of how they went at their job - obviously sick leave, productivity on the job. The trends were amazing. In their ability in the particular job - particularly in the public relations area if they were in a hardware store dealing with the public - the levels of experience that they were able to bring to those positions; the level of trust that the consumers and the shoppers had in the particular person because of their level of experience and ability to talk about any range of products from their own personal experience, was outstanding and they got a terrific loyalty. Sick leave was pretty well non-existent. They were using that study to try to market older workers in response to the age discrimination that certainly exists in the labour market. If you know people who, once they are in their 40s - 45 and on - and they lose their job it can be very difficult to get back in to the work force because there is very much age discrimination existing across employers.
In relation to how the public service handles it from a management point of view - and that is what it is it is: a management question - the Public Service Commissioner, CEOs and managers are already being required to look at this question, particularly where there are already 19 of these people continuing to stay on. At the bottom line it requires a attitudinal change from all those responsible to say, ‘Yes, we are going to embrace these older workers and they are going to continue to stay with us in the workplace’. It will mean, of course, greater access to flexible work practices so that you might stage an individual’s retirement so that they go from full-time work to part-time work at their calling. So, you phase that retirement stage in.
There has to be a much closer look - and by the federal government as well - at the rules applying to superannuation. We all know of many examples of people at 54 years and just short of their 55th birthday, who retire so as to obtain the maximum available under their Commonwealth superannuation. If they did not, it would take them probably another six or seven years in the work force to get back to that same level of package of superannuation that they would have if they had retired pre-55 years. Many of those people go back to work at the same job on a consultancy basis, costing the employer far more than they did as an employee on the books. Those sorts of penalties need to be closely looked at, and those anomalies eradicated where possible.
In relation to those management issues we were talking about: the flexibility, the attitudinal change required, the retraining where necessary, where practical and where possible, and the redeployment to other forms of employment - again, they are management questions and career management of the individual involved. Most managers are welcoming those moves and it is a question that they will have to look at and pick up.
Madam Speaker, I thank the members for Millner, Blain and Greatorex for their comments. I am pleased, as you are, to see this legislation go through. However, I would urge the member for Blain in future, if the opposition is supporting the bill, say so - just say so.
Mr Mills: I am sorry, wrong words. We do support it.
Mr STIRLING: There is nothing wrong. I stood there throughout my 11 years in opposition …
Mr Mills: I thought I said that. I will check the Hansard.
Mr STIRLING: … and said loudly, ‘We support this bill’. Nothing wrong with that. They should not be ashamed of it. You do not get criticised for supporting good, solid government legislation as is the case. So, do not be ashamed, be proud. Just stand up and say, ‘Yes, we support this legislation’ rather than the niggardly, miserly, little, ‘We will not be opposing this legislation’. There is a vast different between those terms. I encourage the member to look to his language. I thank them for their support.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr STIRLING (Employment, Education and Training)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
PLUMBERS AND DRAINERS LICENSING AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 163)
(Serial 163)
Continued from 19 June 2003.
Mr BALDWIN (Daly): Madam Speaker, this falls under my shadow responsibilities. At the outset, I thank the minister for briefings on this bill and a similar bill that I see comes up at No 8 on the Notice Paper to do with electrical workers and contractors. Both amendment bills arise from the NCP review that was carried out on these two areas - the plumbers and drainers and the electrical contractors. I understand there was some hold up because a general review of this bill was foreshadowed, but because the general review will follow at a later date in conjunction with major amendments to the Building Act it was decided to go with the NCP review recommendations as we see them here outlined in this bill.
The bill does a number of things: recommending that national competency based approach to qualifications be recognised; that the Power and Water representation on the board be reviewed and replaced by a representative from the agency administering the Building Act; and it also brings into play new sections that give the board the ability to explicitly recognise national competency based approach trades qualifications and the application process.
Generally speaking, we have no problem with these amendments, particularly in the case of the amendments which go to a clear appeals process, which is another part of this bill, and providing information on notices where decisions are made by the board in respect to applications for licensing, either as a journeyman or an advanced tradesman, in this case, of plumbers and obviously if the board decides not to either grant a license or renew a license.
The issue that we do have, though, is one that has been raised within these two trade sectors by those who are currently at work and those who are licensed tradesman but are not working. The minister would be aware of this because I have raised it in the form of a letter for the electrical side – which he has replied to and I thank him for that – and that is that for the journeyman in the case of plumbers and for the A grade electrician which now is going to be called an unrestricted electrician – the need to undergo competency tests, if you like, by the board to ensure that their levels of competency are maintained. The argument is not against having a national competency based program. No one disputes that. It is the thought that you need to go through an apprenticeship, be awarded a license – which has happened up until this point – and renewal is a given in most cases. There has always been the provision for the board to have a look at past experience, but I and many others believe that there is a shift now. It comes by way of self-certification that has crept into these trades over the last decade.
Now, without inspectors inspecting the work of these two trades in particular, self-certification means that the contractor can self-certify their work and the only way the licensing authority can check it is by way of audits. The view is that, to maintain good quality work, you need to ensure that competence and skills are maintained. That is a fair approach. It is hard to argue against. Perhaps the argument should be: has self-certification worked and why are we shifting to look at competency levels of licensed tradespeople rather than the people who are working in an unlicensed manner? I note that the whole premise is based on national competency-based schemes. I looked at what other states are doing and that is varied, as you would expect. I, for one, would love to see a scheme across these two trades, in particular, that was a standardised licensing requirement.
I declare an interest: as you know, I am a licensed electrician. I was a licensed contractor - I am not sure if that has been renewed, actually. I did my trade in the ACT, so I qualified for an ACT licence. However, at that time, the skills level was maintained by the New South Wales authority so I also qualified for a New South Wales A grade licence. When you move from state to state, you have to reapply and demonstrate your qualifications. I would love to see something that recognises, irrespective of where you do your trade, the skill and you are issued with one license that carries you nationally. We all operate under the same Australian standards. There are no particular differences, and that could be taken up by notices by jurisdictions to be aware of rather than having different licences.
I will talk about plumbers in other states because I know the debate is coming up on electrical at some later date. In Victoria, if you have been previously licensed, you can reinstate by filling in a reinstatement form and paying a fee. Simple as that. In New South Wales, if you do not get around to renewing your licence on time, you have to pay an extra fee. If your licence expires and you do not renew it by the due date, you can only restore it within three months. After that time, you have to apply for a new licence as a new applicant. In Western Australia, a plumber’s licence is issued for one year. It may be issued providing a plumber’s course or a four-year apprenticeship has been completed. There is no requirement to have been practising as a plumber. A new licence may be issued several years after one has expired, providing earlier qualifications can be shown. In South Australia, plumbers who can show a recognised certificate or previously held licence can simply reapply for a licence with no refresher course requirement. In Tasmania, provided that a three-yearly registration fee is paid, licences are for life. In Queensland, licences can be renewed if the application is received up to 14 days after expiry and a renewal fee paid. There is no requirement for skills or competencies to be assessed at this point. Licences can be reinstated if the application is received within 12 months after expiry and the renewal and reinstatement fees are paid. There are no requirements for skills and competencies to be assessed. That is how the various states do it.
It is all very well to say that we will maintain these things. However, if it is not being addressed nationally, I find it hard to understand why you require someone who has been through years and years of training, and I have no objection if you are the contractor, in the case of advanced tradesman or electrical contractor, that perhaps there are skills and competency levels that need to be shown. I think that somebody who has done an apprenticeship should be given a licence to operate as part of the skills that they have learnt in that trade.
That is the issue that has been raised across both these trade sectors, and it was sufficient enough in the electrical area for a number of people to contact me, and enough of a concern for the Electrical Workers and Contractors Licensing Board to put out a bulletin that starts by stating the board understands that some workers may not support the requirement for skills maintenance.
It is a concern out there. I am not sure that people who are either licensed and not working in the industry, or licensed and working in the industry, are sufficiently aware of the impact that these changes will have. I know they are getting notices on renewal, and there have been some forums in the major regional centres. There is an argument that ‘if I need to do an up-skilling course, where is it available?’ It is available, for instance, through the TCA. How expensive is it to get into a regional area? Some enquires have been made by various electricians which suggest that it is going to be fairly onerous to get it into some regional areas, let alone remote areas, and that travel will be required to go to Darwin to undertake this course, and at some considerable cost. It is not the issue of a new application, or if you have been out of the trade for some time, that you would have to undergo some testing. However, if you have kept your licences current, the issue is whether or not you should be made to undergo assessment for at least the tradesman certificate level, A grade tradesman.
They are the issues that have been raised. I would like to see, preferably - and I know you are probably not going to like the suggestion much - some deference of these bills and writing to all of the licensed contractors and tradespeople under the Plumbers and Drainers Licensing Act and the Electrical Workers and Contractors Act, notifying them of the changes. I know they are getting them at renewal, they have had some forums and all the rest of it, but there is still quite a bit of uncertainty out there. In some cases it will mean that people who like to, from time to time, provide work in these areas, may not have the opportunity now without doing complete refresher courses every time the term of their licence is up. That is what is bothering them. They have gone through apprenticeships, they have done a trade; some of your own people on that side have done a trade. They think, by right, they should be able to operate in that trade. The licence is something that is the reward, is the ticket. I know that in other professions, for instance, they have to upgrade their competency levels, there is no argument about that.
However, it is just, I guess, a change of a culture and the need to always now supply documentation that says, ‘Tell us why you are still competent to do work in this area’. It is like your driver’s licence; every time you go for renewal, they do not ask you: ‘Show us why you are still competent’. Except for an eye test, there is nothing about retirement age, and nothing about whether you are still a skilled driver. It is that right that you get to hold this licence to operate, in that case, a vehicle, and, in this case, a pair of yellow pliers, a wrench, or whatever. That is what is upsetting.
It is not an argument that can be forcefully run because no one argues against having the right competency. It is really the shift against, ‘What about the blokes who are working in the industry who are not licensed? I can name three of them’. That is the sort of thing you hear, and you have heard it. You say: ‘Well, give me their names’. Well, they are not going to. Rather than hitting the people who have done their trade qualifications and making it onerous for them, give them a break and let the renewals of that nature take place. Contractor’s licences and advanced, fair enough, they are the ones whom most electricians work for anyway. So, that is the argument. It is something that is dear to my heart, obviously, as a licensed electrician, and has been raised with me by both plumbers and electricians. They would like to see some level, like the other states, where your renewal is by right unless you let it lapse for some period of time. Minister, they are the comments and I ask you to take them on board.
______________
Visitors
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise of the presence in the gallery of Years 8 and 10 Legal Studies students from Sanderson High School, accompanied by their teacher, Ms Carol Sawyer. On behalf of all members, I extend you a warm welcome.
_____________
Mr VATSKALIS (Lands and Planning): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Daly for his comments. I take his comments into consideration because I am aware he was a licensed electrician, and I understand the way he came through the trade. I want to assure him that I will be writing to all the licence holders advising them of the changes. If they bring to our attention any issues of concern, I will take them into account. I want to assure him that the same thing will happen with the electricians bill that is coming soon, and some changes we are going to be announcing.
As you are aware, the Plumbers and Drainers Licensing Act was reviewed in accordance with the National Competition Policy, and the review identified that a general review of the Plumbers and Drainers Licensing Act was also required. That general review was delayed so we decided to hold it back so it would take place together with the review of the Building Act, and to implement some of the recommendations for the NCP review.
The Plumbers and Drainers Licensing Act is an important act because it provides for a control over the plumbing industry workers, to establish work standards and practices in order to protect the public interest, health and safety, and also to provide the possibility for Territory workers who want to work in other states. The truth is now we are moving away from a school-based education to a competency-based certification qualification. Competency has now become uniform throughout Australia, so whatever happens in the ACT will happen in Western Australia and in the Northern Territory. It is also very true that we are moving to a national legislation and we should have one not only with trades, but with professional people. For example, we have the Australia New Zealand Food Authority Act that applies throughout Australia. In relation to some of the building trades, we have the building code of Australia which provides national standards.
The member for Daly spoke about electricians mainly, and the plumbers. We will have that discussion when I bring the electricians act review into this House. Both have powers to assess competencies at renewal; it is in the existing act. It is not a new requirement to review competencies; it has always been in place. The licence is issued for three years and is renewable, as in other states. The NCP review recommends changing anti-competitive measures. However, in this case, because of the nature of the act, especially to protect the public health and interest, the National Competition Policy review found that licensing, while it is restrictive and probably anti-competitive, should be maintained and retained because there are obvious benefits from it and for that reason is left in the act. At the same time, the review recommended the act to specifically state its objectives and the new section 2A establishes the objectives of the act.
Apart from that, the NCP review recommended that the national competency-based approach for certification rather than only trades school qualification, and that the national competency based approach should be recognised by the act. The new sections 22, 22A, 23 and 24 put the base for recognition of national competencies. Another recommendation was that the appeal mechanism relating to a ‘fit and proper person’ in the act should be clear and accessible in order to be retained and that is the reason why we provided sections 36, 36A, 37 and 37A in that they provide an appeal process through the local courts.
The members of the board have been looked at and certain adjustments have been made. They changed the Power and Water Corporation, which is now is a government owned corporation rather than a government instrumentality. The comments by the member about the updating of qualifications, renewal of registration and communication with a relevant tradesman are very important. I will look into it and will make sure that all the licensed people are notified, not only about the changes to the act at the time of licence renewal, but immediately the act is proclaimed. We will look into the courses available to people – not only in Darwin but also outside Darwin – especially courses required to update their skills and qualifications, bearing in mind there is significant new developments in the trade - new equipment, new ways of doing things that are part now of the Australian Building Code which are supposed to be used throughout Australia.
Madam Speaker, I again thank the member for his comments. As I said before, I know very well his professional background and certainly comments from people who work in the trade, in a similar trade, are always welcome.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr VATSKALIS (Lands and Planning)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
O’Sullivan Report into Police Resources
O’Sullivan Report into Police Resources
Mr HENDERSON (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): Madam Speaker, I rise today to outline how the Martin Labor government will implement the O’Sullivan Report with a $75m Building our Police Force plan, the largest ever injection of resources into the Northern Territory police force. This report, and the government’s comprehensive response to it, represents a landmark in the history of the Northern Territory and its police force. It is clear from the response I have received since last Thursday that the community, and police officers in particular, are overwhelmingly pleased with this report and the government’s comprehensive response to it.
Today is an opportunity for members to learn more about the report and the government’s $75m plan, and for members to place on the record their views. The announcements I made last week represent an unprecedented injection of funds into the Northern Territory police force. Above all else, this package will deliver 200 extra police on the streets by the end of 2006. This will be achieved primarily by the government providing sufficient funding so that the police can recruit and train 120 constables a year. The O’Sullivan Report provides an independent assessment of the needs of our police force and its 112 recommendations provide a road map for building the strength and capacity of the force.
As I said in February, the outcome of this review would be made public and that is exactly what has happened. The full report and a summary are available to all on the web. Materials have been widely distributed throughout the community. The opposition spokesperson and independent members received the report in full last Thursday. Interest has been high. In fact, I am told there were technical difficulties on Thursday due to the large numbers of police members down-loading the material from the web site.
The report was commissioned by the government in February 2003. The expertise, credibility and independence of Mr O’Sullivan is beyond reproach. The feedback I have received from the community, and police officers especially, about the way he went about his task has been exceptional. The task he had was massive. Over four months, he and his team spoke to over 1200 Territorians and travelled the length and breadth of this great Territory. The comprehensive report he prepared is testament to him and all those who contributed to it. The Territory is indebted to Mr O’Sullivan and his team for their efforts.
Mr O’Sullivan makes several key findings about how the police force has arrived at where it is today. This is a discussion that cannot and will not be swept under the carpet. To know how to assist an organisation, the community and elected representatives must, I believe, understand how and why it has the problems it has in the first place.
Mr O’Sullivan found that the Northern Territory police force was run down over a decade, with under funding and staff shortages. He found that a recruitment freeze from 1991 to 1994 left the Northern Territory police with a shortage of experienced sergeants. This recruitment freeze, which was brought about by funding and broad policy decisions, which must have had the consent of the government of the day, went for three years and 11 months in the early 1990s. It means the force now has a serious shortage of sergeants and senior sergeants; officers of this rank provide the on-ground supervision and leadership that is so important. The finding of O’Sullivan in this area can be found at page 24 of the report, and I quote:
- Not only was there an impact on absolute numbers of police personnel during the years 1990-94 as
attrition rates eroded the membership base, but this four year gap had moved progressively through
the organisation so that there is currently a shortage of personnel with 10-13 years of service.
Mr O’Sullivan found the number of police available for operations has always been fewer than the number of police positions recorded on paper. There has been some discussion in the Assembly over recent times about the strength of the police force during the 1990s. This finding is important because it puts to bed much of the nonsense that has been espoused by members opposite. It also reinforces the position articulated by the former commissioner, Brian Bates, in correspondence tabled during the Estimates hearing earlier this year. In that letter, the former commissioner complained underfunding in the late 1990s meant he did not have the real police to do the job, but what he had were ‘police on paper’. Commissioner Bates wrote:
- This increase of police with no funding for an increase in civilian support staff has continually posed a
problem, as already mentioned, without adequate funds for civilian support staff police will have to carry
out more administrative duties to the detriment of their operational duties.
The former commissioner went on:
- I again restate that the only civilianisation carried out to date has occurred by leaving police positions
vacant but retaining the establishment numbers on paper.
Commissioner Bates’ observations were backed up entirely by this finding of Mr O’Sullivan, which makes clear what really happened in the years following the recruitment freeze in the early 1990s. Whilst the rhetoric from the government of the day was overflowing, the reality on the ground was far less impressive. The numbers on paper looked good, but they were never matched by operational strength.
Mr O’Sullivan found that long-term, police recruitment rates have failed to take into account the rate of police leaving the force. The sickening part to this finding is that it uncovers that the previous government did not implement the key finding of the McAulay/Bowe Report. McAulay/Bowe, on the whole, made a number of relatively less substantial recommendations. It did, however, make one very substantial recommendation relating to recruitment. It urged the government of the day to ensure recruitment levels took into account anticipated attrition. Mr O’Sullivan found that this never happened. The key recommendation of McAulay/Bowe was never implemented.
Mr O’Sullivan found the maximum numbers of constables the Northern Territory police force can recruit and train each year is 120. This finding is pertinent because it puts a reality test next to everything politicians of any ilk want to say on the topic of police numbers. It is simply not possible to produce police overnight. Suitable applicants have to be found, they have to be trained and they have to be supervised when they leave the police college. Taking all factors into account, Mr O’Sullivan found the maximum capacity of the Northern Territory police to recruit, train and absorb new constables is 120 a year.
Significantly, Mr O’Sullivan found that the Northern Territory police force is led by a professional commissioner and staffed by dedicated men and women. This must be remembered at all times. Over the past two years, and even as late as last Friday, we have seen many unreasonable attacks launched by members of this Assembly at the commissioner and attacks on the efforts of the police. An absolute key finding in the O’Sullivan Report, and it is wholeheartedly endorsed by this government, is that we have a fine commissioner and a fine body of men and women in our police force. The time for negativity is over. The time for getting behind the commissioner and the police members must start now.
In summary, the damning findings of the O’Sullivan Report is that the combination of under-funding, and the previous government’s recruitment freeze, has meant our police have been unable to deliver many of the basic services expected by Territorians and the Martin Labor government. These are the lessons from history. These are the things we must learn from. The mistakes are ones that must not be repeated, so that in 10 years’ time another government will not inherit the type of mess passed on to this government by our predecessors. The government said it would act on the O’Sullivan Report and it has. The Martin government’s $75m Building Our Police Force plan is the largest ever injection of funds into the Northern Territory police. By year it will see: in 2003-04, $9.8m more to the police; in 2004-05, $16.4m; in 2005-06, $20.5m; and in 2006-07, $28.3m more to the police.
These funds will enable
200 more police on the beat by the end of 2006;
recruitment and training of the maximum number of constables – 120 each year;
doubling the number of constables entering the NT police force;
more Territorians recruited to the NT police force;
more police back to core policing duties;
more police patrols;
more than 80 extra civilian support staff to get police back on the beat; and
improved living and working conditions to keep our experienced police in the
Northern Territory.
The bottom line - this government wants to see more police on the streets, faster police response times and improved levels of service for Territorians.
I will now break down the initiatives in more detail. The immediate priority of the government’s Building Our Police Force plan is to get more police into the Territory community for core policing duties - 200 more police on the street by the end of 2006. This will be achieved through a range of initiatives. As I outlined earlier, the O’Sullivan Report found that the maximum number of constables the police can recruit in a year is 120; that is recommendation 83. This will mean more constables entering the police force than ever before. There will also be more recruit squads than ever before. In 1998 and 1999, there was one recruit squad each year. In 2000, 2001 and 2002, there were two squads each year. This year, the plan is that there will be four recruit squads – one graduating next Thursday. In 2004 and beyond, there will be five squads each year.
Under Building Our Police Force, the government will meet this recruitment rate, more than doubling the current number of recruit squads and the number of constables entering our police force. Taking into account the current rate of police leaving the Northern Territory, this record recruitment rate will deliver 150 new constables to serve Territorians by the end of 2006. The government will also recruit an extra 28 Aboriginal Community Police Officers and two extra Police Auxiliaries. I am sure members are noticing those advertisements in the paper at the moment.
As a short-term measure to bridge the gap and experience left by the 1991-94 recruitment freeze, the government will implement Mr O’Sullivan’s recommendation to contract interstate sergeants on a temporary basis. It is expected around 25 sergeants and senior sergeants will be sourced through this scheme. These officers will add to the experience base of our police force, providing additional support and guidance for constables as they gain experience on the job. Discussions will take place with the Northern Territory Police Association to ensure suitable arrangements for this scheme. Mr O’Sullivan recognises this temporary measure will be a sensitive issue amongst serving police. The government would not accept this recommendation but for the persistent representations from many, including the Northern Territory Police Association, that the shortage of sergeants is a real problem. In addition, Mr O’Sullivan makes it clear that this initiative is only designed as a temporary measure.
The government has made clear its desire to see more Territorians join and remain serving in the police. The lateral entry program is only a measure designed to bridge the gap caused by the mistakes of the past. I am confident that the understandable and legitimate concerns of serving police can be addressed and accommodated. More than 80 civilian administrative, technical and professional roles will be funded to address the current lack of support for our police, making sure police are able to get back to the basics of policing.
This injection will allow for new support mechanisms, such as the creation of a PROMIS administration unit with civilians employed to support officers with patrol-related paperwork. PROMIS, the computer system chosen by the previous government in 1999, has been a huge issue for police on the ground. This new administrative support should further the government’s objective of police spending the maximum amount of their time on the street and providing direct service to Territorians.
Civilian professionals will also be employed to do some of the jobs currently done by police, seeing more police return to the beat. The exercise of freeing up police contrasts with that undertaken under Planning for Growth in the late 1990s. Under Planning for Growth, civilianisation took place, but the Northern Territory police were never funded for the extra positions that were created. In Commissioner Bates’s letter he observed:
- Without this funding, administrative support staff cannot be employed and police will have to carry out
even more administrative duties to the detriment of operational policing.
This, of course, led to police needing to shuffle money away from operational areas to cover the civilian posts that had been created. By contrast, this process will see police allocated the funds they need to see police freed up.
The Leader of the Opposition has curiously belittled this massive and record expansion of the resources for the police. To put what he says about police resources in context, prior to the last election, the Leader of the Opposition, who had led a party that had been in power for 26 years, said that the Northern Territory police needed an extra 60 police, an increase of 15 a year. Under the plan I am outlining, this government will be recruiting 120 constables a year, which should result in a nett increase of around 50 constables per year. On top of that, we will be having other recruitment initiatives and rearrangements of roles that, in combination, will result in an extra 200 police being available for core policing duties by the end of 2006. The contrast between 15 police officers a year and what this government will be doing is clear: 200 more police on the street by the end of 2006 will mean more police than ever before patrolling our suburbs, towns, and communities.
Some of the things this will enable the commissioner to do are identified in the report:
in Darwin: three new patrols, including a foot/bicycle patrol for Darwin’s northern suburbs;
a new foot patrol for Darwin Central Business District; an extra 24-hour vehicle patrol for
Darwin’s CBD and inner suburbs;
in Palmerston: two extra general duties patrols;
in Katherine: additional uniformed police for general duties;
in Tennant Creek: additional uniformed police for general duties; additional police for
crime investigations;
in Alice Springs: additional uniformed police for general duties; and
in remote communities: more general duties police and Aboriginal community police officers
and more police available for relief duty from nearby centres.
I emphasise that this unprecedented boost in resources will benefit both the towns and the bush.
For too many years, the rate of experienced officers leaving the Northern Territory has been too high. The government tasked Mr O’Sullivan to investigate the issues of retention and attrition of Northern Territory police as part of the terms of reference for the assessment. Reasons for leaving identified by the O’Sullivan Report include:
the impact of over a decade of under-funding and stretched resources;
decline in benefits and working conditions over the last decade;
standards of police housing in urban centres;
targeted recruitments of the Northern Territory’s talented and highly skilled police
by other states; and
officers returning to their interstate home towns.
The government will action a range of initiatives to address this issue. The stretching of resources, including the unacceptable levels of overtime, will ease as the strength in the Northern Territory police force is built.
In 1999, the previous government removed death and disability insurance cover for new police officers. Recognising the dangers involved in policing, all other jurisdictions provide police with this protection. Following discussions with the police association, the Martin Labor government will introduce an appropriate form of cover for police and their families.
The standard of police housing in major urban centres has been unsuitable for too long and the government is taking action. The O’Sullivan Report identifies a range of possible solutions, including Defence Housing Authority providing services; the government taking out head leases on properties; and upgrading facilities in existing houses. All viable options will be examined to address this important issue and the Northern Territory Police Association will be actively involved in the consultation process. In line with the report’s recommendations, Aboriginal community police officers will be provided with the same housing and remote area allowance entitlements that apply to other police officers. Greater emphasis will be placed on attracting Territorians from all sections of our community to the Northern Territory police force.
The Martin Labor government believes that, generally speaking, Territorians have a greater understanding of the challenges facing Northern Territory police, and importantly, they will be more likely to stay in the Territory and for longer. The priority of the government’s Building our Police Force plan is to see more police on the streets. At the same time the government has recognised that, where funds allow, capital items and equipment must be improved. To ensure police officers have the necessary and appropriate policing equipment as part of Building our Police Force, the government will fund the $2m capital shortfall in the recurrent police budget identified by the O’Sullivan Report enabling the scheduled maintenance and replacement of vehicles, radios and communications equipment, station equipment and furniture, small motors for boats, safety requirements on vehicles, minor forensic equipment, and surveillance equipment.
In addition to the on-going maintenance and replacement of existing capital works, the government will provide funds for an expanded road safety campaign through improved driver safety education and awareness, and upgraded road safety equipment. The government has also allocated funds for new inshore patrol boats and has agreed to a phased schedule to boost inshore water patrol capabilities. The government has made boosting the human resources the priority of the $75m plan. The capital expenditures I have identified have also received priority. Other capital items referred to by Mr O’Sullivan will be considered in the context of future budgets.
The government has mapped out the broad policy directions it wants to take the police and has funded the items I have outlined. Reporting to the minister, the Commissioner of Police has been charged with the responsibility of implementing the operational aspects of the O’Sullivan Report. A steering committee along the lines of that recommended in the report will be established to assist with this implementation process. The commissioner will chair the committee which will involve the Northern Territory Police Association, the Commissioner for Public Employment, Treasury, and others as required.
I am pleased to advise that on Monday morning I met with the commissioner and we discussed the implementation action. I know the Police Association executive is busy considering the report and its implications. The first meeting of the Implementation Committee to be chaired by Commissioner White is scheduled for Thursday next week.
The government recognises policing demands can change rapidly. The Police Commissioner has the discretion to advise the government on changed operational circumstances and the subsequent changes in resource requirements. Territorians will want to see how the progress of Building our Police Force is tracking. As the O’Sullivan Report found the community has experienced the key recommendation of the 1997 McAulay/Bowe Report never being implemented. This fact says something in relation to the credibility of the members opposite, but more importantly it says to all those associated with implementing this report, including government, the Commissioner, the Northern Territory Police Association and other stakeholders that the community must be kept informed on how things are tracking. The community will not stand for the ‘trust us’ approach of the previous era because patently that trust was breached.
To that end, I have committed the government to providing reports to the community and the Legislative Assembly on progress being made. This will include performance indicators, milestones and details of the numbers of officers entering and leaving the police force and the number of recruits in training.
I place on the record my appreciation to the Chief Minister and my colleagues in government for their support to police as evidenced by this package. For any government to commission a truly independent report on such a sensitive area as police resources, and to commit to implementing its findings in such an outstanding way, is exceptional. The feedback from members of the community, organisations like the Alice Springs Town Council, the Police Association, individual police officers with whom I have spoken since last Thursday, to the government’s approach and response to the report has been overwhelmingly positive.
There is relief that Territorians now have a government prepared to seek out the truth and to share that truth with Territorians. But most importantly, Territorians are relieved they now have a government prepared to act and put the funds into building our police force to the strength we need. At the start of this process the government had before it two stark choices: to stick with the old ways of underfunding police, or to embark on an ambitious plan for the future. We have a fine body of police members who are eager to be provided with more and better resources. Mr O’Sullivan has given us the launching pad into a new era. It is an exciting time. I know we have the backing of Territorians to build this police force into something better than what we inherited. It needs to be done, it can be done and today I have outlined how it will be done.
Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.
Mr BURKE (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, you hear so often in media reports, or any commentary that the Labor government makes on any issue of concern to the Northern Territory, that it is the fault of the previous CLP government. The ministerial statement I just heard emphasised that.
As I was listening to the minister carry on, I was thinking of that wonderful line in the movie Traffic where the new boss of the Drug Enforcement Agency is being recruited. He goes to the old boss, who is about to be sacked because his agency is not performing up to standard, and, as the old boss is about to leave, he gives the new boss, Michael Douglas, a little bit of advice. He says: ‘When I first came into this job, the previous boss gave me this advice - write two letters. I have put the two letters in the cabinet and you should look at them’. He opened the first letter, and it said: ‘Blame everything on the previous boss’. The outgoing boss said: ‘Things went along wonderfully and when I got into real trouble and I was about to be sacked, I went down to the cabinet and opened the second letter. The second letter said: ‘Sit down and write two letters.’
That is the classic example of this Labor government. They cannot live up to the responsibilities that they have inherited as the government in the Northern Territory, now over two years in office, cannot accept that fact that they have the handles of power and they have to implement the power, authority and trust that Territorians have given them, but they have to do it in a way that is responsible.
Territorians are not interested in this blame calling across the Chamber, that everything that has happened that maybe bad is always the fault of the previous government. What Territorians want to know is what this government is going to do, and to own up honestly to the situation with which you have presented yourself. The best way to address the ministerial statement, which essentially is a recounting of a couple of major issues of the O’Sullivan Report – it is a very lengthy report – but ends up with this classic statement:
- At the start of this process the government had before it two stark choices: to stick with the old
ways of underfunding police, or to embark on an ambitious plan for the future.
I reckon there must be a school. There is a school in the Labor Party that says: ‘Whatever you do, blame the previous government’ and there is another school in the Labor Party that says: ‘If you are a minister, whatever you do, blame the previous minister’. That is what the current police minister has said. We now have a courageous police minister who has come into this office. This courageous police minister has been presented with two stark choices: to stick with the old ways, or blaze a brand new trail for the future. Unfortunately, the old way is the Deputy Chief Minister who, when presented with this portfolio on assuming government, was also presented with a plea from the opposition, the Police Association and the public to do something about our police resources. In fact, do something courageous and implement an independent review, which was promised by the CLP prior to the last election as part of our policy platform.
Members interjecting.
Mr BURKE: The government members find that amusing. You might like to make reference to the Police Association because it was very aware of the promises that were given by both political parties prior to the last election. The promise in the political platform of the CLP was that immediately upon attaining government, we would commission a new, independent review that would leverage off the McAulay/Bowe review. In the context of the McAulay/Bowe Review, it is also worth emphasising to this current government as they rewrite history, it is not a courageous, new, ambitious thing that you have done solely as the new police minister and the new government, because it has been done before. It was done in the McAulay/Bowe report in 1996 …
Mr Stirling: Oh yes, the $75m worth - what a joke.
Mr BURKE: The Deputy Chief Minister says $75m. What we have yet to see from this Labor government is the colour of your money, and the result of any of your promises. The one thing we do know about a Labor government is, it is going to do this and it is going to do that, and when it eventually gets around to doing it, we will probably be into the next election.
If we are going to talk about the courageous act that has been done by this new government, the police minister has to be fair and say that courage has only come since he took over the portfolio. The previous police minister clearly, by this ministerial statement, did not have that courage. There is plenty on the record to show that; that the previous police minister did not believe a review was necessary. The previous police minister believed that the McAulay/Bowe Review had been implemented extremely well by the previous police commissioner, and to find the current police commissioner, who gained all the plaudits for this effort by the O’Sullivan Report, to praise his Chief Minister and himself in the wonderful way that they are now approaching this portfolio, is hypocrisy at least. I would also consider it to be, if I was the previous police minister, bloody offensive. One of the conventions that I hope exists in your current Labor government ministry is that when you pick up a portfolio, you pick up the portfolio in its entirety. You do not turn around and start blaming the previous minister of that portfolio for any of the warts that you might discover when you pick it up. That is essentially what this ministerial statement from the minister presents us with.
We have heard snippets of the O’Sullivan Report. It is a very lengthy report. Of course, many Territorians will not only not be able to read the report in its entirety, but will be dependent on the sorts of misinformation that is being put out by the government about that report and also the commentary that they might pick up from the Hansard. In that context, I intend to read a small part of the executive summary, because that summary really pulls together the essence of the report. It is important to read the executive summary. I do not resile from any criticism of the previous government in that at all. However, I do believe it needs to be put in context when the current minister and this current government use words such as ‘sickening’ in the way the police force was managed by the previous government.
I am quoting from the report:
Between 1991 and 1994, the Northern Territory police force experienced a recruitment freeze caused
by funding constraints and a decision by the police force to freeze recruit intakes rather than reduce
the number of established police positions. From 1995-96 to the present time the approved establishment
grew by 185 police personnel (117 police, 15 ACPO’s and 53 PAUX) but essential additional specialist
support and administrative resources including Forensics, Information Technology, the Police College and
the Air-wing were not formally approved as part of the establishment, resulting in unfunded supernumerary appointments of public servants. The assessment concluded that the current resource situation was historically based.
There is no doubt that the issue of bringing auxiliaries into the force, and the core funding of the whole of the force during that period 1991 to 1994 was a factor in the situation that we were presented with.
- Attrition rates within the police force within recent years have grown to the point where they are now
8%+, considered high compared to Australian average police service attrition rates of some 4%. The
local attrition rate currently exceeds the recruit intake by at least ten police personnel annually, and
because of funding constraints, the police force operates during any year with up to 100 vacant police
positions if recruits in training are excluded from the count. This situation arises because recruit
intakes have historically been regarded as part of the fully sworn police establishment and funding
of recruits results in less funding for established police positions.
If you then look at the resourcing history of the police, and it is in this context this notion of ‘sickening’ is quite wrong:
- Analysis of the financial resourcing history of the police force reveals that between 1996-97 and 2002-03
there was an addition of $30.5m to the police force budget to account for additional approved positions,
but that the cost of these resources over time was approximately $4.3m more per year than the additional
funds provided. The department sought and received budget supplementation of $4.2m on average per
year over the last seven years to cover these overruns.
Mr Kiely: That is that forward estimate you never counted, wasn’t it?
Mr Dunham: You cannot count.
Mr Kiely: Do not forget the PAC had a look at that.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: In the first instance, no one will deny that during 1991 to 1994 the introduction of auxiliaries created resourcing issues overall with police. However, clearly the report does provide ample evidence to show that the government was endeavouring to meet those resource complaints.
If you skip to the fact that Mr O’Sullivan is now reviewing police stations in the Northern Territory during the period of the review, after the Labor government had been in power for one year. He says this:
- Police establishment throughout the Territory were reviewed to assess how well resources had been
allocated to address a broad range of policing priorities. The assessment found that:
only 25% to 55% of the approved establishment was available for more than 50% of the
28 day rosters to perform policing tasks. For example, at Casuarina police station for the
January - February 2003 roster only 25 of the established 58 police personnel were available
for more than half of the rostered period.
at Katherine, only 20 of the established 38 were available. Actual police availability in a fully
resourced organisation should be at least 60% - 65% allowing for periods of leave, in-service
training and other absences. The assessment concluded that general duties police numbers
throughout the Northern Territory were quite inadequate to perform their role properly.
This is Mr O’Sullivan looking at the police force now under a Labor government. I emphasis that, because when you try to blame all of these problems on the previous government, check the Hansard, check your own transcripts. Either you were on top of your own portfolio areas or you were not, because the transcripts are clear in the statements made by ministers in this House. The current minister and the previous minister said that the police force was well and truly resourced, was recruiting adequately, that attrition rates were being held under control. The problems that the opposition were raising with regards to under-resourcing, high attrition rates, the lack of operational police in our police stations which were being scoffed at by the government, have now been brought out to be true by the McAulay/Bowe review.
Mr Henderson: O’Sullivan.
Mr BURKE: I cannot remember the number of times I have stood in this Chamber and talked about community opinion and again been scoffed at. We have had censure motions in this House, any number of attempts to bring to the government’s attention the perception of the community with regards to policing in our community and the effect that they were not having in our community, and were scoffed at. We were called irresponsible, we were called blame callers against the commissioner.
Mr Bonson: What did the O’Sullivan Report say?
Mr BURKE: What does Mr O’Sullivan say? It is worth reading. Community opinion - this is consulting with the community under a Labor government, under a government that has been in power now for the best part of two years. This is consulting with the community against a government that did not even want to have an independent review, and had to be dragged kicking and screaming to actually have one. This is what the community opinion says of policing under a Labor government:
- The assessment consulted widely with community groups and stakeholders who had a particular interest
in crime and law and order issues, including some of the recently established crime prevention councils
and committees. The general response received from the community particularly in the Darwin region but
also in other urban centres and some remote centres was that:
services were below an acceptable standard;
there was a concern that antisocial behaviour, crimes of violence and property crime
appeared to be on the increase and, in some cases, out of control especially in Darwin;
there was a reported discernible and rising level of fear, resentment and strongly
expressed anger at loss of lifestyle and safe public space;
there was a concern that uniformed police were not visible, that they were sometimes slow
to respond, and too thin on the ground to effectively deal with or follow up problems;
whilst there was strong support for police generally, there was increasing challenge and
questioning about the adequacy of police numbers, how well police were being deployed
and the effectiveness of their activities; and
some retailers confirmed that they no longer reported minor offences as their past
experiences confirmed that nothing could be done.
A member: Sounds like a censure motion!
Mr BURKE: Sounds like a censure motion, says the man with the driver. Sounds like a censure motion. I think you have probably had two censure motions in this House on those issues, and the reason I highlight it is that these are the same issues that this current government scoffed at. These were the issues that we raised in this House that needed addressing. These were the issues that we said needed to be addressed by an independent review and in all of the time you have been in government, until the point where we have this courageous, new minister who is now making a threshold step - one small step for man and one giant step for the Labor government under Minister Henderson who has now righted all the wrongs that existed in our society and says that only he and only his Labor government have been able to reconcile this and address …
Mr Henderson: Tell us what you did about crime?
Mr BURKE: Madam Speaker, let me begin by stating unequivocably that we support the recommendations of the …
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order! I think if we had less interjections and allowed the Leader of the Opposition to get on with his reply, then we would not have these provocative remarks. Member for Sanderson, less provocation, thank you.
Mr BURKE: Madam Speaker, the member for Sanderson is quite provocative! I thought to launch the Garden Show on Saturday after the Administrator’s wife has just launched it and declared it open is pretty provocative. We are all trying to be team – team work and friendly, but it was a bit offensive to the Administrator’s wife. I mean, a little bit of time in reconnaissance and preparation might help. And that is why we think you are on drugs!
Madam Speaker, can I say unequivocably that we support the recommendations of the O’Sullivan Report. This is a blue print to develop a police service that will serve Territorians for many years to come. It is a report that addresses the needs and concerns of both Territorians and the hard-working members of our police service. It shows the way forward. I commend the government for finally commissioning the report and for apparently accepting the recommendations. I also commend and thank Jim O’Sullivan and Peter Forster, and the team that helped them, for their effort and assessment. This is a report that was needed. It was one we promised to implement had we been re-elected, and is one that Territorians will be grateful that the government finally decided to commission 18 months after they were elected.
The Police Association certainly welcomes it. It has been calling for such an assessment for several years, and much of what the O’Sullivan Report recommends vindicates the stance that the association has taken for some years. If one thing can come out of this in a bipartisan way is the fact that in the case of the Police Association, I believe that it has operated on this issue not only responsibly but within the confines of its lobbying ability. The association has done an extremely good job and certainly I can only hope that the association representing that other arm of Police, Fire and Emergency Services, our firemen, gets that same courage to insist. I will certainly encourage and support them to have an independent review of the fire service conducted as well, because God knows they have a lot of problems too.
When the report was finally released more than six weeks after the government received it, I said that the CLP was fully committed to implementing its recommendations. I repeat that commitment now for the Parliamentary Record. And Madam Speaker, we should use this report to move on, to move forward. But unfortunately, with this statement, the government has been unable to do that. As the minister has outlined in his ministerial statement today, this government sees this report not as something that will benefit Territorians, but rather as something to use in its continuing policy of ‘blame everything on the CLP’. I am willing to stand here now and admit we did not get everything right, that previous CLP governments did make some mistakes as they sought to build and develop the Territory for the first 25 years of self-government. However, this Labor government has been in power for two years now and is still fixated on attacking the CLP. They still see everything in terms of ‘how can we blame the CLP?’
As I mentioned earlier, the government sat on this report for more than six weeks before releasing it publicly.
Mr Henderson interjecting.
Mr BURKE: Well, you did. You sat on it for more than six weeks before releasing it publicly, and it is worth …
Mr Henderson: One hundred and twelve recommendations to consider! $75m to find in the budget. Do it in two minutes?
Mr BURKE: I hope the Association takes note of this. In the interests of informed debate in this House, we still only have one copy of the report.
Mr Henderson: It is on the Net.
Mr BURKE: We have to down load it from the Net. We only received the report after the media release and conference. That was - and I will stand here firmly and say it - six weeks after government had received the report because the Deputy Chief Minister was issuing media releases in relation to it six weeks prior to its release.
Ms Lawrie: And you have a really good track record on that.
Mr Henderson: Absolutely.
Mr BURKE: Well, he did. The acting police minister, in your absence - I do not know whether you were playing golf or sick – issued a media release two weeks after government received the report in an attempt to score a few political points. In that media release, he said that the government would increase police numbers if that is the recommendation of the O’Sullivan Report. He then went on to use the same attack points that the police minister and the government have latched on to since the report was finally released. If that is open, honest and accountable government you, as usual, fail on that count.
As I said earlier, the former police minister, Deputy Chief Minister and member for Nhulunbuy, is left particularly vulnerable by this report. If we go back to November 2001, he was then police minister and when he announced the retirement of Police Commissioner Bates, I quote from his tribute in which he listed some of the highlights of Commissioner Bates’ time as Police Commissioner:
- … the instigation of the McAulay/Bowe review, which involved scrutiny of the budget and financial
requirements of the organisation and increasing the number of sworn Northern Territory police
members from 775 in 1994 to the current 940, which allows the Territory to have the best level of
resourcing on a per capita basis than anywhere in Australia …
and he went on and on and on. He has been blown clean out of the water by the current minister’s comments and by this report. So I imagine that he would recant those comments now in this House because he was clearly wrong, according to the current police minister.
If we go forward a few months to February 2002, to the motion I introduced that, amongst other things, called for:
- … a comprehensive review of the needs of the operational police in the Northern Territory.
That was 12 months before this government finally decided to conduct a review. At that time, the then police minister, the member for Nhulunbuy, went on the attack. He attacked me for spreading the false message that morale was low in the police force. What does O’Sullivan say about police morale? I quote in part from his report:
- In summary, morale in the organisation at the present time is very low throughout the three regions,
and within Berrimah Headquarters.
In the same speech 18 months ago, the member for Nhulunbuy went on to ask:
- Does the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow minister for police encourage the leaking of police
documents? Who does he think he is helping when he goes to the media with a so-called leaked document
detailing efforts by senior management to keep within budget?
If you then fast forward to the Estimates Committee of 2003, who was leaking documents about the police budget? Who makes an issue of it in their innocent media release of 15 July, and who mentions it several times in their statement to this House today? Add that to the list of dishonest and unaccountable charges of hypocrisy.
Back in February 2002, the then minister for police said a review of the police would undermine the commissioner. Now, of course, the review is a courageous act. So we have a bit of a problem here. On the one hand, if we have an independent review by the previous police minister and your boss, the Deputy Chief Minister, you would undermined the commissioner, and now a review is a courageous act by this new police minister.
In October last year, he assured the parliament that he, in turn, had been assured by the commissioner that the resources are there to do the job. This is October last year. He went on:
Police always want more resources. The Police Association has been on the record for the past three
years at least, to my knowledge, saying that the police force needs 150 extra police. It is a line they
stick to. We have talked with them and worked with them on this issue. They accepted in good faith
the fact that we would be bringing 50 extra police over the term of this government. They say it is not
enough. That is their view.
Now it is the view of this government as well as the Police Association and anyone who does not believe in that view somehow is not part of the historical record. The historical record is that the current government did not want to have an independent review, believed that 50 police was enough, scoffed and ridiculed anyone who brought any of these issues to the fore, including in this parliament, and now all of a sudden, all of this is their idea and weren’t they great for implementing it.
Madam Speaker, on 9 October 2002, the CLP again tried to convince the government that an independent review of police resources was urgently needed, and again the then police minister misinterpreted the whole debate, claiming it was a criticism of the hard working men and women of our police service. But what was his reply to the call for a review? It was simple: the member for Nhulunbuy said in this parliament:
There is no case for a new, independent review of the police, something I now learn that they
[that is the CLP] thought was a good idea in the last days before the election.
The fact he did not know that is a surprise, we said it in this House.
Interestingly, in the same debate, the member for Nhulunbuy visited the issue of a lack of recruiting back in the early 1990s and went on to say:
- I give credit to Chief Minister Shane Stone at the time, and the member for Katherine for the work he
did with the police force, because being Treasurer at the same time under him, we saw those numbers
up somewhere where they should be.
So, does the Deputy Chief Minister now resile from those comments? In that same debate, the soon to be minister for police joined in with his usual spin of, ‘What I say today is only for today and never to be quoted back at me’, because he attacked the opposition for introducing political invective into the debate about police resources and, of course, he did not do that today in his statement, did he? The soon to be police minister also dismissed the need for a review with the comment: ‘We are over establishment …’. It is amazing, when you look at the Parliamentary Record. ‘We were over establishment just some 14 months ago but all of a sudden we now need an urgent review to vastly bolster police resources’. At that time, in that same debate, you were not convinced of a review, you did not want to have a review. You did not think a review was necessary and you thought we were over establishment.. And you will run the show, you were the ones in government. Today, this wonderful police minister now talks about it being exceptional that his government has implemented a review, but we will get to his comments later on.
Dr Burns: Where is your ex-police minister today? In a retirement home.
Mr BURKE: In November last year – well, you should be in jail. In November last year, the ..
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: Withdraw that, Leader of the Opposition.
Mr BURKE: I would have thought it was equally derogatory to say I should be in a retirement home, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, withdraw it.
Mr BURKE: In November last year, the opposition again – if I get freedom of information, if freedom of information works as it should work in the Northern Territory they should give me, I have made my application for FOI on the police report, so I would like to see this open, honest and accountable government now, please give me the police commissioner’s report on the incident involving the member for Drysdale, we will see how open, honest and accountable they are.
Mr Henderson: Member for Drysdale? What has he been up to?
A member: Yes, Dunham, what have you done?
Mr Dunham: You would be amazed at what I have done.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: Madam Speaker, in November last year the opposition again tried to get this government to face the reality that the hard working and dedicated members of the police service needed their support. We are now faced with the member for Wanguri and his interpretation of the truth. Take a simple example. He talks about the 2001-02 financial year and baldly states that for at least three months of that time period the CLP was in government. Well, that is not right. The election was on 18 August and his government was sworn in on 27 August. You are pretty good at changing history, even if it is a few months, and you can do it with a straight face.
However, more importantly, he also said that when Labor did come to government, although he was not sure when that was, the police were 33 positions over and above the approved establishment. He went on to say:
We are absolutely determined to give the police the tools that they need to do the job and to give
them the numbers they need to do the job, but we are not going to be able to provide the numbers
that the union seeks.
So, how does that stack up against today’s statement? You are either going to provide the numbers the union seeks - you are now totally committed to the numbers that the union seeks based on the O’Sullivan Report - or do you stand by your comment in parliament that you were not going to give them the numbers that the union seeks?
Today’s statement states that the package will deliver 200 extra police on the street by the end of 2006. Whilst I question that there will be many extra police actually on the street, I am struck by the fact that that is the figure I used earlier this year and I was attacked by both the member for Wanguri and the member for Nhulunbuy. The police minister said, when I quoted that figure: ‘It was impossible’, and the member for Nhulunbuy said it was an empty claim. Now it is a key part of the government’s plan that is mentioned four times in the statement …
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, your time has expired.
Ms CARTER: Madam Speaker, I move so much of standing orders be suspended to allow an extension of time for the Leader of the Opposition to complete his remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Mr BURKE: Madam Speaker, I welcome this commitment from the government and I also thank Mr O’Sullivan for being able to convince the government of this need as, obviously, they were not prepared to listen to our arguments or those put forward by the police association.
The minister is at pains to point out that whatever problems the police service faces today has nothing to do with him, and that is a very typical response from those on the other side. He does actually …
Mr Henderson: I have not said that.
Mr BURKE: … selectively quote from the O’Sullivan Report. I do not have time now to go through the McAulay/Bowe report but you make …
Mr Ah Kit: I will comment on your speech.
Mr BURKE: Madam Speaker, if I could be given another three quarters of an hour extension, I am quite happy …
Madam SPEAKER: I do not think you will get it, Leader of the Opposition.
Mr Henderson: You have plenty of others who can speak.
Mr BURKE: Well, I will let one of my other speakers. However, if you, on the one hand in your statement, criticise the former government for not implementing the McAulay/Bowe review, you should be honest with Territorians. I refer to page 26, 27 and 28 of the review that was conducted by Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu of the Northern Territory police which looked at the McAulay/Bowe review recommendations, the results achieved, and then the comments by Mr O’Sullivan as a result of that review. There are some areas where we could have done better but, overall …
Mr Henderson: Recruiting ahead of attrition.
Mr Kiely: I never thought understatement was one of your strengths.
Mr BURKE: We will go to the first one if you like and have a chuckle - I bet you have not read it:
McAulay/Bowe: increase the number of ACPOs by 15.
Results achieved: establishment of ACPOs rose from 34 to 49.
Comment by O’Sullivan: Fully implemented.
More domestic violence units - by O’Sullivan:
There are enhanced domestic violence procedures which all general duties police now follow.
Moratorium on growth:
The recommendation was not satisfactorily addressed as evidenced by the current establishment
situation in the Northern Territory police.
There is an example where I said we did not do as well as we had hoped to.
However, if anyone honestly looks at the McAulay/Bowe recommendations, in the audit of those recommendations by Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, and can then honestly come in and say it is ‘sickening’ – and let us get the words right: ‘It is sickening’ are the words of the current minister in terms of the performance of the CLP government - is flat, blatantly wrong and misleading this House, because the McAulay/Bowe review does not indicate that in any shape or form.
When the current government talks about how well they are doing with police in the future, we might reflect on what they have done in the two years since they have been here, because that is on page 56 of the McAulay/Bowe report and it is a pretty stark graph …
Mr Henderson: O’Sullivan Report.
Mr BURKE: O’Sullivan Report. It is a pretty stark graph and I table it for the benefit of honourable members, because what it shows is the trend line under the CLP government on recruiting meeting establishment going up, and when the Labor government comes to power the trend line goes down. That is what has happened since the Labor government came to power. So, let us get it all into perspective.
We were trending up and trying to meet the establishment levels that were established for police, and the first thing the Labor government did when they came to power was say: ‘Oh me, oh my, black hole’, and they stopped a police recruit course. You have been playing catch-up ever since. You can go to any senior policeman out there and ask them and they will tell you. Do not try and con the community.
Mr Henderson: They speak highly of you.
Mr BURKE: ‘They speak highly of me’, he says. I can tell you what the Defence community said to me on Sunday about you. You want to talk about who is popular and who is not popular when it comes to the Labor government’s support of our Defence Force, I can tell you. We can soon play tit for tat on that one if you want.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Members, I would like to get this debate concluded.
Mr BURKE: That is the fact of it; the recruiting problems that face us today are real. No one denies the fact that our police force is under-resourced, under-strength – and I say under-strength because that is where the real issue is: it is the strength of people available on a day-to-day roster for operational duties. Those issues have arisen because of a number of factors, not the least being the efforts of this current government. This graph is a stark reminder of the simple fact that we were trending up and meeting establishment figures, resourcing and funding and recruiting, and since the Labor government came to power, any primary school kid can see that that is a trend line going down.
Madam Speaker, I have spoken long enough. I thank honourable members for their indulgence. I reiterate my thanks to Mr O’Sullivan and his team. My thanks to the Police Association for the constant lobbying to have this review done. It is something that we were committed to achieving. It provides a blue print for the future. I applaud the government for saying they will implement all of the recommendations in this report. However, I am concerned that in the minister’s statement some of those recommendations have already fallen away. I see the recruitment of sergeants from interstate is 25; I recall McAulay recommended more than that. I recall two foot patrols in CBD; I notice you have committed to one.
If you are going to commit to the recommendations of the O’Sullivan Report, we will commit to implement all those recommendations. I am particularly interested in the issues of improving police housing. I look forward to seeing what initiatives the government will come up with in that regard because there are some real opportunities to partner with organisations like Defence Housing. I have mentioned that in the past in speaking to the Police Association. Mr O’Sullivan has clearly endorsed that, and it provides a real opportunity to get excellent police housing not only for those in urban areas, but in other areas in the Northern Territory.
Madam Speaker, I thank members for the opportunity to respond to this statement.
MOTION
Note statement – O’Sullivan Report into Police Resources
Note statement – O’Sullivan Report into Police Resources
Continued from earlier this day.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I commend the minister for police for his statement earlier this morning. The minister’s statement and the subsequent actions undertaken by government will be seen as a seminal day in the future operations of the Northern Territory Police.
Not since self-government has government undertaken such a widespread and comprehensive review of our police force, and not since self-government has any government committed itself to such a massive injection of resources into the police force. The outcome of these actions will be a safer community for all.
I listened in part to the Leader of the Opposition’s response to the minister for police this morning. I noticed that a good part of it was criticism of me in the time that I was minister for police because I did not undertake the all-encompassing review that our current minister for police did upon taking the role of minister for police.
I was misrepresented by the Leader of the Opposition, who, on a number of occasions, said that I opposed such a review. I never for an instant opposed such a review. I always believed that there would be a time when we would have to undertake a review of this kind. In fact, what I said every time I was challenged in the media or by the opposition or by the Police Association, which took a keen interest in this along the way, was that I support a review, but we have a new Commissioner for Police, and he is very keen to embark on the continuous improvement program to see, at least for the first 12 months of his tenure, where that took him, his senior management and the police force overall.
It was within that very process that the commissioner and the now minister for police, the member for Wanguri, came to the conclusion that only a major external review could really get to the bottom of everything in and around the police force and get to the bottom of just what the resource gap was.
I never opposed the review. I did say ‘not timely’ on the basis of the commissioner’s wish to get into his continuous improvement program in the first stage of his tenure. Of course, when the current police minister brought the situation to Cabinet, as he explained, Cabinet was fully supportive of a major external review.
It is quite clear from the review that Territory police have suffered a degeneration of resources since late 1990 because the decision by the then government to freeze recruitment for a four year period has to be seen now, looking back, as one of the most irresponsible actions of Northern Territory governments for all time. We also have to put question marks over the effectiveness of the McAulay/Bowe review that was carried out during the 1990s as well. Whilst I am sure it was their honest intention to provide a comprehensive review, it is clear that a far wider and more forensic analysis of recruitment and retention issues needed to be addressed. I suspect that the extent of their brief at the time determined the extent of the inquiries that they were able to make.
Members are entitled to question not just the report itself, but the implementation of the McAulay/Bowe report because it remarked quite clearly on the need for greater civilianisation and it clearly had an expectation that that would be properly funded. Why wouldn’t you? If you make a recommendation like that, you would expect that; you would not expect to have to include in the report: ‘Please, government, make sure that you do fund whatever steps you take into this area’.
What O’Sullivan subsequently discovered is that this civilianisation program was not funded and that, combined with the four year funding freeze, led to a significant deterioration of police resources. The key findings are:
(1) that the Northern Territory police force was run down over a decade with underfunding
and staff shortages;
(2) the recruitment freeze from 1991 through 1994 has left the Northern Territory Police
with a shortage of experienced sergeants;
(3) the number of police available for operations has always been fewer than the number of
police positions recorded on paper; and
(4) over the longer term, police recruitment rates failed to take into account the rate of police
leaving the force.
The report goes on to list a litany of outcomes from those various factors. It states quite baldly that the damage caused by the recruitment freeze from 1991 to 1994 was very significant, and O’Sullivan writes:
- Not only was there an impact on absolute numbers of police personnel during the years 1990 - 1994
as attrition rates eroded the membership base, but this four year gap had moved progressively
through the organisation so that there is currently a shortage of personnel with 10-13 years service.
It not only affected operations at that time, and I remember the debate, some of it public - not very much, not as much as it should have been - but some of it public to the extent you had to, with regards to leave, use it or lose it, and then when they started to take leave, oh, oh, not enough police on deck, no you cannot take your leave, let us try and buy it back. And the member for Macdonnell well knows, because I think he was a member of the force at this very time, and he would know this history. The great work the association has been doing in putting the case in more recent years was sadly lacking in those years 1991 through 1994 when this was going on, that there was not a police association prepared to stand up in public and tell the truth as to who exactly what was happening in the force.
O’Sullivan goes on:
- This dearth in supervisory and management/leadership experience will continue through to the upper
ranks of the organisation.
So the effect of this short-sighted, budget-driven recruitment freeze has been devastating. It was devastating in the loss of ongoing recruitment and replacement of retiring or resigning officers and, most importantly, the flow-on has been devastating in the structure of the organisation, an impact that we are seeing now 10 years on, that impact fairly in place, this dearth of seniority in and around the sergeant level.
O’Sullivan then spent time examining the second issue, the lack of resourcing for civilianisation. In 1997, the government announced an increase in police personnel of 100, and then a second increase of 50. However, as O’Sullivan and the Labor government commissioned analysis by Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu showed, these numbers were not fully funded by the government of the day. The McAulay/Bowe report recommended the policy of civilianisation be pursued in the Northern Territory police. It was, but unfortunately the civilianisation of police was not matched by funding increases to pay for those positions. On page 57 of the report, O’Sullivan points out that in the five year period from 1999 there has been a growth of 32 in civilian positions; 14 of those were supposed to be offset by corresponding reductions in uniformed personnel. Well, that was never going to happen. It simply was never going to happen because you did not have enough police on the street in the first place. That recommendation was simply never going to be complied with, and nor could they. In fairness to the government, the last thing you were going to do was take away 14 police from a force that was struggling to have enough uniformed officers in the first place. Nonetheless, 14 of those were supposed to be offset by corresponding reductions in uniformed personnel.
What is not fair in this is that the government did not compensate the police force by paying them the extra $3m that was required to overcome that shortfall. So, how did the police face up to this recurrent shortfall of $3m in their budget, year in year out? They removed uniformed personnel from general duties, they slowed down the police recruitment rate to allow for the under-funding. As a result, a further reduction in the presence of uniformed police in the community, and a reduction with long term consequences in the overall police establishment. I believe that the minister and the government of the day was fully aware of these concerns and, critically, they chose to ignore it.
If members want proof as to the awareness that government had, all we have to do is turn to the document produced by the current minister for police in the recent estimates sittings of parliament, because it makes for interesting reading. Paragraph after paragraph is a plea from former Commissioner Brian Bates for additional government funding to overcome the problems of under funding personnel, and I quote:
- This increase of police with no funding for an increase in civilian support staff has continually posed
a problem, as already mentioned, without adequate funds for civilian support staff. Police will have
to carry out more administrative duties to the detriment of their operational duties.
The former commissioner was stating very baldly the exact problem that O’Sullivan has identified. He goes on:
- I again re-state that the only civilianisation carried out to date has occurred by leaving police positions
vacant but retaining the establishment numbers ‘on paper’.
Well, you cannot get much more damning that. What Commissioner Bates is saying is that because of the failure to adequately fund the civilianisation program, he was left with paper police. Police who otherwise would be on the streets were stuck in headquarters doing jobs that should have been done by administrative staff. Brian Bates said:
- Without this funding, administrative support staff cannot be employed and police will have to carry
out even more administrative duties to the detriment of operational policing.
Another major stress placed on our police force has been the broadening of the nature of their work. If we take crime as being different from crime 20 years ago, unlike then, today police deal with computer fraud, credit card issues, white collar fraud and so on. The growth in workload in this area, as well as the overall growth of workloads in other fronts, meant that during the late 1990s decisions about police numbers needed to be taken. Because they were not taken, the spiral of stress, overtime, inability to take leave and disenchantment became more widespread. The result was a turnover in staff that is unacceptably high, and this turn over has to be addressed.
That is the past, what is important is to focus on what this government is intending to do about the problem. My colleague has announced the government will spend $75m over the next 3 years to improve the position of the NT police. The total ongoing commitment will raise the baseline funding of the police force by $30m per annum onwards from the third year. We have already plugged the gap in the civilianisation program by allocating an additional $3m per annum towards that in this year’s budget, of course, ongoing. We will place 200 more police in the force by the end of 2006, and we will recruit and train the maximum amount of constables, 120 per annum each year.
The government expects more police to be returned to core policing duties and an increase in police presence in our community. There will be more police patrols. In the northern suburbs there will be new foot and bicycle patrols as well as vehicle patrols. In the city there will be a new foot patrol and overall extra 24-hour vehicle patrol available for the CBD and inner suburbs. Hendo, I hope there will be extra mounted patrols, more horses and more mounted police? I do not see it listed here.
An extra dedicated 24-hour patrol will be available for Palmerston and additional uniformed police will be available for general duties in Katherine. Tennant Creek will receive additional general duties police and additional police for crime investigation. Alice Springs will receive more general duties police. In remote communities, more general duties police will be available, and additional Aboriginal community police officers and relief duty will be bolstered in these areas. There is ongoing work to strengthen the intake, recruitment and training of …
____________
Distinguished Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I acknowledge the presence in the gallery of members of the New South Wales Public Bodies Review Committee: Mr Milton Orkopoulos MP, Chairman; Mr Alan Ashton MP; Mr Matthew Morris MP; Mr Andrew Constance MP; Mr Wayne Merton MP; and Mr Robert Oakeshott MP. They are accompanied by manager, Ms Catherine Watson. On behalf of all members, I offer you a warm welcome.
_____________
Mr STIRLING: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and welcome.There will be a strengthening of the recruitment and training of Aboriginal community police officers. A great deal more attention has to go into that area - as O’Sullivan himself pointed out - into the ability to mainstream and what is required to get Aboriginal community police officers into the mainstream police force and back-fill those Aboriginal community police officers behind them as a recruitment tool in itself.
Staffing issues will be addressed with the government’s aim firmly targeted at reducing the resignation and turnover rates. We will introduce appropriate insurance coverage for police officers, reversing the previous government’s decision to remove death and disability cover from the police in 1999. The government will address housing issues. The police force of the Northern Territory is highly regarded by this government and the community. They do a tough job under tough circumstances and they do it well. However, it is now apparent as a result of this forensic inquiry that this tough job has been made much tougher by years of neglect to the resourcing base to support our police. This government intends to reverse that; it intends to give our police force the tools and the money needed to do their job. It will work to protect our officers; it will provide them with proper compensation for their work.
Jim O’Sullivan has congratulated the government for its bravery in taking the decision to launch this inquiry and our intestinal fortitude for sticking to its outcomes. We do not seek to whitewash the report or gloss over any of the hard facts. The government has reacted swiftly by pledging $75m to fix the problems identified. We should not underestimate the impact these decisions will have on the police - I believe for the better. I wish them well as this rolls out.
It is an enormous task we have set the police force and ourselves in the numbers that have to be recruited. I do not pretend that it is all plain sailing from here, and nor does the minister for police. There will be issues to be worked around in regard to lateral entry but, if we do not get those senior, experienced sergeants from across the border for a limited period of time - I think Jim O’Sullivan makes that very clear; we do not have them - if we do not have that, we do not have the necessary skill and experience on our streets, more importantly to bolster and lead the massive recruitment exercise of raw recruits that is going to take place over the next 3 years.
Madam Speaker, it was a great job by Jim O’Sullivan. I congratulate him, and his off-sider Peter Forster. Certainly, the government has thanked them and congratulated them. I know the minister for police is very pleased to have the report and have the support of his Cabinet colleagues to make this a rather large commitment - $75m over 3 years - but if that is what it going to take, we will do it.
Mr MALEY (Goyder): Madam Speaker, there is no doubt the police have a difficult and sometimes thankless job. There is also no doubt that a strong police force is a fundamental pillar of any civilised, western society, and that is certainly the case in the Northern Territory. The opposition, certainly in general terms, has always - and I will go into more detail - and will continue to provide the support which the police require to maintain a strong service. Unlike members of the government, I have been here longer than five minutes, and I can certainly indicate my fairly close relationship with many members of the police force. Morale may fluctuate up and down a little, but there is no doubt that over the past two years there has been a larger than expected exodus of senior police officers. There is also no doubt that morale over the past two years has certainly reached and all-time low.
It is not a coincidence that about two years ago there was a change of government. There were rank and file police officers, men and women - who, as I said, risk their lives every day to make our Territory a safer place - saying for months, and it really started getting loud about 12 months ago, but 18 or so months ago there was a call for more resources, for an urgent review. There was a need for government to look closely at the type of resources that the police have and have had made available to them. Territorians also began telling the government what they thought, and really echoing the concerns of the police. The police, of course, make up an important part of the Territory community. Members will no doubt recall the ‘Back in 20 minutes’ incident where there was an allegation that a young lady had been sexually assaulted and had gone to the police station in the CBD of Darwin in an upset state at about 10 am in the morning. To her disappointment and shock there was a ‘Back in 20 minutes’ sign stuck on the door. Members would also be aware of the incident where the young fellow was assaulted just around the corner from the police station at Casuarina by a group of youths. I understand he was badly hurt and this occurred within a stone’s throw of the local police station and during daylight hours.
I welcome the positive aspects of the independent report. However, understandably, police and Territorians remain sceptical and I do not blame them. If you look at what has happened in the past, you look at this government’s prior criminal history - things like the economic development summit. There was a summit held in this very place; there were a number of recommendations made, not one implemented, not one. Absolutely not one! Then about 12 months later, it falls off the government Internet site, and there are seven more committees formed to discuss it. The Labor government has formed more committees than I have had hot lunches, and what have we seen? Not one wealth creating project and, indeed, an attempt to mislead Territorians at every opportunity. Lots of talk and no action.
We have a number of recommendations now in the form of the O’Sullivan Report. As I said, rank and file police officers understandably remain sceptical. This is an example of the very general comments contained in the ministerial statement which is parroted by the second Martin Labor government police minister to hold the portfolio: 200 extra police. We are not sure whether that is 200 new members, taking into account attrition, or is that 200 new members if we draw a baseline for what we have today?
If we look at what has happened in the past, there have been countless promises and lots of rhetoric from the government like: ‘We are going to increase numbers. We are going to allocate and make sure that there is an increased number of police officers serving at a particular division within the Northern Territory police service’. Yet it was discovered during the estimates process that the sum increase in the total number of serving police officers was, in fact, only one. So, in two years, the total number of police has increased by only one. That is the Martin Labor government’s contribution to law and order broken down to its most basic form. All the rhetoric, all the money that has been spent, and one new police officer. Mums and dads in the northern suburbs are understandably sceptical.
Members may recall amendments to the Northern Territory Criminal Code Act. There was a re-labelling of some of the unlawful entry provisions, effectively making no difference. All the conduct was already covered well and truly by the existing provisions of the Code. There was a re-labelling. If my memory serves me correctly, there was one or no convictions under the one of the new sections, and that was a question specifically asked during the course of the Estimates Committee. We effectively have this rhetoric. After that stunt, after the legislation was re-labelled and a few minor things tweaked, there was a pamphlet delivered to nearly every household in the Northern Territory bearing the big stamp: ‘We’re getting tough on crime’. The proof is in the pudding. We have not seen anything.
The Martin Labor government had deliberately misled Territorians. They have deliberately abused the trust Territorians placed in them. They have persuaded young journalists, got them in and massaged them and tried to explain to them: ‘We are getting tough on crime. We are doing this, we are doing that’, but the proof is in the pudding. People are talking about it. The government simply has not delivered in two years of government.
During the course of debate on this statement, there was a reference to 10 years - and I cannot take you to the specific page - but the minister said words to the effect that there had been a steady decline for 10 years in his references to some of the underfunding. Whether that is accepted in total or not, on that interpretation by the government, for the last two years this same underfunding had been occurring. There have been two Martin Labor budgets and absolutely no action.
In sheeting home the blame and trying to politicise this important issue, there has been a complete denial to accept any responsibility by this government, only the rhetoric. They are behaving like they did in opposition for 27 years, a place where they belong and hopefully will be returned to shortly.
The minister’s selective and poisonous ministerial statement focussed on the negative. It was very political. It just makes me think that if as much effort was put into being constructive as to being negative and poisonous, then who knows what good could be done for Territorians and what sort of message we would be sending out? It has taken two years to get any real commitment, albeit only oral, from this government. The classic comment was the parroted support from the member for Nhulunbuy, where he was trying to explain and get out of the corner that he had put himself in about his failure to support a review. He said: ‘I never opposed a review but I did not want a review because …’ words to the effect that there was a new police commissioner and but, but, but. Well, at the end of the day, once again, the proof is in the pudding. The government, certainly in its earlier time, the first part of its term, did not support a review. There was a denial there was a problem. It is only now, with the overwhelming comment and feedback this government has been getting, both directly from the public, from rank and file police, and also from the opposition, the concerns we raised, articulated and amplified again and again, that finally prodded this government, the laziest government the Northern Territory has ever seen, into some sort of action.
The other disappointing aspect to this – and in a very skilful and manipulative way - once again, the government has built into this statement the new phraseology ‘Building our police force’. That is their big plan, that is going to be their catch cry, and if you recall the previous election, it was ‘Building a better Territory’. Well, it is a spin-off of that, I suppose. We have seen the new signage getting about. They are trying to get rid of the Territory colours now. We are going back to some sort of blue and red; out with the Territory colours. We have these new signs, we have these political one liners which are now permeating all of the areas of the executive, including the police force. It is conduct which history will not judge them kindly on.
It has taken the Martin Labor government two years to finally accept there is a problem. I give them some credit for finally accepting there is a problem. I hope that the positive and constructive comments which the O’Sullivan Report makes are acted upon genuinely, and that rank and file police officers are not left out in the open like they have been in the past, and not treated badly, and that includes …
Mr Henderson: For the last 10 years.
Mr MALEY: We will test the interjection, the last 10 years. Well, that includes about two years when your government was in power. So, in 25% of the time, on your rationale, you have ignored them. You are saying …
Mr Henderson: It took a while to get through those dusty files down there at Berrimah, to uncover what you guys were up to.
Mr MALEY: No, we just heard a comment that for the last 10 years they had been ignored. For the last two years of that 10 year period, the Labor government has been in power, so there is a concession by the minister for police that he has ignored the police for the last two years. That is the wrong message to send out. You are being a bit smart there, made a bit of a comment - old foot and mouth. You have made it. You have to live by that, and I hope that lots of police officers take the time to closely …
Mr Henderson: I speak to lots of them as well.
Mr MALEY: Okay. Let’s hope lots of police take the time to listen carefully to what the transcript reveals about your comments and about how you have treated the police over the past two years and in what sort of contempt you hold their views.
I am not going to pull apart the poorly articulated and very political speech. However, I can end with this general comment. In general terms, the police have our absolute and total support, and I can pledge that the opposition will do all they can to make sure that the police are properly resourced. There are plans afoot to build a police station at Humpty Doo, and that is something which is great to see. However, once again, there is absolutely no reference in the ministerial statement to the increased resources of police being utilised to service the some 17 000 long-term rural Territorians.
Mr Henderson: Another Labor initiative, we will do it. This year.
Mr MALEY: Good rural people.
Mr Henderson: We will invite you to the opening.
Mr MALEY: I appreciate that. That is all I intend to say.
Dr TOYNE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I will start with a bit of advice to the member for Goyder. Basically, being a member of parliament is more than just standing up and waving the statement of the day around, and hurling a bit of vague abuse around the Chamber. Do some work, for goodness sake. Stop cluttering up the oxygen supply with that sort of rubbish.
The O’Sullivan Report is a landmark document. Whichever way you want to apportion the history that brought us to this current situation, there was no doubt about the starkness and severity that was revealed by this report; an excellent piece of work by Jim O’Sullivan. I also commend his work and that of his team on this very important review.
The government has kept its promise to fully implement the recommendations that have been brought forward in the report, which will dramatically improve the resourcing and the capacity of our police force here in the Northern Territory. It will restore our force as an effective, properly trained and resourced police force within our community.
While working alongside the police on the crime prevention strategies and the law reforms that we have been bringing into the Northern Territory since we achieved power, it really would have been quite futile to continue working on the Territory laws and the community crime prevention groups if we did not have the mainline of crime prevention, the police force, in a fully effective form. The adoption of the recommendations of the O’Sullivan Report gives me an enormous amount of confidence to now press forward to further development of the community-based crime prevention programs.
I look forward over the next few years to seeing an increase in capacity and morale, and a decrease in response times, and increased specialisation within the police force but, most of all, an increased presence of police in our communities to work alongside the community groups that are showing their commitment to their various neighbourhoods through crime prevention work they are already involved in. We had election commitments for the three-point plan to tackle drugs, and the six-point plan on property crime. These are both critical areas that need critical input from the police. There is absolutely no point in bringing in tough new penalties, as we have for those two areas of criminal activity, if you do not have police out there investigating and bringing people to justice if they are committing those types of offences.
It is very disappointing that the O’Sullivan Report reveals a long-term neglect of our police force and its resourcing; the recruitment freeze imposed under previous governments from 1991 to 1994 had a hugely negative impact on the now critical shortage of experienced supervisors within the force. The revelations confirm that we had a paper police force – more positions on paper than actually working in policing duties. That translates into what we were hearing doorstop by doorstop, whether it was in Darwin, Alice Springs or the other urban centres in the Northern Territory. People were saying: ‘We cannot get a policeman when we want one’. There were increasingly long delays in getting anything investigated, and increasingly frustrated reactions from the general public. At community meetings I attended in various suburbs around Darwin and Palmerston, the problem of policing of key areas within a community such as the central business districts or around schools and public spaces, were again a huge frustration. Just one police patrol through some of those places at key periods during the day would make a huge difference to the security and the utility of those very important areas that contribute to the lifestyle of urban areas in the Territory.
When you look in my electorate of Stuart, getting a policeman of any sort within hours and, in some cases, days, even for very serious incidents, continues to be a part of the life of people living in the remoter areas of the Territory. We have to get policemen out there and we have to get them fully supported so that they are not going to burn out, and are not going to become demoralised by the scantness of the support that has been provided in previous times.
We look forward to seeing effective policing, whether it is in the northern suburbs of Darwin, the smaller urban centres throughout the rest of the Northern Territory, or the most remote of our communities. We also look forward to seeing them working with up-to-date and effective equipment, with good conditions in their work spaces, and with adequate housing to support them no matter where they are stationed.
When you look at the findings of the O’Sullivan Report it is no wonder that the police force has suffered morale problems over not just recent times but certainly for a prolonged period of time. As shadow minister for police during our time in opposition we were hearing these sort of things even at that stage. We realised even then that there were major issues that needed to be sorted out within the police force in the Northern Territory.
Whilst the CLP might pretend that this whole situation developed in the time of the Labor government and are trying to chastise us for not fixing it up in the two years that we have been in power, I would certainly point out that we have been assessing the situation with the police well before the announcements made by our minister in just recent times. This process has got to the truth of the matter and this government has dug deeply and honestly into a set of longstanding problems and brought forward a substantial commitment of $75m. More importantly, the report was released openly to Territorians to make what they will of the findings. They, ultimately, are the only ones it matters to; they are going to ascribe blame or credit.
We have great faith that Territorians will recognise that this government has shown much courage and honesty in allowing Jim O’Sullivan to dig down in an independent study, bring forward the findings which were shared with everyone and further to that, fully acted on. We will get credit for that and no matter what carping and what negativity the opposition want to throw into this, the general public will understand what we have done and what we are going to achieve through our commitment to the response to this report.
The crime prevention work will continue in our communities, as I have been saying, on our side of the crime prevention equation. We will be working in partnership with the community through our regional crime prevention councils and the local crime prevention groups, working with people who know what is needed in their communities and will work on the ground. The vital link that has to occur as we roll out the reforms in the police force is that where local community groups require police action, enforcement and support, we will now have the capacity to do that within our police force. This is all about community policing, re-establishing a strong connection between the officers in our police force and the individual communities all over the Northern Territory. When we have that strong link re-established the crime prevention measures that we are promoting through the Office of Crime Prevention will also gain additional currency.
It is hard not to get excited about what could be achieved in the next few years, given that we are already making progress even with a police force that we now know is under-resourced and low in morale at times, and even with the fairly early stages of developing our community structures for crime prevention.
As these police come on line, as the new capacity flows across into the crime prevention programs, the grants, the initiatives that we are setting up, we can look forward to making further significant progress into the level of criminal activity in our communities, and with that stabilisation who knows what else we can achieve. We can get stuck into remote educational programs, remote health programs, knowing that the community is stable enough to really build some new service delivery that is going to provide benefit to the communities. This is the base. The base is the police, the base is the stabilisation of communities through the justice programs. Once that stabilisation is achieved, we can move on and start building ourselves some fantastic new initiatives, whether in urban Darwin or out on the Western Australian border at Kintore.
Building our Police Force plan will turn the deplorable situation that was revealed by the O’Sullivan Report around. The police minister has already commented, but it is worth repeating some of the core commitments within the O’Sullivan recommendations: $75m over four years; 200 extra police on the ground by 2006; more bike and foot patrols, which have been fantastic in Alice Springs, as you probably know; extra police for criminal investigation duties; recruitment and training of 120 new constables each year; 28 extra Aboriginal community police officers, and many people in the House, like the member for Macdonnell, would know some of those ACPOs out in the communities. They do amazing work, and are often the only one out in a community. They do not have support to take leave unless someone can be re-deployed to give them a bit of time off. Usually ACPOs are the face of policing. Twenty eight more ACPOs represents Aboriginal employment, it is employment in the remote communities, and it is employment of people who really understand why Aboriginal people are coming to offend so often in our justice system. They know the family, they know the history of the individuals, they know the detail of culture that can help us deal much more effectively with that person’s pattern of behaviour.
The report recommends strategies to get highly trained police officers out from behind desks and back on the streets where they can do the most good; extra civilian staff to support police officers; better living and working conditions; and a funding capital shortfall of $2m was identified in the report.
Madam Speaker, we are not mucking around on this. We are going straight in to those recommendations and they are going straight onto the ground through the implementation process. I will conclude by saying I commend Jim O’Sullivan on the report, I commend my colleagues, and particularly the police minister, for staying staunch on our promise to fully implement this report. We will find the money because we have to find the money. We will get the activity on the ground because we have to get the activity on the ground. We remain equally committed on the side of justice initiatives, and the Northern Territory will be well served in the area of crime prevention and law enforcement.
Mr ELFERINK (Macdonell): Madam Speaker, I think a basic test of whether or not the police force is doing its job is that when you dial the police station to report an offence, you get a police officer on your doorstep. That is what I would like: if I have reason or cause, or when I have cause, to ring the police force, they actually arrive and show an interest in the offences committed against me or my family, or my friends, or whatever.
Unfortunately, over recent years, that has not been an option available to everybody who telephones the police station. It is a great tragedy because probably the easiest way to demoralise a police force is to say to the people or the police officers who are employed in that force that we are going to have to limit the way that you do your job in such a way as to make up for the shortfall in numbers. It is effectively saying to any person: ‘We want you to do a job, but there are certain aspects of it that we expect you to do quite badly so that the rest of the job can be done properly’. That is really the state of degradation that has crept in to the administration of the Northern Territory police force.
We then engage in the blame game, which is such a tragedy because, whilst we here in the stratosphere throw rocks and lightning bolts at each other, those poor police officers who are on the street in the troposphere do not see a great deal improvement in their environment. I can point out how the blame game has been operating in this room today. I listened to the former minister for police, the member for Nhulunbuy, talk about his time as minister and refer at some length to the early 1990s and the freeze on recruitment and the problem that occurred during that period. Indeed, I think there are probably only about 10 police officers left in the job from that period 1991 through 1993.
Nevertheless, if you look at the report, on page 56, Mr O’Sullivan quite correctly points out that recruitment practices had changed since the early 1990s, and if you travel forward to July 2001, immediately prior to the last election, the number of police actually on the job had reached the established number, or very close to it. Then the new government decided to cut a recruit course. Now the minister says that if the freeze on recruiting had occurred in the early 1990s, it had been something that was consciously done, a government being consciously aware of the outcomes of that decision, then surely the current government was also aware of the outcomes of their decision to cut a recruit course. Unfortunately, any ground that had been made up by the former government had been lost.
The fact is that economic reality drives some of these decisions, and the current government had tried very hard to cut costs upon getting into government, and as a consequence of that cost cutting drive, we find ourselves in a situation where they had refused to recruit, and they are now throwing rocks at the former government for refusing to recruit. They have refused to recruit, and the question I have for the members in this Chamber is, what difference does it make to the public of the Northern Territory who is to blame for what at this point? The effect is that in the households of the Northern Territory, when you ring up to report a minor offence, you do not get a policeman at your doorstep. The blame game does not suffice or prove anything other than the fact that we all know how to count statistics and how to twist them for our own purposes. It does not fix the problem on the street.
What I am concerned about, and something that I wish to flag for the minister for police into the future in relation to a recruitment drive of getting 200 new police officers on to the streets, is that there is going to be suddenly a very large spike in the number of inexperienced police officers on the street. Having been through the recruit process of the Northern Territory police force myself, I can tell you now that the time that you spend in the recruit process basically gives you the nuts and bolts of the Meccano set, and the years that follow learning the trade of being a police officer is how you put the nuts and bolts together to produce a useful product. I urge the government, in their substantial expenditure to improve the Northern Territory police force, to cast their mind to a particular issue, and that is that you are going to have, in every likelihood, probationary constables on patrol together as a result of this sudden spike in recruitment numbers. This has the potential effect of not only lowering the quality of the service which will be delivered to the people of the Northern Territory, but also exposing the Northern Territory police force, through simple inexperience, to mistakes.
Those mistakes can have dire consequences, and a damages claim, because of a shortcoming due to nothing other than a lack of experience because you have two very junior police officers working together. I urge the minister to seriously consider finding ways in which to support these very junior people, who are going to be working together in shift work and in remote places, with as much experience as can be possibly done. It may even be worth looking at retired police officers to come back to the police force and at least give guidance and counselling to some of these junior members. I can tell you now that it is going to be a very, very serious problem and in terms of any negligence action that flows out of it, it is a very real risk.
The other thing I would like to point out is that, as a former police officer, I enjoyed the job immensely. I found it immensely satisfying except on those occasions where - I confess that I am not even supposed to think in these terms - I found that I was working against other government policies. This is something that I notice every day in my electorate, in the ways that different government policies at different levels interact in different fashions to produce mutually exclusive outcomes. By way of example, you look at dole payments and the way they are dished out into a community which has effectively zero employment. We have a federal government providing dole payments. You then have the Northern Territory government which provides health, policing and other similar types of services into an environment which has become destructive because of the effect of what is literally called in my electorate, and I know in many other electorates, ‘sit down money’. You have one government spending money which becomes a destructive force, and another government spending money trying to patch up the processes of that destructive force.
I note that even the current government has committed some $5m to an itinerants program in the major centres, in Darwin and Alice Springs, where health care, accommodation, housing, and those sorts of things will be improved in an effort to improve the lot of itinerant people. I have yet to hear from government how it expects this itinerants program to actually have people move away from the centres and back to their communities or whatever. What I am concerned about is that you have a government with a policy saying it is going to spend more on intinerants and those sorts of things, which, in my opinion, will be an attractant, unfortunately, to many itinerant people. You will get an increasing population of itinerant people in places like Alice Springs and Darwin. Then you will have a police force which is going to be spending money and its resources trying to patch up what results from that. It is an inconsistent approach to this sort of government spending that I have some concerns about.
I would be well pleased to see that the Northern Territory police force has input into how this $5m for itinerant programs is spent, in an effort to give them a means to be able to communicate ideas, which effectively will make the use of their resources less mutually exclusive to other government spending.
I also note that the new government came to power with the promise of 50 more police. I believe at the moment there is a nett one more police officer on the job than there was. I hope that the $75m that they say they are going to commit actually gets spent because, not only do they have to find 50 more to accommodate their original election promise, but actually spend an extra amount of money on an extra 150 beyond that.
I am also interested to see what effect the lack of police has had on crime rates, both in Alice Springs and Darwin, and in the Northern Territory generally. I am surprised to hear a certain inconsistent message coming out of government saying that crime rates have dropped since entering government. I have a question mark still hanging over the methodology of their counting their statistics. I believe it has now been borne out as I check through the Justice Department statistics, that the drop that we saw when the statistical or calculation method changed, has now plateaued out to resemble the plateau that was there prior to the change of statistical collation methods. I am starting to get the impression that it is the methodology that has changed and not the crime rates. I certainly hope that more police on the ground will have a drastic effect on crime rates, simply because they scare villains away.
There is also another aspect of government policy which is important in policing. We could sit here and put as many police as we like on the roads, and we could put one police officer to every individual person in the Northern Territory, but we also need to know that the work that they are going to do is effective. At the moment, I understand that there is a system by which the Summary Offences Act was changed during the former CLP government to allow for the issuing of on-the-spot notices for offences that breach the Summary Offences Act. This is the urinating in the street-type of offence, swearing in the street, fighting, the general brawling and disorderliness that comes with our modern society - in fact, they have been around for hundreds of years. The Summary Offences Act and its predecessors go back to Victorian England and before.
The effect of putting out an on-the-spot notice to a summary offence is to basically water down the operation of the legislation. I urge the government to consider the repeal of using the on-the-spot fines and going back to the traditional systems of policing the Summary Offences Act. That is using either summons or arrest for breaches of the Summary Offences Act. The reason being is that the Summary Offences Act used to be a piece of legislation which enabled police to effectively control the streets. It was a tool which was useable and it was workable and when it was used properly the effect of using the Summary Offences Act had a great effect of controlling the streets.
My mind casts back to a small operation that we did in the Darwin CBD when I was a senior constable, if memory serves me correctly. We did something quite simple. We stuck two police officers on the ground in plain clothes with a radio in their back pocket and another police van driving around town picking up the arrests. What happened was that every time somebody urinated in the street, every time somebody swore in the street, every time somebody was caught with a small amount of dope, rather than an on-the-spot fine or a caution they were simply apprehended at that point and taken into custody, back to the cells and immediately bailed. The effect of this over one weekend was that before too long the word had gotten out on the street that every two males walking together was potentially a couple of police officers who would arrest you for the most minor of offences.
Effectively and unwittingly at that time it was exactly what was happening in New York City and the effect in the streets of Darwin was that the police work in Darwin became quite boring for about two or three months afterwards once word had gotten around that the police were operating in this fashion. The effect was that also up the food chain, the more serious offences, serious assaults and those sort of things, appeared to have been affected by what was happening at the street level. I urge that the government in returning police to the streets also think about returning the powers of police officers in such a way that they are able to control the streets, control the itinerants and those sorts of things and give them the discretionary power that they need to go through the processes of keeping our streets safe in the community.
It is do-able and it is do-able with not a great deal of effort but it needs a government which is willing to take a tougher stance on those sorts of simple street crimes. It needs an enthusiastic police force. I believe that you get an enthusiastic police force by giving them an environment to operate in which makes them feel like they are doing the job productively and usefully.
Madam Speaker, nobody gets job satisfaction out of doing a job in a half measured fashion, and the problem is that because of police numbers as they currently stand, and because of government policies both past and present, the job satisfaction which has come forward to so many police officers has been absent. If there is anything that decays morale more completely than any other factor it is the inability for a police officer or any person in any workplace to get satisfaction out of the job that they do.
Now, I know that the police officers are not allowed to really get emotional about the work they do and they are not suppose to care about outcomes of the work that they do. However, the fact is that they do. And if they feel like that they are making a useful contribution to society, and if they feel that they are doing the job for which they became police officers, then they are going to be satisfied that they are doing a job properly and effectively and you will find morale will go up as a result.
It is not just the expenditure of money that matters, it is not just giving support to the whole raft of new, very junior, members that matters, but what is also going to matter very much is the fact that once they go out there that they know that they are doing a job which is valued, and one that is effective, because they can see the results of their work on a daily basis on the streets of the Northern Territory.
Mr AH KIT (Community Development): Madam Speaker, I rise in support of my colleague regarding the results of the O’Sullivan assessment of the resource requirements of our police service. In doing this I wish to pay tribute to our bush police in general and to Aboriginal community police officers in particular. Whilst my other ministerial colleagues and the minister himself on most other aspects of the report, I feel that my contribution, being from a bush electorate, should pay some attention to what Mr O’Sullivan said about the Aboriginal community police officer scheme that is operating in the Northern Territory police service.
Bush police officers, along with teachers and health professionals who work in remote communities, do it harder, I believe, than anyone who lives in towns and cities might imagine. Forget television soapies like Blue Heelers; the work of bush coppers in remote areas in the Territory is the real thing. No one pretends policing is an easy job, but it is all that harder in remote areas. As well as the problems of distance from towns and cities, our police in these areas have huge beats to cover - in many cases larger in size than whole European countries. Harsh weather, isolation from family, friends and colleagues, as well as rough roads and difficult communications, add to a pretty tough existence.
On top of this, of course, are the cross-cultural issues that must be dealt with. For many Territorians living in remote areas, English, if spoken at all, is rarely spoken as a first language. It is on many remote communities that we see the deep divide that can often exist between western and customary systems of law. This divide is further enmeshed by enormous social problems resulting from the extreme poverty of these communities, including overcrowding, poor health and education outcomes, and chronic substance abuse.
Our police and the ACPOs, the Aboriginal community police officers, are often required to perform above and beyond the call of duty when operating in such social settings. This is the sharp edge of policing. It is in these contexts our bush coppers are asked to do things beyond the imaginings of Sergeant Tom Croydon and the other cardboard cut-out figures of Blue Heelers.
I was pleased last week to have a chat to an officer based at Wadeye, Sergeant Dean McMasters. He is strongly involved in community affairs there and is part of a process designed to turn around the many problems faced by a community where law and justice issues have been problematic for a long time. In particular, he is involved with the local NORFORCE unit made up of 20 local Aboriginal people, and he is joined in this work by the local ACPO, Barbara McClelland. As a firm supporter of NORFORCE, it was great to see the dedication of these local police officers in working with locals in this role. I intend commending their work with NORFORCE at Wadeye with the NORFORCE Commander and the Commonwealth Minister for Defence. Of course, such examples of similar commitment can be found in many other communities across the Territory.
I was particularly interested in the comments made in the O’Sullivan Report about Aboriginal community police officers, especially his recommendations for improvements in the scheme. O’Sullivan strongly supports the retention, expansion and improvement of the ACPO scheme. He states in his report that ACPOs:
- … by and large are performing an excellent job, and in fact in some circumstances are being used in
identical ways to sworn police constables … being assigned in pairs and singularly to undertake
routine first response patrols. In other situations, they support mainstream police and support
community initiatives such as day and night patrol and community warden schemes.
The assessment concluded that despite:
… limitations, ACPOs were performing a highly valued and effective role, and many policing endeavours
in remote communities would be ineffective if it weren’t for the excellent individual policing work, help
and assistance provided by ACPOs.
O’Sullivan has recommended recruiting an additional 28 ACPOs, as well as filling current vacancies. An important element of this is to recruit ACPOs to situations where they can operate in pairs in existing locations so they are not working alone. The assessment cites the great work being done by one such ACPO working alone:
In one remote community one exceptional ACPO was the sole policing presence. She confronted the most
difficult of policing situations daily, has turned her own home into a shelter for victims of domestic violence,
was using her own vehicle for policing work, and operated from a tiny makeshift office with no computer,
fax or phone. She was committed to policing and to her community. and was looking forward to a week’s
in-service training with her ACPO colleagues - the first in some years.
He went on:
- When asked about her circumstances, she commented to the effect that she would appreciate a vehicle,
an office, appropriate cells for protective custody and more flexible entry so one of the younger men
keen on becoming an ACPO in her community could gain acceptance and help her with some of the
worst violence problems. She sought nothing for herself.
Madam Speaker, I repeat: she sought nothing for herself. What an extraordinary example this is of dedication and commitment, not just to her own people, but to the Northern Territory public. Of course, this commitment is replicated across many other communities despite the problems the ACPOs face. For example, many ACPOs expressed to O’Sullivan feelings of being undervalued by the police service. Despite many years of service, ACPOs do not share the same benefits as mainstream police. These entitlements include free housing, fares out of isolated communities, freight allowance, well-equipped offices and vehicles, and much broader in-service training and development opportunities. And, unlike local government anywhere else in the Territory, let alone the nation, we see the current situation where local community government councils are too often required to pay for the provision of vehicles and fuel.
I am very pleased to note that the police service is actively reviewing the role and status of ACPOs, and we can expect dramatic improvement in the coming period for local ACPOs. I am especially pleased to see that the revitalisation of the ACPO scheme is being strongly supported by the Police Association in the Northern Territory.
The O’Sullivan assessment has made it clear that our police service has been allowed to run down for the last decade or so. From the recruitment freeze of 1991 to 1994, we have seen fine police officers face increased pressures to perform in an environment of dwindling or stagnant resources. It is this government that is doing something about it, because clearly the previous mob had no intention of doing anything but come up with empty promises. It should be noted that we are doing this in the proper way, through a properly independent process. Madam Speaker, I commend the police minister’s statement to the House.
Mr VATSKALIS (Lands and Planning): Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services, my colleague, the member for Wanguri, for his statement today outlining the Labor government’s commitment to implement the O’Sullivan Report into police resources.
Police and crime are issues I have always focussed on, even before my campaign to become a politician. I recall very well in the past two years before the election, one of the things I could read daily in the newspapers, and I heard daily from people and businesses was the low presence of police on the streets. When I doorknocked in the Casuarina area, one of the queries that came back to me time after time after time was, where are our policemen? We do not see them at all. That was the question to me. I was very impressed one day when I doorknocked a house, a young man came out and started talking to me. He introduced himself as a policeman and it gave me the opportunity to ask exactly the same question - where are the policemen? Where do you serve? He was serving at Casuarina. But what he described as happening at his station really made me understand where the police where. Well, there were not many. Casuarina Police Station was 23 men and women down for the simple reason there were not enough policemen in real life. There were a lot of police on paper; they looked very good in budget papers every year. However, real police were not there and, as a result the police had to work overtime, work double shifts and work very, very hard. In some cases, they could not be in two places at once; it was impossible.
Another thing that was brought to my attention was the size of the area that the Casuarina Police Station was looking after - from Totem Road all the way to Berrimah headquarters, an incredibly large area with a very, very small number of police. Occasionally, a couple of police used to take two mountain bikes in the back of a car to the Casuarina Coastal Reserve and patrol. Then, the next day, they would take patrol for an hour in Nightcliff or somewhere else, just to show their presence.
However, the demand from the people on the streets was: ‘We want more police on the streets. We want to see more police because we hear about crime. We hear about mandatory sentencing, but the reality is to put somebody in prison for 15 days under mandatory sentencing, you first of all have to catch them. If you do not have the police on the streets, you are not going to catch them’. We know very well that the capture rate at that time in the urban environment was about 10% or less. That happened because of the lack of police.
I also had a very interesting experience in 2000 when I visited my family in Greece and I returned via London. I was fortunate enough to arrive there when the Metropolitan Police Commissioner completely changed the structure of the Metropolitan Police by removing them from their cars and putting the police on patrol. They not only put police on patrol but actually invited more police to apply for positions in the London Metropolitan Police. As an incentive, they increased their salary by 20%. Within two weeks, there were police walking in the larger London area, two of them like we see on The Bill on television with, as the member for Macdonnell described, having a car running around and the two police having the radios, to keep control of the areas. What also impressed me was the confidence of the people. You could walk in London at 1 am and people were still out and the police were out there. People had a perception of feeling safer because the police were there. It is probably a perception that if you can see police on the streets things are safe.
Also the other side is if police are on the streets, the people who tend to commit criminal acts will think twice before they commit the act because they are always thinking in the back of their mind that a copper might turn the next corner and catch them in the act.
I was very impressed when I first got hold of the O’Sullivan Report; it is a thorough report. It is a report that was done not sitting in an office but travelling throughout the Territory, speaking to the community, to the police officers, to the police hierarchy, and writing in the report a very honest response from all stakeholders. I was very, very impressed when my colleague, the member for Wanguri, made a commitment that he was prepared to accept the recommendations of the O’Sullivan Report. His wish was endorsed by Cabinet and Caucus, and by the government.
The Martin government has bitten the bullet on new, real police funding, in stark contrast with the paper police charade that was conducted by the previous government. The Leader of the Opposition said today in his speech that we inherited a responsibility. The reality is what we inherited from the previous government was a liability - a liability of a police force that could not function. We inherited a police force that could not function. We inherited the liability of your mismanagement of the police force, the liability of police on paper, not the real numbers …
Mr Dunham: No, you said you inherited a police force that was a liability. That is what you said.
Mr VATSKALIS: … the liability of police who simply could not be police for the simple reason there were not numbers. I said, and I repeat it, the Leader of the Opposition said we inherited a responsibility. However, I am saying we inherited a liability and that was all of your own making.
This government will deliver 200 extra police on the street by the end of 2006, fulfilling the wishes of the public - 200 extra police. In order to do that, we will recruit and train 120 constables a year.
One of the issues that was brought up with the report was that 60% of the police in the Territory come from somewhere else. It is natural, if you have family down south, that one day you will pack up to be close to your family, close to your parents. What we want is to reverse the trait. We would like to see 60% Territorians.
I recall very well …
Mr Dunham: We want to see 100%.
Mr VATSKALIS: I aspire to have 100% Territorians. The reality is not everybody wants to be a policeman, it is a very stressful job. Some people have it, some do not. I recall very well that a few years back the New South Wales police had very stringent conditions for entry: you had to be six foot something, and of mainly Anglo-Saxon background. Then they realised they had a problem and they looked again at their policies and changed their policies. So a Vietnamese bloke who was five foot nothing could actually be recruited into the police because that person could speak another language, could have a rapport with the community, could have other skills that like it or not, they did not have. It is something that we are aspiring to do, something that we want to do and have real Territorians to police in the Territory in real conditions.
Also, it is not the commitment of people, it is the commitment of money to support these people. Money for recruitment, money for training, money for equipment, money for houses. So 200 more police by the end of 2006, recruitment of 120 constables each year doubling the number of constables entering the NT police force, more Territorians in the Northern Territory police force - and I will invite people in the Northern Territory from anywhere in the Territory, either Aboriginal people or of any other ethnic background to apply to be in the police force. I believe there is only one police officer with a Greek background and I believe there are one or two Italians. I have not seen any Chinese that I can recall. We have police officers or auxiliaries or Aboriginal police officers, but I have seen only one police sergeant of Aboriginal descent. I would like these numbers to increase and I am pretty sure that this government will do anything possible to increase these numbers for the police force to have the same mix as the mainstream Territory community.
We want to improve the living and working conditions to keep our experienced police in the Territory. One of the issues that was raised, and that was raised by the police themselves, was housing. My colleague, the member for Wanguri, travelled in an unidentified police car around neighbourhoods where police live in Darwin and in Alice Springs. What he found was that police are given houses – Housing Commission houses, no problem with that - but the houses were not maintained, houses that had bare yards with a rotary hoist and living among the same people that they will face every day either committing an offence or disorderly conduct or other issues. So, day after day, their family was in an area, totally unsuitable, in substandard housing.
I recall from my days as an environmental health officer that I had the sad duty to issue a condemnation order on a house provided to a public servant; this situation is not only for the police. It has happened to other public servants and especially as you moved out of Darwin it happened more often.
Mr O’Sullivan did a fantastic job. But what I really appreciate is that Mr O’Sullivan had the guts to stand out and say, ‘I am prepared to do this report as long as you give me commitment that this report will be totally independent, will not have political interference by the government or by the minister,’ and this assurance was given and the minister and the government kept that promise. Mr O’Sullivan delivered 112 recommendations which this government accepted. On several occasions, the previous government had commissioned reports and surveys and, when it came to the crunch, either they would not accept the recommendations, or accepted part of them, or some of them, but not the ones that would make the difference. And that is very sad.
Mr O’Sullivan found that the Northern Territory police force was run down over a decade. Even the Leader of the Opposition admitted himself today that he could have done a bit better in some areas. The reality is that the recruitment freeze from 1991 to 1994 left the Northern Territory police with a shortage of experienced policemen. And what happened? The Leader of the Opposition, on the first day the report was released, went on radio and blamed the police commissioner of the day. He was here, he had the audacity here today to preach to us about not blaming previous ministers, not blaming previous governments. He blamed his own government’s police commissioner for 1991 to 1994. To his credit, he was not here; he was not a politician 1994, but he belongs to the party that ignored the request of the police commissioner. At the same time, he blamed the police commissioner.
Mr O’Sullivan found that the number of police available for operations was always fewer than the number of police positions recorded on paper. That was the famous CLP ‘paper police’. The only paper police I know that were effective were the paper police that Swedish police used on speedways to make motorists believe there was a police patrol in the area and so they slowed down. The CLP paper police were totally ineffective because they were nowhere to be seen, only in their imagination.
We had a problem and we had to face the problem and find a solution. Yes, we did face the problem. We had the courage to face the problem and to commission the report. We accepted the report and we are accepting all the recommendations of the O’Sullivan Report. We are going to provide extra recruitment for 28 Aboriginal community police officers and two extra police auxiliaries. We are going to provide for more than 80 civilian administrative, technical and professional roles to be created to address the current lack of support for our police. Three new patrols, including a foot and bicycle patrol for Darwin northern suburbs – read: Casuarina. A new foot patrol for Darwin central business district, something that has been requested by the public and the business community in the central business district for years. The business community that you are now telling us that we are not listening to or consulting with is something you ignored. You ignored their pleas, not only their pleas, but the pleas of the public. We had cases in the central business district when people were bashed early in the morning, late at night, and the police were nowhere to be seen. The police could not be seen because they were not there.
In addition, the police department and my own department will be working very closely to address some of the issues identified by the O’Sullivan Report with regards to police housing. One thing that is identified in the report, one over which you should hang your head in shame, is that police in the Northern Territory did not have occupational death or incapacity insurance. I recall very well when Glen Huitson was killed that there was a collection and a lottery to provide money for his wife and their children to have a decent living because the police did not have proper cover for a police officer. If I had died as an Environmental Health Officer under the government’s own plan, my wife would have received nearly $300 000. That was the government’s superannuation plan for life insurance. Glen Huitson was killed by a criminal, and they had to have a lottery to collect money for his wife and his family. That is absolutely pathetic! If everything else was unacceptable in this report, this is one thing that should be accepted, is accepted, and will ensure that police have the protection and the backing of this government.
In the past, the Conservative governments always claimed to be the ones who looked after police, the ones against crime. The reality is this is only empty words. This Labor government, accused of not supporting police, soft on crime, this is the government that has bitten the bullet, commissioned a report, and adopted 112 recommendations in the report. This is the government putting $75m from the budget to support the police. This is the government that is backing the police. This is the government that will provide real police for the Territorians.
Dr BURNS (Environment and Heritage): Madam Speaker, this is a very significant report in the scheme of the Northern Territory. It is a comprehensive report that has been delivered by someone with great integrity, and that is Jim O’Sullivan.
As most would know, Jim O’Sullivan was a police commissioner in Queensland and he followed on at a time when the police in Queensland were in grave disrepute. I am not for a moment making any suggestion that the police force in the Northern Territory was or is in disrepute, but it is a measure of his integrity that following the scandals around Sir Joh Bjelke Petersen, and Commissioner Lewis who went to gaol, and also very seedy characters like Don ‘Shady’ Lane, the Liberal member who was sent to jail, an ex-special branch policeman …
Mr Dunham: What about the paedophile in the Labor Party? You want to run through the criminal record of various politicians. What about the bloke who was in charge of the Labor Party?
Dr BURNS: I am talking about Jim O’Sullivan. The member for Drysdale can say what he likes, but those of us who lived in Queensland during that time will never forget the likes of Don ‘Shady’ Lane, Sir Joh Bjelke Petersen and Commissioner Lewis, who served time in jail. You might not like to hear about it but that is the history.
However, someone like Jim O’Sullivan certainly has brought the Queensland police force right away from that. I knew many members of the Queensland police force, through my friends, their fathers were policemen, very decent people and they were ashamed about what was going on in Queensland at that time. There was an opportunity for the Queensland police force, under the leadership of Jim O’Sullivan, to draw right away from that seedy past.
He is a man of great integrity. One only has to look at the comprehensive report he has delivered for Territorians to know that he has done his job exceedingly well. I do not think it hurts to read, once again, the terms of reference that Mr O’Sullivan was given, because they were given by the government, and I see them as very open, very wide. It enabled him to do a thorough and comprehensive job. The terms of reference:
required an assessment and report upon current and emerging resource requirements of the Northern
Territory Police, in the context of:
(a) the Northern Territory government’s policy and priorities to build a safe and secure community,
including a continued emphasis on the protection and preservation of life and property, addressing
the underlying causes of crime, and reducing antisocial behaviour within the community;
(b) the purpose and directions strategy and service delivery plans of the Northern Territory Police; and
(c) unique factors influencing delivery of policing services in the Northern Territory, including remoteness, demographic and cultural issues.
I believe these terms of reference are very comprehensive. Implicit and explicit within those terms of reference is the honesty of this government in trying to address a whole range of issues, not least of all, the underlying causes of crime. Crime has been with us from time immemorial, there is no doubt about that, but I think the previous government studiously ignored a major underlying cause of crime in the Northern Territory community and that, of course, was drug use, drug abuse and the associated crime with that.
These terms of reference recognise, in a mighty way, our commitment and our priorities, giving us the information to build on our policies to build a safe and secure community. That is what we are about and I am glad that this report has been handed down. It is very comprehensive, it is very long. I would have to confess to not reading all of the report but I have read substantial …
Dr Lim: You have been given a copy. This was a Cabinet submission, you did not even read it, shame on you. A Cabinet minister not reading papers, what a disgrace.
Dr BURNS: What I have said is I have not read each and every word of this report, but I have read substantial parts of it, unlike some members opposite.
Dr Lim: What a disgrace!
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, order!
Dr Lim: And he stands there and admits it.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, member for Greatorex.
Dr BURNS: I will jump over the foolishness of the other side. I am being honest here. I have not read each and every word in this report but I do know the substantial recommendations. I have read through all the recommendations in this report and I have read all the appendices. I am very confident that I am very familiar with this particular report.
Mr Dunham: Not having read it!
Members interjecting.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Dr BURNS: I am looking forward to the contribution by the member for Drysdale. There is a conspicuous absence here also. There is a conspicuous absence of the member for Katherine in speaking so far on this particular issue. I am looking forward to his contribution and what he has to say about it. Very important - his contribution is absolutely pivotal in this particular debate. However, I digress.
I have already gone through the terms of reference, and they are very important. They point the way that this government wants to create, sustain and support a safer community here. Of course, policing is a crucial issue in all of this. The background of crime that Mr O’Sullivan has painted is very important and it is honest in what it has done. Certainly, high rates of motor vehicle accidents, violent crime and, to some degree, property crime point – and I believe most people in here would agree – to grog as an underlying cause. That is one that we as a community and we as a parliament are going to have to address in the medium to longer term.
He also points, historically, to low clear-up rates, particularly in the Darwin area, which he ascertains to be around 10% to 13%. He believes it should be closer to 15% to 20%. It has also been publicised that police are under a lot of stress and have to write jobs off, and a reluctance on the part of some business people to report crimes of a small nature. He points to a whole range of problems in a very ‘warts and all’ way, and it is a very honest report. From what the police minister said during Question Time, Mr O’Sullivan had two conditions on taking the job on - one of them was that he would be completely independent and that is what he has done and it is a very good report in that regard.
The other part of his method is that he has extensively consulted. He went to every police station in the Territory and sat down with the police officers there. Being a policeman himself and a policeman of the stature that he is, he was able to gain the confidence of those police officers, and they were probably very open and honest with him, and that is reflected in the report.
In attachment 12, he lists a very comprehensive list of those community groups, individuals and representative community groups that he spoke and consulted with. All in all, it is a very comprehensive report with some very comprehensive recommendations. Those recommendations go to a whole range of issues that cover policing within the Northern Territory.
However, at the heart of it, is basically the call on this government to provide over 200 extra police consisting of 150 new constables and 50 sergeants who would be supernumerary, I believe, to the current numbers - senior sergeants who might come here on a short-term secondment or contract to be available with their experience, to be able to build the police force. Having that sort of experience is very important. Therefore, over 200 police, 28 ACPOs, 37 professional officers and 50 admin support officers who, once they are recruited, would free up possibly even more police - obviously, a lot of staff.
There is $75m extra that this government is willing to find because, as I said, as reflected in the terms of reference, we are very interested to building a safe and secure community with an emphasis on the protection and preservation of life and property, addressing the underlying causes of crime, and reducing antisocial behaviour within the community. That is at the crux of what we want. Why do we want it? Because we know that the community wants it. Each of us who doorknock around the place and had issues surveyed like I had, that goes to the heart of what people want. I suppose there has been an element of blaming this side: they did not do this and why didn’t you do that. However, what we have to do now, following this debate, is to ensure that the recommendations of this O’Sullivan Report are implemented because that is what the community wants us to do.
I do not know how many times as a local member, and before that a candidate, there were complaints from people, ‘I called the police and they took two hours to come and when they came they did not take fingerprints, or didn’t do this or didn’t do that’. I think it comes back to the fact that police for some time have been under pressure in terms of the numbers that they have had available to do the job that needs to be done. What we as a government and what we as a group, as parliamentarians, have to do is to try to ensure that the police have the resources to do the job that the community wants them to do. I am very proud to support the minister’s statement, to support the implementation of the O’Sullivan Report because that is what the community wants us to do.
There was, I suppose, some talk earlier about why it was not done before. All I can say is that we are doing it now. I believe this government - we are responsible fiscal managers, our deficit reduction strategy is in place. The success of budgets that we have had in government have pointed to the fact that we are sticking to our guns with our deficit reduction strategy. This will cost $70m extra over the next few years but we believe it is worth it. We believe that we can work it into our budgets because it is very much a priority for this government and for the community.
In summary, I commend the minister for his statement. It is a very good statement. I certainly commend the O’Sullivan Report and everything that is in it. Now it is up to us as a government to implement the O’Sullivan Report. This is a pivotal report in the history of policing in the Northern Territory and it is also a pivotal report, I guess, for community safety, for all the issues that are in those terms of reference and we as a government are absolutely committed to getting it right.
Mr DUNHAM (Drysdale): Mr Deputy Speaker, my gorge rises and the reason is I have never heard such pap from those opposite in many a long debate. First, we have the member for Arnhem telling us how much he likes bush coppers and it is the Labor philosophy that they like them and support them. I can remember a previous member for Victoria River in this House, Mr Gary Cartwright, and how he pilloried a police officer in a remote community. That community was Wave Hill …
Mr Ah Kit: Am I Gary Cartwright? You nut.
Dr Lim: Withdraw that.
Mr DUNHAM: … and how he created a national incident out of …
Dr Lim: Mr Deputy Speaker, come on. Are you going to let him get away with that?
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Mr DUNHAM: He created a national incident out of what happened at Wave Hill. I shall not recount that here but Hansard is readily available because he was censured over it. It was one of the very few censure motions I have ever seen of an opposition person – though they have become more common place now with this new government.
Then we had the Chief Minister giving us this thing about how she thinks the police are wonderful too. Well, we can remember when she was Leader of the Opposition and she sent the police off on a wild goose chase and verballed the Commissioner of Police. We can remember Mr Bailey who pilloried a policeman whom he claimed that unless you support mandatory sentencing, sorry I am not going to come around, which was a defamation of that particular police officer.
Dr Burns, the member for Johnston, has yet to tell this parliament exactly what his role was in a police investigation which was on foot. We have yet to hear the bottom of that one. We have the Deputy Chief Minister who defamed police by claiming that he knew what their voting intentions were. He said, ‘The police, who largely vote CLP …’ – now I thought it was a secret ballot and I would not make assumptions about how anybody votes, including my wife. Hopefully she votes for me. But I think it is defamatory to say I am a Labor politician and I know you guys are against me because you vote CLP. That is a generalisation and a bigoted assumption that he should not be making.
We also have Dr Burns claiming he had fixed various things in his electorate of Johnston.
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! The member well knows to refer to members by the electorate names.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Could you refer to the member by his correct title, please?
Mr DUNHAM: Yes, the member for Johnston, talking about how he had fixed matters in his electorate, how the itinerants have disappeared from around the pub, he called in various leaders, they talked to them, they were not camping there any more. Then I assume he read the same front page I did that showed itinerants camping in the cemetery - not even in the gates, but in the cemetery.
We have a whole series of form from this mob about how they deal with the police force. The most defamatory we heard in this debate, and we heard it from the member for Casuarina who talked about yes, he had a responsibility, but this government had inherited a liability: the Northern Territory police force. That is disgusting. The Northern Territory police force has nation-leading, if not world-leading, DNA facilities provided by the previous government. It has an air-wing with a new plane provided by the previous government. It has a marine branch. It has an honourable, upstanding and well trained cohort of constables and commissioned officers. If he wants to describe to me what the liability they inherited is, he should have done better than his debate. I, for one, see the Northern Territory police force as a very proud asset of this place.
We had injected into debate, in a guise to give plaudits to Mr Jim O’Sullivan, a little excursion into Joh Bjelke-Petersen in Queensland. I really do not care about Joh Bjelke-Petersen in Queensland, but to trot into this debate here with insinuations about police corruption and political interference and the like, and try to dress it up as some sort of applause for Mr Jim O’Sullivan is a bit trite. The link that is drawn is that somehow this is a feature of the Northern Territory police force, and it is not. The Northern Territory police force is an asset. It is straight. It is something for us to be proud of. It is well resourced, but, agreeably, there could be more resources deployed, and that is something that should be done.
Mr Henderson: You have not read the report, either.
Mr DUNHAM: The interjection is that I have not read the O’Sullivan Report. The O’Sullivan Report is not available to members of this parliament in hard copy.
Mr Henderson: It is on the Net.
Mr DUNHAM: It is on the Net! This is the man here, when we talked about our procurement policy, said: ‘No, it is not a policy until you table it. You cannot just put it on the web and assume people are able to access it. You have to table it. Unless you table it in parliament, it is not a policy’. Maybe that is a fair cop with procurement, but I think this report should be tabled here. I also think that if you were a Cabinet minister making decisions about $75m, you would read the submission.
There are some people in this parliament who have been provided with a copy. I notice that the Independents have and the Leader of the Opposition has. I assume Cabinet was. I assume every Cabinet member was given a submission and copy of the report. $75m is a lot of money, and I would want to make sure, if I was making decisions about that sort of stuff, that I read it and the report was something that I was very familiar with. For a person who proudly parades his credentials of a scholar of renown and a researcher of note, I find it absolutely incredible that a report which says: ‘Give me money; $75m of it’, would not be read by him. I find that incredible.
If we are going to talk about this, let us get out two positions right. The position here from the CLP government has been well established by the speakers who came before me. That position is, essentially, that we support our police service. We believe it is a good police service. We believe that they face difficulties that are unique to this part of the world. We believe that many of the problems that they face are within the competence of other agencies to fix, and we believe they should be supported by government in a bipartisan fashion. I have already told you that has not necessarily been the case in the past, but there is absolutely no doubt about the support of the CLP government for the Northern Territory police force. That is well and truly on the record and will remain on the record.
We now go to the business about did they have enough staff, was there some action to somehow thwart their ambition. Well, we have spent two years trying to find out how many staff the Northern Territory police force have had. We have spent many times in Hansard talking to this minister about how many staff we have had, and it is only recently we found out that the legacy of the two years of Labor government is one extra sworn officer. One extra sworn officer. There are a variety of documents that parade around.
There are questions, a dorothy dixer from the member for Arafura, and this comes from the May Hansard, it is a question on page 606, Tuesday, 27 May 2003 where, innocently, the question is put to the minister by the member for Arafura – good government, the trade mark of the budget, how we are supporting police to fight crime. The minister then goes through a great parade of all the additional recruitment - he does the pluses but he does not mention the minuses. There are hundreds here and hundreds there, and 60 recruits. Well, it took us a long time, but we found out that the answer is one. One new cop. And what we found out in Alice Springs is that from the establishment of 134 there are 120 - 14 below strength.
That is our concern. Compound this with the minister telling us that crime is going down in Alice Springs. Compound it with the minister telling us at parliament in Alice Springs in April that police have crime under control, and it was a mere figment of everybody’s imagination to believe that crime is a problem in Alice Springs:
- … there is too much crime in Alice Springs. However, if the community and the police get together and
work hard, with the support of their local members, we will start to drive those crime rates down. They
are already going down despite the claims of members opposite. Just think what we could do in this
community with a bit of positive support from those members opposite.
So what he is saying is, is that there are enough coppers. They were 14 under and crime was going down. I guess you can imagine what they could do if they were full strength.
We now have a report that says, ‘Alice Springs … additional uniform police for general duties’. If I was a cynic, and you can easily become a cynic when you start to query the government about some of these statistics. Yes, they could give them additional uniformed general duties police, they could give them 14, which would bring them up to establishment. What they want in Alice Spring is additional police, and what the minister tried to tell us in that debate about how trite the whole matter of crime was and how crime was going down, has been put as a lie by Mr Jim O’Sullivan, because what we found is that there is a need for additional police in Alice Springs. Surprise, surprise. We told you in April.
Various members have been telling us that they have a handle on this, and they were all external of the police force. Look, for instance, at the answers given by the Attorney-General to petitions. He has told us that, in Alice Springs, police report there were 908 less disturbances dealt with in the 12 months to April 2002-03 compared to the previous year, a drop of 14%. Records for all property offences show there were 741 recorded offences less in Alice Springs This represents a drop in property offences of 18%. Can someone tell me how this formula works? You have the Alice Springs police numbers undermanned by 14; they have secured a drop of 18% in property offences and 14% in antisocial behaviour, and the minister is telling us they need more resources. I would probably agree with the last case, because that was the case we put to him.
The case we put to him in Alice Springs is this is nonsense. There is criminal behaviour, there are issues on the street that require regulatory enforcement. They do not require some treatment program, education program, crime prevention seminar, and the like. They require coppers. We knew it was the case because the minister for Centralian affairs had told us that the Alice Springs Hospital was like a war zone; that is what he told us. What people told us when we doorknocked, what people told us in Alice Springs, what other commentators were telling us, was exactly the opposite of what the minister for police chose to believe in Alice Springs a couple of months back.
He has now come in here saying: ‘Oh, we have a bit of a crime problem’. Well, hurrah! Wake up, sleepy! We knew that back in April. We told you April; the people of Alice Springs told you in April. You tried to pretend it was some sort of a plot, some sort of CLP trick - the cunning devices of Richard Lim had paraded crime as a big issue, but the Labor Party was not having any of this: ‘We know we have it covered’. Rubbish! How can you come in here with these numbers now, in the face of what you are trying to tell us? You are trying to tell us there is not a problem.
Let us stay with the statistics. I live in the electorate of the member for Wanguri, and I received in a letterbox a week ago – this is August – this faded photocopy and it has: ‘Attacking the cause of crime’ on one page, ‘For more information ring the justice minister’s office’. Other page: ‘For more information ring the police minister’s office’. I assume it is a government publication. It is dated, curiously, June 2003. So, it takes from his electorate office – what is that? - maybe a kilometre or a bit from my house - six weeks to get this into my letterbox. Let us have a look at it. In it he runs through the key features: ‘Extra coppers; more foot patrols supporting our police; allocated additional money; numbers up 50 officers.’ He knew in late June that while they have promised 50 officers, they only delivered one. He knew that.
This minister has a very cunning trick of talking about the ‘ons’ and not the ‘offs’. If you want to run a balance sheet you have to tell us what money came in and what money went out. If you want to run an issue of establishment, tell us how many people were recruited and how many left, because that is how you work out your establishment. Therefore, to parade to the northern suburbs this business about extra coppers coming - there is a little photo of police graduates: ‘Twenty-seven new officers graduated from training in May bring the number of new officers on the streets since the government took office to 113’. ‘The number of new officers on the streets since the government took office to 113’. ‘Sixteen of the new constables were posted to Darwin’. Most people in the suburbs reading that would think: ‘Gee, there are an extra 113 coppers and there are 16 of them in Darwin’. That is rubbish! He might well have recruited them, but he did not tell us they were going at higher levels than coming; that they were leaving the force.
These numbers are not nett numbers. He is conveniently telling us in the northern suburbs that all these recruits have started, they are all on the street and they add to police effort, when we know that we are barely treading water.
When the member talks about ‘empty promises’ – and there was a fair bit of that – I remind him that if he goes to McAulay Centre and has a look at the DNA building in front of that station, he will see that that is a very significant crime fighting tool. It was provided by the CLP. If he looks at the methodology that it was set up under, he will see that it is very effective and is a model for other jurisdictions, including international jurisdictions. He will see that, if he looks at the hit rate that comes out of that particular institution in getting the baddies and taking them out of action, it is a most effective crime fighting tool. That was put in virtually as soon as the technology and the science became available to the Territory. Therefore, do not ever give us this story about how we just wrung our hands and were not really interested in catching the crooks; that it was not a big issue.
The back-patting about ‘We would like to hit 60% locals’ is also disgusting. We should be hitting 100% locals. We should be aiming …
Mr Henderson: What did you guys do?
Mr DUNHAM: It is not what you achieve; it is what you aim for. You should aim to have a local police force.
Mr Henderson: You had 60% coming from interstate.
Mr DUNHAM: You should aim to have a local police force. I will admit that in the medium term that is difficult to achieve, given that if you want the merit principle to apply, there will be very meritorious candidates from other jurisdictions. I will admit that.
What we have to look at is how we put the police force out as a career; how we train young people; how we induct people through Junior Police Rangers – another good CLP initiative – and issues like this. The recruitment action does not work on putting an ad in the paper and seeing how much talent turns up. For instance, I thought the Police Expo was very good. The last one was run during the CLP’s time. When is the next one? For instance, the Blue Light Discos ran on a very regular basis under the CLP. They are hardly running at all. For the minister to say: ‘There seems to be a lack of knowledge about police by the young people and the school graduates’, there are things that he can do that are promotional that create an awareness among young people that this is a career choice. The Expo was one of the best things I have seen about engagement of the community between the Northern Territory police force and the citizenry of this place. It opened the facility, it ran them through diving, mounted police, forensics, finger printing, firearms, the whole works; and for some reason, it is too hard to do any more. Well, that would be a good start for it. Blue Light discos out in Aboriginal communities was a great effort in interaction between young people and the police force. It has just virtually stopped happening.
It should not require debates of this nature or Question Time or some sort of government push or exposure in the media to get them working. These are basic fundamentals of promoting the police force in the community in which it serves. I would be very careful about trying to point fingers at this side of the House in a sense that somehow we are neglectful, disowning or even in some way, we have a cultural cringe or are embarrassed of our police force. We are immensely proud of it. Several of us on this side have relations and close friends who have served or are serving within the Northern Territory police force. If you look at some of the rhetoric about our motivation, it is fairly offensive, but that is typical of debates of this nature.
The minister’s statement is full of that sort of rhetoric, that combative rhetoric, and it is also used as a convenient filibuster when the Chief Minister was under attack over a foolhardy decision that she has made and cannot explain. This statement was trotted out, in contravention of standing orders, I might add, Mr Deputy Speaker, and was trotted out again as a question for the edification of members, who had sat through exactly the same tripe a couple of hours before. You have to worry when they have to say quick, let us do a dorothy dixer on that stuff Hendo was talking about because it all looks like it is a really good attack on the CLP. Well, it is not. It is a very flat attack. The rhetoric in here is the stuff that, whoever up there is writing for you, sack them. It is rubbish.
It is not intended in any way to promote a genuine consensus debate. If you really want to show your bona fides, start with at least the Chief Minister maybe admitting and apologising for the wild goose chase she sent the Commissioner of Police and others on. I will not go back to Mr Cartwright or to Mr Bailey because they have both left this House, but certainly, the member for Johnson could be more helpful in putting to rest the case that he is involved in.
Dr Burns: It is already put to rest.
Mr DUNHAM: Well, not in this House it is not. Not in this House. And I think it is one of those things, if you really want to talk about the deployment of police, and you are able to stand up and say, ‘I need three coppers …
Members interjecting.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, I cannot hear myself. Order! Member for Drysdale, your time has expired.
Dr Lim: Mr Deputy Speaker, may I …
A member: It is too late, you are too slow.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services is summing up.
Mr HENDERSON (Police, Fire and Emergency Services): No, Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the debate be adjourned.
Motion agreed to; debate adjourned.
Dr Lim: No, he has spoken already. He cannot move the motion.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Are there any more statements?
Dr Lim: No they cannot. He has spoken, they have all spoken, they cannot move …
Members interjecting.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is a new statement.
Dr Lim: They cannot move the motion be adjourned. That is out of order.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, it is not.
Dr Lim: The minister has already spoken to it.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Minister for Environment and Heritage.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
Litter Abatement and Resource Recovery Strategy
Litter Abatement and Resource Recovery Strategy
Dr BURNS (Environment and Heritage): Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to give a ministerial statement on litter abatement and resource recovery strategy. The future of the Northern Territory as a clean, green tourist destination fundamentally rests on maintaining our natural capital. It is these assets that people come from all over the world to see. It is also the foundation upon which our great Territory lifestyle is built. More than any other capital city, we live, eat and play outdoors.
Against this background, I believe that we must acknowledge that our natural assets remain under threat from the excesses of over-packaging and its careless disposal. While most people no longer throw their empties out the car window as they drive along, we nevertheless have become a throw-away society. Our remote beaches in Arnhem Land are littered with thongs and old fishing nets, empties are scattered across our urban park lands and plastic bags find their way into our waterways.
These impacts, however, do not just stop at litter. Research looking at each person’s ecological footprint, that is, the natural resources used to sustain our current lifestyles, indicates that if everyone in the world consumed resources at the level of Australians and Territorians, we would need an area of land equal to at least three earths. We are spending our natural capital when we should be living off the interest. This is the fundamental shift that we need to make if we are going to live sustainably.
Clearly, the Territory community does not accept this and wants to do something about it. I know this first hand from talking with my constituents and also from the strong calls for action by local government, non-government environment groups, and other community organisations. As a government, we have listened to this message and considered our response carefully and responsibly.
Today, I have pleasure in outlining the detailed measures that this government will be implementing under the Litter Abatement and Resource Recovery Strategy. The strategy will be implemented over the next three years with five main objectives:
changing the way people dispose of their rubbish;
improving litter and recycling services and infrastructure;
establishing better regulatory mechanisms to support community and industry initiatives;
obtaining better information on litter and recycling in the Territory to better target initiatives
and monitor their success; and
creating more open and effective collaboration and coordination between government, the
community and industry on litter management and resource recovery.
To progress these objectives, the strategy includes some important initiatives. First, the beverage industry will contribute $1.5m over the next three years and half of this funding will be available for initiatives that will include small grants and strategic projects. An annual small grants program will be established to assist local communities improve litter management, resource recovery and recycling. Projects potentially eligible for funding could include provision of can crushing machines or balers; provision of recycling bins; culturally appropriate community education; local clean up programs; and litter bin trials and public place recycling trials.
There are many ways in which the community can improve recycling and reduce litter if the appropriate assistance and encouragement is provided. For example, I recently had the opportunity to launch a litter and recycling campaign for the Mindil Beach Markets. This is a great project that has been established by the Mindil Beach Sunset Market Association and the Environment Centre. It is exactly the sort of initiative I anticipate coming under the small grants program: local people initiating local solutions for local problems. However, communities acting alone will not solve the litter problem. We also need to better understand the broader issues that limit the adoption of effective litter abatement or recycling, and develop approaches that remove these barriers. For example, there is little point in developing efficient recycling services such as curbside collection if there are no markets for the material collected or the available transport does not make it cost effective.
The strategic program under the strategy will therefore foster partnership between government, industry, local government, indigenous organisations and research institutions to address issues such as market development for recycled material, impediments to the transport of recycled materials to markets, training programs for better litter management in remote communities, and regional coordination to achieve better efficiency and cost effectiveness across the Territory.
Some litter problems are best resolved at the national level. I recently participated in discussions with my state and Commonwealth ministerial counterparts on the plastic bag issue. The problem of single use, lightweight plastic bags is truly staggering. Australia consumes some 6.9 billion plastic bags each year. If we bring this down to a local level, that is almost 700 000 plastic bags being used in Darwin every week. The impacts are significant on the marine environment, on our waterways and in our public places. As consumers, we have fallen in love with the convenience of plastic bags and we do not change our behaviour overnight. For their part, the supermarkets have embraced the improved efficiency that plastic bags give at the checkout. Clearly, resolution of a problem of this scale requires national action by the retailers, consumers and governments if we are to get an effective and efficient response. Alternative bags need to be developed which are more environmentally friendly and considerable work is progressing on multi-use plastic bags and biodegradable bags. Supermarkets need to look at their checkout practices and designs. Multi-use bags, for example, will generally be filled with a greater weight of produce, necessitating changes to checkout design to ensure that occupational health and safety for operators is not compromised.
Collectively, environment ministers across Australia are firm in their commitment to see that the waste and litter associated with single use plastic bags is stopped. Whilst I think the time frame could have been tougher, I am pleased that together we have agreed that single use plastic bags should be phased out completely within five years, and we are working with the Retailers Association on a strong code of practice that will see this achieved.
Other retailers are approaching the problem from a different angle. Bunnings recently announced that from September 2003, all disposable plastic bags provided to customers will attract a 10 levy. The money collected will be provided to the National Association of Keep Australia Beautiful for community-based environmental campaigns. To complement the levy, Bunnings will be offering a number of alternatives to customers, including free reused cardboard boxes as well as reusable bags. I commend Bunnings on this initiative.
We can see that we need a comprehensive, broad-based approach to the diverse range of litter problems. We need flexibility to target different solutions for different problems, and we need to allow solutions to be developed at the local, regional and national scale. Only a broad, comprehensive strategy, such as the one I have announced today, can do this; inflexible narrow approaches simply will not do.
The strategy places considerable emphasis on education. I am pleased to announce that Keep Australia Beautiful will continue to receive support for its operations. In addition, I have made an offer of $150 000 to Keep Australia Beautiful for the delivery for this year of the very successful Territory Tidy Towns program. I am keen to see this program continue and to work with KAB to develop a stronger funding base for the program into the future. I firmly believe that we need a new funding model for Territory Tidy Towns, one that has a broad industry sponsorship base with government as a foundation sponsor. The Tidy Towns program delivers so much in terms of better environment and improved community pride, and it also fulfils an important capacity building role.
The Litter Abatement and Resource Recovery Strategy does not include the option of container deposit legislation. We will have our debate on this tomorrow, however, I would like to make it clear that the strategy is certainly not soft on industry, or those in our community who choose to litter. We need strong litter laws that are properly enforced. Therefore, the Litter Act will be reviewed with a view to strengthening penalties for litter, making them consistent across the Territory, and ensuring that there are adequate resources for enforcement. Industry also needs to play its part, and to this end, government has extracted a very significant and substantial commitment from the beverage industry that will see them invest $1.5m over the next three years on the delivery of a number of initiatives under the strategy. Empty beverage containers are, however, only once source of litter and, accordingly, I will be writing to other industry sectors seeking similar funding commitments.
Industry contributions will be placed into a Litter Abatement and Resource Recovery fund. Expenditure from the fund for projects under the small grants and strategic projects program will be overseen by a Litter Abatement Advisory Committee. The terms of reference for the advisory committee will be:
to asses the merits of funding applications under the grants scheme;
for promoting better litter abatement and recycling; and finally;
for improvements.
The advisory committee will have broad representation from local government, industry and non-government environment groups. I will shortly be seeking expressions of interest for appointment to the committee, and I aim to secure strong representation from the regions. I will ensure that industry fulfils these voluntary commitments to the Territory community and, if they fall short of the mark, I will not hesitate to examine other mandatory measures to make them take their share of responsibility for the problems that their packaging creates. Accordingly, the strategy provides for the Waste Management and Pollution Control Act to be reviewed, with a view to establishing the capacity to require enforceable litter reduction and resource recovery plans from an industry sector that is not fulfilling its environmental responsibilities.
The Arid Lands Environment Centre recently put a proposition to me that industry be required to meet mandatory targets for the recovery of packaging. I would prefer to see industry improve their performance voluntarily; however, if this does not happen, then the proposal by the Arid Lands Environment Centre will be considered as part of the enforceable litter reduction and resource recovery plans.
The strategy will give Territorians a comprehensive and integrated mechanism to reduce the impact of litter, and to reuse some of the resources we are literally throwing away. Unlike CDL, this strategy will not just address litter from beverage containers. Initiatives will also focus on plastic bags, food wrappers and other items that litter our environment.
I firmly believe that government should be leading the way on recycling. The strategy will, therefore, require each government agency to prepare a waste minimisation and recycling plans for its activities and the services and products it buys. Paper usage is one area that I am very keen to see examined in these plans. My Office of Environment and Heritage estimates that across government the simple act of changing computer settings to automatically print double sided, unless otherwise instructed, would save approximately 240 tonnes of paper, or $480 000, and at least 36 tonnes of carbon dioxide annually. As a result of this initiative, I believe we will see a cleaner, greener government that is leading from the front.
You cannot manage what you cannot measure. The recently released report by the Australian Bureau of Statistics highlights that the proportion of households involved in recycling is lower in the Territory than in other states. However, we have comparatively little current information on overall litter levels across the Territory, and our recycling rates in terms of the percentage of virgin materials that are recycled. Nor do we have a good handle on the overall expenditure of governments on litter abatement against which we can compare the cost of various options for better management. Specific initiatives in the strategy will enable these questions to be answered and ensure that the outcomes of the strategy are measurable. The bottom line will be whether litter is reduced and recycling rates improved. I am confident that this strategy will do both.
It is also imperative that there is a strong focus within government for the delivery of the strategy. The Office of Environment and Heritage will, therefore, take responsibility for coordinating the implementation of the strategy, and administering the Litter Act. As a result of these changes, responsibility for litter and waste management across the Northern Territory will, for the first time, be consolidated in a single agency under one minister. This will ensure that the broad range of initiatives implemented under the strategy will complement each other and contribute to long-term solutions to litter problems and more effective recycling and resource recovery activities. This is also another positive step in strengthening the independent Office of Environment and Heritage, and $225 000 has been set aside for this task over the next three years.
This strategy is backed up with a single largest public and private investment in litter and recycling for the Territory. $2.385m will be spent over the next three years to tackle litter and improve recycling and I will be working hard to increase this funding commitment by securing further industry contributions.
The strategy will be community owned, address all the components of the litter problem, not just beverage containers, and provide both incentives and the necessary regulatory muscle to ensure compliance. It will provide a long term solution to the litter problems in the Northern Territory and contribute to more efficient resource use. Most importantly, the strategy will lead to a better, healthier environment for the enjoyment of Territorians and our visitors from around the world.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend the strategy for litter abatement and resource recovery. I move that the Assembly take note of this statement.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Mr Deputy Speaker, in rising to respond to the minister’s statement, I observe that this really is very much a recycled statement, premature recycled statement.
Members interjecting.
Dr LIM: Somebody laughed. There you go. Nothing that the minister has said today has not been said before except that we are not going to have CDL. That is what he says. Let me draw some points for you. The minister says clearly the Territory community does not accept this and wants something done about the litter problem and he has talked to lots of his constituents. They have told him they want CDL - through all the research, through all the canvassing we have done, through all the polling we have done in the Territory, it is about wanting CDL. But this government says CDL cannot be had, ‘It is not for you, you will not have it’. This is someone who claims to have great intellectual depth and he has not understood public comment, comment that has been given to him over and over again since he has been the minister. I have told you, I have said in this House, CDL is something that Territorians want and it is time that this government listens to people, but, they in government decided they were not going to have that.
The minister talks about it is one thing to develop efficient recycling services, to ensure that materials are collected, so that it can be done in the most cost effective way. This minister, again with his great intellect, does not realise that with the small population that we have in the Territory, we do not have the mass, the bulk, that needs to be available to ensure that recycling with local industry can work. It does not work. We have tried it, we have looked at it. In fact, when I was on the town council many years ago in Alice Springs, we looked at how we could recycle material in Alice Springs. We are only half the distance to Adelaide compared to Darwin and we could not effectively send the recycled material to the bigger centres in this country. We just do not have the population or the bulk of waste material, the waste stream, needed unlike Adelaide with more than 1 million people for recycling to actually work. Let’s take newspapers which are imported into Alice Springs from all across the country. To get newspapers into Adelaide was going to cost us more to transport the paper than the paper was worth. There have to be other ways of looking at how we can deal with the waste stream in the Northern Territory.
The minister talks about single use, light weight, plastic bags and the numbers that are being used. Let me suggest to him that those plastic bags are not single use plastic bags. In fact, the majority of them are used at least twice, if not more, by many households. I use the plastic bags I get from Coles and Woolworths as my garbage disposal system. I do not have to buy more plastic bags for my rubbish bins. I use those bags. That is how you can recycle those plastic bags, and they do that in many households in the Northern Territory.
But remember also, and this minister does not think about it obviously, that some of those plastic bags are single use because they bring home your food, particularly your raw meat, for instance. You would not want to have a cloth bag that has been contaminated with blood, dried over several days, holding another supply of fresh meat. That would definitely produce a huge problem regarding health of our food for Territorians. This minister, with his great intellect, has not even thought about that, and he is supposed to have worked for a health facility some time ago in his other life.
We have to seriously consider that the waste stream in the Northern Territory is not very significant. Of course, it is important to consider our waste stream in the broader context, but the minister cannot have it both ways. He cannot say that we need a comprehensive, broad based approach to the diverse range of litter problems and we need flexibility to target different solutions to different problems. But, we have the quarantine that CDL will not be considered. That is an oxymoron statement, if I ever heard one. We will consider this broad spectrum of methods, this broad, flexible way of dealing with the waste stream, but we must not look at this isolated CDL. That has to be outside the system. Why should it? It should be part of an overall consideration of how we deal with the waste stream in the Territory.
Whilst I applaud the minister for having a strategy, that strategy should include all forms of waste management - not all but one. If that is not an indication of his ministry being bought by the industry, I do not know what is. He has been told by industry: ‘Get CDL out of the way and we will give you $500 000 a year for the next three years’. I will tell you what: you are not going to use that $500 000 a year to fund KAB and the Tidy Towns Program. For that, you have to find money from somewhere else, and that is why he was compelled. He has been compelled to put $150 000 a year into the KAB and Tidy Towns Program. It really is a tragedy. I have been to many of the Tidy Towns awards and seen the programs out bush. It is one of the best programs we have had in the Territory. I recall many years ago when one of the presentation nights was held in Alice Springs and the Chief Minister of the day was sitting next to me. I said to him: ‘See those kids up there on the stage: clean skinned, healthy, fit, well fed’. It is all about hygiene in communities. It could out bush, it could be Alice Springs, Katherine, any town, but it is about hygiene. When I pointed that out to the then Chief Minister, it clicked that this is more than just keeping the place clean; it is about the whole ethos of having pride in the community and doing something about it.
This program deserves a lot of support and $150 000 is barely enough to do anything. It is a real indictment on this minister that he has been bought out by the industry with $500 000 a year, and he only finds $150 000 in his budget, outside the $500 000, to fund KAB and Tidy Towns. It is important to understand that the $500 000 is not going to land in his lap, either, because much of the $500 000 is being used to promote a national anti-litter campaign, which he has absolutely no control over. That is where he needs to understand that the industry is not about looking after him. It is his role to look after the Territory and bring industry to contribute. This way, the industry has him by the short and curlies. I suppose when he gets his advisory committee together, the members of his advisory committee will be those he picks who do not have CDL as their focus. How is he going to deal with that? ‘CDL guys, you are out of the way; we are not going to hear from you, we are not going to listen to you, you are not going to have any representation’. That is such a hypocritical way for this ministry to deal with the environment in the Territory.
There are no page numbers on his statement, but he talked about paper usage. This is one area that he is keen to examine. He is going to encourage using double sided printing. With his statement he did that very well, every page was double sided. And then, guess what? He forgot when he had his attachments printed, didn’t he? His attachments are all one side of the paper. What a hypocrite! If he was really conscious about being environmentally aware and trying to save money and save carbon dioxide in the air, and saving paper and all that, he would be telling his staff, ‘Hey, don’t let that out to the opposition, they will scream at me. At least shred them and start again’. But no, he printed it, and he got up and showed it to us. Well, what a hypocrite. What a hypocrite. You cannot even get it right. You got your speech right, well done, but when it came to the attachments, what, didn’t you read the attachments either? Just like you did not read the other report that you were talking about earlier. Is that what it was? Didn’t you see the attachment?
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Direct it through the Chair, please.
Dr LIM: Well, obviously he did not see the attachments, did he? He could not have. What a disgrace! For you to get up and try and laud how well you have done with the environment, and how well you have done with the litter campaign, well, do it right. You are after all the minister, with all the staff you have, and the great intellect that you have.
Mr Henderson: Tell me about the CDL you introduced. Tell us about it, the one you supported when you were in government.
Dr LIM: Well, I will take on the interjection about the CDL. This government has not been able to articulate what it wants to do. We have already said that we will support CDL. We want you, the government, to bring it in and we want you to give us the details. But you cannot even do that, can you? All you have said to Territorians is, we are not going to look at it at all. Whereas 75% to 80% of Territorians say we want it. You, the government of the people you tell us, would not even consider it. What a shame. You are a disgrace.
Then when the minister talks about the money, how much he is going to put in altogether, the reality is, it is not very much at all. $150 000 for KAB and Territory Tidy Towns, and his independent Office of the Environment and Heritage, he lumped it up in a three-year amount, but the reality is $75 000 a year, one salary. That is all it is, one salary. What is the Office of Environment and Heritage going to do with one person? That is the hypocrisy of the whole business that this minister pretends to present to this parliament. I am very sad to see that he could not at least deal with the issue better.
To bring this on one day before General Business Day, when the member for Braitling proposes to bring on her CDL debate; that is the cynical way this government has addressed Territory issues these last two years. The arrogance that this government has shown Territorians is just beyond belief, and it goes on every day. I am sad to say that many people in the Territory thought that by a change of government - and the CLP were pushed out because things went wrong with us - they thought that this government would be better. In two years, people in the Territory are saying this government has become so arrogant, you cannot get near them, they do not listen and they push their way through. They do not show us anything.
The debates today clearly indicate they do not care what Territorians think. They are not prepared to consult, to demonstrate, to have open and transparent government as they promised. They have done nothing at all. All they have done is steamroll everything through because they have the numbers, and that is a tragedy. In fact, many comments made by yourself, Mr Deputy Speaker, and by members of the opposition, are worthy of consideration, but that side, do they do that? No. All they do is say, we do not care, we will do what we want, we have the numbers, and what we do is going to be right, irrespective of whether Territorians think we are right or wrong. Now, that is not being truly representative government. Sure, governments are elected to lead. But they are also elected to represent the people, and they have not done that.
This statement is really a clear indication that this government has not done that at all. I am very disappointed with what this minister had to say. I had great hopes for this man. I sat with him right from the very beginning of his term, he being the Chairman of the PAC, and I thought this guy has capacity, he has proven intellect. But in the last two years, he has really gone down in my estimation. His intellect is far from what he pretends to be.
I am very disappointed with the statement. CDL should be at least part of the platform - part of it. I am not saying it should be the sole plank in the litter abatement strategy, but it should be at least considered as one of the many planks within the strategy to deal with litter.
Ms LAWRIE (Karama): Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend the minister for his statement. Litter abatement and resource recovery is an issue that is of growing interest to Territorians, just as it is a growing interest throughout our nation and, indeed, the world. Several jurisdictions are beginning to lead the way in litter reduction strategies and it is very timely that the minister brings forward this statement for the House’s consideration and debate.
I congratulate the minister for implementing a small grants program which provides opportunity at the local, grassroots level, for groups to apply to make a real difference in their local community. It was some months ago that I spoke in this House about the disgraceful state of our local parks in Karama and Malak; that the Darwin City Council was failing to meet its duties in cleaning up parks. I read out to the House many letters I have received from schoolchildren who saw all kinds of disgusting litter around their local park. I have written to Darwin City Council making a very simple request for a bin with a lid be placed on a very popular corner of a park in a main street, opposite the shopping centre – it is a very popular thoroughfare – because rubbish regularly overflows out of that current bin and is seen strewn all around the street. That request has fallen on deaf ears. I encourage the minister in his quest to promote partnerships with local government and corporations, because, to my view, local governments are integral to any success in litter abatement and recycling and resource recovery strategies.
I do not think that Darwin City Council, for its part, has really grasped the need to meet its service obligations to the community regarding litter reduction. I have had many constituents say to me: ‘Why are they spending so much money beautifying the dump when our streets look like a dump? They require us to pay higher and higher rates. They are constantly putting up the rates, yet we are not seeing the service, we are not seeing the bang for our buck’.
I communicated with the council and it took me months of lobbying to get them to even beautify an area of garden outside a local child-care centre, because it was a disgraceful eyesore. I commend the council park staff for the beautiful work they did outside that child-care centre, it really lifted the appearance on Kalymnos Drive. Interestingly enough, there is far less litter being dumped along that area than previously when that garden area was an eyesore. I have always held the strong view that if governments and local governments go to the effort of beautification works in areas, the community responds in a very positive fashion by minimising the amount of unacceptable litter that goes through the community.
I note that the minister talks about the issue of plastic bags and the work that is being done at the ministerial council level to reduce plastic bag consumption in our community. I congratulate Coles Karama, for the effort they have been making in encouraging shoppers to not use plastic bags. Quite a few of us are buying our reusable green bags. I find them easier to use than the paper bags, simply because I usually have a couple of kids hanging off my arms, pulling me in various directions while I am trying to shop. I have a range of calico bags as well. As a household shopper trying to feed a family of four, with the best intentions you leave with about seven shopping bags. I have my collection of shopping bags and I am now trying to get into the habit of making sure they are with me each time I go shopping. It is important for politicians to lead the way in showing people that the effort of the individual becomes a major collective change and the community, as a result, is far better for it. My congratulations go to Coles Karama for the efforts I know they are making to reduce the numbers of plastic bags in our community.
I congratulate the minister for the provision of an offer of $150 000 to ensure that Keep Australia Beautiful is in a position to deliver the very popular Territory Tidy Towns awards. I know that Lorna Woods has been concerned about the level of funding Keep Australia Beautiful receives. I note that in his confused comments, the member for Greatorex was trying to indicate that $150 000 funding is not enough for KAB. What he failed to understand is that they also receive an additional $220 000. So, all up $370 000. If you cannot put on terrific awards for $370 000 then I just wonder how much money it would take. Certainly, I know of many organisations that would jump through hoops to get that kind of funding for awards. In saying that, I do not in saying belittle the work that KAB is doing. I know that they are a small, dedicated, hard working team led by Lorna which has over the years developed strong, mutually respectful and trustful relationships with communities right throughout the Territory. I go out of my way to support what the KAB does and I note that more funding is always desirable. I encourage the minister to ensure the success of the Territory Tidy Towns and I was delighted with the offer of $150 000. That was a very generous gesture on his behalf. I look forward to, hopefully, a very positive response from KAB.
I note the establishment of the Litter Abatement Advisory Committee. Its terms of reference are: to assess the merits of funding application under the grant scheme; to make recommendations on funding allocations from the trust fund to the minister; to identify and advise on the merits of new policies, laws and other initiatives promoting better litter abatement and recycling; and to advise on the success of the initiatives in the strategy; and make recommendations for improvements. It is good to see that there will be an advisory committee. Governments can often be quite internal in their own perspectives and by having such advisory committees you get a nice, broad cross-section of ideas, information and expertise coming in. I look forward to seeing some of the results of the advisory committee I am sure the minister will keep us informed on this matter.
I welcome the review into the Waste Management and Pollution Control Act – a long overdue review. Hopefully, it will mean that many different sectors of our industry will indeed clean up their act. I recognise the initiative that the minister has firmly taken on board through the Office of Environment and Heritage in that the government will be leading by example and looking to save approximately 240 tonnes of paper and $480 000 and the reduction of some 36 tonnes of carbon dioxide annually through changing its paper usage throughout all government agencies. I welcome that there will be a proactive role by this office, this more and more independent office, to really oversee government’s actions in litter reduction and such strategies.
I know that the issue of CDL has been a very testy issue. It has been an issue of a previous debate in this parliament I have made it clear that I am a supporter of all litter reduction strategies including CDL, but it is my view that CDL will only work if it is a national scheme. We are too small a jurisdiction to be able to implement what I believe to be a holistic and successful scheme. I know the minister for Education attends the ministerial councils faithfully, and I know that that debate is occurring nationally as well as the plastic bags debate. I urge all jurisdictions to accept and acknowledge that this is a national, legislative requirement and I certainly hope that the Territory will reap the benefits of cooperation through jurisdictions to look at what kind of container deposit legislation could work as a national scheme. The member for Greatorex pointed out his knowledge of the cost issues involved where it becomes literally unviable in a jurisdiction of our size with such a large geographic area. I acknowledge that there are existing models, voluntary container deposit models, such as Santa Teresa and I encourage the advisory committee on litter abatement to look at these models, look at expansion of such models while the national debate continues on what form of container deposit legislation could work, could be viable, throughout the jurisdictions in Australia.
In trying to strengthen the role of the Office of Environment and Heritage, I recognise that some $225 000 will be injected over the next three years. All up, with the various public and private investment in these litter recycling strategies, $2.385m will be spent over the next three years to tackle litter and improved recycling. This is great news for Territorians because I firmly believe we are the custodians for future generations. The more we can do to improve the cleanliness of our environment, the better. Each of us should be doing what we can. I have a regime in my household. I make sure that every time I put out my green bin, it is getting lower and lower, and my recycling bin is more and more full. I have had that strategy in place now for about three years. I have my personal home waste down to about a third of the green bin, and this is a household of four, including children.
What I am saying is that it can be done, and it can be done by us individually. It is important that the government supports these initiatives and strategies. I know our environment minister is very keen to ensure that he and his Office of Environment and Heritage do everything they can. This strategy clearly articulates the way forward, that there is funding, resources and the capacity available to improve the Territory’s record on litter abatement. I call on local governments to step up to the mark. Don’t just take our money through rates, but actually deliver the services we require in terms of working collaboratively with the Northern Territory government to reduce litter, and to be far more effective than they have been in their recycling programs. There are still many questions around about to what degree of recycling is occurring.
I commend the minister for his statement. I know it has been a passion of his since becoming the minister for the environment. I look forward to continuing to work collaboratively with the minister.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I am afraid I have to agree with the member for Greatorex. This is just a recycled strategy. We have been down this path before. I have spent a fair bit of my time on Aboriginal communities and also municipal and local government and we have been down this path. There is nothing wrong with a litter abatement and resource recovery strategy. That is good. But this one is owned by the beverage industry. This one is owned by the industry. This one is funded by the industry; it is not funded by the government. If this money was coming from BIEC as a grant to the government, I might say that is worthwhile, but the purse strings are being held by the industry.
If you wanted to discuss CDL amongst these groups the government is talking about, you will have the same problem that I had when I was a member of the Territory Anti-Litter Committee. I am not praising the opposition. I sat on many a Territory Anti-Litter Committee and wanted CDL, and the opposition, which was then government, continually refused to allow even the discussion of CDL. But that does not mean that this new government should follow that same path. This government should show some leadership. In this case, the government has not shown leadership.
If you go through the minister’s statement, you will see the very same things that TALC used to operate under. It talked about having key objectives of changing the way people dispose of their rubbish. I can tell you now that all the time that the Territory Anti-Litter Committee was in operation, it had very little effect on the way people disposed of their rubbish. Yes, we painted rubbish bins and people went around dressed up in funny costumes. It may have had some effect for a short period of time, but I guarantee if you go out to some of those communities as I have lately, you cannot tell me there has been any effect. I do not believe this program will have any effect, either. Short-term, perhaps, yes.
There are other issues involved in some communities. Some communities, as the Minister for Local Government has said, are dysfunctional. The issues of litter are part of some broader problems that need to be looked in a holistic manner. You are talking about establishing better regulatory mechanisms to support community and industry initiatives - I really do not know what that means. Obtaining better information on litter and recycling in the Territory to better target initiatives and monitor their success - there has been stacks of information on litter and recycling, perhaps not huge in the Northern Territory, but certainly Australia-wide, and you have to ask, why? If you really want to know how much litter goes into the waste system, I guarantee the best way is to sit at Shoal Bay, or sit at Humpty Doo tip, and see exactly what is being dumped. Why are certain things being dumped - because there is not a market for them, because the cost of a lot of these materials is too high. This approach, looking at better ways of resource recovery, I believe is just airy fairy talk.
The reason many of us have pushed CDL is because we know that the CDL system has built into it, as proven in South Australia, a mechanism, which is a monetary mechanism, which allows goods to be recycled from places where it would normally not be viable. You can take cans and bottles from Pitjantjatjara country up near Ernabella in northern South Australia. You can do it from Marla Bore, you can do it from Kangaroo Island. Why - because CDL has an inbuilt monetary system. You cannot do it from Kalkarindji because, by the time you get it to the markets, you would not make any money. You would have to be paying to get it there. I mean, to recycle glass in Darwin is only just a break even project. Talk to people like Merv who used to run the Shoal Bay recycling centre. He will tell you that a lot of these materials just break even, not only because of the cost of the material is so low, and has been reducing over the last few years, but because you have to add the freight on. Do it with CDL, where the consumer does pay a little bit extra, but it gets it to the recycling places. Of course, one of the things you also have to make sure of is that the materials we do use in the Northern Territory are recyclable. I would always be wary of someone introducing a new product that could not be recycled.
The minister also says in a couple of places that, basically, we are not going to introduce CDL because it is too narrow, but CDL should not be narrow. It is an argument that BIEC uses to say that we are picking on their industry. As I have said before, we should be recycling chemical containers. If you go to the Humpty Doo tip at the moment, you will find a whole batch of 20 litre Roundup drums and other insecticide drums sitting there. And they will sit there – I do not know who is going to pick them up, but they will sit there. Perhaps they will blow away, just like the minister for Lands once said was the problem with keeping bottles stored on communities. However, these ones have no place to go, and the reasons they do not have a place to go is that we do not want them in landfill because generally speaking they have residue still laying in the bottom, and two, no one is going to pay for them to go south, it costs too much money. If you put a container deposit on those chemical containers, they would go back. Not 20 ; it has to be something like $10. The retail price of the material in those containers is probably somewhere around $120 to $150. So, to add $10 on to that as a deposit, which you get when you take it back, would make sense. The idea of container deposit legislation being narrow is a fallacy. We should be looking at broadening it so that we can take materials out of the waste stream.
When we talk about communities, even if they are dysfunctional, even if they have problems with employment, if you put a value on that litter, someone will pick it up, because kids are desperate for a few dollars. Many of these kids are hungry. If they know they can get some money for that material, it will be removed, and it will be removed from the waste stream. What also has not been mentioned is that if you cannot get the materials out of an isolated community, then it is going to end up in landfill. CDL removes it not only from the litter stream but from the waste stream, that is the landfill. That is why it is important.
You can have all these beautiful programs. I have seen them all through TALC. I have worked with them. We have painted rubbish bins, we have had them culturally appropriate. However, if you go and look at the landfill you will find it is still full of all the stuff. They might put it in the rubbish bin for a while, but it all ends up in the landfill. CDL covers both: the litter and the waste. And yet, this government had a great opportunity, and great public support behind the idea of CDL, and has missed an opportunity. It has waited; it has listened to BIEC.
I said this before at the beginning of the year, when I said this government has sold us downstream by accepting the money from BIEC. I would have much rather the government stuck to its principles and said: ‘We as a government will introduce this litter abatement scheme under our own scheme’. If people would like to donate money with no strings attached, maybe that might have been all right. But this has strings attached, because when you put people on the various resource strategy groups and the advisory committee and then you see industry stuck in there, I know what will happen: if there is any talk about the alternatives or moving away from this particular strategy, the money will dry up. It dried up previously. If anyone knows the history of TALC, it dried up, and this will happen again. You will be bound by the industry; it will not be a free and open debate about waste.
Minister, you mentioned a few other things, and I must admit I do not agree with the member for Greatorex when he talks about single use plastic bags. Yes, for sure single use plastic bags, like in my household, are used more than once. We then talk about having a lot of newspaper going to waste. Well, perhaps people have forgotten because life has become so easy with single use plastic bags, that most people used to wrap their rubbish up in the newspaper. What a perfect way to get rid of a material that is biodegradable - that is newspaper - and yet saves us from using a material that is not biodegradable - that is plastic.
On that biodegradable issue, minister, you talked about ‘… alternative bags need to be developed which are more environmentally friendly and considerable work is progressing on multi-use plastic bags and biodegradable bags’. When you mentioned biodegradable bags, you will find that they will only breakdown when they are left out in the elements. In other words, when you put them out of the light, they will be just be like ordinary plastic bags and they will still be part of the waste stream. The only way to degrade a bag like that is to actually leave it out in the sun. Once it is back in the landfill it will just stay as it is. It needs the sun to break it down.
Dr Burns: Moisture, Gerry.
Mr WOOD: You can reply to that in your closing speech. However, I do not think that that solves the problem. We are not really after having biodegradable or non-degradable bags. We would prefer to reduce the use of them altogether.
I also congratulate Bunnings. Bunnings’ move to put 10 on each plastic bag is great. I stood in this parliament earlier this year and said we should put 25 on them but got no support from either side. I believe if you did what Bunnings is doing and actually made it 25, you would not have to wait five years for a reduction in plastic bags; they would be gone - simply, they would be gone. As for the problems with the newer, heavy duty plastic bags that are replacing them, I take your comments that you might have to change checkouts for the extra weight and the extra materials you have to carry. The only thing that I would say to that is that it does not really matter. You might have five plastic bags in one hand and five in the other. In this case, you might only have one bag in one hand and one in the other. I do not see the weight actually changing, unless you are going to do a couple of trips. I would like to congratulate Bunnings. Perhaps I should speak to the group I used to work for, Mitre 10, and see whether they would like to do that.
You also mentioned the use of reused cardboard boxes. I remember a supermarket in Nightcliff, Rite Price, when it was operating in the old days before Woolworths took it over, which would always have cardboard boxes out the front. Of course, for the big companies, cardboard boxes do not fit in with corporate image; they do not look very good. However, I know at Rite Price when they had them, many people would take a box. They usually fitted in the boot so all your stuff did not roll around, but people also knew that they were helping reduce waste - you were using a box that, when you finished with, at least you could put it in the garden or something. It is good to see someone like Bunnings looking at that. Again, having worked in hardware for nearly 14 or 15 years on and off, the amount of cardboard boxes that we used to have to tear up and take to the tip because there was no use for them, was quite large.
The minister talked about the funding of Keep Australia Beautiful and I was interested in the comments made by the member for Karama. The statement says that you have made an offer of $150 000 to Keep Australia Beautiful. The member for Karama mentioned a figure of something like $325 000. I cannot find that in the literature that you have given us. In your closing statement I would be interested if you could tell us where the member for Karama got that funding figure. I know that $150 000 is not enough money on its own for Keep Australia Beautiful to run the Territory Tidy Towns program.
Minister, you also mentioned the Litter Act. All I can say is, you can strengthen penalties for the Litter Act all you like; the real problem is catching people who litter. I will probably mention it tomorrow in one of the debates but I really think the government needs to do some things on its own. The land next to BP Palms, that the Minister for Lands and Planning has said to me a number of times is not pristine, is actually Crown land. The dumping of material from the neighbouring caravan park continues to this day. It is covered in palm fronds and all sorts of stuff. There is gravel, there are bits and pieces everywhere, on Crown land. I know of no government officers going out there asking people to clean that up and send that rubbish to the right place, either Shoal Bay or Litchfield Shire dump. You can say you are going to strengthen penalties. I want to know, are you going to act on illegal dumping on Crown land and how are you actually going to catch people? It is a little bit like the discussion that might come up later in this place on fires. How do you catch people? You can have great penalties but how do you catch people? One thing you could do is pop round to a block of land right next to the BP Palms and I can show you a huge amount of rubbish being dumped on Crown land that nobody is doing anything about.
You also have the Litter Abatement Advisory Committee. I call it ‘LAAC’ because I reckon it has going to have a lack of ideas because these ideas have always been round: ‘To assess the merits of funding applications’ - exactly what TALC did. ‘To provide recommendations to me on funding allocations for the trust fund; to identify and advise on the merits of new policies; to advise on the success of initiatives’ - all the things that TALC did. The problem is you have industry stuck in the middle there. I do not have a problem with industry being on advisory committees but in this case it is the industry that leads it; it is the industry that is paying, and it is the industry that will call the tune when it comes to making decisions that they may not like. I just do not believe that it will work.
As regards voluntary commitment, the member for Karama mentioned Santa Teresa where, for some years, they have had a deposit scheme of their own. I could argue that is exactly why CDL works. One of the classic examples of CDL working in the Northern Territory is cans. Cans are CDL. Aluminium cans are the highest recycled product in the Northern Territory and the reason is because you receive approximately something like an eighth or a quarter of a cent per can. You give them to the Cash-a-Can people, you receive money because they are given a value, and that is why it is most successful. The people in Santa Teresa have shown you they can do the same thing with other products. I believe we need to take the bull by the horns. When this debate was being held – and we will debate it again tomorrow – before Christmas and had to go, it simply had to go and I think we have missed the opportunity.
You said in here: ‘Unlike CDL, this strategy will not just address litter from beverage containers’. I agree with you. We need a litter strategy that does take into account food wrappers and plastic bags; maybe untied down loads on vehicles; a common problem. It would be interesting to see if you could come back with statements on how much it costs, as a contract, to clear the Stuart Highway from Darwin to the Arnhem Highway. How much does it cost per year? That is what you are spending in trying to pick up litter. Again, you could reduce that, as I say, with CDL. A focus perhaps should be on loads. How many loads are tied down? I have seen vehicles that are supposed to be delivering rubbish to the tip and there has been more blowing off the vehicle and by the time they get there, they probably do not have to pay as much money, especially if they are paying per tonne. That is an area we should be looking at.
Once again, CDL is not just about beverage. The beverage industry might think it is about that because we generally talk about having drink containers, but we should be thinking much broader. Containers can be anything from baked bean tins to shampoo bottles to liquid soap containers to chemical containers. That is what we should be thinking about. The argument that it is only about beverage containers is exactly what the beverage industry wants to hear, and this is why we have run into so much trouble.
Just a couple of other points. Minister, in your Litter Abatement and Resource Recovery Strategy Implementation Plan under 1.3, you say $250 000 to be made available through a Litter Abatement Trust Fund, and $250 000 to be expended by the BIEC on projects assessed by a Litter Abatement Advisory Committee, the LAAC. I can understand $250 000 going to the Litter Abatement Advisory Committee, but I am more concerned about $250 000 to the Litter Abatement Trust Fund. It is not clear in your statement who actually runs the trust fund because if it is run by the industry, I see the industry using this funding as a way of convincing people that their way is the right way, and anyone who thinks that CDL is the right way will not be in their good books, and they will not be getting any money. So, really, you have to come on board with them if they are the ones holding the purse-strings for this $250 000. I would be interested to know who are the people who run the Litter Abatement Trust Fund and who will be dishing out the money from that trust fund. Minister, you also talked about some …
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Nelson, your time has expired.
Mr BALDWIN: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the member be granted an extension of time such that he may complete his remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: May I make a point there, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker? Perhaps the clock was on the wrong time when I started.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, it is very accurate.
Mr WOOD: I thought it said 30 minutes when I started, so I thought …
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, it is very accurate.
Mr WOOD: I will be quick. Finally, minister, you made a statement about using paper and I noticed something slightly different; I thought your speech was on one side because my speech that was on both sides. I might be wrong there. I had to have a bit of a chuckle when you told us you were going to save money by having it paper printed on both sides, but I think the point you raised is good. Perhaps we have to work out a better way of having the papers presented because you always have to read the second page upside down or on the angle. But I take your point. It has been raised here before, a lot of time when we are writing letters, they all look beautiful, but on page two you have your signature. There are little things like adjusting the computer to make sure that you only use one page. There are a lot of things that you can do.
In summing up, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I do not have a problem with the concept of litter abatement and resource recovery, but I do not believe it will work. The main reason I do not believe it will work is because we are going back over old ground, and we are running a strategy that is basically controlled and paid for by the very industry opposing any other possible ways of looking at this whole strategy, and of course, we all know what that is: CDL. I do not believe that this strategy will be successful.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, the member for Nelson and some of the other speakers are quite right. This is a very disappointing statement and it will disappoint a number of people in the community. Certainly, LGANT will get no joy from it, the environmental centres will not get any joy from it, and all those individuals who have made representations to us will see that it is just another regurgitation of past strategies. There is nothing new in it. In fact, it is full of contradictions.
The only thing it does is give us some idea of what this government thinks about litter management and where they are heading. From that point of view, at least we all know exactly where the government stands, instead of some of the toing-and-froing that has been going on over the last few months. The minister says that we need to be more mindful of the use of our natural resources, and that we cannot keep on using them forever as though they were a never ending source. However, he does not really tell us in his strategy how he is going to recycle and preserve our resources. He tends to always not give a solution in this particular paper to the problem that we have out there.
The strategy has some very commendable objectives. I will be following some of these objectives with interest because, again, the paper does not give any detail. He says it will improve litter and recycling services and infrastructure. Okay, tell us how it is going to do it. You have not given us the nuts and bolts, minister. You have just made these broad over-arching statements that people have been making for years. You are going to establish better mechanisms to support community and industry initiatives. Okay, if you want to put in some regulations, bring in CDL. That is one of the best ways to do it. Just do not tell us that you are going to establish these things without telling us what they are. You are saying you are going to ask for more effective collaboration between government, community and the industry on litter management and resource recovery. Well, why are you not listening to what the community is telling you? Why are you not listening to local government and community councils? They have all been saying to you, over and over again, address the litter problem, particularly in the area of container deposits. That is what they are saying.
Minister, I notice in your paper you were saying that we have lost the throw away mentality, we do not throw our cans out of cars any more. You have to be joking! When did you drive from Darwin to Alice Springs? I did it a week ago, and if you think there is no litter on your highways, then you are kidding yourself. Just stop and have a look at those road side stops and see what is dumped there. Go and have a look along the bushes. About two weeks ago, I drove from Adelaide to Alice Springs. There is no litter in South Australia that you could possibly compare with what you see in the Northern Territory. You do not see the cans and bottle there. You only have to drive from Darwin to Alice Springs to see all the litter along the highway. So do not kid yourself! Do not keep saying stupid things like, ‘We have lost this throw away mentality’. We have not. Go into your parks and look under your trees, and see what is on the ground. It is still there. I think you are just avoiding it if you do not believe it is there.
You talk about the beverage industry contribution of $1.5m over three years. Okay, I am glad the beverage industry is going to put money into it. So they should. We are talking about a problem that they initiate. These containers are their problem so they should be taking responsibility. If that $1.5m was put into a container recovery program, you would get far better results because, to be honest, what you have on paper, there are no new projects. There is nothing there that will say to us, this is all new, this is going to create a better environment for us. The list, in fact, says, ‘could include’. It does not say, ‘will include’. There is no firm commitment in your paper on that at all. That is why I am saying to you that it is a load of contradictions. You are making these wonderful statements here, but you are not giving us the details, the crunch line. For instance, you say they may provide can crushers to remote communities. Okay, great. The remote community gets a can crusher. What is it going to do with them then. Why aren’t you helping them, assisting them? Do you know they get 90 a kilo for cans when they sell them? That is not going to pay the cost of the transport from the community into town. So, do not kid yourself. These ideas are airy fairy. They will not work. You have to come up with the details that will work.
You also make no mention of the cost to the community of how they can improve their recycling and reduce their litter. In your paper you say they cannot do it unless they get appropriate assistance and encouragement to do so. Well, I say to you, they do not just need encouragement. They are out there asking for it. What they need is infrastructure and incentives. That is what they want and, if you introduce something like CDL, certainly that will give it to them. I was approached by the people from the Tiwi Islands who are just so frustrated at the amount of cans over there. Maningrida said one million cans a year. What is happening to it, minister? Dumped in landfill. Is that what you want? Is that what you saying to me? Okay, we have cleaned up the problem, we have hidden it in the landfill. It has not gone away.
Until you come up with a program that will face the problem with a solution, you admit yourself that communities acting alone will not resolve the litter problem. You say it in your statement. You are quite right; they will not. They need leadership and they should be getting leadership from you. However, then you do say: ‘Government should be leading the way in recycling’. This is another contradiction. If you believe, and you have said, that you should be leading the way in recycling, come on, we want to see you do it. We want you to put your money where your mouth is instead of putting your money in all of these airy fairy programs like painted rubbish bins, and competitions to encourage people. Let’s do it, let’s get it crunchy. Remember, minister, it is not just a community problem about which you keep saying: ‘Communities should get their act together’. It is the industry that has created the problem, and it is the industry that should be taking responsibility for the problem. You cannot ignore that. You cannot keep blaming the people out there on the street. You have to realise that if it is industry that creates it, then they should take a responsibility.
You made much of supporting a national push. In fact, you boast about the end of plastic bags, that they will be phased out within five years. Well, I bet we will be in this parliament in five years time saying plastic bags are still out there in the community. I bet this so-called national push does not happen. As well as that, you boast that Bunnings are putting a 10 levy on bags. You commend that additional cost to the consumers, but you will not support a 5 redeemable deposit on containers. It is okay to charge a 10 levy on a plastic bag, but do not charge the 5 deposit which they can redeem. Come on, minister, that is another contradiction in this paper. You have to get it right. Somehow or other you are not.
This Litter Abatement Advisory Council - well, I will clutch at straws. I will clutch anything if there is some mechanism there that will get through to this government. One of your terms of reference for this council says, ‘to identify and advise on the merits of new policies …’ - okay, laws, the merits of new laws, ‘… and other initiatives for promoting better litter abatement and recycling’. If that is what the role of this advisory council is, then I am saying to you, minister, they should certainly be looking at CDL and finding out whether that can work. That is what I would like to see you do - take that CDL and ask them.
Minister, the ABS statistics came out the other day. You must have been embarrassed because you did mention them even though I do not think you read them the way that I did. Those stats tell us that the Northern Territory has the worst recycling per household in Australia. That is not something we can be proud of. Surely that evidence there that is Australia-wide tells you something; that you are not winning on recycling. You are not winning on doing it and, if you are going to improve those stats at all, then you certainly have to come up with some sort of incentive for people to do it. That is the problem; there is no incentive there.
I really think you are a little out of touch with what the community is saying to you. There are questions that need to be answered and I would hope your advisory council can answer them. For instance, you keep saying things like CDL will raise the cost of living. Let them research that, because I cannot see how, when Bunnings can put on an extra levy for a plastic bag, but you put on 8 for a can of coke and get 5 of that back, that …
Dr Burns: It is different.
Mrs BRAHAM: ‘It’s different’, says the minister. Okay. It does not increase the cost of living; it is different. Perhaps that is one of the things that this advisory council really needs to look at. You are saying, ‘Is the community willing to bear the increased cost?’ Of course they are. It has been established over and over again through consultations. How many times do we have to say it? How many petitions do we have to get? How many times do you have to go to your shows and to your community and find out?
Do you really know what the true extent of the beverage litter problem is in the Territory? Have you really done an analysis for it? Do you know how much it costs local government to deal with it? You ask local government exactly how much it does. Minister, you do not seem to care that the landfill is getting greater and greater.
Minister, there are a lot of questions that need to be answered.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, through the Chair, please.
Mrs BRAHAM: Sorry?
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Direct your comments through the Chair.
Mrs BRAHAM: Sorry, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, of course.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, all these questions need to be sent to this so-called advisory council if it is going to do any good, if it is going to have any crunch and if it is going to do its job well. If it is only there as a token of this government, to say, ‘Look, we have set it up, here it is’, then you may as well not even bother. But if it is going to be used in a proper way, then let them answer some of those questions, research some of the things about CDL that this minister does not like. Let them find out for him exactly what are the opportunities, for instance, for transporting from remote communities. What will it cost? What will they need? Will it help employment? Will it help jobs? What is the end result? What are the opportunities there for Aboriginal communities?
Minister, what are you going to say to the Scouts Association which has been asking for a long time to be part of the CDL? They say that they can, in fact, not only help you clean up your environment but also make a few dollars for themselves.
There are many questions to be asked, but this statement does not resolve them. This statement does not give us anything that we have not seen before; it does not give us details of what the minister intends. There are too many contradictions. The dilemma I have is simple: if I go ahead with my container deposit legislation tomorrow, the government will vote it out and it will be lost. That will be a huge disappointment to many people in the community. I am offering the minister a compromise: I will leave it on the paper. I will ask for a deferment of that bill until the next General Business Day if the minister will take container deposit legislation to that advisory council as one of the agenda items that they will look at.
That is what I am asking you to do, minister. If you mean what you say within this statement, then possibly that is a solution for government as well. Then they can really find out for themselves, once and for all, whether it will work or will not work. Let us try to reach this conclusion together. I would like to work with government with this. It would be easy for me tomorrow to come in and say, ‘Okay, I am going to put this bill. Slam it if you want to. Defeat if you want to. I have done my bit for the community’, but, to be honest, that is not what I want. I do not want this to be lost. I just say to you, minister, that the strategy you have put forward today is very disappointing. It is disappointing for LGANT, it is disappointing for people in the community and, certainly, it is disappointing from my point of view.
I ask that the minister consider that proposal of referring that CDL to the Litter Abatement Advisory Council – the LAAC, as the member for Nelson calls it – and see if we cannot work together to come up with a solution so that, in fact, what we will do is, give the Territory what they deserve – and that is a clean environment.
Mr Baldwin: Did you want to go first, Jack?
Mr AH KIT (Community Development): Thank you, member for Daly. Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I rise to support of the statement provided today on litter abatement by my colleague, the Minister for the Environment and Heritage. Whilst there is criticism from members opposite and some independent members, I believe that the intention of the minister is serious in that we believe that we are going to be able to put together something that is workable. That is not to criticise the Keep Australia Beautiful committee and the good work that it has done over the years. For quite some time I have been a staunch supporter of the Territory Tidy Towns competition. I have said in this House on previous occasions that the Territory Tidy Towns awards is one of the best evenings of the year. At that gathering you see a mix of Territorians representative of all the regions, and you see pride and dignity, and people coming together, both indigenous and non-indigenous, sharing in one common goal and concern, and that is working hard to keep the Territory as tidy as much as possible with the resources that they have.
There can be claims made by members in respect of BIEC, as it is known, but we are a government that will work with industries, especially in cases of making contributions and sponsoring projects. This is not a government that is going to continue to govern in a way in which we are lackadaisical with Territory taxpayers’ money. The report outlined today by the minister, in which he explains a coordinated and consistent response to this particular issue, is in line with that which we want to achieve.
It is a time for change. People will always oppose change, and that is something that we have thought long and hard about. Over the years, my department has had responsibility for funding Territory Tidy Towns through Keep Australia Beautiful. In this statement, the minister quite openly informs members of this Chamber and members of the public that that will be transferred to his responsibility, and I am quite happy to do that. The responsibility of the Liquor Act will be administered very shortly by the Minister for Environment and Heritage, and we believe that this is a sensible move. No doubt, the funding that has been received in the past, something like $160 000, will also go from my budget across to the minister to allow him to provide the support outlined in his statement.
We all know that the Territory’s outdoor lifestyle and natural environment needs to be protected and maintained. I am positive that there is not one member in this Chamber who would disagree with that statement. All too often, we see examples of once pristine land and coastline being littered and made unsightly in many areas, including our remote communities and townships. The minister has made it quite clear, and outlined a long term, multi-faceted approach to reduce the amount of litter and increase the rate of recycling. Community government and industry collaboration will obviously be at the core of its success.
The strategy is based on long term planning, supported by initiatives and education designed to encourage changes in public attitude, combined with increased litter recycling infrastructure. The strategic plan and the implementation plan targets specific outcomes that are assisted by community and government services. In particular, the pooling of the funds into a trust account, and the resulting grants scheme, will allow specifically targeted local initiatives to be established at the community level. There has been some criticism of that, but it is nowhere in my mind that this is going to be dictated by industry as some commentators have expressed concerns about. The minister will be working with his committee to ensure that the outcomes that the statement proposes are achievable. And, might I add, at the end of the day, if we are not achieving the outcomes that are proposed, then it is obviously going to be an opportunity for us to review that.
This is the Legislative Assembly, and whilst we deal with legislation, we are also a Chamber of review. I do not think members should be very critical of the minister’s statement and what he proposed to implement. I would rather we come at it with a common approach, then we can talk through the concerns as they arise and, as I say, review those concerns, if there are any, in the next 12 to 18 months or two years time.
Madam Speaker, in the remote regions, this outcome-based approach will enhance the potential to improve community aesthetics. It also has great potential for spin-off benefits in the health sector. Many remote communities already have strategies, such as the use of paper bags at the local community store. This statement outlines measures that will allow communities to build on such initiatives through the small grants pool, and will be of direct …
Dr Lim: If you are talking about the community, tell us about recycling. He needs to know.
Mr AH KIT: Well, there we go again, Madam Speaker …
Dr Lim: He needs to know the communities are saying they want CDL.
Mr AH KIT: … the minister of nine months in the former government cannot help himself, in uttering criticisms …
Dr Lim: They want CDL. And the bush will tell you that. Ask the member for Arafura.
Mr AH KIT: … he has to understand that if he wants to participate properly in this debate, then offer up some real outcomes and solutions, rather than sit there and moan and groan.
The increased community pride will be a direct outcome of the strategy.
Dr Lim: You do not care about your constituents. That is what it is.
Mr AH KIT: Well, we know that you are not accepted well in the communities that you visit. Many people in Central Australia when I visit, inform me of how unpopular the member for Greatorex is.
Dr Lim: Well, if that is not a lie …
Mr AH KIT: Madam Speaker, I should not digress ...
Dr Lim: … you can stand there straight and tell a lie.
Mr AH KIT: … and get sucked into some of the heckle and jeckle on the other side. I would rather get on with providing some positive comments to the minister’s statement.
Education is a key to the strategy. It is important to enhance public awareness of the need for litter reduction and increased community recycling capacity. Increased awareness will be fully supported by a legislative review of the Litter Act to ensure its consistency and strength in achieving the strategy objectives.
The ongoing funding of KAB will continue the good work that the council has been doing within the community. The strong government financial support and commitment over the three years of this strategy sets the benchmark for industry to follow. The collaborative nature of the strategy will contribute to its success across all levels. As I said, we believe that there is time for a change in regard to the Territory Tidy Towns/Keep Australia Beautiful approach. Whilst it has been successful, everything at some point in time in respect of legislation and government assistance, needs review. I believe Lorna Woods and her committee have done an excellent job over the years, but we believe that this is going to be a much better approach. I feel that there will also be many more opportunities to attract sponsorship because one thing that did come out in the talks with Lorna Woods, in her position as the executive officer, is that they are unable to attract sponsorship.
We believe that the minister’s statement lays the foundation to forge ahead and have the litter abatement concerns addressed properly, and to start to get real outcomes. Madam Speaker, I support the statement.
Mr BALDWIN (Daly): Madam Speaker, what a lot of trollop, particularly from a local government minister. A local government minister who knows exactly what the communities of the Northern Territory are saying about this – about not funding the Tidy Towns; and CDL. I do not know how he could come in here, with his background and his knowledge of what the communities are saying, and his portfolios as the Local Government minister, the minister for Aboriginal development, the Minister for Community Services, and stand and say the things he said. That is going to be great reading for many people in the communities; for the Local Government Association; and for all the community government councils which he knows support CDL and Territory Tidy Towns programs. He stands here and says: ‘It is time for a review of Tidy Towns’. Well, I just cannot believe it. I am sure when people read this out in his communities, they will not believe it either.
However, the strategy that has been proposed here is a weak, hollow and, certainly, a gutless strategy. I have never seen anything like it. I am glad, Madam Speaker, that you gave your contribution. I am glad also that the member for Nelson gave his contribution, as did my colleagues on this side. We are all saying the same thing. Isn’t that funny? We are all saying the same thing, but we are not collaborating by any means. I was interested to hear what the Independents were saying about this. The fact is that they are saying the same thing as we are saying; there is nothing new in this. This whole strategy is predicated on how to spend $500 000 worth of coercion money from the beverage industry. That is what it is. But not only that - how to spend this $500 000 without (1) introducing CDL, and (2) giving any money to Tidy Towns. That is what it is about, and you have come up with this strategy. What a joke! There is nothing new in this and it is the most abysmal piece of garbage that I have ever seen.
I note, apart from the strategy, you have to turn to this attachment to understand what you are actually talking about. The statement is confusing and that was mentioned before. You actually have to turn to the attachments. You might have written this yourself, minister, but it is terribly written, and you have to go to the statement to try to comprehend some of the arguments in here. Already we have seen confusion from your side. The member from Karama stood up and said: ‘No, no, there is more than just the $150 000 for Tidy Towns; there is an extra $225 000’. The member for Nelson stood up and said: ‘Well, I heard the member for Karama say that’. I heard the member for Karama say that but it is not mentioned in here. Well, who is right and who is wrong? Then we had the Minister for Local Government say: ‘Funding will continue. We are going to transfer the Litter Act to the environment office …’ - which is a good thing, a great thing - ‘… and funding of $160 000 goes with it’. Where is the mention of that? Is it $150 000, is it $160 000? Where is the other …
Mr Ah Kit: I said $160 000. Are you deaf?
Mr BALDWIN: Where is the other $225 000? Where is the mention of that? Is it $150 000? Is it $160 000? Where is the other $225 000? Next time you write a statement you could put all that information in there. It might make things a little bit easier. It will save all the confusion.
Dr Burns: If you have been listening to my statement over some time you would understand it.
Mr BALDWIN: It has been heard by every other member that has spoken in here. It is just absolute nonsense.
The Beverage Industry Council: I do not know whether they are actually mentioned by name in your statement. You might clarify that while I am on my feet. Do not go into the attachment. Do not go to the attachment. Have you named BIEC in your actual statement? I do not think you have. It is not until you get to the attachment that you actually get down to saying that it is BIEC that is supplying the money. You keep calling it ‘the beverage industry’.
Minister, last sittings in this House you said, when announcing that there was $500 000 coming from the industry to a litter abatement program, that you will give an outline that we have here today, of this woeful statement, that you had never met with the Beverage Industry Council. Perhaps you might like to clarify that now you have met with them, and did your office meet with them at the time that you said you had not met with them? My understanding, while I am on that subject, is, the executive officer and the president of the association actually flew up here to meet with you and you were not around, in recent times. You might like to also clarify that. I find it very strange that in the bulk of your statement you do not mention them by name, not until we get to the other part of it, which is the much better constructed attachment which, by the way, you might notice is not printed on both sides, like your statement.
I commend you for wanting to print on both sides of paper and have government save 240 tonnes of paper and $480 000, but you might start by leading by example and having all of your statement printed in that way. You might have advised your senior ministerial colleague, who delivered a statement today, to do likewise, so that we can see that you are setting an example.
The point raised by both the independent members, about Bunnings – and I add my congratulations to them for their national program - of putting a levy on plastic bags to limit the use of them or at least making users pay a dividend for the disposal of them, that that money would go to the Keep Australia Beautiful Council nationally. I was going to raise the point that has already been raised. It is just very funny that somebody, an organisation, a private organisation, could organise themselves to do that and you say it is a great thing in your statement and applaud what they have done, and then say that, ‘We should not include a levy on cans’. It is just contradictory.
The whole aspect of this strategy, it seems to me, is saying, ‘We need a broad strategy. We need local grassroots stuff like painting bins’, and you are going to have a grants program for that, ‘and we need a more regional one where the advisory committee is going to decide on more regional aspects’. But one thing we cannot have in that whole broad strategy, ‘let’s put everything together’, except CDL. Except a levy that we know 10 000 people put their signatures to a questionnaire – not a petition like ‘sign here’ - they had to stop, understand what they were talking about, fill out a number of areas on the questionnaire; and they did this two years ago at the whole show circuit. Something like 10 000 people not only answered, yes, they were in favour, the majority, of a levy on packaging, but they also indicated that they would not mind if they had to pay a premium on different sorts of packaging, as outlined by the member for Nelson. Not just cans – it could be containers for other products – and not that they were interested in only paying a few cents. There was a range that they could tick a box on, something like from 2 to 20 or 30, if I remember rightly, the majority of whom ticked the higher end of the levy.
So, your broad strategy, which is going to be all-inclusive, leaves out CDL when you know full well that there is a lot of support for it. How can you call this a broad strategy? That is supposed to be all-encompassing, one that is going to be at all levels of the community, whether at grassroots level right through to the regional, right through to the macro. You say: ‘I will support a CDL at national level because that is the only way it is going to work.’ What rubbish! You know it works in South Australia. It has been proven. You know there are models being put up by various people including Madam Speaker, and that there are various community associations struggling for money at the moment, like Scouting Australia, which would make this work for you.
To say it is a broad strategy is just crazy. I think you dealt with it briefly in your statement, that CDL just was not going to be a part of it. It was about two lines. That is how dismissive of it you were. I think that is part of the agreement for the money that you are receiving: $500 000 a year in exchange for CDL not being talked about at all if possible. It is a shame we are not having the debate tomorrow because you probably will not get enough time to reply to all of us today and give us your reasons why CDL would not work in the Northern Territory.
What you are proposing under this strategy is recycling measures broader than just in Darwin, because that is the only place that it exists to any extent. You are saying your committee will strategically look at the regional level. Why can’t we have recycling in remote areas or remote regions or regional centres? The arguments are, as you know, all about cost. They are all about transportation differences and distances. Also they about the markets being viable. Can you actually get product down south to be recycled at a cost-neutral return at least, where it does not cost you? You know you will struggle to put together those arguments together in a viable way.
If you are using the argument that you are going to look at better ways of doing this, surely the same arguments stack up for CDL and why it could work as well. You are not fooling anyone, minister, with the tack you have taken on this strategy. There are parts of it I wish you well on, such as making sure all the agencies have a reporting strategy on waste management; having a look at the Litter Act and the penalties and those sorts of things. I commend you for doing that. They should always be looked at. But the guts of your strategy is, I am afraid, just hollow. I do not think you are going to get any kudos in any sector for the stance you are taking.
I understand, and I have found somewhere here in the attachment, that the implementation of the strategy will be funded from industry and the Northern Territory government. The Beverage Industry Environment Council, BIEC, will provide up to $500 000 per annum over the next three years for a range of initiatives; $250 000 to be made available through a Litter Abatement Trust Fund and $250 000 to be expended by BIEC on projects assessed by the Litter Abatement Advisory Committee. Now, that is a worry. We have $500 000. You have said in your statement that half of that will go to the community grants program and the other half will be expended by BIEC on projects assessed by the Litter Abatement Advisory Committee. It is a bit of a worry that BIEC has control of half of the money for a start. They have not actually handed it over. You do not have control of it. They are going to be assessed by the Litter Abatement Advisory Committee. I look forward to seeing who is going to be on that committee and the numbers are going to be the interesting factor, how the numbers stack up.
Let us look at the $250 000 grant program. If you look through the criteria, very good criteria, I guess. Any community organisation, whether they are local government, schools, clubs, perhaps the neighbourhood-type associations the member for Karama was talking about; we have something like 200 communities throughout the Territory as we speak. So let us say there are 200 of those, throw in another hundred clubs, pubs whatever they are, darts associations, schools, clinics. You will get up to 400 applications, one would think. To make the matter simple, let us say there are 250 applications, of which they are all good projects. You have $250 000. How much are they going to get each? $1000. What are they going to do with $1000 for their litter abatement program that has been assessed? Or are you going to knock on their head 300 or 400 of them so you can give $10 000 to 150 of them? It is just ridiculous. A thousand dollars, go and paint your rubbish bins. Put up a sign saying, please put your rubbish in the bin.
We have seen all that before, minister. It has been an ongoing program. In fact, you know who has been doing it – Tidy Towns. it is one of their roles. It is one of the things they do. You talk about regional collaboration. Well, the best forum you have for regional collaboration is Territory Tidy Towns. What are you doing? You are going to make them die. That is what you are doing. Because that is what the industry wants. And, on top of that, you are saying we need a better model for funding them, and it is has to come from a partnership with government and industry. Well, which part of industry are you talking about that should fund them? You have BIEC here, putting $500 000 a year in. Are they not industry? Why cannot they contribute? Why won’t they, and why won’t you, ensure that they have $400 000 to $500 000 so that they can run, and keep running, a program that has been in place, that is loved by all the communities?
You have probably been to some of the Tidy Towns awards. I know the Minister for Local Government has been to many of them, because I have seen him there, and he loves the accolades that he gets from that. And good on him, and so he should, because it is one of the most rewarding nights that you can see, not because it is an awards night and that is all it is. It is the combination of a year’s work, ongoing every year, for people in communities to get recognition for their litter abatement programs and strategies, including dump management and all of the things that you have put in this and reinvented.
The Territory Tidy Towns award night is their night of recognition. You have seen them, perhaps, and others have seen them, coming from all over the Territory, mixing with one common purpose, and that is litter reduction and litter management. Territory Tidy Towns is the one that pulls all of that together, very cheaply. You are just throwing them out with the bath water, that is what you want to see. That is what everyone thinks. That is what the communities think, that is what the organisations involved with Tidy Towns think, and local government councils and the local government associations. So minister, good on you, great performance here, badly written, hollow, gutless and totally useless. And you have been conned. And good luck, you can live with it.
Dr BURNS (Environment and Heritage): Madam Speaker, I will try to wrap up the contributions that have been given tonight. For a start, I think members opposite lack quite considerable credibility on this issue. As the member for Nelson said, if we are talking about CDL here, basically he battled away for many years. The previous government, when they were in power, were not interested in implementing CDL. For them to come in now, I am sure they are saying we support CDL, well, I think they are cynical enough to say, ‘Yes, let us support CDL, and then, let us also hope the prices go up, say $5 on a slab of beer, and let the government handle that’. That is the political opportunism and cynicism that I have come to expect from members opposite. That is the sort of political game they are playing.
I will address a number of issues that the members for Daly and Greatorex raised. Madam Speaker, I will compliment both yourself as the member for Braitling, and the member for Nelson for your contributions. I take them seriously and I will try to address the major issues that you raised.
However, once again, I stand behind my statement. I believe it is comprehensive and addresses a whole range of issues to do with litter, litter abatement and resource recycling in the Northern Territory. Whilst I understand your emphasis on CDL, we have to come back to the fact as we know it, that beverage containers account for maybe 15% to 20% at most, of the litter stream in the Northern Territory. We do not exactly know, and that is why research priorities are also outlined within the litter abatement strategy. What I am trying to do, and what I believe this will achieve, is to address litter issues in toto, as they affect the Territory in its many parts, from the urban areas right through the more rural and remote areas of the Territory. That is why I stand behind this particular statement.
In relation to the opposition, I am advised that, basically, the Territory had a recycling strategy that had not been updated since 1992. Despite what others have said, I believe that there are important initiatives in what I have announced today in my statement. It is some 11 years on since the last update of the recycling strategy. I am also advised that the Litter Act had no dedicated resources for its implementation. Therefore, if you are talking CDL, recycling, or the Litter Act, I do not think the commitment was there from the opposition, from what I am advised. It was raised in different ways by other people, probably not quite as aggressively as the member for Daly, who raised the issue of Tidy Towns and KAB. I do not think that he understands the difference, or the funding, that has been announced in terms of Tidy Towns and KAB.
However, a little history. It is common knowledge that there was a considerable amount of conflict between Keep Australia Beautiful and the beverage industry. The beverage industry was essentially funding Tidy Towns over a number of years, there was a falling out, and Tidy Towns’ funding was in jeopardy. That is fairly common knowledge. Just to recap for the member for Daly, approximately $160 000 was coming from my colleague, the Minister for Community Development, from his section, for the support of KAB. Government also supported KAB and will continue to support KAB in other ways; that is, through rental subsidy or rental assistance for their property, and also a number of vehicles - I am not sure, but at least more than one vehicle - bringing the total level of support per annum up to about $220 000. What has been flagged in my statement here today is that the $160 000 will come across from minister Ah Kit’s portfolio area over to mine, and the other funding support that we give KAB will continue.
Historically, government has never funded Tidy Towns - never funded Tidy Towns. I am not saying that as an accusation against the former government, but that is just the history of it. What this government has said to Tidy Towns is: ‘We will fund you to $150 000. We would also like you to go out and get corporate support and other sorts of support for Tidy Towns’. My understanding is that Tidy Town programs in other states and territories have abundant support from the corporate and other sectors. We have simply asked Tidy Towns and their committee to come up with a business plan, to come up with a plan as to how they might augment their funding. So, there is no confusion in my mind between what is said in the statement and what the member for Karama said about figures and sums there. I hope that is plain for people to see.
The member for Daly made mention of the fact that I am on the Parliamentary Record the last time that I spoke about this in parliament as saying, in relation to accusations that somehow I am having my arm twisted behind my back in terms of the beverage industry and basically I have been monstered by them and bought off by them. I had not at that stage met with the Beverage Industry Council or their representatives. I certainly have since then. I have met with their executive officer, some interstate members and also the local representative. So I have met with BIEC. We have discussed the funding arrangements that have been outlined within the litter abatement strategy. So, that is just to lay that on the record.
The member for Braitling raised a number of issues, and one issue that the member talked about was that there were a lot of the contradictions in my statement. One of the major contradictions which was pointed to was: you are refusing to bring in CDL but you congratulating Bunnings and other people for having a levy on plastic bags at the point of sale. It is a world of difference. One is a levy by Bunnings to be used as a disincentive for people to walk out of the shop with a plastic bag. That is the difference. A container deposit is within the price of the container, as in South Australia, as an incentive for someone to bring the container back. They might be called a levy but they have two entirely different functions. It is a disincentive. To say well, you are in favour of a levy here, but you are not in favour of a levy there, and it is contradictory, you only have to look at the function of the levy to see that it is not contradictory.
The member for Braitling talked about the need for better infrastructure and how it was going to be part of CDL anyway. Infrastructure costs, as I understood it as part of CDL all over the Territory, will still represent a considerable cost. What we can start doing in terms of this litter abatement strategy and the funds from BIEC, is to start funding some of that infrastructure around the Northern Territory. Simple things, as someone said, like balers to bale up items, whether they be PET drink containers or cans. There is a whole range of things that can be done in terms of infrastructure. I will come to the challenge that the member for Braitling has issued to me in a minute.
I would like to say this about CDL and making comparisons between South Australia and the Territory. I guess, we will not be debating this tomorrow, but one of the points that I would make is that South Australia has been very wise, if you like, over a period of time. When the rest of Australia was saying it is not worth while to recycle materials, we will just have to throw away bottles, and then we will smash them up, and then melt them down and make new bottles again, and maybe add a bit of sand and whatever, it took everyone a while to realise that that probably was not the best way to go. South Australia continued with their container deposit, the same container deposit that I remember as a young bloke. You know, you get a couple of bottles of coke and you get sixpence in those days – pretty sure it was sixpence then - you buy a shilling’s worth of lollies, that sort of thing, and rot your teeth. But that was the way it worked. They have always had that infrastructure and collection points and also their system. You have to look at the population distribution in South Australia where I believe that approximately 90% of the population resides in Adelaide, and 10% outside it. It is a quite different demography within the Northern Territory.
What I want to do in terms of the litter abatement strategy is actually make sure and ensure that those remote communities - I understand why they are worried about cans and soft drink containers and plastic bags I might add - I want to address their concerns. I want to give them the chance of small grants monies to try to address those litter issues that they have. I recognise them as real issues and we have to look at the whole Territory, not just the populated areas.
Of course, we always want to cooperate with local government and, as everyone is aware, there are a number of urban centres throughout the Territory that do not even have kerb-side recycling. That is an important issue, a very important issue. Once again, you are coming back to infrastructure. The member for Braitling raised an ABS report which said that Northern Territory households have the worst recycling rate of any households in Australia. It is true, I guess – the ABS have put it there – but I think that comes back to the issue of having many, many remote communities, and a significant proportion of our population live remotely. There are very low levels of recycling there. What we have to do is look at innovative ways to recycle a whole range of materials from those remote communities.
I have something very specific in reply to the member for Braitling. I just want to get this correct. I have noted the contribution of the member for Braitling, and I am aware that community-based container deposit schemes have been successfully introduced in some areas of the Northern Territory. In view of this, I will direct the Litter Abatement Advisory Committee to place particular priority on providing advice and assistance for the introduction of community-based container deposit schemes in the Northern Territory. I anticipate that I will be able to provide a further report on this issue to the Assembly in the first half of next year. So, member for Braitling, I hope that addresses your issues. I have given that undertaking and that is on the public record.
Just on one small issue, the member for Nelson mentioned biodegradable bags. There is technology developing in terms of cornstarch polymers that are being made into these finer grades of lighter weight bags. The technology is not exactly there yet, but it is fairly well advanced and, basically, those bags break-up when they come into contact with moisture and humidity, which could provide a bit of a problem for us here in the Territory, I suppose, but…
Mr Wood: Can we eat them? You said it was corn based.
Dr BURNS: … they need to be made a bit more durable. I suppose you could eat them if you were a bit hungry, member for Nelson. There are some very important issues for us. I believe the plastic bag issue is very significant for us.
In summary, Madam Speaker, I thank all members for their contributions. Some members were a bit more constructive than others. I believe that in my ministerial statement I have charted a way forward for a Litter Abatement Committee.
There is one outstanding issue I should address. The $250 000 would be under the umbrella of the committee and they would make recommendations in terms of the programs that would get up there. In respect of the other $250 000, the Litter Abatement Committee would provide advice to the beverage industry. I should put on the record that currently, the beverage industry advises me that is the level of their spending on a whole range of smaller grant programs in the Territory, anyway. The Litter Abatement Committee is a crucial committee. It already has the reference that I have given it in relation to the member for Braitling. I will be endeavouring to make that committee representative.
There has been some sort of suggestion here that they will just be stooges or that we will just put people on that committee who will reflect government views. No. I see that committee as being representative of industry. I would see people from the Environment Centre who do not often reflect government viewpoints being on there as well; a whole range of people and, of course, Keep Australia Beautiful which, once again, has not reflected government thinking, particularly on the CDL issue. That committee will have a life of its own. It will have those funds to administer, and will also have that very important reference, Madam Speaker, that I have put on the public record.
I thank members for their contribution, and I look forward to reporting on progress on litter abatement and resource recovery in the Northern Territory.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
TABLED PAPER
Estimates Committee – Answers To Questions Taken On Notice
Estimates Committee – Answers To Questions Taken On Notice
Mr KIELY (Sanderson)(by leave): Madam Speaker, pursuant to the order of the Assembly dated 27 February 2003 which appointed the Estimates Committee, I table the following answers to questions taken on notice during Estimates Committee hearings: questions 4.10, 4.11, 4.12, 7.4, 7.6, 7.9, 7.11, 7.12, 8.6, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, and 9.4.
I advise that all the questions taken on notice during the public hearings of the committee have been answered and subsequently tabled in this Assembly, as required under section 30 of the committee’s terms of reference.
ADJOURNMENT
Mrs AAGAARD (Health and Community Services): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Ms CARTER (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, many members of this House would have learned with sorrow of the untimely passing of Brenda Kendray on 3 August this year. I would like to welcome to the Assembly this evening many of Brenda’s family, and Phil Mitchell, the former member for Millner, who are here tonight for this adjournment.
What I am going to do is read to you the eulogy, which was prepared by her loving and loved husband, Bob, for her funeral service last Friday, 8 August. Because it was written by Bob, I have had to change it to the third person, so I hope you will understand me as I read through it tonight.
Madam Speaker, Brenda was born in Melbourne on 29 November 1946 to her parents, Barry and Mary Condor, the fourth child of six siblings: Margaret, Shirley, Peter, Barbara and David. Brenda’s dad, Barry, whom she adored, passed away from a heart attack in the mid-1970s. Her mother, Mary, was in every sense the matriarch of the Condor family. She was Brenda’s role model and her best friend. It was from Mary that Brenda learnt to perfection her culinary and motherhood skills. Bob and Brenda’s first child, Andrew, won first prize at the Chadstone Shopping Centre’s baby competition for the baby with the best and longest eyelashes. Brenda was so proud. Unfortunately, the trophy was lost in the clean-up following Cyclone Tracy.
Brenda’s trophy cabinet boasts many trophies from Indoor Bowling as well as Club Person of the Year awarded by the Nightcliff Tigers. Baseball is number one, Brenda would say.
Bob first met Brenda at her parents’ home when his mate, Craig Chandler, and he were invited there by their mutual friend, Brenda’s brother, Peter, for card games on Friday nights. Brenda and Bob were married on 6 May 1967 at St Stephens Church of England on the High Street Rd, Mt Waverley. After much talk, Bob convinced Brenda to move to the north for two years, and brought her, as a new bride in 1967, to Timber Creek, which had the grand population of eight permanent people.
Over time, Brenda became more of a Territorian than most of us. Home was a Works Department depot on Watts Creek. It was an eye-opening experience for a girl from Melbourne. They had to grow their own vegies, and prepare their own meat. Beef was a ‘killer’, that is, you caught it - a cow, a pig or a chook - killed it, skinned it cut it up, and made salt meat and sausages. Poor Brenda was apparently speechless. The first meal that she prepared was beef rissoles. Bob told her they were the best rissoles that he had ever tasted and so she cooked them for him for the next meal - and the next, and the next. Bob tried really hard to find a way to break the cycle and to convey that Brenda should really try something different.
That is just one of the family stories that Brenda would relate with great humour in their later life. She, of course, fell in love with their food: the chooks, the turkeys and the pigs they kept. They were not allowed to eat the pets, which spoke volumes about her caring way.
It was here at Timber Creek that she met her soul mate, Joan McDonald, who became one of her best friends in life. She made many more along the way; friends like Peggy and Deidre. Brenda finally became famous for her sausage rolls, her best Yorkshire pudding, her best rum pie and, of course, her famous whistle. Importantly, she became famous for her wonderful sense of humour and her incredible dedication to her friends, and even to those she did not know at all well. If you were in trouble or sick, Brenda was there.
She sent a pregnancy test to the doctor in Darwin on the once-a-week plane service from Timber Creek and hit the jackpot in the middle of 1968. Well, according to Bob, she was off the planet and this was the start of her love affair with her children. This was Andrew, a love she carried tirelessly, without ever doubting her role. Brenda’s children came first in every decision she ever made, and her grandchildren fell under the same umbrella. If you ever wanted to see Brenda fire, you just had to have a shot at one of her brood.
The family, now of three, moved to another Works Department site at the Roper River Road. In 1971, with baby number two, Joanne, on the way, they moved to their first real house in Katherine, where they became the full-bottle family: two kids, two dogs, all growing. A new challenge loomed: the opportunity to take up a position with Henry and Walker - more highways, camps and still more camps. Brenda never, ever complained, even when driving into and out of Katherine to access, first, preschools, and then the big school.
Later on, when the kids became active in sport, Brenda was the chief organiser: Mum’s taxi, the cheer squad, the mender of broken pride, and the number one fan. The years rolled on and, at the time of Cyclone Tracy, Brenda was eight months pregnant with their third child, Ashley. Brenda was evacuated with her two small children and Ashley in the oven, according to Bob. It was a herculean effort. Darwin was a devastating image and event, and Brenda had to face a very long and lonely trip to Melbourne via Sydney. Her return to Darwin was a much happier journey with her brood now being three and, doing the rounds, she enjoyed showing off the newest.
In 1979, dark clouds were gathering. On what was meant to be a trip of a lifetime to Melbourne and Tasmania, Melbourne turned out to be a disaster with Brenda experiencing her first massive heart attack. Only her fitness and her will to survive pulled her through. The road to recovery was a rocky one, with several setbacks and minor heart attacks. However, the fighter within Brenda was focussed and never wavered in her resolve to get back to her kids. These kids were her source of strength; the stockpile of resolve from which she drew. All her friends, including her great mate, Carol Curtis, and the Curtis family were there to help her start on the next stage of a long journey.
With her return to Darwin, 38 Sabine Road, Millner became the family castle. Having the school across the road made the decision to purchase easy, and the Kendrays inherited some wonderful neighbours, now lifelong friends. Home became sports headquarters, crisis centre, 24-hour meal service, and a mini-Telstra exchange as Brenda organised her own mob, plus her inherited family including Greg Cran, Paul Machin, the Feenies, Hatzis, etcetera. They rolled from one victory, loss or disaster with gay aplomb, as Brenda cleaned up the messes and stowed lovingly the hard-won trophies.
At about this time, Brenda joined the Millner Preschool Parent’s Team, a job that she loved and relished, but, again in the early 1990s, the dark clouds for Brenda’s health emerged. After an evening meal at Jessie’s at Parap, a pain in the chest led to a visit to hospital which led to a flight to Melbourne, a quadruple by-pass and the discarding of 40% of Brenda’s badly diseased heart. The big fight was on again.
Bob will never forget the look of terror on Brenda’s face when a nurse tried to convince her how easy recovery was going to be by pointing to the other people recovering from by-pass surgery as an example. The reality was that the ward resembled an abattoir, with most patients in absolute and obvious distress. Had it not been for the kids ‘sticking it to her’ as they held her hand and conned her forward, she may have given up. This was to be a long, hard fight. It gave Brenda a lifeline for another dozen years of life.
Following her recovery, Bob and Brenda decided to go and see and do things while they could enjoy them. A trip on the QEII from Darwin to Hong Kong led to a romance with the sea and, in particular, the QEII. In all, they enjoyed six fabulous trips on the QEII, each one an enormous adventure, an opportunity to meet new people and make new friends.
They journeyed to Ireland and Scotland with the Steve Smedley Road Show. Brenda was blamed for a lot of the noise and mischief at the back of the bus, but it would be fair to say that other people, like Cheryl and Jim Kerr, Rosco, Woodsie and Rags, really put her up to it. In between these wonderful trips, tennis and the ‘tennis ladies’ as Brenda fondly called them, became her great love. Her little mate, Ruth, filled a special place in her heart. Bob thinks back to when Ruth’s daughter, Dianne, died suddenly earlier this year from a heart attack, and how they spoke long about the suddenness of the event. It made Bob and Brenda aware of tomorrow, which really is today.
Brenda made so many special friends, Bob found it impossible to keep up. They included her lunch mates Ricky, Marg, June and others. She even considered her GP, Dr David Cox, as her own special friend and was never really interested in Bob’s medical books and his opinions. They even tried conning Dr David into going on one of their trips which, having their own physician in tow, would have enabled them to really let fly.
Brenda’s sense of humour and timing was uncanny. Bob remembers when they were in New Orleans visiting a witch doctor to have Bob’s fortune told. Brenda was not real keen on the idea, less keen on the downtown part of New Orleans into which he had dragged her in the endeavour of hunting down the ugliest witch, whom he eventually found. Anyway, he asked the witch how much she charged and she replied: ‘Between $20 and $50. It is up to you.’ Bob said: ‘Go for it’. Nearing the end of the consultation, the witch started to stare fixedly at Bob and asked would he like to know for how much longer he would live. Bob recklessly said: ‘Yes’. She took his hands, turned them, tugged them, looked at him coldly in the eye and said: ‘You will live to be 93’. Instantly a voice - Brenda’s - called from behind: ‘Look out! She is going for the $50!’.
All the dreams to capture Brenda’s life were her grandchildren: Rebecca, Dana and Georga. Her dreams fulfilled her every aspiration, her everything. They were Nanna’s girls. They will always have her travelling with them. She will live through them and she will be their guardian angel.
Some of the special people and activities in Brenda’s life are her soul mate from Timber Creek, Joan McDonald, Peggy, Deidre and Carol - what a team! Her bingo buddies; her pokey exploits; her baseball barracking; her shopping expeditions; the lay-by king - in every conceivable shopping centre Brenda has something put away for her grandchildren. It will take a dozen trackers, according to Bob, a dozen years to find them all.
And her back-of-the-bus leadership. The following is the content of a message received by Bob from Steven Smedley:
When we first met, we travelled to many places throughout Europe and your smiling face was a delight
on the tour. We had a beer or two at many pubs and shared many a joke. You kept good control of those
who chose to sit at the rear of the coach, and I sometimes wondered about the laughter that was generated.
I still study the wonderful collage that you did on that trip and hoped that one day we could do it all again.
You will always be remembered as a great friend and mate. I hope that you can still have beer on the odd
occasion.
Another of Brenda’s favourite activities was footy barracking: Go the mighty Hawks! The neighbours always knew when the Hawks were playing, with Brenda whistling and coo-eeing. Bob used to tell her to quieten down, that the neighbours would think he was belting her, but she continued like she had not heard him.
They were the words read at the funeral, the eulogy.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, my own mother died unexpectedly at the same age as Brenda, so to Bob and Brenda’s loved ones, my sincere condolences at your loss of a daughter, wife, mother and grandmother. Brenda, in her own special and supportive way, has contributed to you and the lives of many Territorians. May she rest in peace.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms MARTIN (Fannie Bay): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I also offer my condolences to the Kendray family on the loss of Brenda. Listening to the member for Port Darwin’s words, she was obviously a very special person. To have someone taken at such a young age seems so unfair. Our condolences to you.
On a very different issue, it is with great pride as a Territorian that I share the story of an event of major reconciliation between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people that took place at the Supreme Court building on Saturday, 28 June. This is a story that began nearly 70 years ago on the remote frontier of Arnhem Land.
In the 1920s and 1930s, a number of deaths had occurred on the Arnhem Land coast as a result of clashes between Japanese and European fishermen and the Yolngu people they encountered. In 1933, Albert Stuart McColl, a police constable on patrol, was investigating the deaths of five Japanese fishermen on remote Woodah Island. McColl was speared and killed by an Aboriginal man, Dhakiyarr, while McColl was hand-cuffed to Dhakiyarr’s wife.
Dhakiyarr was brought to Darwin in 1934, where he stood trial in the Supreme Court and was found guilty. An appeal against the decision went to the High Court and the verdict was quashed. Dhakiyarr was released a free man, but somewhat mysteriously was not seen by his family again. Many different stories circulated about his fate, but, ultimately, there is no one alive today who really knows what happened to him.
This event was a turning point in Australian history. The widespread reporting of the events of the trial and aftermath unified the Australian community on the issue of Aboriginal and European relationships as never before. Across the continent, Aboriginal community and church groups committed to the recognition of Aboriginal rights lobbied the Commonwealth government for justice when dealing with Aboriginal Australians.
As a result of the public reaction to events, the decision was made that in the Territory, in recognition of tribal culture and law, Aboriginal prisoners found guilty of murder would no longer face the death penalty. The Methodist, now the Uniting, Church Mission founded the community of Yirrkala, and the families of those who had so fiercely resisted the incursion by outsiders began to find other ways in which to accommodate the presence of Balanda in Arnhem Land.
Significantly, it was from this community of Yirrkala that, many years later, the famous Bark Petition protesting at the lack of consultation when mining began in this region originated. What was never reconciled for the Yolngu people was the absence of Dhakiyarr from clan and kin. The fact that no one knew what had happened to him, that his shade would still be wandering, was a source of disquiet for his family. Until now, this story has been one of the Australian frontier: violent, poignant, offering both faith in the judicial system, and despair at the tragedy of cultural conflict.
Events were to change in a strange and special way. Yolngu elders for whom the pain of unfinished business became too much, began to make public their feelings of pain and disquiet as the result of the disappearance of Dhakiyarr, and the elders proposed a radical solution. In November last year, Yolngu elders and member of Dhakiyarr’s surviving family wrote to me and asked for permission to hold a Wukidi in Darwin as a public act of both healing and reconciliation, but also to commemoration the 25 years of self-government.
In addition to the Wukidi several of the Yolngu elders, who are also distinguished artists, offered, as a gift to the Territory, nine Larrakitj poles to stand as a permanent memorial. The Yolngu elders also wished to invite the living family of Albert Stuart McColl to come to Darwin so that they could make an apology and present ceremonial gifts. The arrangements were made, with Will Stubbs from Buku Larrngay assisting to coordinate the event, which involved arranging the transport, accommodation, construction and painting of memorial poles and many more associated tasks. The McColl family were contacted and they expressed their support for the idea. Indeed, they said that members of their family saw this as such an important event, they were planning to attend from as far away as London, flying to Australia, and from Victoria, Queensland and other places around Australia.
The Wukidi took place on Saturday morning, 28 June, and was attended by about 400 people, in addition to more than 160 Yolgnu and more than 30 of the McColl family. The event was also filmed for national television. Liberty Square and the Supreme Court were the sites chosen for the Wukidi and the memorial Larrakitj poles. These would be located in State Square, the parliamentary precinct, symbolically linking the site to the centre of government, judiciary and vice-regal associations.
It was a recognition of the importance of the occasion that His Honour, Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia, Murray Gleason, was able to attend in this, the centenary year of the High Court. Justice Gleason made it clear that the Dhakiyarr decision is to this day one of the most important decisions made by the High Court over the last 100 years. In addition, the event was also attended by His Honour the Administrator; the Deputy Chief Minister of the Northern Territory; the Hon Chief Justice Brian Martin; Justices Angel and Riley; and Chief Magistrate, Hugh Bradley.
The painting up began early on the Saturday morning and by 11 am the Wukidi began. This was a series of ceremonial dances which, like the passage of the tide in the sea, cleansed and washed away the disharmony and balanced the cosmos. It was also the most magnificent display of dance that I have seen in Darwin. Austin Asche, who vividly recalled his early years in Darwin in the 1930s and who, as Administrator, had travelled widely and seen a great deal, said that he had never seen finer dancing in his whole life.
Following the dances outside, a ceremonial circuit of the Supreme Court building took place while the judiciary robed up and there was further dancing inside. This included dedication of the magnificent Larrakitj poles and ceremonial exchange of gifts between the McColls and the Yolgnu, speeches, poetry and song. The Wukidi is the Yolgnu way of freeing Dhakiyarr’s shade from his years of restlessness, and allow him to find peace at last. Yolgnu elders, young men, women, teenagers, children and babies from the homelands of Dhuruputjpi, Yilpara, Birany Birany, Wandawuy and Yirrkala took part. Many people helped or donated services or time because they too were moved in the spirit of reconciliation offered by this unique event.
In the Territory, we take for granted the immediacy of our past and the way that so often the Territory is the stage where the nation explores concepts of history, reconciliation and Aboriginal culture. We also take for granted what it means to live alongside Aboriginal people who are willing to share with the wider community such exchanges. In this year of the 25th anniversary of self-government, the families met in friendship to mourn and find peace through an act of reconciliation.
It was a privilege to attend the ceremony that day, not only for the magnificent display of Aboriginal culture and performance, but the actions also to watch the bringing together of family to family, kin to kin, clan to clan and people to people. As well as stories of courage, hope and endurance, some of the events of the Territory’s past did encompass violence, tragedy and injustice. The actions of the Wukidi and the installation of the memorial artworks transformed the events of the past into a positive act of reconciliation for our future, celebrate our unique Territory culture and identity and certainly, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, point a way to us to move forward together.
I put on the record my congratulations to all those involved in that Wukidi ceremony. It was extraordinarily special and, really, I have not been part of an event in the Territory that moved so many people in such an unexpected way. It really was a tribute to all those involved and a special act of reconciliation.
August is Seniors Month and I have been privileged to meet up with our Territory seniors at several events, joining in their celebration activities. Today, I would like to mention three very special groups of Territory seniors who, through their enthusiasm and dedication, have come to epitomise the concept of active, healthy ageing.
The Gray Panthers is a unique group of Territory women, aged from 55-plus. The group of predominantly over 60-year-olds formed in 1988 to perform in two linked community dance events, Dancefest and Dance-on-Darwin, and they have been an umbrella group, with Tracks Dance ever since. With over 1200 collective years of wisdom, they dance, sing, act, write, perform drill marching and poetry, and have even been known to ride on the back of Harley Davidson bikes in street parades. There is very little these women do not do. The Gray Panthers share their gusto for life by performing regularly for special events, especially for older adult women and health-specific organisations such as the Arthritis Foundation, University of the Third Age, Rotary and the Lions Club.
Last week, they gave a preview of their upcoming show to guests at the seniors morning tea event at Parliament House. Together they have written, designed and performed several major performances, including Old Spice Club Cabaret – that was in 1992; Healthy, Wealthy and Wise three years later, in 1995; Reluctant Retirees/Taking the Plunge, 1999; Dear Auntie in 2001; and their latest production, A Bowls Club Wedding, will be a major event of the Darwin Festival.
The Gray Panthers are Lucy Aylett, Betty Ballinger, Barby Barclay, Kay Brown, Adie Bruce, Bette Chapman, Val Clark, Beryl Darben, Margaret Glowackie, the effervescent Audrey Gorring – not that the others are not – Kathleen Harding, Jan Hastings, Crena Hemmings, Elaine Marlow, Lois Penman, Greta Quong – who certainly fits the tag ‘vivacious’ – Shirley Somers and Jacquie Williams.
For The Bowls Club Wedding, it was apparent that they needed a groom and so the brave Kevin Gould has joined as a new Panther. There ain’t much Kevin won’t do, let me tell you!
This talented group are regular performers as part of the Darwin’s arts and cultural calendar and I am in awe of their vitality and creativity.
The second group of seniors that I wish to acknowledge this evening are the Palmerston and Rural Seniors Committee. I was pleased to attend the launch of the Palmerston and Rural Seniors Week, a luncheon hosted by the Palmerston and Rural Seniors Committee, at Palmerston last Sunday. The committee is a small but effective group which is devoted to supporting seniors in the Palmerston and rural areas by providing activities and events throughout the year. Their very successful fundraising efforts each year enable this group of seniors to coordinate a week of activities for seniors from Palmerston and the rural area at no cost, or with heavy subsidy for participants.
Whether it is morning tea, a quiz night, a casino outing or afternoon dances, the events that are hosted by this keen group are always popular and very welcomed by seniors. The committee is supported by Palmerston City Council and comprises Ann McNeill, Gay Maddox, Elva Whitbread, Iris McGregor, Bette Chapman, Joe Postl and Lucy Aylett. This team of very effective organisers have put enormous effort into planning for this year’s week of activities, and I congratulate them on their endeavours.
While at the launch on Sunday, guests were treated to a performance by the Palmerston Senior Songsters, the third group I wish to acknowledge today. The songsters performed a tribute to ABBA, which had the audience begging for an encore. With special choir costumes and guitar accompaniment, the Palmerston Senior Songsters wowed the morning tea with favourites like Money, Money, Money and Mamma Mia. This is a group that has fun with what they do and they share their positive energy with everyone who sees them. The Senior Songsters have performed at the Palmerston Festivals, at special community events, such as Carols by Candlelight, and, of course, during Seniors Week.
The members of the group do not profess to being a professional choir, but they certainly know how to have fun. It is great to see the camaraderie between members: Judy Joyce, Margot Cox, Nannette Marron, Ray Jeffery, Kath Harding, Lucy Aylett, Bette Chapman, Val Wilson, Brenda Lang, Barbara Martin, Maggie Shoenfisch, Joan Bower – conductor - and the wonderful Les and Linda Domotor, who provide the accompaniment for the group. Although no longer with the group for health reasons, I also acknowledge long-time Palmerston locals, Dawn and Wilf Waite, for their contribution to this group.
The people I have mentioned are special, because they have continued to contribute to our community after reaching that so-called magic retirement age; and special because they seek the opportunities to not only participate in something new and innovative but to share their talent, enthusiasm and sense of fun with the rest of us. They are an inspiration and it is good today that we are able to no longer say that at 65 it is compulsory to retire from our public sector. Here, I think, we have almost redefined seniors. It was really interesting to see recently that the institute in Australia that deals with ageing has redefined middle age. Middle age is now 45 to 64 and you only become senior after that. I say that with great personal relief, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker.
Mr ELFERINK(Macdonnell): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I am relieved to know that I am not going to be middle aged for some time yet.
I rise on several issues tonight. The first issue I wish to rise upon deals with the Ngurratjuta/Pmara Ntjarra Aboriginal Corporation. The manager community services, Mr Chris Walsh, has contacted me, indeed in the past on several occasions, expressing his increasing frustration with government over the government’s failure. I talk about the federal government’s failure as well as the Northern Territory government’s failure to deal with issues that deal with the outstations under that organisation’s control. I will start with where Mr Walsh leaves off with the press release that he put out on 25 June. I care to read in the Hansard and the text of it is such:
- Beware of committing any tied budget infrastructure funds as last resort to urgent major repairs on
bores previously the responsibility of the government department, PAWA. The decision to relinquish
bore maintenance has been a political decision by the incumbent government. If we had been notified
in a proper manner of this decision, we could have taken appropriate action to offset the considerable
costs. Instead, we have been forced on humane and moral grounds to repair three bores after failed
attempts to receive assistance from the responsible government departments.
- Reports from our bore contractor suggests that the failures can be attributed to poor maintenance by
PAWA. Do not expect the incumbent government to display any moral fortitude when they can, without
procedure and proper process, abdicate their physical and moral responsibility to the welfare of people
in remote areas.
Fair go, ministers. You have raised the goal posts and completely dropped the ball. I hope you enjoy
your daily shower, cups of beverage and flushing toilets.
I have raised these similar issues in parliament before and it was not that long ago that the Education minister was embarrassed into doing some work on a bore on an outstation in this particular area because there were students in the school who did not have running water to flush their toilets. Now, that problem has been fixed.
But unfortunately, Mr Walsh’s frustration goes back to the fact that he cannot get any satisfaction from the current Minister for Housing. Indeed, the Minister for Housing had written two letters, both signed on 19 June 2003, blaming ATSIC and not the Northern Territory for the lack of maintenance on the bores in these remote places.
Problematically however, the minister seems to be somewhat ill-informed in terms of the support which is being given by ATSIC to this organisation. I quote from a letter that the minister has sent to Mr Walsh:
I understand that ATSIC has recently made a significant financial contribution towards the repair for
Lilla and Ukaka water supply bore to the satisfaction of Ngurratjuta.
I think the marginal note that is made next to the minister’s comment is a big, in large black letters ‘Not!’. The minister continues, in another letter dated the same day, trying to suppress the responsibility for the care of these particular bores onto ATSIC. I urge the minister to explain to this House and explain to Northern Territorians and explain to those people who live at Lilla Creek and Ukaka what he has done in terms of pursuing this matter. I urge the minister to lay correspondence on the table as a matter of urgency as to what he has done and who he has written to in relation to the shortcomings of provision of supplies into these outstations.
The fact is that the Northern Territory government used to provide these services to these outstations until such time as the NT government decided to corporatise PAWA into PowerWater and, consequently, because it is now operating in a commercial environment, had to start making commercial decisions, and the government was quite happy to let these small outstations swing in the breeze without any form of support or funding whatsoever.
I warned and cautioned the Education minister at the time that I raised the issue of the school, that this would be an outcome of the government’s failure to ensure that these places would be protected. Indeed, in his own annual report from two years ago, I think, the department identified this as a critical issue, and one that they would have to keep an eye on. They have dropped the ball. I am afraid that the level of services to these remote communities has fallen away. There are people without running water sitting in these places. I urge the government to take active steps. If that means trying to bludgeon the federal government over these issues, I will stand hand-in-hand with the minister at the federal minister’s door step and try to persuade the federal minister to change policy on these issues.
If the minister can bring any weight to bear in any other fashion to ensure that proper supplies of water and power come to these areas, I will applaud the minister’s efforts within his sphere of influence, and will assist the minister in spheres of influence that are beyond his control. It is a challenge that I throw down to the minister. There are people out there without running water in the Northern Territory. The minister has said, as a matter of policy, that he has dedicated himself to improving the lot of those people living in remote places. I urge the minister to put his money where his mouth is.
On another issue, how easy it is when we are blinded by convention centres, it is always at the cost of smaller people. The issue that I have just raised is an example, and here is another. I received an e-mail from a Year 12 student at a senior college here in Darwin. This student is studying politics and, without reading out the e-mail, he basically asked me several questions in relation to custodial law for the purposes of researching a project that was necessary for his Year 12 education – I presume it is a him. It could be a female on the name, and I will provide the name to the minister for Education should he condescend to ask for it.
I have always, as a matter of importance, responded to these e-mails as quickly as I can because the education of our children is vitally important. I will never forget the time that a very senior officer in the Royal Australian Air Force took time to help me with a project when I was at school, and made certain that I did well with that project. I have always made a point of repaying that debt by being timely in my responses to inquiries from Year 12 students. If I cannot help, I certainly find out who can.
This, however, was the response a few days later, bearing in mind that the initial e-mail was sent to me on 1 July. I responded on or about 1 July. On 15 July, I get this e-mail:
- Mr Elferink,
Thank you for your correspondence.
Unfortunately, I will be unable to use your information on my upcoming report due to the
government’s failure to respond to any of my e-mails. I have decided to look into a new
area of community concern.
Thank you for your time.
Signed
[the name of the student]
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, this government is dedicated to the proper education of our young Territorians. I urge the government to approach me to determine this student’s name, and find out whether they can make up to this student their shortcomings in terms of how they responded. I ask that government does not forget the small people; those living in the bush, our Year 12 students on an individual basis. Our electorates are not so big that we cannot make the effort to show individual people that little bit of time that they require so that their lives can be better and their lives can be enhanced living in the Northern Territory.
One of the failings of modern politics seems to be the loss of that human touch, on all sides of politics. I urge the government to think about that and consider what they are doing, and hopefully we can start to see a government for Territorians and by Territorians.
Mrs AAGAARD (Nightcliff): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I was very pleased to officially open the new Tennant Creek Child Care Centre on Thursday, 10 July 2003. It was a pleasure to be there, together with the Minister for Tourism, also the member for Barkly, and our federal member for Lingiari, Mr Warren Snowdon.
Firstly, I would like to congratulate the staff and parents of the child care centre on attaining their recent accreditation status. This has been a feat in itself, particularly since they were also involved in the design of this new centre and the setting up for family day care and outside school hours care.
There is a growing body of evidence of the importance of the early years in a child’s overall development. The design of this new facility takes into account recent learning on what makes high quality early childhood learning environments. This facility can be considered one of the best early childhood facilities within the Northern Territory. Designing this child care centre involved a wide range of local stakeholders, including the school council, the principal of the local school, Jack Favilla, teachers, child care staff, parents, committee, town councillors, particularly Sharon Kinraid and Jean Civitarese, and also special people from the child care staff, particularly Tracey-Lee Konidaris. The actual project management and overseeing the construction of the child care centre involved local officers from the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and the Environment, as well as staff from Darwin, who worked collaboratively with the officers in my department’s Children’s Services Unit to finally bring the project to fruition.
The child care centre design takes in the unique needs of Tennant Creek, allowing the service to provide both centre-based care and a base from which to administer a family day care program. The centre also caters for outside school hours care. By locating this facility within the primary school grounds beside the preschool, they are recognising the growing importance of co-locating early childhood services for the benefits of children and families. The closer relationship between school and child care services will also assist in breaking down the sense of isolation early childhood professionals may have felt in the past.
I commend the school principal and the primary school council for their vision and willingness to embrace the child care service into the school community. The government provided $1.275m to build this facility and the child care centre contributed nearly $40 000 for new equipment, such as a stove, industrial dishwasher and all of the outside equipment, and repaired and replaced the shade cloth domes.
I am aware this has been a substantial financial investment by a small, relatively new community-based organisation and I thank them for their commitment to this project. I also thank the following organisations that have donated to this project – ADrail, which donated fill and sleepers for the garden beds; and the Tennant Creek Town Council, which donated part of the fencing and the shade domes. Construction of this new centre in Tennant Creek brought some unique challenges to the project team. For example, one of the issues not usually faced in Darwin or Alice Springs was locating and transporting suitable, soft fall and white sand. At the time of requiring sand, a river that could have been used to access sand was in flood. The suitable alternative sand was brought all the way from Alice Springs. However, nothing was wasted as the excess sand was donated to Little Athletics for its long jump course.
Another challenge was to ensure that the yard was ready from the day of operation. This required purchasing suitable turf from Adelaide and transporting it in refrigerated trucks to ensure the grass survived, and as these grounds were previously an oval, the provision of shade was also a necessity. I can assure members that in fact that grass did survive and it looked fabulous on the day of the opening.
Mr McAdam: It looked wonderful.
Mrs AAGAARD: Yes, member for Barkly, it did. It is a wonderful testament to the people of Tennant Creek.
I congratulate Mr Steve Erlich, the architect from MKEA Architects, for a wonderful design concept, Sitzler Brothers in Alice Springs, and all the local contractors involved in this large project for the high level of workmanship. The child care centre should provide many years of quality child care experiences for Tennant Creek children. It was with great pleasure that I officially opened this child care centre.
I also put on the record the continued hard work and dedication of the member for Barkly, who has certainly taken a keen interest in this project and was also, as I said before, present at the opening. I know he is doing an excellent job for the people of the Barkly, and is a very passionate lobbyist on behalf of his constituents. I thank him very much for his contribution to this project.
Moving to another topic, on Tuesday, 2 August, it was my privilege to once again recognise the staff of Royal Darwin Hospital for their outstanding effort for Territorians during the Bali bombing crisis. The Chief Minister and I attended a special function where Australia’s Prime Minister reimbursed the Territory for the costs to the Royal Darwin Hospital for the Bali incident. I extend my thanks to the Commonwealth, and particularly to Senator Patterson, for the recognition of the Territory’s outstanding effort for all Australians.
As all members are aware, in October last year, a collaborative, clinical effort was mounted to respond to one of Australia’s worst peacetime disasters. This senseless act of violence and terrorism served to define the true capacity of a multi-discipline clinical team which, while focussed upon the Royal Darwin Hospital, also involved a number of other government and non-government agencies including community services, St John Ambulance, the Darwin Private Hospital, Northern Territory Police, Fire and Emergency Services, Qantas, Customs, the Australian Federal Police, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Defence and many others - not the least, the people of Darwin.
In response to this tragedy, a whole-of-hospital response ensured a level of care that has been recognised nationally and internationally. Coordinated by a team comprising of Dr Gary Lum, Dr Vino Sathianathan, Dr Diane Stephens, Dr Didier Palmer, Mr Alan McEwen and Dr Len Notaras, the hospital’s clinicians and support staff quickly put into practice its award winning emergency response plan. The response involved not only doctors, nurses and allied health professionals and diagnostic staff, but also administrative and ground staff, laundry, housekeeping, kitchen staff - in fact, all staff deserve our praise. Dr Notaras tells me the story of the patient delivered to the theatre by the gardener who, when asked for a clinical handover by the senior nurse, explained that he was a member of the ground staff and was thanked accordingly for an appropriate handover. That was the spirit of the time; the spirit that epitomised the attitude of a dedicated and capable staff.
The Director of Finance, Mr Chris Martin, quickly became a ward clerk and secretaries, Caroline Adam and Jo Byrne, efficiently assisted with relatives’ inquiries. Emergency department nurses such as Sister Ronnie Taylor, prepared the clinical way for others such as surgeons, Mr David Gawler and John Tracey, and the physician team headed up by Dr Dale Fischer. All worked tirelessly with the spirit of collegial support. While specialist burns nurse, Sister Alison Mustapha, provided invaluable advice, direction and care, others such as Mrs Sandra Mitchell provided a public relations response second only in size nationally to that which occurred following the events of 11 September.
Few actually realise that more patients were seen and treated at the Royal Darwin Hospital than at any hospital following the attacks in either New York or Oklahoma. It is a fact that in little more than 12 hours, more than 60 critically injured patients arrived at Royal Darwin Hospital and were seamlessly resuscitated and treated. Few will also recognise that two local specialists in the Reserve Defence capacity, Dr Sue Winters and Dr David Read, travelled to Bali on the first flights to treat critically injured victims. I am personally proud of this fine response and was very pleased to be present at this special occasions.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I tonight pay tribute to a great Centralian, Henk Guth, who passed away on 26 July this year. Henk was born in Holland on 19 October 1921. Most people in the Assembly today will remember Henk as the visionary man who painted and developed Panorama Guth. The eulogy that I am reading from tonight was given to me by Dick Kimber who read it at his funeral.
Henk had the most interesting life; I do not think people realise the experiences he had. He was born after World War I and it was, obviously, at a time when things were happening around the world. For instance, there were suddenly intercontinental aeroplane flights. It was a decade when trucks and buses began competing with steam trains to carry people around. It was the ‘Roaring Twenties’, all those sort of things, and, of course, it was the age of the talking films.
Henk was of this vivid, vitally alive world. Like all people of his home country he inherited centuries of the great Dutch maritime engineering and other traditions. We can see this in some of the works that are on display at Panorama Guth. However, while still at school Henk experienced the impact of the world depression of 1929 to 1933, when hard work and frugality were not only valued but necessary, where neighbours helped one another and where compassion prevailed. Families and communities pulled tight together to survive.
Henk was basically born to be an artist. However, at the end of his secondary schooling, practical jobs to assist his family were his first priority. Spray painting of motor vehicles was not exactly the art career he dreamed about but it meant that he earned an honest crust. The same applied to his other jobs as a painter and decorator. As the world began its recovery from the Great Depression, his father encouraged Henk’s artistic yearnings by sending him to art school and here he flourished, demonstrating his talents in the painting of seascapes, flowers and other nature paintings, portraiture and other varieties of art forms.
This idyllic time for Henk was shattered by World War II. He was still a teenager but he became part of the underground resistance. His artistic skills helped to transform passports so that his fellow Jewish citizens escaped persecution. The years of living on the knife’s edge, of being captured and interrogated, of escaping and then being captured again and sent to a concentration camp meant, I think, that Henk treasured life perhaps more than most of us.
In 1961 he decided to come to Australia and fell in love with the light of the country. At his first attempt at art in Australia he entered a competition with a Hans Heysen-type portrait of a lovely, old, red gum tree. He was pleasantly astounded to win a cash first prize. By this time Central Australia was becoming better known to tourists. Like many of us here he was on but a brief visit on his way somewhere else, as we did in the 1960s also. He fell in love with Central Australia and instead of a few weeks he spent most of his next 37 years here. I remember Henk saying, that having seen paintings and prints of Albert Namatjira while ‘down south’ he had not believed that the landscape colours were realistic, yet immediately he was bedazzled by them. ‘Fantastic’ was a favourite word and, being an artist, he immediately set out to get the feel of the country, to leave its impossible vastness free and yet capture it on landscape.
Much as Henk did manage his occasional returns to Europe, he was transplanted to Central Australia from that moment on. The landscape and the light nourished him. Because he arrived at the end of the great drought of 1958-1965, which carried over to 1971, he instantly understood the significance of the gaps, the gorges and the MacDonnell Ranges and the importance of water. He also experienced, of course, the dust storms, the plagues of flies and the pestilence of ants. Being from Europe he was so amazed that the sky was so constantly blue, that he began to appreciate when clouds appeared.
Whilst Ormiston Gorge was an instant, magnificent landscape – ‘fantastic’, as he would say – the realities of making a living once he established his art gallery meant that he often visited the closer localities, such as Standley Chasm and Simpson’s Gap. He said that it was while he was painting at Simpson’s Gap one day that he had an experience that was to become transforming. He became aware of an old Aranda man who, having quietly approached, was appreciatively watching over his shoulder. When he had completed a section of the work Henk paused to enjoy a sandwich and a cup of tea from a Thermos. He attempted conversation with the old man but could not comprehend him. Might I say, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, those of us who know Henk, he really had a fairly strong Dutch accent still. He offered the old man half of his sandwich and then returned to town.
The next weekend the same old man materialised again and Henk offered him a sandwich and, of course, this time he brought along a spare mug, just in case, and poured him a cup of tea, although they still could not understand each other. The next week the old man appeared again and he presented Henk with a hessian sugar bag bundle. It was filthy dirty but Henk accepted it as he could see the old man really wanted him to have it. When he arrived home he gingerly unwrapped it and found that he was handling a massive, ancient, dried, fatty material in which were embedded some sticks. He was at first tempted to throw it into the rubbish bin but instead he boiled some water and placed it in it, forgot it for a week, and when he remembered it, he was able to pull the sticks from it, and there for the first time was that revelation. Henk had no more comprehension of what it might mean than most – and certainly than I would – but what he did see were the intricate patterns of fine indigenous art.
Over the next several years, Henk had various items offered to him for sale and, unlike many of the other tourist shops, he truly appreciated what was being offered. Here, in the circles and spirals and other markings, he appreciated a rather ancient traditional art. He did not know what he should pay for these items, so paid what he could afford, and it happened to be quite a lot more than the other shops were paying. Consequently, he amassed a remarkable private collection. While he appreciated the craftsmanship of items such as a stone axe, it was the art of the objects that he greatly appreciated. Since then, Aboriginal men have gone back and visited the collection that Henk had, and they describe the room as a cave. They expressed respect for Henk’s care for these items.
We all need to understand that this man was a visionary. He was a creator. He was a fine artist. As well as that, Henk was always an impeccably dressed gentleman, an unofficial ambassador for Central Australia when he travelled, certainly a connoisseur of fine foods and wines, host to locals, tourists and dignitaries, a smiling father and husband and, of course, a shrewd businessman.
Henk must have been very pleased when he was able to sell Panorama Guth to local interests whom, I know, will certainly look after them in the way that he wanted them to be looked after so that his collections would never have to be broken up. I recall taking my mother to Panorama Guth one day. She just stood there in silence, then she turned to me and said: ‘Where am I?’ She was completely transfixed by this wonderful panorama around her. That was the effect Henk’s work had on so many tourists.
I also record my appreciation to Henk for his compassion for me. At times when other people in Alice Springs turned away because of what the CLP did, Henk came to me privately and visited me, bearing a small gift. I will always remember him as a man of compassion and friendship who I never saw bitter or angry with anyone. He was certainly a gentleman.
His funeral was rather lovely because there were so many people present, and we walked in a procession down to Panorama Guth. I think Henk would have enjoyed the theatre of that. Of course, then there were buses out to Ormiston Gorge where he was buried. Reverend Lindsay Faulkner, who presided, sent me this little poem written by Carmen Librado and read at the graveside:
- You that loved the Outback so much
The sun, its colours,
Now that your time has come
It is their time to care for you,
The sun will keep you bright
The earth will keep you warm
And the Outback will forever be your home.
Farewell, Henk Guth.
Mr AH KIT (Arnhem): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I rise tonight to say farewell to a great Territorian whose life covered a large part of the last century, and whose deeds affected so many Territorians and other Australian indigenous people over this time.
I speak in tribute of Uncle Joe McGinness. He led a life characterised by honesty, integrity and hard work. Joseph Daniel McGinness was born in 1914 at the site of his parents’ tin mine, some 50 kilometres south of Darwin. He was the youngest of five children born to Irish immigrant, Stephen McGinness and his wife Alyandabu, a Kungarakan woman also known as Lucy, the name of the tin mine. He died aged 89 in Cairns on 11 July.
Joe McGinness was an extraordinary man who led a life of remarkable achievement and was involved in the 20th century’s defining battles for indigenous rights in the Northern Territory, Queensland and nationally. His death on the final Friday of this year’s NAIDOC was particularly poignant, given his critical role over many years in establishing and developing this important annual celebration of indigenous Australia.
His early years were relatively unrestricted for an indigenous child at the time, thanks largely to the presence of his European father, but following his father’s death in 1918, the lease on the family’s mine was forfeited. McGinness and his brother Val became wards of the Chief Protector of Aborigines and were removed, with their mother, to Darwin’s Kahlin Compound. Life at Kahlin was difficult. The children were separated from their mother for most of the day and were left without formal schooling or regular meals. Like most children at the compound, McGinness had to raid the nearby vegetable gardens and orchards at night to stave off hunger. He left Kahlin at the age of 13 for his first job, working as a rouseabout for a travelling salesman to whom he was indentured for a year.
During the 1920s and 1930s, McGinness worked as a truck driver, labourer, and trepang fisher in the waters of the Northern Territory and Torres Strait, and was unemployed for several years during the Depression. In 1935, he met and married his first wife, Jaura Ah Mat, who died just four years later. Two children were born from this marriage, Elsie and John.
After surviving the bombing of Darwin in 1942, McGinness later wrote that the shock of the attack brought him to reality. He joined an army field ambulance unit and served in Darwin, Morotai and Borneo. Here, he learnt Bahasa Malay, adding to the Cantonese he had learnt as a child in Darwin. He moved to northern Queensland to be with his family and children after the war.
Uncle Joe, as he was so well known, lived through a period of Australian politics in which state governments began their policy of assimilating half caste Aboriginal children into white families and institutions, and herding tribal people into reserves. So-called protection laws gave state governments near autonomous control over the movements of Aboriginal people. However, at the same time, the colonial attitudes of non-indigenous people were slowly changing. Many groups, including unions, welfare organisations, and some churches, had begun to protest against racist state and federal legislation and the other injustices that daily faced Aboriginals.
McGinness’s activism began in the 1930s in Darwin, where he protested against mass unemployment and appeared before parliamentary delegations examining the question of indigenous rights. Along with members of his family, he staged a protest tent outside the Kahlin Compound, an action unheard of at the time. Despite his lack of formal schooling, he had long realised the importance of literacy in tackling the injustices he faced, and was eager to read as much as possible. He read the daily newspaper and did the crossword until the last stages of his life. He counted among his good friends the authors, Frank Hardy and Xavier Herbert, the latter of whom he considered ‘instrumental in motivating a number of us into meeting together and becoming active around the question of Aboriginal rights’. But it was after joining the Waterside Workers’ Federation while working on the wharves on Thursday Island that McGinness’ activism began in earnest.
McGinness moved to Cairns in 1951, where he met his second partner, Amy Nagas. His daughter, Sandra, was born in 1954, and he also helped care for Amy’s two sons, Raymond and Samuel. It was in Cairns that his involvement with the union expanded after being elected to its executive committee. Like most Australian towns of the day, Cairns had sharp racial divides, with most Aboriginals living on the outskirts and surviving on intermittent, underpaid work. McGinness was determined to fight the constant discrimination and abuse directed at the local indigenous community, largely by employers and police.
The Guivarra family remembers these times, and they stated:
- We often went under the protection of the unions, and just a handful of us marched on Labour Day in the
May Day procession. Even then we were constantly harassed by the Queensland State Police before the
march commenced, and there were always the threats to our parents of imprisonment. Our father and this
big Uncle (Joe) would always be there contending with the police, but we always managed to get our little
show on the road, putting up with the abuse, sometimes even from our own people and being the recipient
of the rotten apples being thrown by pedestrian abusers.
The Cairns Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders Advancement League was formed in 1958 to take on this advocacy role with McGuinness as its secretary. The league worked closely with the local Trades and Labour Council which McGuinness described as ‘the only white organisation that showed concern over reported cases of injustice’. The Cairns league’s activism coincided with an emerging national movement in support of indigenous rights – a national indigenous advocacy body, the Federal Council for the Advancement of Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders, commonly known as FCAATSI. This organisation was formed after a coalition of rights groups met in Adelaide, also in 1958. McGuinness soon became FCAATSI’s first indigenous president, a position he held for 17 years between 1961 to 1973 and 1975 to 1979.
It was not long before FCAATSI won its first victory of national significance. A young indigenous man at the Hope Vale Mission who had consorted with his girlfriend, had been severely flogged by the mission’s pastor and ordered to be moved to Palm Island. McGuinness directed a long and intense campaign against the pastor’s actions. Although the campaign gained unprecedented publicity, Queensland’s Minister for Native Affairs, Dr Noble, continued to condone the punishment, describing it as ‘part of the tribal way of living’. However, the persistence of McGinness and others eventually forced the government to hold an inquiry into incident, which found that the pastor’s behaviour was ‘inexcusable’. It was the first time this type of misconduct by a mission had been successfully challenged. The win triggered a range of protests against similar incidences of abuse across the country.
Hope Vale was McGinness’ first major victory, but there were many, many more to come. Across the country, FCAATSI pursued legislative reform, wage equity cases, and the early push for land rights. McGinness will no doubt be remembered best for his role as joint national campaign director during the lead-up to the 1967 referendum. It was a campaign of driving from town hall meeting to town hall meeting and grassroots action across the nation. The referendum was FCAATSI’s strongest and most successful campaign. It gave constitutional capacity to the federal government to legislate in favour of Aboriginal people, and allowed indigenous Australians to be counted in the census. Supported by more than 90% of voters, it remains the strongest ‘yes’ vote of any Australian referendum.
His co-campaigner, Faith Bandler, said of Uncle Joe that he was a:
tireless worker for the 1967 referendum [and that while] his vision and tremendous commitment might
not be replaced … it will leave many throughout this country in good stread to continue the work for
reconciliation.
Uncle Joe went on to be a key figure in the early days of the development of the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and had great influence over members of federal parliament from both sides of politics. Back in North Queensland, Uncle Joe became the regional manager of Aboriginal Hostels in Cairns, and was instrumental in the establishment of many of the major Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations in north and far north Queensland. As Patrick Dodson wrote of Uncle Joe:
- This grand old man has been the inspiration to many of us who have joined in the battle for justice.
He has provided wisdom and advice, guidance and correction, humour and hope. His interest,
enthusiasm and point of view on the continuing challenges we face against the ignorant and arrogant
who professed to know what is best for us or who try to con us in so many ways was always present
and available as he encouraged us on.
- He did not like corruption in Aboriginal affairs and had high expectations for all leaders. His preference
appeared to me about getting the task done in a cooperative manner, not to bask in the limelight of the
media. The priority of the peoples’ rights, interests and conditions were the most important things.
Uncle Joe served his people in the Northern Territory and Queensland, and indeed, nationally. I have here a collection of tributes to Uncle Joe McGinness written by his family, friends and colleagues, which I will lodging with the State Library as a permanent memorial to this great man. Mamak, old man, we will always remember you.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I rise to honour Mr Bob Darken. I take my information from the publication called Citation which is the newsletter of the Northern Territory Police Historical Society. I raise this issue because I wish to recommend to the House and to the Place Names Committee that the road that leads from Larapinta Drive into Simpson’s Gap back to the car park, some 4 to 5 kilometres of that road, be named after Mr Robert Darken to be called Darken Drive.
Mr Robert Darken was a very well known personality who passed away in Alice Springs on 17 February 2000. I will quote from Citation, and paraphrase some parts of it:
Robert Cousins de Champfleur Darken was born in Parkes, New South Wales on 9 July 1919. His parents
were Eugene Darken and Catherine ne Woodward. He had two sisters, Catherine and Doris, and he was
the youngest of three brothers, Frederick, Thomas and Raymond. His parents were both English. His mother
was a nurse and his father a soldier who served in the Boer War and World War I where he was wounded at Gallipoli. His brother was killed while flying Lancaster Bombers over Germany during World War II. Bob and
his other brothers all joined the AIF during this period.
His childhood was spent on 5000 acre wheat, sheep and cattle property near Parkes where he attended primary
and later high school and it was there he attained his Intermediate Certificate. His favourite subject was sport
and at one stage he and his brother, Ray, were both picked to play against the Australia XI which included Sir Donald Bradman. After leaving school Bob obtained his wool classing diploma and worked in various sheds
and wool stores. After his first year of wool classing Bob moved to Sydney and got a job as manager of a
parking station garage that happened to be next door to Jack Dunleavy’s boxing gymnasium.
Here I paraphrase: Bob was picked up by Jack Dunleavy and was trained by both by Jack and Hop Harry Stone, both great fighters of the day, and trained to become a professional fighter. Bob fought under the name of Jack Fitzgerald so that his parents would not know that he has become a professional boxer. Bob had 27 fights of which he won 26 and drew one. His last professional fight was against the New South Wales middle weight champion over 15 rounds and he won 500 from the fight in spite of having a broken thumb two weeks earlier.
In 1938, Bob joined the Darwin Mobile Force which was formed just prior to the war. That is when he came to Darwin. Whilst with the Darwin Mobile Force his main duties consisted of patrolling the coast line. I quote again:
- On 12 June 1939, Bob transferred from the Army to the Northern Territory Police in Darwin. In those days
all training was learned on the street. On the first day legendary Inspector, John Creed Lovegrove, called
Bob into his office and asked if he could fight. Bob answered that he could a bit and was duly informed,
‘Well, you will get plenty of practice’. Those words would prove correct. In those early days of his career
there were less than 50 police officers serving the entire Northern Territory. Most of his duties were
confined to patrolling the Darwin area.
In 1941 Bob was stationed as a relieving OIC in Katherine for several months before returning to Darwin.
At 9.50 am on 19 February 1942 he had just given evidence in a court case. Hearing aircraft, he spotted
three formations of nine Japanese bombers and remembered his mate, Dave Mofflin, was asleep in the
barracks after completing a night shift. He woke Dave and, as they were leaving, the barracks received
a direct hit. Both men were blown under a concrete tank stand suffering only minor injuries. Fortunately
they also escaped the Japanese strafing and other bomb fragments as they made their way to the police station.
Unfortunately, the Darwin Post Office also received a direct hit and many occupants of those premises were
not so fortunate.
Here, today, we are standing on the site of the old Darwin Post Office.
At the end of May 1942 and after many air raids Bob and other police officers found themselves transferred
to Alice Springs. However, the war was still with them and Bob was successful in applying for leave to join
the army.
On 25 June 1942, he married Vicki Ormond, whom he met soon after joining the Mounted Police. Vicki was
the first Miss Northern Territory. They were married in a church in Alice Springs where Woolworths is now situated. Bob used to joke that they took their vows where the cheese, cream and butter is now displayed.
The couple were not financially well off and spent their honeymoon at a gap in the Western MacDonnell
Ranges in a tent. That gap was later to be named in their honour, and is known today as Honeymoon Gap.
Later on, Bob joined up with Captain Snow Elliott to form a transit camp south of Newcastle Waters. The camp
was named Elliott after the Commanding Officer and is now a township. Some time afterwards, Bob developed malaria, was hospitalised in Alice Springs and recalled to the police force where his duties included that of prosecutor, later transferring to Tennant Creek. It was in Tennant Creek that Vicki gave birth to their first
child, Sondra.
Later on, he went to Roper River Police Station and then in 1945 became the police officer for Harts Range, a police district of 60 000 square miles or 100 000 km, where he was required to carry out regular patrols on horseback.
I quote again:
- The Harts Range patrol area covered from Alice Springs in the west, east to Queensland, the Queensland
border, north to Barrow Creek, and south to Loves Creek. It was while at Harts Range that Vicki and Bob’s
second daughter, Joanne, was born. Bob and the Webb brothers from Mount Riddock started the Harts Range Amateur Race Club, and this popular event continues today.
Bob, in 1950, left the police force and purchased Simpson’s Gap Station. One day, Bob was mustering cattle when his horse fell on him and injured his back to such an extent that it was 12 months before he could move freely and, certainly, he was unable to ride a horse again. He decided to sell the station to the federal government, who turned it into a national park. Bob was offered the position of Curator in Charge and then became a member of the Reserves Board, resulting in him being one of the first rangers in the Northern Territory.
Bob Darken has achieved one heck of a lot. I will quickly read the list of things that he has done to demonstrate that. He was president of the Police Association from 1940 to 1944; a founding member of the Harts Range Amateur Race Club; chairman of the Alice Springs Hospital Advisory Board for four years; a founding member of the Tennant Creek RSL; president of the Alice Springs Owners, Trainers and Jockeys Association in 1950; a foundation member and president of the Centralian Arts Society; president of the Central Australian Show Society for five years; assistant chairman of the Northern Territory Wildlife Advisory Board; and in 1961, became a member of the Alice Springs Lodge.
It is people like Bob Darken who helped make the Territory a great place today. No doubt his job would have been made a lot easier over the years by the great support of Vicki, herself a very accomplished artist. Vicki Darken’s showroom and my medical practice were next door to each other for many years until she decided that it was time for her to close the shop and moved her gallery and works to her home.
In my research for information on Bob Darken, I was able to secure a copy of A Recorded History of 30 Centralians by Shirley Brown. In there, she had transcripts of an interview she did with Bob and Vicki Darken. I will read some extracts in relation to the Darkens and Simpson’s Gap. This is a direct transcript of what Vicki Darken said:
- Simpson’s Gap was good, too. We left the police force after Harts Range. We were there seven years all told.
Then we took on Simpson’s Gap as a cattle station. With the Webb brothers in the beginning, and then later on,
we were on our own. They (the Northern Territory Reserves Board) opened just The Gap area. They took where
The Gap was – for the flora and fauna reserve and then they had somebody coming from town, I think, looking
after it occasionally.
- Then Sam Calder came out and asked Bob – Sam was the then federal member and he came out and asked Bob if he would be the ranger or whatever there. It was extra money, you know, and then later on he had it full-time (the job of ranger). They started improving it and the rest of it. It was bought actually by the federal government - the whole of Simpson’s Gap, the whole station, as a national park, the whole area. Well, they had the right to take it, you know.
It was all settled amicably, especially offering Bob the job of staying on permanently. It was very nice. We really did not want to leave. We enjoyed it there, actually. And then it looked as though we would have to get out of it at some stage, so I took on the job of senior wildlife officer with the (Conservation) Commission, when it was. Well, when I went into it first it was the Reserves Board and then, well, they have changed the name so many times. I think it was the Reserves Board, and then the National Parks and Wildlife, then the Conservation Commission when I took the job of Senior Wildlife Officer. Twenty seven years we were there, from 1950. We went there on 1 January 1950. We came into town in 1978, so we had 28 years there.
I quote again:
It was during the Darkens’ time at Simpson’s Gap that Vicki began painting, and over the years since has become an artist of some repute, both in Australia and overseas with her oil paintings of central Australian landscape. This led her to getting a Churchill Fellowship in 1968.
After they moved into town, the Darkens lived in the Larapinta area, and Vicki continues to live there, with her collection of art. One of the children still lives in Alice Springs and has provided much of this information. It is important to realise that the Darkens have been significant contributors to our community in Central Australia. Their link with the Simpson’s Gap area is without doubt established, having initially owned it and then worked as a ranger in that area for a total of some 28 years. At the time of the handover of the property, the Administrator of the Northern Territory wrote to the Darkens, and I will read that for the record:
- Dear Mr and Mrs Darken,
Simpson’s Gap – Acquisition
At the time of finalising the handover to the Commonwealth, I would like to express my thanks for your cooperation during these negotiations on the acquisition. The Director of Lands informs me you are willing to remain on as a caretaker for the Commonwealth until it is proclaimed as a reserve and other action is taken regarding its future management. I appreciate your action in this regard.
As at the date of the handover, it is understood by the Commonwealth that your occupation of the lease area will be permitted to allow you to destock the area by the end of 1970.
The further details of the handover will be discussed by the Director of Lands with you both, but before departing from the Northern Territory, I would like to express my thanks to you for making possible the conservation of a very attractive part of Central Australia.
Yours sincerely,
R L Dean,
Administrator.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I look forward to the House supporting my bid to have the Place Names Committee take on the task of preparing for the renaming of the Simpson’s Gap road; that that stretch of road between Larapinta Drive and the Simpson’s Gap car park be named after Bob Darken. Perhaps the most appropriate name might be Darken Drive. That would be great recognition of a true Territorian, someone who has contributed so very much to the development of Central Australia in particular, and a recognition of the continuing link with the Darken family, in the presence of Vicki and the rest of the family, the family being Sondra and Joanne, the daughters; the grandchildren, Mark, Michelle, Richard and Michael; and great grandchildren, Lauren and Daisy.
Mr VATSKALIS (Casuarina): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I welcome the suggestion by the member for Greatorex and I invite him to write to the committee or even to myself and his proposal will be considered. If Territorians have contributed to the history and the development of the Territory, they have to be recognised and have to be recognised publicly.
I recently made a proposal to my department. I took part in some retirement ceremony with the Darwinbus company. I suggested that if we have a person who worked in this area, let us say, for 25 years and contributed so much to the bus company, why don’t we put a plaque on a bus and name a bus after that person. I have to say that the department liked the idea. I cannot see any reason why we do not have such long term people in Darwin or Alice Springs who work in the bus company, being recognised by having their names on a bus. I think it would be a very nice gesture.
Tonight I extend my best wishes to Col and Judy Friel. Col and Judy are well known Territorians who live in Alawa, just outside my electorate. I believe they live in the electorate of the member for Johnston. Col is probably best known to many in the House for his frequent contribution to the Letters to the Editor’s section of the NT News. He is a passionate advocate for the environment, for social justice for indigenous people and an independent stance for Australia in international affairs, and many other issues of concern to us all. I do not agree all the time with Col’s interpretations of these issues, but I respect and defend his right to make his interpretation and continue the public debate. In many ways, he carries on a long tradition of public education through the Letter to the Editor’s section and is a great character and Territorian.
Unfortunately, writing letters is one of the few ways Col can continue these days, as his health has deteriorated recently. I am advised he was in hospital last week for several days, but improved enough to be able to return home over the weekend. I join with my colleague, Chris Burns, and I am sure the rest of the House, in wishing Col a speedy recovery to good health, and I am looking forward to some more Letters to the Editor in the NT News.
Another resident of Alawa, and a constituent of mine who is not in the best of health is Kenny Hart. I caught up with Kenny again at a community barbecue last Sunday at the Alawa Preschool grounds, and although Kenny is unable to walk without a frame, he walked all the way from his residence in Henry Ellis Street to the other side of the primary school just to say hello and to see his friends. In fact, this is a journey that he tries to do every day, so it actually helped with his recovery and rehabilitation. Kenny was in hospital early this year for a significant number of days, but determination to maintain his independence and return home has seen a remarkable progress in his recovery and, Ken, my best wishes.
Every month, I provide awards for school children who achieve in the schools in Alawa and Nakara, and with this award I provided a $25 voucher from a book shop to each of the winners of the awards. This month, I was very pleased to provide the $25 book voucher to Kamika Pollard, who had been awarded a citizenship award for helping others, and secondly, to Dean Cameron for a fabulous effort and excellent standard of work. Congratulations to both those students. I am looking forward to providing more awards this week to some of the students in Nakara.
I also pay tribute tonight to executive members of the Laurel Club: Norma Allen, Nola Smith and Margaret Kirkup. The Laurel Club was established in 1984 to support war widows in the Northern Territory. Over that 19 years, the membership has grown to nearly 200, the oldest member being a World War I widow in Alice Springs. The club also includes some of the bereaved partners of people who lost their lives in the East Timor peace keeping campaign, or other campaigns where the Australian Army has been involved.
The club is a voluntary organisation which conducts regular meetings and outings, and provides valuable support services for the widows of defence forces personnel. Recently, I was privileged to present a small cheque from the Community Development Fund to Major Jack Hamilton, the president of Legacy, to pay for an outing the club had organised to Myilly Point Heritage Precinct. I am pleased to support the Laurel Club and their hardworking executive, Norma, Nola and Margaret.
However, what really moved me was what Jack Hamilton told me, that they thought that with the people getting older and the war widows getting older, the number of members would diminish. But very soon they found out that people in Legacy, now in their 50s and 60s, had to brush up their skills in footy and other things, because they realised that the partners who have lost their husbands or wives in some in the most recent campaigns such as the Black Hawk helicopter disaster, the East Timor campaign and other campaigns, left behind them young boys and girls. Some of the boys do not have the paternal guidance, so the old men of Legacy, as they describe themselves, the people in their 50s and 60s, have started taking these boys to the football park and kicking the ball with them.
That is a fantastic initiative. It shows a strong community spirit and the determination of these people not to let their partners in the defence forces personnel down, and will continue to help them. I congratulate them for that initiative.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016