2012-05-03
Madam Speaker Aagaard took the Chair at 10 am.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have before me a pair document signed by the government Whip and the opposition Whip. It is for the members for Arnhem and Drysdale, and is from 10 am to what has been referred to here as stumps, which I assume means the end of the day.
I table that document.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise you of the presence in the gallery of Year 5/6 Stuart Park Primary School students, accompanied by Mrs Ildiko Sarmany and Mrs Jacqui Murray. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr Tollner: What a great bunch of kids.
Madam SPEAKER: Very nice children they are, member for Fong Lim.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, as members would know, there are actually three motions here which are linked, so I propose to deal with them as swiftly as we can; we have a great deal of business today.
The first motion, to read it to the House, is in relation to referring the budget and Appropriation (2012-13) …
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, can you just move the motion, please?
Dr BURNS: Madam Speaker, I move –
Mr Elferink: Keep going, we can do all three at once if you like.
Madam SPEAKER: It will not take very long.
Motion agreed to.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move –
Motion agreed to.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move –
(1) Prayers
Motion agreed to.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, in relation to item (6), I have been asked whether or not the adjournment will happen on that evening. I advise it will be as a Wednesday night, so every member may adjourn.
LIQUOR AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 205)
Continued from 28 March 2011.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I respond to this bill and can say at the outset, whilst we understand the intent of government is to prop up its failing alcohol action plan, the Enough is Enough campaign, we will not be supporting this bill because it is too little too late and will not achieve what this government has been trying to achieve.
The Enough is Enough alcohol campaign has been an abysmal failure. Even if you look at the conduct of the drunks that infest our streets on a daily basis, it is clear whilst there might be people placed on the register, they are still obtaining alcohol. This government has not been able to deal with problems of alcohol in our community because it was not prepared to do what was necessary and make the actual hard decisions of using the criminal justice system as a way to achieve the health outcomes. Our policy does and, given the opportunity by votes of the people of the Northern Territory, should we be elected into government, we will introduce it.
I am frustrated we are not going to spend as much time on this bill today as it deserves. One of the reasons for that is we still have the appropriation debate to go ahead. It is now Thursday; it will be the last opportunity, essentially, for most members to contribute to the appropriation debate. This last minute desperate gasp to breathe some life into a failed policy is not going to be something that I, and members on this side of the House, will spend a great deal of time giving credence to.
The one thing I will note is government is attempting, in one respect, to do something we, on this side of the House, have been unashamed talking about; that is, the criminalisation of public drunkenness. The government has now moved to issue on-the-spot fines for drinking within 2 km. It takes the 2 km offence out of the Summary Offences Act, an act that deals with public behaviour, and moves it into the Liquor Act. Whilst I understand the rationale behind that, I am not entirely sure that rationale is entirely justified. That is a side issue and I will not dwell there for long.
However, if you breach the act you will cop a fine. If you do not pay the fine that matter will convert, ultimately, to a warrant of commitment because, I presume, the courts will deal with these minor fines on an ex parte basis. As a consequence, the government has finally decided to move into the area of criminalisation of public drunkenness. However, rather than doing it in a fashion that is comprehensive and necessary, it is doing it in a piecemeal fashion designed to do nothing more than add window dressing to the next media release.
We and Territorians are unconvinced. If you look at the comments on the NT News website in relation to the stories that are run on public drunkenness, the public is now so cynical and so critical of the failure of this policy that, every time the government tries to wave it as its standard, the mockery and derision which is poured upon that standard is manifest for all to see. The government has lost credibility in this. Whilst it speaks of the toughest alcohol laws in the country - and perhaps that is true - it is insufficient to meet the public expectation. Because this government could not bring itself to make drinkers responsible for their own actions in a meaningful way, it has tried to compromise its way through this policy and, like every other compromise in this field, those compromises are failed attempts.
I pause briefly to talk about one component of this legislative package which will bring prosecutorial difficulty to any prosecution brought under this act. This is in relation to the application of the word ‘nuisance’. In the legislation, the application of the word ‘nuisance’ is not defined and, therefore, I was referred in the briefing to a common law decision relating to how ‘nuisance’ can be defined. There are no shortage of common law decisions that deal with what objectionable words are, offensive language is, disorderly behaviour is, riotous behaviour is, and what, for that matter, nuisance is.
The problem we have is, from a prosecutorial point of view, you have to be able to demonstrate to a court the points of proof, or the elements of the offence, are made out. In the instance where a person is fined under this legislation and they determine to plead not guilty in relation to a charge brought against them or, for that matter, even if they determine to plead guilty and the matter is proceeded by way of a court hearing, then you find yourself in a situation where you have to meet the necessarily elements of the offence. One of the elements of an offence is you have to demonstrate a nuisance. To that end, somebody then has to be annoyed as a consequence of that nuisance provision under this legislation. I can well perceive a magistrate sitting in front of a prosecutor, who reads the precis out to him, and will ask for evidence of a person being annoyed by the result of the nuisance activities of the accused.
This is not entirely dissimilar to the same problem you run into with the Traffic Act ‘drive under the influence’. You can exceed 0.05% and commit the offence - that is a straightforward concept. However, ‘drive under the influence’ could be attributed to a person who is driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol, drug, or psychotropic substance, which means a person driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, but is below 0.05%. Then, as a consequence of that, you have to demonstrate the other element of the DUI offence, which is loss of effective control of the vehicle. That means when a person is charged with DUI, it is almost automatic that a secondary qualifier or supporting charge has to support the DUI; that is, the person was driving under the influence of alcohol or a psychotropic substance and lost control of the vehicle.
To demonstrate to a court there is a loss of control of the vehicle, the next consequence is you have to charge them with some other offence: their vehicle strayed from the lane, strayed over some double white lines, or a single white solid line, or something of that nature. Consequently, whilst there is a capacity for an on-the-spot fine here, I expect if a person was to be arrested and charged for the offence the government is intending to create, the arresting police will also have to turn to the Summary Offences Act to find some other offence to support the concept of a nuisance that is being introduced in this legislative instrument.
I was advised during the briefing this would create an offence of a new nature in behavioural offences. I am under sufferance to imagine how that is possible. The Summary Offences Act provides for offences which are already of a nuisance-like nature. When you look at the Summary Offences Act, for arguments sake, disorderly behaviour would be a supporting charge to a breach of the offence the government is trying to create with this particular offence, to satisfy the concept of nuisance. In doing that, what you have actually now done is required a police officer to charge a person with a supporting charge to support the element of nuisance in the charge the government is trying to create. A fairly pointless exercise when, in the Summary Offences Act, there is already an offence of disorderly behaviour. Why the hell do you not just charge them with that in the first place and be done with it, and give them the fine for that?
I would like to hear from the minister how the minister is going to navigate through this particular issue. It is, in my opinion, not particularly well thought out because this issue will come up the first time there is a not guilty plea in relation to one of these offences. It will not be long before this offence will find its way into the realm of redundancy in the same way that ‘drive under the influence’ has become redundant under the Traffic Act. I suspect the ratio of people being charged with ‘drive under the influence’ compared to exceeding 0.05 is probably 10 000 to one. That is a guess, but, in my years as a police officer, I recall only on one instance charging a person with driving under the influence, and that was under the influence of cannabis. I had to demonstrate several other offences just to make out the DUI offence.
This offence falls into that same problematic category. I suspect how this will, ultimately, manifest itself once you find yourself in a situation where there are not guilty pleas being entered into in relation to this, is the courts will only accept the evidence if there is evidence of some other breach of the Summary Offences Act, thus qualifying the requisite nuisance.
I do not accept the argument that nuisance is some new category of offence; it just does not work at any logical level. The Summary Offences Act as it stands now is designed to deal with the concept of nuisance and how nuisance inflicts itself on the people of the Northern Territory. It is this lack of consideration which betrays what this legislation actually is: a last minute ditch attempt to put out a media release to demonstrate to the people of the Northern Territory this is a government continuing to be tough on alcohol.
The government has had its opportunity. That opportunity has come and has passed them by. They have failed miserably in their fight on alcohol abuse in the Northern Territory. It appears that $20m - or whatever it is - worth of advertising has not achieved the results the government wanted to achieve. The ALP’s Enough is Enough campaign was more about the tag line ‘written and authorised by the Northern Territory government, Darwin’, than it was ever about really responding to alcohol problems in our community. If the government was serious it would have taken decisions which were, essentially, unpopular, Moreover, it would have been seen by some of their traditional supporters as being onerous and burdensome. The government could not bring itself to go to that place, so the result was a comprise. The Banned Drinkers Register and its variant expressions of toughness was the compromise result.
I open the newspapers on a daily basis. I opened the newspaper yesterday: the dreadful incidents in The Narrows. Other incidents we read about on a daily basis; some of them are sub judice so I will not refer to them in any length. However, a number of times we realise alcohol is the direct contributor. The government promised to have stopped this stuff by now. It has not stopped.
We would have spent more time on this bill in front of the House today. It is not good policy; it is bad policy trying to support worst policy. As far as we are concerned, on this side of the House, it does not earn support. I also say I am disappointed the government has seen fit to find itself retiring early on repeated occasions during parliamentary sittings earlier this year, only to be trying to push other items of business through at the last moment during budget sittings. I suspect, in my more cynical world view, this is more about government being able to load up the Notice Paper on the last day with business than allowing members on this side of the House to have their clear and free voice on their appropriation replies.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, today I will give my qualified support for the bill, because I have said a number of times before, I would rather a government tried something than did not try at all. It is an attempt at least. I am on record as saying there should be some mandatory involvement of people who have alcohol problems in rehabilitation programs. I have used the example that we have legislation at the moment which allows government to put people into places such as the secure care centre in Holtze. To some extent, this is looking at a means of coercing people into rehabilitation, but does not go that far.
I will get on to that particular subject for a moment. I take the member for Port Darwin’s words; I believe he has always been a supporter of the idea of mandatory detention for people who have continual alcohol problems. However, before we really go down that path - and I am also saying it to myself as a supporter of that process - I believe we really need to base that on evidence that mandatory treatment will actually work. The reason I say that is we were talking to Amity before this bill came to parliament. The CEO of Amity Community Services, Bernie Dwyer, noted he believed people who went into voluntary rehabilitation were far more successful than people who were forcibly put into rehabilitation programs.
We obtained some materials from various places. One was some work done in Canada on the effectiveness of mandatory coerced and voluntary treatment. The evidence is very difficult to find one way or the other. In fact, this report from Canada was done by the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse. I am just looking for a date, but it was, obviously, done fairly recently in 2006. It said, under the heading, Effectiveness of Mandatory Coerced and Involuntary Treatment:
I will take a couple of quotes from their document. It said:
It said further down:
The New South Wales Legislative Council issued a report on the Inebriates Act. The Legislative Council Standing Committee on Social Issues issued a report on that act. Chapter 5 of that particular act talks about the evidence of compulsory treatment. I will go to the section there on that specific issue. Under the heading, The Effectiveness of Compulsory Treatment, it says:
That is noted throughout. They certainly had trouble finding any evidence that could show, one way or the other, whether compulsory treatment is effective. In fact, they say:
They took anecdotal evidence on effectiveness. The anecdotal evidence from one person at the Kirketon Road Centre said:
Dr Glenys Dore from Macquarie Hospital said:
She went on to say:
And it goes on.
There is another case from Ms Diane Paul from the Herbert Street Clinic:
The conclusion from that committee stated:
The committee in New South Wales had some concerns about whether coercion or mandatory rehabilitation was effective. The New South Wales government, in December 2006, responded to all the recommendations and added a few additional issues. It would be interesting to look at some of the areas that were being looked at. It asked whether it is appropriate for people to be compulsorily detained in the interest of their relatives. If not, what would the rationale for compulsory detention be? That would apply to many families in the Northern Territory.
I do not have time to deal with this whole report; however, what has come out is the New South Wales government decided it would establish a new secure four-bed involuntary care unit colocated at the Nepean Inpatient Withdraw Facility which will have the capacity to accept up to 50 patients per annum during the trial. Further details to the proposed new short involuntary care are dealt with in later responses.
I have just received - it took a bit of looking, but I rang the hospital that conducted the trial and this was the executive summary. I will read the short evaluation of the involuntary drug and alcohol treatment trial October 2010. It said:
As I have only just received this report, I may have to talk in the third reading. I will check to see what the results of that review were because this particular bill is now introducing, to some extent, coercion - coercion by ‘We will manage your income, therefore, we want you to go to the tribunal to get assessed and we want you to get treatment’.
We are looking at a move to a form of mandatory rehabilitation. We have not gone that far, but we are giving people a push and a shove. It is worthy of debate that we look at what the evidence is regarding whether that type of process will work. This is why I say I give qualified support based on I would rather try something than not try something at all. I am asking the minister that there be a guarantee that, if this bill is passed, in two years time there is a detailed review of the effectiveness of this process - if the government is still in power - to look at a range of issues; to see whether those people who have been income managed have actually been rehabilitated. It is no good introducing legislation for a purpose and, if that purpose is not achieved, legislation is not worth looking at. So, there needs to be a reasonable time for the review, and I believe two years will be a reasonable time.
We also need to have statistics about who is being income managed, who has been charged, or who has received infringement notices. I refer to whether they are Aboriginal or non-Aboriginal because I want to ensure this law is applied evenly, regardless of race, so there is no criticism of whether it is being dealt with just for a particular purpose.
I also would like to know how many people are income managed, and how many of those are Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal. We need to have those statistics if we are to find out whether this particular legislation is effective. I will say again, there is no point introducing legislation that has a particular purpose if you find out, in two years time, the purpose of this legislation has failed. I really would like something from the government to say there will definitely be a review.
Some of the concerns I have - and by the way, I thank the department for the number of briefings. I also thank the Police Commissioner who gave us a briefing as well. However, there are a number of issues which need to be touched on. One is the definition of ‘nuisance’. The member for Port Darwin has much more legalistic knowledge than I have. However, the Police Commissioner was concerned about how the test of the word ‘nuisance’ would stand up in court. As part of that review, it will be good to see whether that is, in fact, an issue or not. It has been raised that there will be difficulty assessing whether a person is a nuisance.
In relation to the nuisance, I must admit, I still feel we are just tinkering around the edge of public drunkenness. I know the minister will say: ‘A person does not have to be drunk, they have to be a nuisance’. However, generally speaking, they will have been drinking and, if you take the definition of ‘nuisance’ as in the second reading, from which I will quote:
If I saw a person walking down the street doing that, there is probably a pretty good chance they are drunk. That is why they are doing all these things. Most people when they are sober, unless they have some other problem in their life, do not do those sorts of things unless there is a reason to get them into that situation. If I run into a bunch of people who have had too much to drink and I have to get out of the way because they are yahooing and carrying on a bit, but they are not within the 2 km or they are not in a regulated area, nothing will happen to them unless we get them on some other law. Those people are in that state of being a nuisance because they are drunk.
We are saying here we are going to pick up people for being a nuisance, and the reason is not being termed as ‘public drunkenness’, it is simply because they are only drinking. I believe the two go together: they will be drunk; that is what is causing the nuisance. If it was one beer, I do not think these people would cause a nuisance. In reality, they will be drunk and they will be causing a nuisance.
The other issue I have is, to some extent, it is a discriminatory law not based on race here - I am not talking about that, I am talking about where the offence occurs. We have a series of laws that say if you, as a member of the public, happen to be within 2 km of a licensed premises, in a designated area, or one of the other regulated areas, then you are protected from people who are nuisances. If I happen to be in an unlicensed area, say, halfway between Cox Peninsula Road and Acacia. We are miles from any regulated areas. but there is a bunch of people there causing a nuisance on the side of the road. They have alcohol, they have thrown rubbish on the side of the road, and they are carrying on. They do not come under this law. So, to some extent, you have a law that applies either happily if you are a member of the public to some parts of the Northern Territory, but to other parts of the Northern Territory it does not, even though people are creating the same issue. That is a matter that needs to be looked at.
We also have the issue of all the different forms of regulated places. We have the whole area of Alice Springs, parks in Palmerston, and designated areas in Mitchell Street - that is another area which needs to be looked at and reformed if we are going down that path.
Another area I am interested in is the law about encouraging people to get rehabilitation. The problem I have is those people who get an infringement notice in a designated area are more than likely not going to be on welfare. I might be wrong, but I believe the people you pick up are not welfare recipients. The people you might pick up within the 2 km area are more than likely going to be welfare recipients.
You will have one group of people you can, after three infringement notices, advise are going to have their income managed to get them to go to the tribunal. However, the people you might pick up in Mitchell Street might be on a fairly good wage in the public service, and are not going to be required to have their income managed. I would love to see that happen; that would certainly cause a bit of a stir ...
Dr Burns: Only if you are earning $110 000.
Mr WOOD: I thought you might mention that, member for Johnston.
Ms Lawrie: It is subject to orders, Gerry.
Mr WOOD: That is right, but I am just saying ...
Ms Lawrie: Keeping off the grog for 12 months, for example. They are subject to orders.
Mr WOOD: Yes, yes. I am just highlighting some differences and one group of people will be income managed and the other group will not be. We know which group will be income managed ...
Ms Lawrie: Taxpayers.
Mr WOOD: Yes. That is the facts as they are.
Another thing concerns me, and I cannot find it in the act. I did not bring it up at the briefing because I only thought of it recently. Is there any appeal mechanism for a person who is put on income management?
Ms Lawrie: Yes.
Mr WOOD: If there is, minister, can you explain where it is now, because we had a look and I could not quite see it, so it might be in something else. I believe that is a really important issue. CAALAS wrote a letter. It talked about natural justice, and I would have thought in the case of natural justice there must be some methodology in the bill to show a person can appeal against the decision made by a tribunal. If that is there, that would be good.
I know the government is trying to do something. I understand, from the point of view of the opposition, to be consistent they did not agree with the swipe card system. That is fair enough; that is their right. They are saying: ‘We did not agree with that and we do not agree with this’. I do not think they are necessarily saying there are not some good things in here, but, from a point of view of a policy they have put forward, this would not be consistent with that policy.
My point of view is that no one has the magic wand when it comes to alcohol and drug issues and abuse in the Northern Territory. I would rather see the government give it a go, but I would put that with the proviso that there will be some definite report back to this House, with a detailed review and statistical analysis of what has been put forward, to show that it is actually working. If it is not working, I d hope the government says: ‘We tried, it did not work, let us try something else’.
I am concerned, of course, we all tend to get up here, and have a particular viewpoint. I am one who has said I support mandatory rehabilitation, for two reasons: (1) because when people cannot help themselves they need to be helped; (2) the community can get sick and tired of their freedoms being interfered with because people are, basically, a nuisance. I also take into account there are people looking at that.
The New South Wales government did a trial at Nepean Hospital. I believe it would be better for all of us - and even me before I went down the path of saying this is the only method to ensure that method actually would work – to certainly be looking at what trials are around. As I said, I am not looking at this from a purely health perspective; I am looking at it also from a public nuisance perspective. The safety of the public is something that should be given equal weight in relation to mandatory rehabilitation.
That is what we apply, to some extent, to the secure care centre people. If they have a cognitive impairment which can be dangerous to themselves and to the public, we make a special law which allows those people to be taken off the street to be given treatment, to have various safeguards to ensure their freedoms are continually checked. It is not something which should be done lightly. It is a bit of a two-edged sword, but I am certainly willing to do some more reading to see what research is being done.
I am told the New South Wales government is rolling out more facilities for involuntary treatment. That is why I received that information this morning from the Nepean Hospital. Victoria is now doing trials on involuntary treatment as well. I believe it is a really important issue for parliament to be discussing. It is too serious a problem to get really stuck into one side or the other.
I understand we are getting close to an election, and I will live with that. However, it is one of these social problems we come across in our society where we have to be willing to keep a clear head, an open mind, and be willing to try things and ensure we bring the community along with us. The reality is - let us face it - most of these people we are talking about will be Aboriginal people, because that is the majority of people in our prisons. They are the ones who are involved in the alcohol-affected crime.
That is not to say non-Aboriginal people do not have an alcohol problem. You are looking at someone who lives in the real world, and I know many of those people have. However, they are not necessarily the ones you see. Unfortunately, the ones you see are the ones people complain about the most. They will be picked up because they will be seen to be more of a nuisance.
I understand the legislation does not have any discrimination in it. However, I hope when this law is carried out it is carried out evenly: if an Aboriginal is a nuisance they are treated the same as a non-Aboriginal person who is a nuisance. It is the way the law is carried out - we need to ensure it is done in an even-handed way.
I have given my qualified support. I have asked the minister some questions. I hope the minister can give me some guarantees there will be a proper review in two years time. That is enough time to see if it is working. Then, we will see whether this law needs to be repealed, amended, or continued as is.
If I am allowed in the third reading, if I have more information - I will take your advice, Madam Speaker - on the review of the effectiveness of the involuntary trial in New South Wales. However, if I cannot, I will take your word on that, Madam Speaker …
Madam SPEAKER: In a third reading you are not meant to introduce new information. Member for Nelson, you have five minutes and then a possibility of a 10-minute extension at the moment.
Mr WOOD: I believe I have the page; it is hard when you have to do it on your feet. This says:
It says the trial - and I presume this is the trial for involuntary treatment:
The trial at Nepean ...
Which is Nepean Hospital:
I will read the conclusion, Madam Speaker:
Etcetera. My understanding from this morning’s conversation with the Nepean Hospital ...
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I move the member for Nelson be given an extension of time, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: What I was told by the lady from Nepean Hospital this morning is it has been reasonably successful, and they are trialling it in other parts of New South Wales now. I will also read something which might be of benefit, while I have the time. I mentioned it before. This is the evaluation of the involuntary drug and alcohol treatment trial which was in October 2007. There is a conclusion here:
co-morbidities in a controlled environment, as well as the provision of supportive aftercare.
I think that was said before:
The new system of care is more effective than treating this cohort under the existing treatment systems.
Of course, with that kind of care comes a financial burden. I still think this is where the Commonwealth needs to start to step in. Our alcohol problems extend from alcohol, and alcohol is made by companies, and companies make big profits. I know they are taxed; I understand that. However, a set proportion of that money, similar to the Living with Alcohol program, is a requirement the Commonwealth government must make to rehabilitation. The New South Wales government saying if you want to go down this path it is going to cost more money. The Territory government is looking at more work for police and for administrators through the tribunal. All that costs money.
This all comes down to one basic thing: alcohol abuse. I believe the alcohol industry - especially the breweries, the big companies that make alcohol - need to step up to the plate and put a substantial amount of money into rehabilitation. It is their product. We hear much in the container or packaging industry about product stewardship. Well, I say to the breweries here is an example where the concept of product stewardship should exist; they produce a product. Most people deal with that product sensibly, but there is a group of people in our society who do not. Because of that, our society pays a pretty big price in taxation, health costs, and in the cost to families and our communities.
I believe our government - and I am not saying they do not do it - needs to put more pressure on the Commonwealth government to put more money into these programs. They are expensive, but the Commonwealth collects the taxes from the breweries, and that is where our money should go. If we are going to achieve some changes in the alcohol problems we have in the Northern Territory - some positive changes - it is going to require financial assistance. The Territory government cannot do that on its own; it does not have the power to tax the breweries. The Commonwealth government does and they should set aside a percentage of that taxation income for more rehabilitation programs that are required, especially in the Northern Territory - if they really believe in closing the gap. I say most - not all - of the reasons why we have a big gap in the Northern Territory is associated with alcohol and welfare combined, and alcohol is certainly a key part of that.
Madam Speaker, as I said, I have qualified support for the bill that has been put forward today and I certainly am interested in hearing the minister’s response.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Speaker, first I will address some of the issues raised by the member for Nelson. When he mentioned speaking to people in the industry about whether mandatory rehabilitation will work, I can enlighten the member for Nelson as I have had meetings with quite a number of people who are in the industry of providing Alcohol and Other Drug services.
When one sits down and explains our policy from this side they give us support because they believe it will work. There are people out there who are beyond help. I agree with the member for Nelson regarding mandatory rehabilitation. When people are beyond helping themselves, they need a helping hand to get back on track from the community. Some of these people may not want to do that but, when you are beyond helping yourself, and beyond that ability to make those good decisions, sometimes the community has to help you. We do that with people suffering mental illnesses. We do it with a whole range of issues. Therefore, I do not see why we cannot do that in this particular instance.
I also agree with the member for Nelson when he said people are usually okay when they are sober. I have worked with habitual drunk legislation in Western Australia as a police officer. I have said in this House before that I have seen it work. I agree these people can be reasonable people when they are sober. You just have to get them to be sober so you can help them back to the path of either responsible drinking, abstinence, or whatever the outcome that particular person wants.
However, it revolves around alcohol abuse. When we ask why people do that, one has to look at what the very basics are in our community; that is, accountability, responsibility and consequences. If you do not have those three things then you have people being able to make choices to consume copious amounts of alcohol without fear of too many consequences. There are people in our community who just do not believe there are any consequences. When we look at the current form of mandatory rehabilitation and secondary supply, those things do not seem to be working at the moment. We seriously have to look at doing something quite different.
The member for Nelson also said these people are dangerous to themselves, and also dangerous to others. People who are out there inebriated fall over, get into fights, walk onto roads, get run over and, sadly, some get killed. They are also a danger to others because they do things that cause drivers to, for instance, swerve around to miss a pedestrian who is inebriated and hit a pole, or roll the car. That person then suffers either death. injury, or trauma. The other thing is if you are in the unfortunate position where you are in a road accident caused by someone who is drunk and that person dies, you have to wear that for the rest of your life. These are the psychological consequences of excessive alcohol consumption in our community.
We can see why the government is trying to do things. I do not blame them. They have a major problem. It is 11 months in, and there are well over 2000 on the BDR. They seriously need to try to revamp what we believe to be poorly thought-out legislation. They are fiddling around the edges. There are a couple of things in there that I believe are positive - not that we are going to support this legislation – such as issues around the gap orders may be okay. Sadly, it is a bit like shifting the deck chairs on the Titanic. They seem to be failing. There are more and more people going on the Banned Drinker Register. There are no deterrents. The government is desperately trying to fix what was poorly thought-out legislation.
We have to do things such as go into further changes upon changes. Even when we finish this debate, there will be further changes required to this legislation. It is a bit like a dog chasing its tail, or the old story of the rabbit going down a rabbit warren. We are just chasing around trying to fix this and fix that.
When you are out talking to people about this particular legislation, it is interesting. I have spoken to a number of police officers who are at the coalface. They said it is becoming more and more complicated. One of the questions put to me by a serving police officer was how on earth do less educated people understand all the different aspects of this legislation when they are trying to explain to them that there is this and there is that. Of course, it is going to be all sorts of different exempt areas, regulated areas, and defined areas, and anything else the government dreams up, to try to prop up this legislation.
We see terrible incidents occurring, 11 months after the legislation is introduced. As I said, well over 2000 people are on the Banned Drinker Register, yet, we still see people lying around the streets and the parks drunk. These people still appear to be getting their alcohol through friends, cousins, partners, or what have you. The good citizens are still suffering the consequences of verbal and physical abuse by drunks in our streets and parks. We had the terrible situation recently at Hudson Fysh Flats in Darwin with the 72-year-old man, who simply went out and was asking people to be quiet. What happened? He was stabbed in the back and the poor guy is still in a serious condition in hospital.
The people responsible for these ghastly deeds need to be in rehabilitation - mandatory rehabilitation, real rehabilitation, not the optional kind the NT Labor government pedals at the moment. We all hear them saying this and that. They talked about secondary supply. When you talk to serving police officers out there about secondary supply, they do not have time to scratch themselves, let alone go out and try to find, from a bunch of drunks, who bought what and who gave what to whom, who left the circle, and who stole their alcohol. These are some of the things they say when the police are trying to ascertain what exactly is going on with people out there.
These people need to be in real rehabilitation. Yes, we still have issues. Why are those people not in rehab? Well, I do not see in the budget money allocated to actually give real rehabilitation; that is, where people are taken away - those who cannot help themselves, those who are beyond help and perhaps are a danger to themselves and other people - into rehabilitation.
In my travels around talking to people in the Alcohol and Other Drug Service providers - the NGOs and the like - when I sit down and explain to them, they actually understand where we are coming from and support it. I know in closing remarks the minister will stand up and say - I can see it now: ‘The police force say they have the best tool they have ever had’. Unfortunately, they do not have the best tool available, but they have the best this government can give them. That is a bit sad, because there are better tools available. I would be happy if the government picked up on some of our initiatives and actually went out there and implemented those, because we firmly believe, as do the majority of people in the Alcohol and Other Drugs Service industry, that our side will work far better than the government is at the moment.
Of course, the minister will stand up and say: ‘That is all rubbish. We have the industry saying this is the best tool and it is all great’. I expect that is what the minister is going to say but, behind the scenes, there are some major problems with their legislation and their policies.
There are still only 400 beds in the NT, and that includes sobering-up shelter beds. The government says they have all these rehabilitation facilities going and it is all great, but there are still only 400 beds. I will be happy for the government to say they got it all wrong, there is more here and there is more there, and produce the figures to demonstrate that figure is incorrect.
Secondary supply is still a major problem out there. There are stories, when you wander around, walk into a supermarket and talk to people. I recently drove to Alice Springs and asked people on the way how they are handling all these issues. There are some major issues, and those issues are probably something that could form a whole other debate.
Sadly, those in the public who are afflicted by this terrible addiction still do not seem to be able to get sufficient help to get themselves back on the straight and narrow. What do we see? There are plenty of media releases at the front end; however, when you talk to the people who are responsible for trying to fix this - the public servants and the non-government organisations - there is not enough support at the back end. Look at the budget and the government will say, ‘Yes, well we have put in all this’, but it is still going to be insufficient to truly fix the problem.
I note, though, in a couple of media releases, one in February, the Chief Minister said: ‘Yes, we are going to go to the Commonwealth’. I agree; the Commonwealth needs to help. The member for Nelson mentioned the Commonwealth receives much of the taxes and it needs to stump up some money to help us fix this problem. However, if you do not have accountability, responsibility, and consequences, the problem will continue to grow.
I was at the budget lunch where the minister, in her capacity as Treasurer, gave an expos on what the budget is going to do and how wonderful it is going to be for the Territory. There were a few holes in it. However, as I left the budget lunch I walked out thinking: ‘Well, I did not hear anything about this, that, and a few other things’. I was confronted by a group of drunken people sitting outside the Holiday Inn - drunken behaviour, drunken abuse, people screaming and shouting at one another. As the Minister for Alcohol Policy’s counterpart on this side of the House, I thought: ‘I hope the minister comes out this end of the building because she will be confronted with exactly the problem all the other good people and good taxpayers in the Northern Territory have to face’.
When you talk to various people around Darwin, in Alice Springs, and along the way, they say when they go to use public barbecue facilities or public facilities, they are confronted by people who abuse them, will not move, and will not allow the public to use public amenities. People call the police; however, if the police are tied up they do not get there. They destroy people’s Saturday or Sunday outing at these public places, when they simply get a mouthful of abuse. Most of these people are taking families and kids with them. People tell me they are disgusted they cannot use these public facilities because their kids are then confronted with the hurling of abuse.
Other people I talk to work in and do the maintenance in the parks around Darwin. I have not spoken to them in Alice Springs, but it is plain to see by the newspaper articles the state of law and order in Alice Springs - it is quite sad. I know, from talking to police officers there, they do their very best. The problem is they are constrained, obviously, by budgets, directions, and government policy. However, when you talk to the workers out there - I was talking to one about a week ago, and that person told me several years ago they used to go through the parks and there were people sitting there drinking. They, would, obviously, report it to the police; the police would do what they could, and these people were not aggressive. However, sadly, this person was saying the trend now is these people are becoming very aggressive and literally telling these workers where to go: ‘Go away. Leave us alone’. They use huge amounts of expletives and foul language I dare not repeat in this House.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Year 5/6 Stuart Park Primary School students accompanied by Mr Lachlan Griffin. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr STYLES: This is our future, Madam Speaker - there they are. There is the future, and we can wave to the future up there. These are the young people who will inherit the problems we do not fix. Our job in this House is to fix the problems so these young people have a better life.
The minister will say: ‘Yes, we are doing that and we are going to do a far better job than you would ever do on your side of the House’. Obviously, we differ. The people we talk to say: ‘We just want to get the drunks off the streets’, and that is exactly what the Country Liberals will do. They are sick of walking in urine and human faeces. They are sick of tripping over people. They are sick of getting humbugged and sick of groups of these people - the very nature of the groups they are in and the condition they are in - intimidating people.
I have old people in my electorate who will not go to the shopping centre without being in a group of people or without being escorted because they are afraid. I can assure the minister - especially some of the women - will not use the ATM at the shopping centres because they are afraid. It is really sad when you doorknock people and are sitting in their lounge room and an old lady who deserves all the respect the community can give says: ‘I am too afraid to go up to the shopping centre on my own. I walk out and get humbugged. I have a bag of stuff’. There are people humbugging them.
I am assuming this is going on all over the place. I receive reports these people are humbugged all the time. Obviously, some of these people used to buy 4 L casks, but they buy a 2 L cask and go home because they like to have a little drop over a period of a couple of weeks. They are humbugged for that alcohol. Now, people are starting to get very aggressive in the way they are humbugging other people. It is very sad, indeed.
Obviously, the problem exists, the government is aware of it, and is now trying to find ways to fix it. Now, we are going to issue people with infringement notices for drinking in various places. If they are causing a nuisance we are going to give them an infringement notice. The infringement notices, generally - as the member for Nelson alluded to and I agree with him - will be predominantly in relation to within 2 km of licensed premises, and will be Aboriginal people in our community who are on welfare payments and are probably the people who can least afford to pay these fines. Many of these people - not all of them but a core group of people - who fall into the category of being beyond making decisions to help themselves; they have simply chosen to go off and live that particular lifestyle. Then, they get to a point where, without any help, it is probably not going to be easy to turn back.
What happens? They receive these infringement notices and, if they get three of them, they go on the Banned Drinker Register. If they do not pay these things, what happens? They go to court, these things are heard ex parte, they turn into warrants of commitment, and these people, sadly, are going to end up in gaol.
I wonder whether or not this is the government’s answer to mandatory rehabilitation; where they use this particular model to get these people into gaol and, then, they will run mandatory rehab programs in gaols. That is something that is almost akin to recriminalising public drunkenness. If people are in these areas and get an infringement notice, then end up in gaol, someone is going to say: ‘If I was drunk out there, how did I actually end up in prison?’ ‘Oh, well, it was the non-payment of fines’. It would be interesting to see how the government handles that particular issue. That is something the Labor government said they would never do.
We, on this side, agree you have to get these people into mandatory rehab; it is just how you do it. I am interested to see, in the near future, how the government will do this.
How does a large proportion of people this legislation targets understand what the issues are, given that police officers are saying it is complicated? We have 2 km rules, regulated areas, designated areas, special licence areas, exempt areas, and special exemptions. When they are talking to people who, perhaps, do not understand how the law works and have limited education, police officers are tearing their hair out and saying: ‘They just do not understand and you cannot even explain this to them, because they all just sit there and look at you with a blank look on their face’.
My colleague, the member for Port Darwin, addressed the issue of the definition of ‘nuisance’. I will move on to others, as he did a fairly good job of putting that to the government.
These people should be in rehabilitation. The government says they have the toughest laws in the country - in fact, I have heard the minister say in the world. These are the toughest laws Australia has ever seen. In 2001, when the CLP left the government benches, there were 13 457 apprehensions of people taken into protective custody. The next full set of numbers I have access to is the 2008-09 year, when there were 94 400 apprehensions for protective custody either in police cells, sobering-up shelters, or taken home by Night Patrols. We can see the problem, over the last 11 years, has been getting progressively worse.
If we use income management as a way of forcing people into the tribunal and into some form of rehabilitation, that is going to be an interesting task. I agree with the member for Nelson asking how we are going to do that. That needs to be even-handed across the board. If the government thinks this is going to be an easy process - it has to negotiate, obviously, with the federal government to get the process set up so it has the ability to do that.
There are a number of questions which are going to have to be asked after some of these amendments are in place, and we will see what happens and what we believe is going to arise from that particular issue.
Regarding minister Macklin’s Stronger Futures legislation, the federal government has said income referral decisions are made by the Northern Territory government, and referred to Centrelink for application. Well, it is going to be interesting to see how the federal government handles that particular issue.
Moving on to some of the changes to proposed section 101U as per the proposed amendments: a person can receive a BAT notice for drinking in a house they are house sitting within 2 km of a licensed venue within a designated area, but not for drinking in the park opposite the licensed venue. So here we have a situation and the government needs to ensure this does not happen. It will be interesting ...
Ms Lawrie: That is not true. You are so wrong.
Mr STYLES: ... to see how that actually plays out.
There are changes which are needed and the government does not appear to know who it is targeting. We moved some amendments when we were discussing the PACSM bill about having figures put into annual reports so we could actually be given a clear picture of how it is working, who it is working for, and who it is not working for. I say again if they had adopted some of the opposition’s proposed amendments, we may be able to track, very clearly, what is happening there.
In this legislation, we also need to deal with a couple of issues in relation to police officers searching people for alcohol and other things. I note under the Police Administration Act, the Juvenile Act, and the Misuse of Drugs Act, there are powers for police to conduct the search themselves. When you are dealing with the same gender, that is okay. When you do not have people available of the same gender under that other legislation, police officers can direct a member of the public or, for instance, a medical practitioner to search people. We do not have the ability to do this in the Liquor Act. In relation to consistency, we need to move across and have that power, and that issue should be considered.
There are a number of questions we should put to the government. I do not know whether we have time to debate them here today. What is going to happen in relation to the non-payment of fines? What is going to happen to our gaol population? We note the gaols are overflowing. There are probably insufficient deterrents for people. They just seem to think they can do what they like out there. That is the message I get from police officers who have to deal with this. People who work in the courts are quite amazed at some of the situations which are occurring at the moment, and the predicaments the community finds itself in ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Sanderson, I will just acknowledge these young people. Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Year 11 Darwin High School Legal Studies students, the Step Up Be Heard class, accompanied by Ms Michelle Elliott. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr STYLES: Thank you, Madam Speaker. They are some more of our future, and it is nice to have them here ...
Ms Lawrie: Do not put them off too much, Peter.
Mr McCarthy: They will be deconstructing this debate, Peter.
Mr STYLES: Oh, good. Well, it gives them something to think about, and some alternative ideas. We like that because people should question not only us but, in particular, the government and the government policies, and whether they are going to work or not. I encourage people in Legal Studies to talk to stakeholders, go out into the community and talk to the people in the Alcohol and Other Drug areas and ask them what they think. Do not take my word. Go out and ask, and I am sure you will get the same answers I did: there are some serious concerns about the legislation which currently faces all of us in our community.
Madam Speaker, the amendments the government is introducing have the effect of almost recriminalising public drunkenness ...
Ms Lawrie: No, they do not.
Mr STYLES: ... and if you work that back - I pick up on the interjection by the minister. If people are going to end up in gaol because they are out sitting there drinking, that is just another way around - and it is a cute way - of recriminalising public drunkenness. These people will probably end up in NT gaols, as many of them already are for alcohol-related issues - something the Labor government said it would never do. It is going to be interesting to see what the minister says and actually what happens out in the real world.
There are all sorts of interesting articles in newspapers. I note there is one in today’s newspaper in relation to the Northern Territory’s ability to govern itself. It would appear we are losing the ability to govern ourselves. When you look at The Australian today, in an article by Sean Parnell, the headline is: ‘Blueprint ready if Northern Territory drink plan fails’. It would appear the federal government is getting ready to take over more aspects of what is, and should be, the realms of the Northern Territory government. Why? They had to do it with the intervention, they are now doing it with alcohol. The federal government is stepping in. We are in, perhaps, the awkward situation where the federal government may step in and take over more and more of what should be the Northern Territory’s responsibility. Why is that happening? Well, probably because of the failure of the government policy - serious failures in relation to child protection and alcohol management.
It is interesting - I have said it before and I will say it again - we do not mind if the government moves further towards CLP policy; in fact, it would probably be a good thing. The government will say they are talking to people out there and everybody reckons it is great; it is full steam ahead and everything is right. Well, I do not know who the minister and her advisors are talking to, but if it is the same people I am talking to, then we are all getting two different stories. What we see in the community, is the community is sick and tired of it. We are still seeing people lying around the streets and in our parks, and the results of alcohol-fuelled violence. We do not see any huge reductions. I know the minister will get up and say: ‘Here are the statistics, here is this, and there is that’.
However, the fact remains people out there are not seeing any difference. They still see the same people, they are still getting humbugged, and they still have the same concerns. They are tired of wearing the consequences for the behaviour of a few. From our side, we will target the people who are actually causing the problems and creating the issues the public is so very sick of.
There are going to have to be some more amendments to this very quickly to try to fix up some of the issues. It was put to me the other day it is a bit like when Churchill was referring to Russia in 1939. The quote is - and I suggest this alcohol issue is quite the same:
I believe the key is a change in policy. In nearly 12 months not much has changed. The situation needs to be overhauled again. It is sad it has not worked. I agree with the member for Nelson: you are better off trying something than not trying anything at all. I will give credit to the government, they have tried. However, I do not think they have it right, they have it wrong. We need to have a serious look, as a collective group of people in this community, to try to fix some of the problems we are all affected by.
On this side of the House, we believe the key is real mandatory rehabilitation. The Country Liberals’ policy of removing drunks off the streets and giving them real rehab - not the optional type that the Northern Territory government has - will actually fix the problem. I might add the majority of people in the Alcohol and Other Drug industries actually agree that is a better way to go. I would not come into this House and propose something that all those people thought was a waste of time and was not going to work, because that would just be a bit silly.
We do believe we have some serious answers. We are talking to people - and I acknowledge that the government, the advisors and the member for Nelson have all quoted some research from other areas. We have had a look at some of that. However, we have a unique set of problems in the Northern Territory which are not replicated anywhere else in the world - not in London, where people were talking about floor prices, and Canada. It could be similar, but we have a unique set of problems. You can draw on that information and I am happy to …
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Sanderson, you time has expired.
Mr STYLES: The clock does not say so, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: The clock finished then.
Mr STYLES: It is still showing one minute to go.
Madam SPEAKER: No, the red sweep just went around, member for Sanderson.
Ms LAWRIE (Alcohol Policy): Madam Speaker, for the students of Darwin High School, you just met the parliamentarian nicknamed Eeyore. He is the harbinger of doom and gloom. According to him, there is nothing going right in the Territory at all, ever, anywhere ...
Mr WOOD: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The Treasurer should be directing her remarks through the Chair.
Ms LAWRIE: I will direct my comment through the Chair, absolutely …
A member: She should withdraw.
Ms LAWRIE: I withdraw Eeyore.
Mr STYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I acknowledged in my speech the government was doing several things wrong. The Treasurer is misleading the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Sanderson, that is not a point of order. Resume your seat
Ms LAWRIE: Clearly touched a nerve.
Mr Styles: No, you are misleading the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Please continue with your closing remarks, minister.
Ms LAWRIE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I will go to the issues raised. However, first, I will give a synopsis of the legislation we are debating because we have students in the Chamber. We are debating the next tranche of amendments to legislation designed to turn the problem drinker off tap. There is no legislation like this anywhere in Australia. We are yet to find anywhere in the world that is trying to go to the source of the problem – the problem drinker - turning them off tap due to their behaviour. It is a behaviour-driven reform, rather than reforms that look at alcohol restrictions across our society. There is a reason for it.
Alcohol is the main cause of violence in our society. Data shows it is alcohol which is fuelling about 60% of violent crime in the Territory. Clearly, we have unacceptable levels of violent crime. We also have unacceptable levels of antisocial behaviour. All the analysis shows it is alcohol fuelling the majority of that. Equally, research shows alcohol actually costs the Territory $642m per annum in relation to the economy and social costs. That is the cost of the people in the health system dealing with trauma victims as a result of alcohol, whether that is stabbings, bashings, or car accidents because they were DUI. About 80% of our prisoners are in gaol because they committed alcohol-fuelled crimes. The costs, obviously, impact on that. There is also the entire alcohol and other drugs delivery service rehabilitation and treatment, quite aside from the clinical assistance required along the way.
Do we have a major problem with grog fuelling crime and antisocial behaviour in the Territory? Yes, we do. As statistical data, Indigenous Territorians drink at 1.7 times the national rate; non-Indigenous Territorians drink at 1.5 times the national rate. It is not just an Indigenous issue; it is a whole-of-Territory issue. Australians are known as the great drinkers of the world. However, whilst the majority of people can handle their grog, there is a significant minority of people where grog is the cause of a great traumatic series of consequences in their life through health failures. The rate of renal failure in the Territory is just one example. Of course, it is often the cause of homelessness, neglect of families and, fundamentally, alcohol-fuelled violence leads to tragic outcomes for the victims, and the offenders are gaoled. If you look at many of our lifers in our corrections system - people who will be looked up for 20-plus years - alcohol fuelled that crime.
Did we have to do something about it as a government? Yes, we did. Listening to the member for Sanderson, the shadow minister for Alcohol Policy, you would have thought in 2001, when we came to the end of the 27-year regime of the CLP, all was good out there. He quoted protective custody at around 14 000 a year. I will tell you why the figures were so low: you had a four-year freeze on police recruitment in the Territory.
I am the member for Karama, I cover the suburbs of Karama and Malak. I tell you, I was born and raised in Darwin; been here four decades. Karama in 2001 had groups of drunks drinking in the parks and around the Karama Shopping Centre. Malak had groups of drunks in the parks and around the Malak Shopping Centre. Seriously, the amount of antisocial behaviour, public drinking, and incidents arising out of that was phenomenal. Do you know what the main thing was that people said to me, when they were electing me? ‘We do not even bother trying to call the police anymore because they do not turn out’. When we got to government, we realised why. You froze police recruitment for four years. We literally did not have the capacity in our police service to respond to the incidents, to the calls.
This government has invested in police - a phenomenal investment in police. We have, I think, something like an additional 450 police out on our streets today as a result of our investment in police. We have another 94 police funded in this Budget 2012-13 - thank you to the Commonwealth funding.
It is just absurd to pretend this is a problem which has occurred in the last 10 years - absolutely absurd to stand on the other side and pretend it is just since Labor came to government. We acknowledge we have an unacceptable level of alcohol-fuelled violence and crime in our society. We acknowledge the level of antisocial behaviour is unacceptable. That is why we invested in these reforms in the first place. The Enough is Enough alcohol reforms are a $71.5m investment in tackling the problem; investing in our police resources to tackle the problem. We have put nurses into watch houses. We have put database systems in the watch houses - for the first time. Protective custodies before these reforms where never, ever even identified and entered into a data system. We had the revolving door of drunks going through the watch houses with no system behind to support any triaging of them regarding their health, any referrals into the health system or, indeed, even knowing who it was and how many times they were coming in and out. These reforms bed in place all of those significant changes just at the watch house.
Do not get me started on the furphies you ran in here today in this debate about ‘where is the funding into rehab?’. Pure laziness or deliberate misleading - I really question which it is. Probably a combination of both, member for Sanderson.
In this budget alone, we are putting in an additional $4m to enhance urban and remote treatment and rehabilitation services which includes outreach services, withdrawal support, and clinical support. In this budget alone, we are putting in an additional $4.4m to continue support of the Banned Drinker Register, to provide support to the police around enforcing those bans. There is $4.2m additional to support the SMART Court, which is the court with the powers to put people into mandatory rehabilitation and treatment rather than gaol - for the low-level offenders, not the violent offenders. The violent offenders go to gaol.
There is support for the Alcohol and Other Drugs Tribunal. There is no tribunal of this nature anywhere in Australia. We set it up and we are supporting it. Yes, they have many referrals going to them and, yes, they have found it hard to get those people to come before the tribunal. That is why we have the legislation amendments we are debating today; to give the tribunal ex parte powers, and to give them - as the member for Nelson quite appropriately put it - that coercion power to get welfare recipients on income management - up to 70% of income management - so there is a genuine hip-pocket reason why they would be compelled to go to the tribunal and have their issues dealt with.
As I said, we are funding nurses into Darwin, Alice Springs, and Katherine watch houses to provide that important level of health screening. To stand over there and pretend there is no funding to support rehabilitation is a nonsense. What we have done is added an extra 24 rehabilitation beds into the rehab system, on top of the 400-odd beds we have in the system - 14 of those beds in Darwin, and 10 in Alice Springs.
We have also worked with the health sector. There has been something like 120 health intervention training systems around AOD that have occurred to complement these reforms. There has been training for about 50-odd GPs to complement these reforms. The proof is in the pudding. In the first six months alone, we have 2100 drinkers on the Banned Drinker Register. The police have said it is the best tool they have ever had. Alcohol-related assaults are down across the Territory. In the first six months, alcohol-related assaults dropped 12% in Darwin, 13% in Palmerston, 11% in Katherine, and 8% in Alice Springs. That is data directly from the police PROMIS database. Rehabilitation, as I have said, has been boosted.
Not only that, when you are coming into the hospital system because you have an injury, the other thing that really has been boosted is treatment times for withdrawal clients have dropped from eight days to less than three hours. So, the referral systems have dropped from eight days to less than three hours.
These reforms before us are designed to build on the success of the first six months. We are giving police new powers: those on-the-spot infringement notice powers. Within the CBD precincts at Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs, if you are drunk, or have an alcoholic drink in your hand - not even having to be drunk - you cop an on-the-spot infringement notice of $70. If you do that three times in a year, you are on the Banned Drinker Register.
I pick up on the good question from the member for Nelson regarding people, obviously, infringing in that way rather than the 2 km plus nuisance outside of the CBD zones, who will tend to be the non-welfare recipients. To be honest, I think there will be a real mix. That point you made was that they could be the wage earners. These reforms are about changing people's behaviour. If someone is walking along Mitchell Street, at whatever hour, with an open drink in their hand and they cop a $70 on-the-spot fine. Someone in that situation is going to ask: ‘Why am I getting a fine?’ Bearing in mind we will advertise and promote these reforms coming into place. I believe in letting people know what is happening in the law. Public awareness is crucial, and we have already been running advertisements on television. If someone has copped an on-the-spot fine, the police will say: ‘You cannot have an open alcoholic drink in the CBD’. By far, the majority of people will not want the fine again and will not do that again. There are, of course, people who do not get the message the first time. By the time they cop their second fine, the conversation we will have is: ‘You get this another time, mate, and you are on the Banned Drinker Register’.
Not many will be foolish enough to go through to Banned Drinker Register at Strike 3, but those who do can be dealt with before the tribunal. They will be clinically assessed, all of those things. Equally there are the ex parte orders that can apply if they do not turn up to tribunal, and the orders can be around banning them from drinking for 12 months - all of those things. The orders are what the tribunal chooses to make. So, there are consequences for those who are not just the welfare recipients.
Yes, there are significant consequences for welfare recipients, but that is picking up the community sentiment where they see people who are not working, who are receiving taxpayer funds as welfare recipients, and they are trashing their lives through grog. So, manage their income so they cannot keep having that amount of money to spend on grog.
I asked my agency to have a look at an example of where these things are starting to already come through. I will quickly turn to where they are, because we looked at the Family Responsibilities Commission in northern Queensland and how that is working. The other thing we have in place in the Territory already is through the child protection system. The quarantining of welfare payments is occurring and some orders have been made. I will go to the Family Responsibilities Commission example in Queensland. Both the Alcohol and Other Drug Tribunal and the Family Responsibilities Commission are tribunal bodies whose members are formed of community members as well as expert medical and legal members. Both bodies work in the civil jurisdiction with no criminal sanctions. Both make orders seeking to address social problems.
The Family Responsibilities Commission is already a body authorised under the Commonwealth Social Security (Administration) Act and has been provided with direct power to make a person subject to income management. The Commonwealth bill provides that other authorised bodies, like our tribunal here, may be declared as authorised bodies and to exercise the same power as the Queensland Family Responsibilities Commission in making a person subject to income management.
One of the things you do when creating change to law is go out and consult with people in the field. I will pick up again, member for Nelson, on the research you have done on mandatory versus voluntary rehabilitation. Consistently, people in Congress in Alice Springs who deal with the consequences of the drunks all the time have told me to look at the Family Responsibilities Commission in Queensland, at how it works; it really is a good model to look at how we can make the tribunal work. They really have urged, I guess, consideration of those extensive powers. It was also in the discussions with Congress and others such as Bernie Dwyer from Amity, where that whole testing of mandatory versus voluntary came up.
Essentially, what I was being advised throughout is that the jury is still completely out on the evidence based around the effectiveness of mandatory rehabilitation. However, in some overseas studies and some of the early studies here in the trials in Australia, what it is starting to show is, in short, it is better than nothing. As you said when you read out the trial results, it is, first of all, a withdrawal period. It is off the substance for a period of time. It is a period where the health checks can occur. It is a period where that social engagement can occur. It is a circuit breaker in their life. I believe you quoted the figure of 80% who went on to do other treatment out of that trial. For some they generally do. That is a great thing and it works.
The general prevailing view of the experts is, of course, voluntary rehabilitation gets better outcomes because of that personal will to want to change your life. However, in the absence of that, mandatory increasingly is seen as very much a tool to put in play, which is why we scoped mandatory into the reforms in the first place, through the tribunal powers, but also through the SMART Court powers.
Regarding your question, member for Nelson, around the importance of doing a review, understanding the data, and having the statistical data for review, I fundamentally agree with you. Embedded in the funding for the Enough is Enough reforms is funding for evaluation. We have also exchanged correspondence with the Commonwealth around the evaluation. We would like to do evaluation, not just of these reforms, but of the broader Commonwealth prescribed areas initiatives across the Territory.
It is important to look at it in its entirety, so we absolutely have to evaluate these reforms, not just for the sake of the Territory, but also for the sake of the nation, because there are other jurisdictions. South Australia and Western Australia have entered into the debate of whether they have reforms like these. I believe it is important because we are not the only place in our nation where we have drunkenness issues. It is important because we have gone first with reforms of this nature, that we genuinely evaluate them so people can see the results - so we can see the results.
The view you have of keeping your mind open to change - absolutely. As you said, there is no one magic solution to this. It takes a range of initiatives to intervene in people’s lives to get constructive outcomes, without a doubt. It is oft times generational change that you are really striving for. You want immediate change, medium-term change, but it is sustainable long-term change you need to strive for as well. Therefore, evaluation is critical. I can absolutely commit to getting in and reviewing the efficacy of these reforms, evaluating them, ensuring all the statistics and data are being collated, including, member for Nelson, the statistics on Indigenous and non-Indigenous and the income management statistics. All of that data that you want - absolutely not a problem. Will there be a review? Yes, there will.
What I cannot commit to today standing in the Chamber is a point of view regarding Year 2. What I want to do is go back to the experts and ask about the point of view regarding Year 2; whether that would be good, helpful, or what is the most efficient and effective way of doing a review? Is it Year 2, is it Year 3? Some people argue it is Year 5. I do not know. I would not want to wait five years - that is too long. There needs to be a far earlier point than Year 5. Is it Year 2 or Year 3? I need to rely on the advice of the experts who undertake this research and evaluation, rather than make it up here in the Chamber. I am genuinely committed to the review. Would it be Year 2 or Year 3? I cannot give you that answer today. I certainly would not accept an answer that it has to be Year 5. That is too long for the extent of the reforms we have undertaken.
The other answer I want to give first - I will touch on nuisance in a moment – is I will go to the other concern you had, member for Nelson, about the appeal process because it is a very valid issue. When the tribunal makes a BADT order it requires a person to be subject to income management. If the person does not agree with this order they may seek review of the BADT order under Division 4 of the Alcohol Reform (Prevention of Alcohol-Related Crime and Substance Misuse) Act. Section 41 provides for a review, on application, by a banned person for variation, extension, or revocation of a BADT order, which includes orders relating to income management. An applicant is required to attend the hearing of the application. The tribunal must provide a notice of the decision to the banned person after the review. If the person does not agree with this decision they may appeal to the Local Court - section 68. First of all, there is a review mechanism within the tribunal. Equally, if they still do not agree with the outcome of the review, it is appealed to the Local Court.
The other issue I want to touch on is the one raised by the members for Port Darwin, Nelson and Sanderson in relation to ‘nuisance’. To say there is no definition of ‘nuisance’ in the bill and, therefore, the new offence provision will not work, I disagree with, obviously. I sought specialist legal advice on this matter. I have received specialist legal advice which says having a definition of ‘nuisance’ in the bill would limit and constrain the ordinary and natural meaning of the word.
Just as every member of this Assembly would have a view of the type of behaviour this word would cover, courts have been considering what it means since medieval times. There is a well-established body of law which says what ‘nuisance’ means. ‘Nuisance’, in this context, means interference with the rights of the public to peaceful passage and enjoyment of public places, free of unacceptable annoyance or interference from the behaviour of others.
There are other NT laws that have offence provisions which refer to creating a nuisance without providing a definition. These laws include laws about public health, conduct in taxis, and residential tenancy. By having a definition of nuisance, behaviour that might otherwise not be classified as a nuisance could, potentially, be brought into question. Take shouting, for example. Without question, shouting can constitute a nuisance. Under the new offence provision, a person who has an open container of alcohol and is shouting in public within 2 km of a licensed premise can be given an infringement notice if their shouting is causing a nuisance. That infringement might lead them to be placed on the BDR if it is repeated. On the other hand, a frustrated parent who may be enjoying a family picnic with a glass of champagne and shouts at their unruly kids to get their attention to return home is unlikely to be creating a nuisance. If the bill contained the definition of a nuisance which said shouting constituted a nuisance, that parent could be at risk of being given an infringement notice. The courts make these judgments and the courts have made sensible judgments on these to date.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, do you mind if I acknowledge these young people who I think you would probably be interested in?
Ms Lawrie: Karama Primary School!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery - I believe there may be two school groups, but I am not sure - Year 4/5 Holy Family Catholic Primary School students accompanied by Miss Racheal Joyce and Mrs Bernie Kenwrick ...
Ms Lawrie: No, Holy Family is not there yet. That is just Karama.
Madam SPEAKER: That is just Karama. We will welcome them for later, and Year 5/6 Karama Primary School students,
Ms Lawrie: Holy Family is coming in now in the blue, Madam Speaker. Karama is in the green, Holy Family in the blue.
Madam SPEAKER: Okay, and Karama Primary School students are accompanied by Miss Renael Carolin, and Ms Georga McNicol. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome. Welcome to Holy Family, as they are coming in.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms LAWRIE: Welcome, Holy Family school and welcome, Karama Primary School. These schools are about two streets from where I live in Karama, one in one direction and one the other direction. I love these schools; I visit them regularly. Hello …
Mr Wood: Within 2 km?
Ms LAWRIE: Within 2 km, absolutely. A short walk to both.
The other point I want to pick up before I close is the member for Sanderson continues this line that the new offence is a backdoor method of simply making drunkenness a crime, or criminalising drunkenness. No! Neither offence requires the person to be intoxicated. The offences are made out of if the person is drinking liquor at a regulated place. You do not have to be drunk, you can have the can open - not be drunk, just have the can open. You are wrong to lead with that. I know that will not stop you, member for Sanderson, from leading with that furphy, but you are wrong.
I have captured the questions which have been asked by the member for Nelson, and I have touched on the nuisance issue for the three members who have contributed. The last remaining issue is the one of the non-payment of fines. I will just go to that because that would have covered all of the issues which have arisen in this debate. I am very conscious of the time, Madam Speaker, so I will go quickly.
The issue is, just recapping, the non-payment of fines. Other non-payment of fines go to the Fines Recovery Unit. Failure to pay a court-ordered fine or an infringement penalty results in enforcement by the Fines Recovery Unit. The Fines Recovery Unit has a number of sanctions available to it which uses driver’s licence suspension as an effective tool. Imprisonment is the last resort and can only be imposed on breach of a community work order. The community work orders would come well and truly before then. To date, the Fines Recovery Unit has not imprisoned anyone for non-payment of fines. An extreme gymnastic stretch there from the member for Sanderson - getting it wrong again.
I will recap. We will have very strong, different political viewpoints on how to tackle public drunkenness, and the causes, effects and the harms it is doing on our society in crime and antisocial behaviour. However, it is very early days. What we are seeing is alcohol-fuelled violence dropping in the Territory. There are hideous incidents which occur, without a doubt - hideous, distressing incidents, and we have seen those this week alone; one, of course, at Hudson Fysh Avenue, and separate incidents in Alice Springs.
Nothing beats, I guess, prevention, and these are preventative tools. This is about trying to get people restricted from that takeaway alcohol. It is not prohibition. You can never prohibit; people will always find a way of getting hold of that substance. However, they are genuine tools which have genuine consequences to people’s behaviour. Very early data shows they are absolutely taking us in the right direction in reducing alcohol-fuelled crime and antisocial behaviour incidents.
Member for Sanderson, you have a very different view of our community to me. I live and work around Darwin, and I move regularly in and through Palmerston. I meet with many people. Obviously, they know me through being the Minister for Alcohol Policy and having introduced these tough and fairly radical reforms. The consistent feedback I am getting is it has become much quieter since they have come in place. Yes, there are places where drinkers are still hanging out and where police are still having to attend. Consistent feedback is support for the reforms; that it has become much better, much cleaner, with fewer people around in the parks. A classic example is Raintree Park. You will see people sitting there, what I call the morning after, at around 10 am. They are not drinking, they are not shouting, they are not causing a nuisance, they have come out of wherever they have been overnight and are sitting there waking up. They have not slept in that park at night. Yes, there are some patches, and Parap Road is still what I describe as a hot spot. However, we have policing activity there. These laws in the Chamber today are around dealing with the issues of places such as Parap Road.
Madam Speaker, the member for Sanderson and I will always have a different view of the world, and I say thank God, because debate and diversity brings a focus to all of this.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Ms LAWRIE (Alcohol Policy)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Continued from 27 March 2012.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, as a member of the select committee investigating youth suicide in the Northern Territory, I speak in relation to the committee’s inquiry and the report which was tabled in the March sittings by the chair, my colleague, the member for Arafura.
I acknowledge the chair for the particular passion she has for tackling the subject of youth suicide, knowing only too well the devastation she has seen, not only around the Territory but in her own country on the Tiwi Islands, which has suffered one of the highest suicide rates in the world, and how that community has grappled with and endeavoured to address the loss of its young people through the Tiwi for Life Project.
It is, indeed, disturbing to learn of those stark and alarming statistics; that the Northern Territory suicide rate is three-and-a-half times the national average and, with it, there is a steady increase of suicide amongst our Indigenous young people under 18, and also an increase in young women completing suicide, with girls now comprising up to 40% of all suicides of children under the age of 17 years.
During this term of parliament, I have been a member of several parliamentary committees and they all do important work. However, this one has been one of the more difficult personally because it has dealt with such an incredibly tragic subject: suicide. Suicide, in anyone’s language, is awful. However, young people’s lives ended way too soon makes it all the worse.
As a committee, we dealt with the subject at a very raw level as we heard from individuals who shared their experiences of loss of loved ones, children, family members, and even a couple of young people who shared their stories of depression, alienation, attempts at self-harm, and attempts of suicide.
We heard from a whole range of professionals working in the field. This is certainly not a complete list, but it included youth workers, counsellors, teachers, nurses, doctors, psychologists, psychiatrists, police, and traditional healers. Through the collective experiences of the many individuals and organisations we heard from we were able to build a picture of the multitude of factors which can contribute to the pressure cooker situation - as one person in Tennant Creek described it - which leads to a young person in the depths of despair and hopelessness seeing no alternative but to end their life.
This concept of suicide is so incredibly difficult for us to grasp. I was touched, during the hearing in Central Australia, listening, via a translator, to two very senior men from the Ngaanyatjarra Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Women’s Council and their role as nungkeri, or traditional healers as they explained. They explained with some bewilderment they had no word for suicide; no way to tell, even as healers, if someone was unwell in their mind or spirit, and so unwell as to contemplate ending their life, though they were able to identify the triggers associated with suicide and self-harm such as cannabis, alcohol, jealousy and shame. We heard this story many times when we went to Indigenous communities.
The other notable, if obvious, thing about this inquiry is there are no easy solutions for our society to fix this issue. Whilst government policy and properly targeted and resourced programs have a big role to play, we need, as a community, to go to the grassroots of young people’s lives. While the contributing factors might be identified, as indeed, the nungkeri were able to identify, it is knowing how to address and grapple with these factors and causes, both tangible and intangible.
Without a doubt, this was a considerable body of work collected during our investigation. We collected many hours of evidence through 16 hearings and 45 written submissions. Members of the committee thank all those individuals who either appeared to provide evidence or did so by what were, generally, very well-prepared and detailed submissions.
This report, with its 23 recommendations divided into four areas of focus, provides an appropriate framework for sectors across government and non-government organisations to work with people and communities to address and turn around youth suicide.
The first key area is about building strong, healthy and resilient communities, with recommendations focusing on the development of infrastructure for community activity, service delivery, and public awareness. Within this key area, the committee heard, time and time again, about the need for activity to engage youth, especially in our remote and rural areas.
We heard about the importance of engaging youth through sport, for instance, and the importance of sport for individuals as a collective through a team where there is a unity of purpose and support, an opportunity to achieve and be physically involved and, importantly, something in a young person’s life that they can look forward to - team practice for a game in the lead-up to what would be, perhaps, a weekly competition.
As we learned during the evidence provided by an expert in sports psychology, Professor Colin Tatz, what commonly features for those contemplating suicide or self-harm is they have no hope and nothing to look forward to.
We also heard through CAALAS about the importance of youth programs and the irrefutable evidence that they improve kid’s lives. Indeed, they went as far as to say youth programs should be regarded as essential services. This was a view shared by the Northern Territory Council of Social Services.
All the well-intentioned programs in the world; however, will struggle on the service delivery end so long as we have constraints to enable service delivery: funding cycles; capacity to staff programs, including the challenges of recruiting and retaining suitably qualified staff; not to mention the practicality of housing them; as well as the need for infrastructure for youth activities
We learned also through our investigation about the overlap and the duplication of service delivery. Of course, a big part of building strong, healthy, and resilient communities and, with it, strong, healthy, and resilient young people means putting the spotlight on public and community awareness. The main target, clearly, needs to be around prevention. I will talk a little later about the critical need for postvention.
We heard of many programs which focus on the core need for the emotional health and wellbeing of our young people. Schools and education featured in much of the evidence we received - schools being regarded as places which are safe and, frequently, havens of normality in kid’s lives. While there are a number of very successful programs delivered in schools, the programs KidsMatter and MindMatters seemed to feature in many of the hearings we held. However, of course, schools do not, and should not, be the sole domain of raising public awareness. Indeed, for our disengaged youth who are not attending school, there needs to be other avenues and campaigns to reach and capture these young people. Public awareness needs to extend not only to our young people, but right across our communities.
The second key area of the report’s recommendations is about identifying and helping those at risk through increased counselling and mental health services across the Northern Territory. Our capacity to effectively provide timely, accessible, flexible, culturally-appropriate and, above all, coordinated counselling and mental health services around the Territory is, clearly, a challenge. However, it is one we must rise to.
Our geographic challenges aside, with remoteness, we discussed at the hearing in Tennant Creek the very real fact that most suicides and attempts occurred during the night and outside of the hours of normal service providers. While counselling has an enormous role to play in early intervention and prevention and, indeed, postvention, we heard, for instance, from Wesley Mission the need to provide training to people not necessarily to be counsellors, but to be able to recognise the possible warning signs, to be able to ask the right questions to direct to an individual and, then, to the right service provider. Equipping individuals with these tools, especially young people, is so very important when we know young people at risk will invariably turn to other young people.
Regarding the provision of mental health services, we heard much of the need for a service which is geared towards young people. To that end, the federally-funded service headspace was raised and praised on a number of occasions. Members of the committee took the opportunity to visit headspace in Palmerston, to see for ourselves what headspace was like. We found it to be a place that is bright, vibrant, slightly funky in its dcor, and welcoming - all of these factors making it very youth friendly. We met with staff and some of its clients. Importantly, the physical location of the service in Palmerston means it is very deliberately accessible, but also has a discreet entry away from mainstream shoppers and pedestrian traffic.
The importance of this had been highlighted earlier in the day for the committee at a hearing in the Litchfield Council offices, where we had a number of people from Taminmin College talk about the negative experiences. One person in particular talked about the negative experiences of a student from their school who had been referred to a mental health service in the city, and how alienating that experience was for that young person to walk through the door of a place clearly signed as a mental health service, sitting in a very drab waiting room with patients exhibiting very visible signs of mental health issues - all the things which, for a young person, would make them fearful of being stigmatised and unlikely to return.
Although headspace is nothing like this, it meets a need to engage with and provide a tailored service to youth who do not want to be labelled as having mental health issues and, indeed, may not have mental health issues, but may, instead, walk in wanting to talk about issues of low self-esteem, depression, and things that are happening in their home lives. The two headspace services in the Territory clearly offer an incredible service, and attempt to offer an outreach service as well. However, what is needed is an investment to create permanent headspace services located in our remote areas. Recommendation 14 calls on the Northern Territory government to lobby the Australian government to establish and fund headspace centres in Katherine, Tennant Creek and Nhulunbuy and, then, from each of those locations, with the capacity to deliver outreach services to the more remote areas.
The third key area of focus in the report is about helping the bereaved and stopping the contagion, with recommendations that focus on: a review of emergency procedures policy in schools; a review of debriefing procedures policy in schools; provision of bereavement training; to have all hospital and emergency department’s capacity of conducting suicide risk assessments; and the establishment of mandatory follow-up support procedures.
While early intervention and prevention are so critically important, the need for postvention following a completed suicide is equally as critical to deal with the inevitable grieving and the reality of contagion, or copy-cat suicides, or clustering, in the wake of a young person taking their life. In the same way that schools need to be prepared for emergencies such as fire and bomb threats, they need to have a response plan for a critical stress incident such as a suicide. That is not just in response to a current student, but also recognising the loss of A former student who may still have contacts with their old school through their peer group, siblings, or extended family is also important as part of that plan.
The fourth key area within the report was around smarter service delivery, with recommendations 19 to 23 focusing on the importance of data collection and the formation of a Northern Territory suicide prevention coordination committee. In this key final area, the committee heard about the need and the importance of effective data collection to be able to drive evidence-based policy. Understanding the true extent of suicide amongst our young people, episodes of self-harm, the symptomatic cry for help, and for completed suicide is all too important. But, also important is a mapping exercise and development of a database of the existing services, what it is they provide, how effective they are, how they are funded, and how they interact with other services.
Whilst additional resources are always welcome - and, indeed, the report has called for additional resources - we also need to understand exactly what it is we have in place right now, how these services interact with one another, how effective they are, and how they are funded, in order to find the very best efficiencies.
The formation of a new Northern Territory suicide prevention coordination committee, with a high-level interagency level representation, is very critical to addressing youth suicide in the Territory because suicide does not sit with any single agency. I am not going to read Recommendation 23 because it is very lengthy. It is deliberately so because it is detailed and very explicit in spelling out the need to formulate an action plan for 2013 through to 2016, and why it is that a high-level interagency group of people is needed to drive that.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, as I draw to a close, I will highlight evidence we heard in my own electorate during a fairly full day for the committee, which included hearings with the East Arnhem Shire Council, the Galupa Marnggar Suicide Prevention Group, and a very valuable community meeting at Yirrkala. Indeed, all three of those hearings were very valuable.
The Galupa Marnggar Suicide Prevention Group has been in existence for a number of years, and was formed by Yolngu community leaders in response to a succession of suicides completed and attempted at the community of Gunyangara, also known as Ski Beach. That community has been free of suicide for some time because of the grassroots action and a singular commitment of community leaders to deal with the issue of suicide. What this has highlighted is the fact that community solutions, driven by ownership of the problems - and that includes addressing alcohol, substance abuse, and training to be alert to the early signs of a troubled individual who may be at risk - are all part of what is necessary to drive a grassroots campaign.
The Galupa Marnggar Suicide Prevention Group meet regularly at what is known as the Causeway, in an outdoor setting, where they talk openly about suicide and mental health issues and work collaboratively with other stakeholders from the government and non-government sector - and this includes the Wesley Mission. Most importantly, they own what they do. They have their own network of people within their community who look out for others who may be at risk.
Their work and the success they have achieved in reducing suicide is widely recognised. During hearings, I spoke with witnesses in Tennant Creek, Katherine, and Alice Springs during our tea breaks, and all of them knew of the work of this group.
The key driver of the Galupa Marnggar Suicide Prevention Group is Gayili Marika. She was recognised for her achievements last year with a very special award and national recognition for her work in the area of youth suicide. In fact, next week, they are hosting, in Nhulunbuy, a two-day conference appropriately titled ‘Back to the Roots’. This two-day conference has a number of guest speakers and places are fully subscribed. I look forward to being at the opening of that event next Wednesday. On the following day, the Thursday, we look forward to our Minister for Indigenous Development, the member for Arnhem, who will be attending that conference and addressing the group.
In closing, I obviously look forward to hearing the other contributions from members of the committee. It has been a good committee to work with. We have all been on the same page in wanting to learn about suicide, what the issues are and, importantly, what it was we could report back to government by way of what was quite a substantial report into how we think suicide needs to be addressed in the Northern Territory
I thank you, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, member for Fannie Bay, for your participation, the members for Goyder and Sanderson, and reiterate my thanks to the chair of the committee. I also need to thank the very hard-working committee secretariat. There was an awful lot of organising to do around our hearings - a bit like herding cats sometimes, when you are trying to get all members’ schedules lined up to be in the same place at the same time. However, there was a good level of cooperation. There were probably other places we wished we might have been able to get to, but we always have upon us the constraints of time.
I thank the committee secretariat, Mr Russell Keith, Ms Julia Knight, Ms Maria Viegas, Ms Lauren Copley and Ms Kim Cowcher for their very hard work in assisting us, including drafting of the report.
On that note, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend this report to the House.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to comment, albeit briefly, on this report. I commend my colleagues on the opposite side who were part of the committee, and also my colleague, the member for Sanderson.
Youth suicide, or any suicide for that matter, is a very tragic state of affairs. It was a difficult subject to review, investigate, and research. It is difficult for many people, particularly those who have struggled themselves in regard to their mental wellness and wellbeing. It is often a subject that is unspoken about. Thankfully, in these current times, it is spoken about and addressed far more seriously than it has in the past. Much work and research still needs to be done in regard to this very difficult subject.
It is something that goes across all sections of our society. No one is immune from suicide or attempted suicide or self-harm. It does not seek out any particular race, creed, religion or age. It is not just applicable to people who live in the bush or the urban areas; it goes across the board. I guess that makes it a very difficult subject in itself to tackle, because you never can tell where people are going to present themselves with problems. Sadly, in the course of our work and investigations into youth suicide, we discovered there are many people who have not, or do not, present with any kind of mental health issue, and end up taking their own lives. That is going to be one of our biggest challenges as a community: to find those people and have them spoken with, treated, and managed, such that they do not get to that state of despair where they want to end their life and leave this world forever.
I thank all the people who met with the committee, from the professional medical people through to the artist from Wales who did live theatre to help young people. I particularly thank the couple of people who shared their personal stories with me. They are in my electorate, and they had either read Hansard, or someone had brought it to their attention. So, to you, Barb, and to you, Jill, out there, thank you for talking with me and sharing your stories about your losses, and also about how you had been through troubled times. I appreciated it and I will always treasure what you gave to me.
I thank my colleague, the member for Sanderson, for supporting the committee and me in this. I thank the chair and the members for Nhulunbuy and Fannie Bay because there was no disagreement in how we had to tackle this issue. We all had the same vision, which was to try to understand why it happens, where it happens, and how we can stop it happening. It was important to have a cross-section of people to talk to, including the professionals, which I appreciated very much. It was a great learning experience for me. I also appreciated the secretariat support staff and all the work they did in drafting the report, and the input they gave to make the work of the committee as good as it was in producing the final report.
We have heard the recommendations. I sincerely hope the government takes all the recommendations seriously, which I am sure it will, and will lobby both the federal government and other agencies to get funding and assistance - for example, for another headspace in the rural area, and in Katherine or Tennant Creek. That requires commitment from the Commonwealth government, as well as other agencies, to manage these establishments if we are successful in obtaining funding.
Once again, thank you to all my colleagues and to the secretariat. To the people out there who, perhaps, are listening, it is never too late to step forward and ask for help. That is what I ask people to do because, whilst it may seem there is no hope or there is no way out of the black hole, there can be. All they have to do is step forward and find a friend. Someone ran that campaign - I do not know which group it was – which said we should ask our friends or neighbours: ‘Are you okay today?’ We should adopt that and always do it.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Madam Deputy Speaker, I support the report and commend it to the House. It was a very challenging committee to be on and a very - what is the right word? I do not want to say rewarding, because it was not that way in a sense because we had a very emotional journey with much of the evidence we heard. Compelling might be a better way of putting it.
It was a very compelling committee to be on, and I thank my colleagues on the committee, from the leadership of the member for Arafura, the deputy chair, the member for Nhulunbuy, and also my colleagues across the floor, the members for Goyder and Sanderson. We came together as Territorians to deal with what is a very difficult and challenging issue which has personally affected probably every member in this Chamber. It happens, unfortunately, to many Territorians and we are a small place. We all have been affected in one way or another by someone who has completed suicide.
It was a very challenging committee. We had excellent participation from witnesses; very cooperative participation. Everyone who came to the committee came willingly with experience, information, and ideas they wanted to share. We also visited many places across the Territory and had some fascinating, very deeply-moving, eye-opening conversations at times. It was a very challenging committee.
Together, we have created a report, with recommendations that mean well. We had some debate and much discussion over the time of the committee about what we wanted to do, which has led to a very good report. I make my most important point that, sometimes as a committee, you can deliver a report with recommendations and you can say: ‘Tick, done, that is excellent. We have fixed this problem’. That is not the case with something like suicide. It is not enough to write a report and make some recommendations. Those things that will prevent suicide are in many ways community-based and are away from what government does. We need to do more, and we need to do some of what we do better. This report goes to much of that.
This is not the case of a committee meets, issues a report and, suddenly, the problem is fixed. Suicide goes much further than that. We heard some excellent testimony from different witnesses from across the Territory about the things they have done at a community level which have been quite inspiring and have led to much success in reducing attempted and completed suicides.
This is a complicated issue. One of the biggest complications we heard from all witnesses is the difficulty in identifying early someone who might want to complete or attempt suicide. We constantly talked to different witnesses about points of intervention, or intersection. School is a very big point of intervention, and there are different programs you can do there. We have recommendations that go to that, and they are excellent because school is a good point of intervention. Unfortunately, sometimes the people who are going to attempt suicide are not going to school. We often heard about that. The people who are likely to attempt suicide opt out, so they are not going to be at school, which is a point of intervention for us. They are not going to be going to the local footy club and kicking the footy around, as the member for Nhulunbuy touched on, because they are opting out. They are not necessarily attending those places where we can make a difference.
We, obviously, want to do the best we can. The fundamental differences occur often at that community level. We heard some excellent evidence from Mount Theo about how they went about reducing attempted and completed suicides. I will read from some of the testimony:
As a government, we can support people when they start community programs, but you cannot manufacture community - or it is very difficult to manufacture community. This was one young man making a difference. Then, from that point, the Mount Theo program grew, and it made a massive difference to the lives of people of Mount Theo. It reduced the number of attempted and completed suicides significantly, to the point where there were not any by the time we were talking to them. They created a mentoring network. Suddenly, this community knew what they were doing. They were caring for each other, caring beyond self, and they were getting many referrals directly from young people.
It is worth noting - again, this is from their testimony - that the professional counsellor had been in that community for five years, and then had assumed the role as professional counsellor for the last two. She had been living in the community for an extended period of time and, as a result, she had very strong relationships and very high levels of trust within the community. So, it was not just a case of saying, ‘Here is someone with the skills set from university who knows what they are doing’, and putting them into a community and saying: ‘This is the person you talk to’. She was someone who was local to that community, who happened to have that skill set. That is an extremely rare thing; that is not something you can do overnight in every community. However, it was a demonstration, again, of the importance of community and of having relationships of trust.
Where we saw the best programs that led to the reduction or the absence of attempted and completed suicides is where the community had made an effort to stand up. That is No 1 of our four points we identified, as a committee, for further action. No 1, Building strong, healthy, and resilient communities. Other areas are around identifying and helping those at risk, helping the bereaved and stopping the contagion, and a smarter service delivery are really important as well.
However, it starts right back at that first point. That was a question I asked of many people. We heard from many different service providers who provided excellent programs which, if people were in them, they helped them; they did not go on to complete or attempt suicide. However, the difficulty was getting them into that program. It was not so simple as they just entered it. We have this whole mass of people in our general community who are at risk, and we do not know they are at risk. You have a great service, but the difficult question no one can really answer well was: how do you get someone into the service? That is where you go right back to that very step around community, and the story of that young man at Mount Theo who stood up and said, ‘I am going to make a difference’, and visited everyone, then put in countless hours - and is still putting in countless hours - to make sure Mount Theo has community. At that level, they are reducing attempted and completed suicides. They talk about how it is not an easy thing to do; it involves much sacrifice.
It is really a fundamental point to make: that, as well-meaning and well-intentioned as we are, and as well-thought out, as well-argued as these recommendations are, these are not a panacea. That is something we need to discuss and work so much on: that level of community involvement. That was something which came through quite clearly in much of the evidence we heard.
Regarding helping to grieve and stopping the contagion, we heard very good evidence from the Coroner who was the last witness to appear before the committee - a very impressive witness who spoke with great passion and detail. In some ways, the best thing about having the Coroner speak to us - and he should have been either the first or last witness and he was our last witness - was even though we knew the statistics are of people, he spoke very impressively and passionately about them being people. These are more than statistics; these are people. They were not a case file for him; they were someone’s life. He had been dealing with the bereaved and he understood very well the importance of postvention – to use the phrase we heard a great deal – the importance of talking and working with families after a completed suicide to stop contagion, or to reduce the impacts of that suicide on the family and friends in that circle. I thank the Coroner for his evidence. It was a very moving session. He spoke with profound wisdom and it was very good of him to come along. His appearance was very helpful to the work of the committee and reinforced, in many ways, much of what we had already discussed. Having evidence from the Coroner was critical.
It was about those personal stories which we heard from different witnesses who spoke to us. We heard directly from people who had been affected and moved by suicide. The member for Arafura, as our chair, was particularly instrumental in running the committee to ensure we dealt well with people who were often in pain when appearing before our committee. There were times that were very difficult for all involved, and I believe we got through those and heard some very important testimony as a result of that.
The other group I thought was particularly important in the evidence they gave - and the member for Nhulunbuy mentioned them – was the people we sat down with at Ski Beach. They had a very similar story to that of Mount Theo and Aaron, where they had these ladies who were out there waiting to hear whether there is domestic violence – and this is quoting from the transcript:
They were prepared, as volunteers, to wait and, as soon as they heard of anything they knew would lead to someone being at risk, they immediately acted. They were a strong volunteer group of people who could deal with people. Again, it comes down to that fundamental level of the community taking interest and being involved. I thought that came through time and time again. It was, perhaps, some of the most critical evidence we heard about the importance of community.
The members for Nhulunbuy and Arafura spoke at length to the specific recommendations in this report. I wanted to speak to some of the lessons we learned from witnesses who came before us.
I acknowledge, while I am on my feet, the efforts of the committee secretariat which supported us. It was clear during the time we were acting as a committee, that they were very involved. They cared about what we were dealing with. They had much work to do. We crammed a great deal in, in the six or seven months we were working. I thank Russell, Julia, Lauren, Kim and Maria. I hope I have not missed anyone. They did much work. As the member for Nhulunbuy said, it can be difficult managing all our diaries, especially in that short period of time, to ensure we could get to everywhere and do everything. More importantly, it was clear they were taking a very deep level of interest as well. Their efforts have also contributed to what I believe is a very important report with some very important recommendations.
We all came together as a committee with the clear intention of doing our best to tackle a very significant issue in the Northern Territory. I like to think what we have done is going to make a difference - a great deal of difference. However, it is going to be a permanent challenge. That is probably one of the big things: it takes constant and persistent hard work and a desire to be part of the community. That was clear: this is an ongoing challenge. There are many recommendations in the report which are important and will go a long way, but there is an ongoing challenge. I thank all my colleagues for helping prepare what, I believe, is an excellent report.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I support the report. I thank colleagues from the House on the committee, and I thank the member for Arafura as the chair. I thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and the members for Fannie Bay and Goyder.
It is interesting because, often when you have committees made up of two groups of people with differing philosophical beliefs, you can clash as to how things should and should not be done. From my view, this is a truly bipartisan committee, where we all walked into the room, and all knew there was an issue. I do not think we knew quite the extent of the problem, but we were enlightened by a large number of truly wonderful people. They are the people who work in this industry to try to reduce not only attempted suicides, but completed suicides.
There are a number of things I have learnt in my life. One of the greatest lessons I learnt is that there are things that I know, things I know I do not know, and things I do not know I do not know. It was the third reason I was really grateful for participating in this committee, because some things I learnt were very enlightening, and some very sad.
I would like to relate a story - one that is very close to home - of a member of my extended family who completed suicide some years ago. In particular, it is a message to those who may read this about the importance of the work the committee did, and the importance of the recommendations of the report. We lost this person, and the most pertinent point was that at the funeral - in fact, after the funeral - we were gathered around at the cemetery. There was a large group of a dozen people talking, and the theme that went through is they saw this person doing odd things. The first person explained the odd things they saw my relative doing, then the second person had a different set of odd things and, by the time we went around the people in the group, everyone could see that alarm bells should have been ringing - everyone had seen some behaviour that was not typical of the nature of the person.
It is when these things happen - if we do not understand and we are not aware of the signs that people are in trouble - for many reasons they get themselves into trouble. However, if we do not actually have the ability to identify that people are struggling, nor the confidence to go and ask them whether they are okay or need a hand, then we are doomed to have repeated, unfortunately, people committing and completing suicides, and that is sad.
However, I believe the report goes a long way trying to ensure we, as a community, work as hard as we can to prevent that from happening. In the report are a number of recommendations. What I would like to see occur is the ongoing commitment. I can assure all members of this House that all of us who are on that committee, on both sides of politics and the Independent member, have the ability to work as a team to prevent this. This is something that should be apolitical and receive bipartisan support. I can assure all my colleagues who are on that committee, irrespective of whoever wins the August election, I will be supporting, either from opposition or government, all the recommendations we made in this report.
There is a recommendation that we adopt the ASIST program. This would have related to the case of my relative. Had people had the ASIST program available to them - through community groups, through schools and any other organisation which can deliver that knowledge to people - we would be, as a community, in a far better position to identify the risks and people who are struggling with a whole range of different issues.
I am a great supporter of school-based policing - it is one of my favourite topics - also school-based nurses. One of the things I learnt was about drug dogs, especially in communities. We heard from the Tiwi Islands the evidence about the massive issue they have over there with various drugs. Having drug dogs around to prevent young people getting involved in drugs would be of great benefit. We need, through education, to empower youth to resist the temptation of drugs and to understand what they are, what they do, and why they should not partake in those drugs.
There needs to be a commitment from both sides to take the recommendations of the report, implement them in the community, and try to reduce the number of people who take their own lives. I am very grateful for the opportunity to utilise the knowledge I have had for most of my working life, especially working with young people, in the area of community issues and problems. It gave me an opportunity to have an input, but it also gave me an opportunity to learn so much more. As we go into the future, I feel I am far better prepared to deal with some of the issues - both in the provision of government services and also on a personal level.
I thank the people on the committee, our support crew - they have all been mentioned. The problem when you are the last speaker is everyone else has done all the thanking and you can almost just say: ‘Well, I thank all those people mentioned without taking up the time of this House;. However, I thought you did an excellent job. The report and the people who pulled it together in the end - you guys did a fabulous job and you should be commended for the hard work you put in, not only pulling the report together, but also making it all happen.
To the non-government organisations, the individuals, and the government organisations who gave evidence to us, we support you. The report has highlighted how much work we need to do, as a community and, in particular, as a parliament, to support you people out there - the people with the passion, caring, and commitment you have. It is so important we support you people to do the job. It is hard for us to go on a one-on-one basis and do what you do. Our lives are consumed with so many different facets of trying to make our community a better place.
I salute you guys because you are out there saving lives. People use that word flippantly sometimes. People say: ‘You are going to go out and save some lives’. Well, to you people who work in that industry and help people out there, you truly do go out, on a daily basis, and save lives. It is hard to quantify how many lives you save. However, deep down, all of us in the community should be aware that you work hard, are dedicated, and achieve fantastic results.
Therefore, there needs to be more financial and human resources allocated to you guys so you can do your work better, do it further afield, and work with those people out there to educate them so they, too, will have the skills and knowledge to identify those in our community who are most in need.
We all have needs and wants; however, when you are in a situation where you are contemplating suicide you are in the greatest need and the direst of straits anyone in our community can be.
I commend this report to the parliament. I commend it to anyone who reads it. I assure them, as a parliament, we will support those people at the front line trying to save people, and also provide grief counselling to those who have lost loved ones. It is a tough gig, and they need all the support they can get.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I ask that not only we commend this report, but we support it from both sides of parliament.
Mr VATSKALIS (Children and Families): Madam Deputy Speaker, today I bring the House’s attention to the findings and recommendations of the bipartisan parliament select committee inquiry into youth suicide in the Northern Territory tabled in parliament on 27 March 2012.
First, I wish to commend the committee for the comprehensive report Gone Too Soon: A Report into Youth Suicide in the Northern Territory. The inquiry and subsequent report demonstrated determination to consider all of the factors which play a part in the tragedy of suicide of young people in our community. The recommendations are an inspirational, thorough, and honest appraisal of the current issues facing the Northern Territory and outline a proposed whole-of-government approach addressing youth suicide in the Northern Territory.
Suicide touches many of us. The heartache that is caused for those left behind, and the devastating impact, extends far beyond immediate family members and into our schools, workplaces, and communities. The Australian Bureau of Statistics figures released in April this year indicated that the suicide rate in the Northern Territory decreased for the second five-year period in a row. The rate per 100 000 people in the five-year period 2006 to 2010 in the Northern Territory was 19.7% per 100 000 population, compared to the national rate of 10.4% per 100 000. This represents an 11% decrease in the rate in Northern Territory, compared with 22% per 100 000 in 2004 to 2008. However, the suicide rate in the Northern Territory is still the highest of all jurisdictions, and nearly double the national average.
The highest rates of suicide in the Northern Territory are occurring in Indigenous and non-Indigenous males living in and around Darwin, and young Indigenous males living in remote communities. Recently, there has been a relatively small, but worrying, increase in the number of suicides of young women from remote communities. We are also aware there has been an increased number of deaths over the past 18 months of young people where suicide is suspected.
Attempted suicide and deliberate self-harm are also serious problems for our young people. Whilst there are difficulties with recording and interpreting these type of incidents, it would appear from the available information that more of these incidents are being reported.
The Gone Too Soon report highlights the complex factors that precede suicide. These include mental health problems, drugs and alcohol misuse, sexual and physical abuse, problems with family and the law, inadequate education, lack of meaningful or any employment, cultural or sexual identity issues, and poverty. Factors such as the cumulative grief, loss, and trauma experienced by many Indigenous people in communities also have a significant impact on individual’s vulnerability and resilience.
The situation surrounding each suicide differs, and there is no single approach to prevention, or reduction of our suicide rate. In considering how to respond to this complex issues, the committee has identified four themes for action. These themes include:
1. building strong, healthy, and resilient communities by focusing on the development infrastructure, better service delivery, and more public awareness;
2. identifying and helping those at risk by providing increased counselling and mental health services across the Territory;
procedures and counselling available, providing bereavement training, ensuring capacity in hospitals and emergency departments to combat suicide
risk assessments, and establishing mandatory follow-up procedures; and
The breadth of these themes clearly illustrate the extensive nature of the challenges which lie ahead. In the context of the four themes for action, the report has developed 23 recommendations. The Northern Territory government has reviewed these recommendations, and all 23 recommendations are supported in principle. The recommendations reflect the direction of existing Northern Territory government policies, and confirm we are on the right track. However, we need to continue to build on this important work in collaboration with Northern Territory government agencies, the Commonwealth, and non-government organisations.
The Northern Territory government is committed to addressing the issue of youth suicide, in particular the recommendations set out in the Gone Too Soon report. As a first step, I am pleased to announced progress on four key commitments that respond to several of the recommendations.
In response to Recommendation 19, the Northern Territory government will establish an interagency working group, with the support of the Commonwealth, and carry out comprehensive mapping of all youth- and community-related services. This interagency working group will be headed by a very senior public servant who will be appointed to coordinate collaboration between the Northern Territory government agencies and the Commonwealth to provide a clear up-to-date picture of the youth- and community-related services provided in the Northern Territory, both in the government and the NGO sector.
The group will work to identify and strengthen services to ensure that all youth at risk of suicide can access the services required to build protective factors - resilience and a sense of self - to prevent the need to resort to actions that will have devastating consequences.
Given the wide-ranging nature of risk and protective factors associated with youth suicide, effective coordination of services requires a high level of intergovernmental and interdepartmental cooperation. The Northern Territory government will also seek Commonwealth support through the Department of FaHCSIA and Health and Ageing in response to Recommendations 1, 3, 11 and 14 to establish a coordinated approach to progressing the review of the provision of professional development and training of staff in regional, rural, and remote communities; the prioritisation of youth-specific infrastructure for greater accommodation options, and better health facilities for young people at risk; the status of the Youth in Communities funding and associated outcomes; and the provision of headspace outreach services in remote Northern Territory communities.
The Northern Territory government acknowledges that effective, adequate, and appropriate levels of infrastructure are required to support the provision of services to youth at risk of suicide. The committee identified, during the course of the inquiry, that access to youth-specific counselling, allied health and medical services, as a priority issue for residents in outlying rural areas of Darwin, Katherine, Tennant Creek, Nhulunbuy and, in particular, remote communities.
It is important in maintaining and attracting service providers that appropriate housing is available in these areas. As such, in support of Recommendation 2, the Northern Territory government will carry out a review of government employee housing and will establish a senior interagency housing management group to oversee planning, prioritisation, and the provision of strategic advice to the Northern Territory government.
Suicide prevention is not, in itself, a core function of any particular department or agency, but the responsibility of all levels of government and the non-government sector. In recognition of this, the Northern Territory government supports the establishment of the Northern Territory suicide prevention coordination committee, in line with Recommendation 23. It is clear, from the evidence received by the committee, that to address the complex and multidimensional nature of youth suicide, a strategic and coordinated approach to service delivery which actively encourages a high degree of collaboration between government agencies and programs and the non-government sector is required. The Northern Territory government supports the need for a coordinated approach to youth suicide prevention, and will review the current Northern Territory suicide coordination committee plans and governance structure.
Further priorities outlined in the report include the implementation of a series of recommendations which would enable greater assistance to be provided to youth in crisis, and to support them through their transition to adulthood, with a particular focus on meeting the needs of youth in rural areas, regional centres, and remote communities. These recommendations include:
training for local staff and improved access to primary and specialist mental health services, counselling services, respite services for youth not requiring acute
inpatient care, and short-term residential options in the regional centres;
expansion of headspace services to regional centres and remote communities and continue funding for the Youth in Communities program;
increased mental health staff based in emergency departments to better access and respond to young people at risk of suicide;
and drug problems, evidenced-based psychological therapies, and community education;
increased sport, arts, cultural and other recreational opportunities, including drop-in centres and positive youth development programs; and
abuse, and family violence in the past 12 months.
Recommendations relevant to the justice system include access to on-call specialist mental health staff in court and detention settings to provide assessment, acute intervention and coordination of community follow-up, and implementing an intensive family- and community-based program for repeat young offenders.
To implement recommendations above, the committee called for improved infrastructure in remote communities, including improved accommodation for visiting services and an audit process to determine the accommodation needs of locally-based staff in regional centres and Territory growth towns. An increase in accommodation and mental health facilities for youth at risk of suicide, with severe substance abuse problems and/or mental health problems was highlighted; as was infrastructure for drop-in centres and youth recreational facilities in regional centres.
The committee recommended that a report on the audit and review of infrastructure is tabled in the Legislative Assembly by 30 June 2013.
In recognition of the importance of addressing risk factors and building resilience amongst young people, the committee also made a series of recommendations in relation to services in school. They suggested the Department of Education and Training increase professional development and training for teachers; actively encourage schools to take up mental health promotion and resilience building programs; review anti-bullying policies to address cyber bullying and use of mobile phones; launch a new health and physical education curriculum; and establish an appropriate school council student ratio.
In recognition that it is, sadly, not possible to prevent all suicides, the committee emphasised the importance of bereavement counselling for individuals, families, and communities that may be affected, as well as support for frontline staff dealing with completed and attempted suicides.
It was also recommended that the Coroner’s Office maintain and provide access to a suicide register, and that the Department of Health investigate establishing a regulatory and administrative framework to enable the reporting of serious incidents of child self-harm and the initiation of appropriate responses. A report on the finding of this investigation should be tabled in the Legislative Assembly by 30 June 2013.
The committee acknowledges that a whole-of-government, whole-of-community approach is required. The 23 multifaceted recommendations apply to a range of Northern Territory government departments, including the Departments of Health; Chief Minister; Children and Families; Police; Education and Training; Housing, Local Government and Regional Services; Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport; and Justice.
The report also recommends the development of a Northern Territory suicide prevention action plan for 2013 to 2016, to be tabled in the Legislative Assembly before the 2013 budget sittings, which will build on work under way across government in the implementation of the three-year Suicide Prevention Action Plan 2009 to 2011, which was based on the Northern Territory Strategic Framework for Suicide Prevention.
Over the past three years, suicide prevention action included:
in addition to provision of acute and community mental health services, Department of Health-funded delivery of specific suicide prevention coordination and response
services in the Top End and Central Australia; a range of suicide prevention self-harm training programs; mental health promotion activities targeting groups more
vulnerable to suicide, including young people and men;
the Department of Health working in partnership with the Department of Children and Families for the development of a shared client case management framework
and practice guidelines for complex clients;
the Department of Children and Families funding of a variety of family focused support programs and services for vulnerable young people to assist families in crisis
and those in need of more intensive support;
the Department of Health and Northern Territory Police updating their protocols to ensure a coordinated system of care for people with mental illness and safe resolution
of mental health crises, including responses to people who are suicidal;
principles in the design of new Correctional facilities;
the Office of Youth Affairs supporting and developing a range of initiatives focusing on young people, including sponsoring mental health promotional activities in
National Youth Week;
the Department of Education and Training supporting implementation of wellbeing programs such as KidsMatter and MindMatters in Northern Territory schools; and working
hard to foster supportive school environments by encouraging meaningful partnerships between schools, family, and community;
the Department of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport developing sustainable sports and recreational programs in remote communities promoting healthy
lifestyle choices that will have long-term health and social benefits; and sport and recreational officers undertaking training in suicide prevention and mental health first aid to
assist them in this role.
The Northern Territory government committed an additional $600 000 in 2011-12, increasing to $800 000 in 2013, and $1m recurrent for 2013-14 for suicide prevention. The Department of Health’s mental health program has allocated resources to a number of important initiatives, including further development of the highly regarded Suicide Story, an Indigenous training tool produced by the Mental Health Association of Central Australia Life Promotion Program to assist people to create suicide-safer communities and families. There has been overwhelming demand for this program throughout Australia and, as a consequence, the Mental Health Association of Central Australia is developing a train the trainer package in 2012 which will be launched later this year in Alice Springs.
Further, the mental health program has implemented Counterpunch, an innovative program which utilises boxing and psychological strategies to increase resilience and encourage positive choices in youth aged 10 to 25. Already, 80 young people are participating in the program. Counterpunch has just moved to dedicated premises in Darwin with an official launch next month. There has been significant interest in Counterpunch from regional and remote communities, and the program will be expanded in 2013.
Funds have also been allocated to improve data collection and research, targeting of hot spots - communities and groups with the highest incidence of self-harm rates - and support for community action groups such as the Darwin Regional Indigenous Suicide Prevention Network and the Galupa Marngarr Suicide Prevention Group, which is holding a conference on suicide prevention in East Arnhem next month. Community action groups are considered to be a powerful weapon in the fight against Indigenous suicide and are expected to expand in the next few years.
In addition to a commitment to suicide prevention, the Northern Territory government also delivers funding to expand child and adolescent mental health services in the Northern Territory of $1m in 2011-12, and $2m recurrent from 2012-13 to expand the capacity of specialist child and adolescent mental health services to respond to increased demand for services by young people in both urban and remote areas. Included amongst these measures is specialist assessment and treatment for young people with severe mental illness and increased support to general practitioners, health centres, and schools to better support young people with mental health problems.
We are also working closely with our colleagues in the Australian government to ensure the suicide prevention strategies it funds are well-targeted and fit within local context. This collaboration continues through the Council of Australian Government Health Agreement and Mental Health Reform, and it is here we work hard to ensure the Northern Territory receives its fair share of Australian government funding in this area.
We, as a government, are committed to tackling this devastating issue which affects our community. We will be further increasing mental health services in our hospital and emergency departments and in our communities. We are expanding opportunities for young people to participate in sport, recreation and cultural activities, particularly in our regional centres and remote communities. We are increasing the support our children receive in school and better engaging young people who have left school. We will provide more support to those young people who use alcohol and other substances, or who have found themselves in detention centres or in trouble with the police. We will also provide better support to our vulnerable families, and implement strategies to build resilience and equip our young people to negotiate the, sometimes, difficult transition to adulthood. We want them to be able to realise their dreams, contribute to their community, form healthy relationships, and bring up healthy and well-adjusted children of their own.
This government is absolutely committed to reducing suicide wherever possible. I am sure members of parliament on both sides of the House will support all efforts we make to address this tragedy.
Again, I thank all members of the parliamentary select committee for their dedicated effort in producing such an important and detailed report. We now all need to play our part, work together, and share the responsibility for addressing this tragedy in our community.
In closing, I assure you we will do our utmost to implement strategies which will help to turn the tide of despair into a wave of hope for the future of all young Territorians. They are leaders of tomorrow and our most precious resource.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I ask the Assembly take note of the statement.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Deputy Speaker, I will not take long, but I will acknowledge all my fellow parliamentarians who have contributed to a fantastic debate in a bipartisan way to deal with and talk about what is probably the most harrowing of issues to conduct an inquiry into, and look at issues across all areas. There were young people from our urban, regional, and remote Aboriginal communities.
Fellow members on that committee found the increased rates of suicide, particularly amongst young women, quite confronting. We often hear the statistics in relation to young men, and the issue of completed suicide amongst our young men. What was also frightening was the increasing number of attempted suicides. We often do not hear about or focus enough on attempted suicides.
I am hoping, with this report and the recommendations we made - and I thank the minister for the government’s response. I was also hearted by the CLP’s response that they too - after 25 August, whatever happens, whoever is in government - will pick up those recommendations and support a way forward to assist not just communities, but families which are dealing with this issue.
I thank the members for Goyder and Sanderson, and my colleagues on this side of the House, the members for Nhulunbuy and Fannie Bay, for being part of the committee to look at that. I do not think there was any member on that committee who was not touched by the great evidence we received from those fantastic non-government organisations and our government agencies. I thank all of those government agencies and the public servants who participated and provided evidence to the committee and assisted us with information. I thank the Commissioner for Police who attended the hearing and gave us the statistics and talked through what issues are confronting our Northern Territory Police men and women. I place on record my thanks to the Coroner. In hindsight, when the Coroner came to talk to the committee, I wished we had talked to him at the start, and worked through with him those issues of his office, and some of the processes we need to look at. I thank Greg Cavanagh, the Northern Territory Coroner, for the part he played in the evidence he provided to the committee.
I thank those families - Julie Turner and the lady in Alice Springs; whose name I was trying to find - who gave evidence as families who had been affected by completed suicides where they had lost their children, or had children who had attempted suicide. I thank those families for sharing their stories with us because, without those stories from those individuals, we would not have been able to get an insight into those families.
I was not able to get to those communities, particularly in the electorate of Nhulunbuy, when those committee members went there, because I missed the plane that morning. However, I managed to hook in, and I thank Mr Russell Keith, and the secretary who had her phone and some speakers. I was able to hook into all of the sessions and listen and participate. However, some of my fellow committee members forgot I was on the other end of the phone. The session the committee had at Yirrkala, and the participation of all of the individuals there, was great. There were a number of people who spoke with great passion about what needed to happen. We found that everywhere we went.
The member for Fannie Bay talked about the Mount Theo program and that young man who came and talked to us in Alice Springs. The group we met in the member for Goyder’s electorate was at the Litchfield Council Chambers, I think. Often, we can become insulated and think this is just a remote area issue, but it is not. We have many kids in our urban centres and regions where this is a problem.
For me, it was a suicide - and I had talked about this at the committee - in my electorate of a very young person. As a member with a bush seat, a day does not go by where you do not receive a telephone call or you hear that someone has passed away in your electorate. However, this completed suicide of a young person confronted me like no other death. It made me question what I am doing, what my role is, where the policies are, and how they are helping and, why, in this day and age, given the intervention in 2007 and all the money which is flowing into many of these remote communities, this is not making a difference on the ground in these communities.
It was question upon question, and this inquiry allowed us to look at layers of mishmash that are often in these communities. Working through or peeling back those layers is an imperative of whichever government is going to be in place after 25 August, because the young people in those communities need government - whether it is an Australian Labor Party or a CLP government - to not play politics with this but to put in place a comprehensive strategy to assist communities and families to deal with this issue in a way which is going to assist those families through their grief. This is not about politics or either party’s ideology; this is about families - real live people who need to be assisted through their grief. I hope that, regardless of the outcome of the election on 25 August, we continue to implement those recommendations and pick up all of the issues that need to be looked at, particularly the issue of the audit and mapping recommendations in the report. People often say there is not enough money. If you have a look across the Northern Territory, there is a substantial amount of money going into these communities. The issue is where that money is going and how we target those areas to achieve the results we need.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank all members and the minister for their contribution. Final thanks to members of the committee, Russell Keith, Julia Knight, and the recording staff who assisted and travelled with the committee and recorded and took note of everyone’s comments. I thank the member for Fannie Bay who supplied the title of the report - aptly titled Gone too Soon - which all members of the committee agreed to.
Motion agreed to; paper noted.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table the interstate travel reports, pursuant to Paragraph 3.14 of the Remuneration Tribunal Determination No 1 of 2011, for the members for Braitling, Goyder and Port Darwin.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, in accordance with section 39(7)(a) of the Government Owned Corporations Act, as shareholding minister for the corporation, I table the Power and Water Corporation 2012-13 Statement of Corporate Intent or SCI.
The SCI is the annual performance agreement between the corporation and the shareholding minister on behalf of Territorians as owners of the corporation. Consistent with previous years, information of a commercially sensitive nature has been removed from the SCI being tabled today on the basis that it would be unreasonable to disadvantage the corporation by disclosing commercially sensitive information that no private sector business would be expected to release.
The 2012-13 SCI continues the largest ever capital and maintenance investment program in the corporation’s history. $1.3bn of capital spending will be invested, and $452m is projected to be spent on repairs and maintenance over the SCI period.
The 2012-13 SCI includes key financial sustainability measures which continue to be below that recommended by the Reeves report. However, this is largely as a result of a continuing capital program to improve reliability and customer standards, and weather-related reductions in revenues. Despite this, the corporation remains in a small profitable position in 2012-13 through to 2014-15.
All utility tariffs in the Territory remain at previously announced levels which, for electricity and water, are the second-lowest in the country. This means that not only is the Henderson government, through the continued provision of debt for equity swaps announced in the 2010-11 budget, assisting the corporation in maintaining financial sustainability, but by keeping tariffs supported by generous subsidies among the lowest in the country, we are making the cost of utilities affordable for all Territorians.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, as the 2012-13 SCI will be considered by the Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee, I will not go into any more detail now.
MOTION
Power and Water Corporation Statement of Corporate Intent – Referral to Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the statement be referred to the Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee for examination and report.
Motion agreed to.
Continued from 2 May 2012.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I had nearly finished my remarks yesterday, but with the condolence motion coming on for Mr Murphy, I needed to stop where I was, so I will just be a couple of minutes. I think I had worked through in my budget reply to most areas of key service delivery.
The one that I had not got to was spending for transport infrastructure. I acknowledge the budget notes for the Central Arnhem Road - obviously a critical access road into my electorate - of some $10m in this current budget. This is part of a much bigger project, with $15m devoted to upgrading three key crossings on Central Arnhem Road. Central Arnhem Road runs about 400 km through to Bulman across Aboriginal land trusts, and then it is a further 300 km to the Stuart Highway.
Just the other side of Bulman, in the electorate of Arnhem, is the Mainoru Crossing. It is a really critical crossing, particularly for Bulman’s capacity to run cattle trucks in and out of the stations. The crossing for Mainoru is just about complete. There has been significant work happening there. There is significant work involved on Goyder Crossing, being on Aboriginal land trust land, which has reached the point where there is agreement from the traditional owners, which was, obviously, a highly consultative process over a period of time. I believe we have reached an agreement there. The process now is around scoping of the works to put a crossing in there. I believe there was geotechnical drilling that occurred just before Christmas.
Obviously, with Wet Season rains work comes to a close. However, definitely everybody in and around Nhulunbuy - and that includes homeland residents, as well as the fact there is a number of growth towns which feed off that road - look forward to these works occurring. It will provide safer access which will keep the road opened for much longer. Currently, the road is generally closed about five to six months in the year, obviously during Wet Season times. However, with the Goyder Crossing and, then, eventually the Donydji Crossing just the other side of Gapuwiyak fixed with bridges put in, that access will be extended to 10, maybe even 11 months in the year. That will be welcomed by everyone. It provides competitive freight and travel options. During the Wet Season the only option for freight is with barge services.
We welcome that, as well as additional funding announced, some $1.5m, to put in passing lanes on the Central Arnhem Road. I do not know how many passing lanes that will provide us with or exactly where they will be located. During the Dry Season, the Central Arnhem Road can be very busy and very dusty. Having those passing lanes where we have larger vehicles - we have trucks running freight during the Dry Season - with four-wheel drives will certainly make the road safer.
That was really all I wanted to specifically comment on regarding my electorate in the budget. I commend the Treasurer for her work. It is a tough but responsible budget and is delivering for families and Territorians, and gearing up for growth. The Treasurer has worked incredibly hard in the lead-up to the delivery of the budget, as have her staff and Treasury staff. This week has been an incredibly busy one with not only delivering the budget itself, but also all of the follow-up that goes in engaging with people and stakeholders about what the budget contains.
I look forward to the Treasurer coming to my electorate on 16 May. Those budget roadshow events, certainly in Nhulunbuy, are always really well attended. People are very interested to know what is happening, and also welcome the fact that the Treasurer takes the time to come out and talk with people and answer questions. That is a very valuable opportunity for people to have firsthand information. I am sure when she comes out we will organise a time for her to meet with the East Arnhem Chamber of Commerce and Industry, as she generally does.
On that note, because I know there are other people waiting to speak, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I will conclude my remarks and commend the bill to the House.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, the temptation with reading this budget is to get all shrill and bent out of shape over it because it really is a budget which causes me, as the potential Treasurer of the Northern Territory, subject to several things of course - whether I am re-elected in my seat, whether we form a government, and whether the Chief Minister would condescend to making me Treasurer. However, as the potential Treasurer of the Northern Territory, I have to say the sense of dread I am left with after reading this document gives me cause for great personal unease.
We always talk about budgets as if they exist in some form of perfect isolation from one year to the next. They do not; budgets are part of an organic, ongoing process. As the government in 2001 made great play of, it inherited something which was, in its description, very bad. I go far as to say I believe it was not particularly good; a debt to income ratio of 61% was unacceptable. I recall the then new member for Johnston screeching from the rafters with his own sense of dread, whether manufactured or real, that the great crocodile jaws being visited upon the people of the Northern Territory required all sorts of things, including a new tax, which was introduced. For essentially political reasons, they introduced the tax - and got rid of it very quickly too when they realised how unpopular it was.
However, they said at the time that $126m was this huge black hole. Without revisiting the fact that $126 was largely their decision, I point out that $126m looks nothing like the sea of red across the bottom line of the balance sheet now, and pushing out for the next few years to the year 2015-16.
If the minister was shrill about what they were handed in 2001, then he should be absolutely apoplectic about what he is seeing delivered into this House now. However, he is positively sanguine about it – relaxed - saying it is all appropriate spending. The borrowings do not even make sense in the sense that they are borrowing to build stuff that is going to create infrastructure that works. At least the excuse available to the Country Liberals at the time was they were borrowing and trying to raise capital to build a railway - which was built. Yes, that left a legacy debt, but at least there is infrastructure at the moment, and 10 years or 12 years later, that infrastructure is going to actually start paying for its self because of the amount of resources that are being developed up and down the track down to South Australia.
The vision of the railway will come to fruition, probably later than most of us would have liked, but it will come to fruition. I believe it will become a profitable exercise, particularly when things like Western Desert, Sherwin Iron – I have to declare an interest; my superannuation fund, I think, has a few shares in Sherwin. I will declare that just to be sure. I think Olympic Dam is now going to be the biggest hole in the world. Is it Olympic Dam or Roxbury?
Ms Purick: Olympic.
Mr ELFERINK: Okay, Olympic is going to be truly Olympic.
What concerns me about what happened afterwards is the GST started providing enormous income to the Northern Territory. The government then decided to start pouring that money into an already hot economy. Things were happening, the railway was being built. You only have to look outside this building to see how the taller buildings were starting to be built in the mid-2000s. Into that environment, the government started to complete directly with the private sector because they wanted to build the waterfront. So, rather than engaging in counter-cyclical spending, they engaged in amplifying the cyclical nature of the Northern Territory economy. Which means they grew the economy by pump priming it when it was already hot, so it grew even further. The risk with that approach is, as time passes, there is a very big chance the rivers of gold will start to dry up. The warnings, frustratingly, were there.
I return to Budget Paper No 2 of the Budget 2005-06, and quote the warning which, by the way, resonated in budgets before it and after it. It is repeated even in this budget; it is almost word for word because it gets rolled over from one budget to the next. The quote is:
Which means, in short, you were warned! The Northern Territory government was told there was a strong vulnerability built into the GST. From that, only a prudent government would have realised you would not have used the extra GST income to amplify the growth in the Northern Territory economy when you did not need to. So, rather than build the waterfront when they did, they could have waited. However, of course, the political imperative for this government is to show they could do the big projects. The political imperative overtook the sensible fiscal and economic imperative, which was to ensure you had cash in the bank; that you paid off the credit card.
If you take into account the GST windfalls up to about 2007-08, and the savings that could have been made, plus added even a slither of increases from other sources of revenue, we could have paid off our debt, I argue, by the time the GFC was visited upon us. Therefore, there is no reason for this government to be able to blame the GFC.
You can read it in the budget papers of years gone by and the quote is almost exactly the same every time: we are susceptible to even slight variations in the GST for the Territory’s fiscal position. As a consequence, despite the fact the warning I sounded is in the budget papers, government chose to ignore those warnings and they set themselves up to amplify the problems.
When the GST was doing better than everyone expected, it provided us with hundreds of millions of extra dollars. What did we do? We spent it. We barely squirreled any away into savings and reducing our debt profile. Gallop, a Labor Premier, managed it in Western Australia. John Howard, the Prime Minister of Australia, managed it nationally. It could be done by both sides of government, but it was not done. It was not done because this government wanted to pursue its political imperatives and, in the process, went on to imperil the fiscal future of the Northern Territory. The consequence of that is they had some expenditure they did not want to bring onto the forward design list, but had to because of problems with infrastructure, particularly in the Power and Water area. As a consequence of that, they had to spend more than they wanted to, and had to do that on tick.
If you look at the budget papers of just two years ago, the prediction for the Northern Territory, for the financial year 2012-13, was $1.6bn. If you look at the set of budget papers which have been brought down now, the prediction is $3.1bn. In two years, the government borrowed in the order of $1.5bn, which they did not expect to be borrowing two years ago. That is poor fiscal management. The excuse has been that it is to avoid a contraction in the economy. However, it is the very economy you pump prime to reach such a big size that it became dependant on large amounts of government spending - so you set yourself up for the fall. The government should appreciate that in doing so, they were doing so against the warnings of many people and observers around the traps, not least of which was your own Treasury Department which said you had a real vulnerability in the area of the GST.
Was the great Roaring 20s, which was similar in the early 2000s internationally, going to end well? You do not have to be much of a student of history to realise that when you have the Roaring 20s something happens in the 30s, and that is exactly what the GFC was about. The only difference is when the GFC was visited upon us, governments decided to do the very opposite of what happened in the late 1920s and early 1930s; they decided to extend spending. However, if you follow that Keynesian model, you have to follow it completely. That model says that when you are in the good times you squirrel the money away. This government did not do that. The extra money from the good times was spent. Now, they say: ‘If we cut spending we will lose jobs’. Well, no ‘something’, Sherlock! Duh! We know that, we have known that for years!
Here is a thought: if you allowed the economy to grow under its own steam in the good times and restricted yourself to squirreling money away for a rainy day, you would have been in a much stronger position. You see how quickly these things manifest when you get a forward projection wrong by $1.2bn in the space of two years.
If you look at what is being proposed now for the Northern Territory, nett debt on the general government sector balance sheet - that is the section of the government which is, essentially, the public service; it does not refer to the Power and Water Corporation and those things - is currently $1.6bn. In four years time, that will become $3.6bn. The government is going to borrow $2bn over the next four years, and that was not in any of their forward projections. In fact, if you go back and see what was being said in 2010 by the Chief Minister, he said we would be returning to surplus budgets by now.
Let us examine the surplus the government promised to have delivered by now. The figure is a deficit of $491m - for the general government sector only. Let us add those publicly-owned corporations and government business divisions and examine their deficit for the year. Their deficit for the year will be $760m. That can only come from one place: borrowings; we have to borrow it. If you track that out, the deficits from the non-financial public sector, which is the government plus all its corporations, is $755m, $600m deficit, $500m deficit, and another $500m deficit. When do we start paying back this money? It makes me feel sick that this is actually occurring.
If you then track what that debt looks like, that debt in the non-financial sector of government-owned corporations plus government, goes from $2.8bn to a figure of nearly $5.6bn across government. Then, we have to add our superannuation liability of $2.8bn on top of that. So, as a jurisdiction of 220 000 people, the government now has financial liabilities and debt of over $8bn. In my family, that is the equivalent of $140 000-worth of debt added on the credit card at my home where there are four of us. $140 000 - that is just my home. The average Territorian has now a credit card bill of $35 000, the equivalent of a Holden Commodore for every Territorian …
A member: And they cannot drive it.
Mr ELFERINK: They are in debt for a car that they cannot drive; in fact, they cannot even see.
Then, this government will tell us they are good fiscal managers; that this is a responsible budget. It may be responsible in trying to avoid the loss of jobs, but at what point do you stop racking it up on the credit card? There is not a figure in this document in any of the forward projections which gives me any comfort that it is nothing but deficit, deficit, deficit spending from year in year out into the future. When do we pay the piper? When? What is the date that this is actually all paid back? If you follow the logic - and we heard it from the minister with the Greek accent, and also the very Greek approach to finances - it does not matter if it is $1m worth of deficit or $10m worth of deficit, it is about a health service. Well, I will tell you what happens at the other end of that. Sooner or later, the creditor knocks on the door and there ain’t no health service, because you are too busy paying the interest payment.
What do we get from our own source revenue, our own taxation revenue, in the Northern Territory? This is not from federal grants or GST money; this is the money we make for ourselves from our stamp duties, our fees we pay, the registration, all government fees. We will earn $450m worth of income from that taxation revenue in the year 2015-16. What will our interest bill be on that year? $404m. Nearly every cent – that is an exaggeration – nearly all the money we earn from our income, from our own taxation revenue in the Northern Territory, will go to pay the interest bill alone.
When I pay to register my car and pay the fee, when, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, you pay your licence fee, when the Leader for Government Business buys a house here and pays his stamp duty, do you know what we are going to be spending our money on? Paying the interest bill alone. Yet, we are told by the Treasurer this is a sensible and responsible government. It is not; it has shown no fiscal responsibility since the day it was formed. If it had it would have eliminated the debt it carried into government during the good times. If it had, it would not have competed directly with the private sector in overheating the economy by seeking to build its large infrastructure projects at the same time the economy was strong in the Northern Territory.
However, they chose to take political solutions. They needed the political ability to say: ‘Look, we built a waterfront, aren’t we good?’ It was all sweetness and light at the time because the economy was doing well, the punters were happy. However, underlying all of that, it was being racked up on the credit card.
If I, in my household, suddenly realise I have a loss of income - by the way, if I know that I have, potentially, a threat to the level of my income, I ensure I live within the means of that threat. This government chose not to. Moreover, they have then chosen to whip out the credit card and increase the quality of their lies even further. As income has gone up - in 2001 the annual income for the Northern Territory was $2.2bn, the income now in the general government sector for the Northern Territory will be $4.8bn, more than twice it was 10 years ago - you would expect the debt would start coming down, but that is not what is happening. It did for awhile, for a short period, not by much. However, the income is still going up and the debt is still going up.
I heard the Leader of Government Business in 2001-02 screeching from the rafters about using the word ‘unsustainable’. How is an increasing debt situation with an increasing income sustainable? When does it stop? That answer has been avoided assiduously by every member of parliament on the other side of this House who contributed to this debate because they do not have the answer. What is the wisdom of going down this path when you do not know where the path leads; when your headlights are so dim you cannot see past the bumper bar on your car? That is precisely what this government does and, what is worse, they put their foot on the accelerator in those circumstances and expect not to run into anything ...
Dr Burns: We do not have the handbrake on.
Mr ELFERINK: I will pick up on that interjection. That is precisely right; you never put the handbrake on. The foot was only ever on the accelerator even when it should not have been. There are times when you have to consider slowing the vehicle down. Unless you slow things down, particularly in the good times, you are going to drive straight into a brick wall. This government has driven into that brick wall and has no solutions. I would love to hear, by interjections or otherwise, from the good minister on what date we will be returned to surplus. Even if we achieve that, on what date will you have paid off the $8bn debt which is now outstanding in debt and financial liabilities?
The government said: ‘You cannot afford to talk about anything but the general government sector because that is how all governments talk’. The Territory is slightly different because we park huge slices of our debt in government-owned corporations. It does not always work for the other governments because they do not own huge government corporations - certainly not ones which carry 20% or 30% of the debt. That is a great place to park debt and say: ‘Just look at the general government sector balance sheet’. However, unless you are intending to sell the Power and Water Corporation along with its debt, you carry that exposure. It is a contingent liability. Does the government carry that exposure? Sure does. Debt for equity swaps which is - I love that expression, debt for equity swap. What it means is we bail them out.
The other thing we also do is we give them a holiday from their payments to the shareholder. We do not ask them for any money; in fact, we give them money. It is interesting when you read the Statement of Corporate Intent which was just tabled. Listen to this: the strategic direction of the Power and Water Corporation is:
Operate at least as efficiently as any comparable business.
The second one is:
Maximise the sustainable return to the Northern Territory (NT) on its investment in the Corporation.
So, we are not going to sell it. You cannot sell it; we could not sell it even if we wanted to. I love that allegation: ‘Oh, you are going to sell it’. We would not get 10 for that because, if it was a real business, operating in real terms, it would not survive under its current circumstances. It would be trading, if not trading insolvent, so close to flirting with the edges of it that any potential investor would say: ‘I will give you 10 for it’ - if you are lucky. You can get rid of that furphy, it is just not true. It cannot be done in the current structure - not that we intend to anyhow. The argument does not stack; it would not be worth anything.
The frustration I have with this government is they have been true to their Labor values. Their Labor values are simply that they want to be Santa Claus. They want joy. They really do want to be Santa Claus; they think they can go through life and just give things away. I listened to the minister over there - I am not announcing any budget changes, so do not get all excited - the Minister for Transport saying: ‘Oh, we gave this away, and we let that go for free, and that is for free, and we provide that for free’. No, you do not! You do not provide anything for free! It is all on the credit card, and somebody has to pay. You do not give away things. It is like Santa Claus is in town and we can just feel good about these things: ‘We do not want to hurt people, we do not want to place expectations on people’.
I listened to the Chief Minister saying today: ‘We are tough, we are tough, we are tough’. No, you are not! You have avoided the tough decisions since Day 1. If you had been prepared to just restrain a little expenditure when you were getting extra money, you would not be in this position. That is not tough; it is dumb, stupid, moronic. That is what has happened with this government’s fiscal management over the last 10 years. And who has to pay? Not these guys. After the next election, if they are still in power, then they have a problem. I almost get the sense they are almost prepared to lose this election so this becomes somebody else’s problem. Which is your typical Santa Claus approach: ‘Oh, I am not going to pay the piper, just pass the debt on to someone else’. That is what bankrupts do. Every time somebody declares themselves to be bankrupt, the people who are there creditors are the ones who actually pay the bills. Nothing happens for free. Yet, this government seems to think it is all for free, that it is all a gift. As a consequence, they led us to the brink of disaster.
I remember when the former Treasurer, Syd Stirling, and the current Treasurer, would screech from the rafters about the benchmark of poor fiscal planning was when your debt to revenue ratio reached 61%. This government is taking us to 74% and they are saying: ‘Oh, well, it is fiscally responsible’. No, it is not. By your own arguments in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005, and whenever else, it is not fiscally responsible; it is fiscally reckless.
I was concerned about 61%; to see 74% made me feel unwell. I do not like it when I look at my house loan as an asset in my home because I know I still have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars back to the bank from my own income. I want to take the same attitude to the Territory’s finances, but these people do not. They have no interest. They do not treat the Territory’s finances like their own finances ...
Dr Burns: No bankrupts on this side, mate.
Mr ELFERINK: They do not treat the Territory’s finances ...
Mrs Lambley: How would you know?
Mr Tollner: You do not treat the Territory’s finances like your own. You are sending us bankrupt.
Dr Burns: Careful what you talk about.
Mr Tollner: You are sending the Territory bankrupt.
Members interjecting.
Mr ELFERINK: The member for Fong Lim is exactly right: no bankrupts on your side, absolutely not. Do you know why? Because you would not want to be in a position where you have to claim bankruptcy.
But holy cow, come the public purse: ‘Here is the credit card. Would you take these, or how about Diners Club?’ That is your answer to everything: spend your way out of it, someone else will pay the bill. Ho, ho, ho, back to the North Pole we go. You have been so reckless it is scary. I can tell you I am terrified about what we will find should we win government.
Did you see the way you were squirming when we were asking about the financial exposures we carried in relation to the waterfront, Power and Water Corporation, and some of those other institutions? There was some very odd squirming on the other side of the House. I am terrified about what we will find when we open the books, should we win government, because I have the sneaking suspicion the exposures we have are a great deal more substantial.
This government is reckless; it has exposed us to an interest bill which will, in a few years time, be well over $1m every single day. They talk about Aboriginal housing; they will not be able to build a house at all because we will be paying $404m every year in interest alone. This government is a disgrace. They have taken us to a dreadful place and, then, they squeal when people start becoming critical in other jurisdictions as to how the finances of this jurisdiction are managed.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, they have only themselves to blame. They have been a wanton government. When compared to the spending habits of this government, drunken sailors look like sober souls when it comes to spending.
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, first, I was appalled at the budget that was handed down this week. It is so typical of any Labor budget, no matter where you go. Whether you look federally, at Queensland Labor or New South Wales Labor, this was just a typical smoke-and-mirrors budget of a typical Labor Party. I say smoke-and-mirrors budget because when the Leader of the Opposition tabled his 27 questions to the Chief Minister and the Treasurer on Wednesday it highlighted there are so many things which are not accounted for in this budget. There is so much debt that is not accounted for in this budget. We still need answers to those questions, and very much look forward to receiving them. We are praying we receive them because it is my view this government has no intention of being open and transparent with the voters of the Northern Territory. However, we live in hope that at least they might try to respond to those questions.
The defining part of this budget was the level of debt we have been taken into. The member for Port Darwin summed it up very well when he was talking about our own source revenue in the Northern Territory. If you were operating a business and your outgoings were much greater than your income, you would be declared insolvent. That is exactly what is happening to the Northern Territory in 2015-16 as highlighted by the Treasurer in her own budget. Our own source revenue is almost the same as we are paying out on interest on the debt that has been shown in this budget.
As I said, if you were a company, you would be declared insolvent. However, of course, this is not a company we are talking about, this is a government. This particular government has revenue that comes not only from its own sources, but grants and gifts of GST and other monies from the Commonwealth. They breathe a sigh of relief and say: ‘We are all right. We do not raise that much money in the Territory, but look at all this largesse that other people are giving us from around Australia’.
It poses the question, though, that from 2015-16, every single cent that is raised in the Northern Territory is not going to building roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, or provide better sporting facilities, or any of that type of thing, it is going to pay off debt. In actual fact, it is not even going to pay off debt; it is going to meet the interest repayments on that debt. As a Territorian anyhow, I find that is a hard thing to stomach; that my Territory taxes and charges, the stamp duties, payroll tax that employers pay - every single cent that is raised in the Northern Territory - is simply being used to pay the interest of the debt this Labor government has created. It is a rather shameful situation to be in.
We all understand that the Northern Territory is a growing jurisdiction, that we do have bills; however, this government has taken it to a new level. As the member for Port Darwin rightly pointed out - and the analogy was very good - these guys think they are Santa Claus. They thought they were Santa Claus for the last 10 years, running around being merry men, preaching peace and joy to everyone in the Northern Territory, with a big sack of goodies, handing them out everywhere and, at no stage at all, considering somewhere down the track these things would have to be repaid.
You only have to look at their reaction to the way Kevin Rudd handled the global financial crisis. They seemed to think it was wonderful thing handing out cheques for $900 to every man and his dog. They were even handing out cheques to dead people, and people who had not lived in the country for decades. Cheques were going everywhere, and this government here was cheering them on as hard as they could, saying what a wonderful thing it was they were just throwing money around willy-nilly. Joe Hockey put it very well. He said: ‘We have spent $10bn. We have thrown $10bn into the electorate in order to see a $300m jump in retail sales - not very good value for money at all’.
That is not the Labor way; the Labor way is to get out there and throw money around everywhere, doing exactly what this government has been doing. Now, the rubber is hitting the road. I remember, in the few months that have gone by, the admonitions that have been coming from the Leader of Government Business and others in this place. When you stand up and say you are going to do something, the Leader of Government Business is very quick off the mark, saying: ‘Ooh, you have to be careful. Be very careful, member for such and such, you do not know what is going on, and do not spend money that you do not have’. That was a pretty good signal to the rest of us that the books were not in the shape they should be; that they actually saw the wall looming and knew we were about to hit a big wall. Indeed, that is what this budget has shown: that we have hit a big wall.
That is proven also by a range of other broken commitments of ministers, Chief Ministers, Treasurers and other people in this government. Things such as the Myilly Point development, the Katherine Prison Farm, the Bagot Police Beat are all broken election promises.
We heard today about the planned abattoir. The member for Casuarina, the Minister for Health and minister for Primary Industry, could not help himself a couple of weeks ago standing in front of 300-odd cattlemen. He had to show he was quite prepared to throw money around, and quite happily told everybody at that meeting he was going to rake up $9m to support that abattoir. We now find out that was all bunkum - absolute nonsense. He then went on to say: ‘Well, no, hang on. That was federal money I was committing. They have to deal with the federal government. We are making a case for them federally’. We then find out they cannot even word up their mate, Anthony Albanese in Canberra, the Infrastructure minister. He proved the member for Casuarina to be a complete fool and denied he had any contact at all with anyone from the Northern Territory government in relation to an abattoir.
Those are the depths these guys are plumbing. That is the wall they have hit. They now realise things are bad. We are not yet at the stage where they are crying and saying: ‘Gee whiz, haven’t we done a dodgy job over the last 10 years?’ However, the people in voter land are starting to work out this mob is a pack of charlatans and fakes when it comes to talking about their budget.
They seem to have a whole number of people hoodwinked. I have been very interested to read the editorials of the NT News in the last couple of days. The NT News on Tuesday or Wednesday ran an editorial saying it was a good, balanced budget. I almost fell off my chair when I read that. The people at the NT News, clearly operating out of the Treasurer’s office, seem to be hoodwinked by the Treasurer, and are simply mouthpieces for the Treasurer, which is rather sad. They have led with their chin. There would be a few people at the NT News now feeling a little embarrassed about the stance they have taken on the budget.
They are not alone. Other media outlets, such as Channel 9, I was quite surprised to see on Wednesday night, mentioned the budget. Admittedly, they made mention of the debt, but it seemed they were also very convinced this Territory Labor mob is doing a reasonable job.
We all know, what has come to light in the last couple of days is things are not good at all. The Territory is wallowing in debt. We cannot make commitments on the most basic things. Sitting here last night watching people ask the minister for Transport what road can be built, can we duplicate lanes on particular roads, and that type of thing, was a joke. This guy has reneged on a whole range of promises and commitments and, now, you are asking him to make another one. That is the victory of hope over reality: some bloke who cannot organise the Katherine Prison Farm after years and years of talk is now being asked to do things with roads. Goodness me, if anybody thinks that will occur they are sadly deluded.
The Bagot Police Beat is another area. We have heard over and over again that the government is going to do something in Bagot. Before the last election, of course, the Chief Minister said he was quite keen to get in there and turn Bagot into a normal suburb. He quickly ran away from that commitment and made another commitment that they put a police post in there because they understood the antisocial behaviour and the crime that was going on behind the fence at Bagot. They were going to step up and do their bit to reduce crime in that Ludmilla area, and give a bit of respite to the residents of Bagot from much of the antisocial behaviour by putting a Police Beat or a police post there.
Alas, of course, we learned this week that none of that is happening. The Chief Minister said police have been doing drive-throughs in Bagot. Goodness me! The Chief Minister should understand those things have been going on for years and years, and the situation is only getting worse. As I said, they have broken that commitment.
What is the government’s response to this dreadful situation? Well, they tried to hide. They tried to run and hide. They tried to hide this debt; they are not up-front in the budget about where the debt from the prison is, how we can get out of it, if we can get out of it, or what the terms of the debt are. They have been very reluctant to explain how the waterfront debt works, why we are paying $60m a year when the repayments are only $36m a year. They cannot explain where the extra $24m a year is going. It is a budget that is designed to hide things.
You saw the reactions of the government following that budget. The first thing they did was organise to have the shadow Treasurer removed from the Chamber in Question Time on Tuesday, which I thought was one of the most disgraceful things I had ever seen. I have never in my life seen a shadow Treasurer removed from the Chamber and not allowed to ask a question on budget day. However, there is no depth this government will not plumb, and they had the shadow Treasurer removed.
Then, they started concocting stories about Tony Abbott: ‘Let us blame Tony Abbott for all of this. Things are bad at the moment but, goodness gracious, imagine how bad it will be if Tony Abbott starts messing around with the GST’. Tony Abbott had said something along the lines that he would like to see a little more per capita funding. It is a curious thing, this discussion about the GST, because there is currently a review of the GST arrangements going on. It is actually not Tony Abbott who is conducting that review, or who has organised that review ...
Mr Chandler: Do not let the truth get in the way.
Mr TOLLNER: That is dead right. My friend, the member for Brennan, said: ‘Do not let the truth get in the way of a good story’. No, it is not Tony Abbott who is doing that review. As a matter of fact, it is Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan who are reviewing the GST arrangements. Interestingly enough, in Western Australia where Tony Abbott made those remarks, his biggest critic was, in actual fact, the Leader of the Opposition in Western Australia - the Labor opposition - who said Tony Abbott should be condemned for not guaranteeing Western Australia would get a greater share of the GST pie. He has been condemned by Labor in Western Australia for not going far enough, he is condemned up here in the Northern Territory by Labor for even suggesting it and, in the meantime the whole review is being taken place and run by Labor federally. What a scam!
Then, we pick up the newspaper today and read some bizarre story. I do not know how an editorial like that can end in what once was a reputable newspaper, saying we have to be very wary of Tony Abbott because he is a dangerous man and he is preaching dangerous views. Goodness me! How does a story like that come out of what should be an objective media organisation? The whole situation is laughable, but it shows me the NT News is probably a little too close to the Treasurer of the Northern Territory and the Labor government in the Northern Territory because, obviously, they have not done the most rudimentary checks of their stories. Had they done so, they would have found Labor in Western Australia is calling for even greater changes and commitments from Tony Abbott than he gave and, in fact, the review of the GST is being conducted by Labor federally. It is an interesting way of trying to distract attention from a very dodgy budget.
The other thing Labor is doing here - and I saw it done in Queensland by Anna Bligh and her government just before the election in Queensland - is distancing themselves from Labor. They do not want to be seen to be Labor. In the Northern Territory we now have a new entity called the Henderson team. They are trying to suggest they are not Labor because they know Labor is a toxic word across the country.
In Queensland, Anna Bligh tried to do the same thing: suggest she was not Labor. It was quite funny driving through the streets of Brisbane and looking at the signs. Normally, you would see LNP and Labor signs - or corflutes or posters or whatever you want to call them. However, not at that election - there was not a single Labor sign or logo to be seen anywhere. They were completely absent. What they were doing was painting words with pink paint on the back of their corflutes and sticking two of them together front to back so you could not see what the poster was supposed to be. They would say, ‘Keep Kate’ with a little love heart in the case of the Ashgrove MP at the time. Everything was ‘Keep Kate’ done in nice pink with a love heart, and there was not a Labor logo to be seen anywhere.
It is interesting when you access the website here because it lists the local party as the Australian Labor Party, Northern Territory Branch. The official register of political parties in the Northern Territory lists it as the Australian Labor Party NT (ALP). Further, their own membership application form defines it as the Australian Labor Party, Northern Territory Branch. There is no reference anywhere in any of these areas to the Henderson team, Hendo’s mob, or even Territory Labor. They identify themselves legally as the Australian Labor Party, but we have not seen that shown anywhere of late. They have tried to distance themselves from the Australian Labor Party because they understand the toxicity of Julia’s mob and they do not want to go anywhere there.
The only problem is these people here run their books in exactly the same way as Julia’s mob run its books federally. I find it curious these guys are trying to distance themselves from the Australian Labor Party. Imagine if that applied to sporting clubs! Can you ever imagine a situation where the St Mary’s Football Club or the Buffaloes Club try to change jumpers simply because they are on a losing streak? It defies logic. Because the Parramatta Eels team have hardly won a game this season, would they would run out and change their colours from blue and gold to pink and red and change their name to the Parramatta Bronco? You just would not imagine it happening.
However, this is exactly what Labor in the Northern Territory is trying to do. They are doing their best to distance themselves from this budget. They have rarely talked about it this week; they have said practically boo about the budget. On budget day, they threw the red herring about Tony Abbott out there. The reason being, of course, is they are embarrassed about their budget. They are embarrassed about the state of the Northern Territory’s finances. The worst part of it is they know more about what is going on behind the curtain than any of the rest of us do.
I suppose one thing about the Leader of the Opposition’s 27 questions is those questions go to what is actually behind the curtain. That must send the fear of God into members of the Henderson team because, of course, in the Northern Territory the Australian Labor Party NT Branch does not exist. There is no way known they want to be known as the Australian Labor Party anymore, because that has connotations of Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd, and that creepy little fellow, Wayne Swan ...
Dr Burns: Oh, I thought you were talking about Christopher Pyne for a minute.
Mr TOLLNER: Ha, ha, and a few of those other clandestine dodgy characters such as the Craig Thomson affair - all these things that are getting very murky down in Canberra.
Labor in the Northern Territory wants to distance themselves from that. They want to try to ignore that is happening. They conjure up evil things that Tony Abbott is supposed to be doing. You only have to listen to them at Question Time. We say the budget is in a terrible position, and the Treasurer jumps up and says, ‘Oh, so you are going to cut infrastructure spending’, as if the only way to balance the budget would be to cut infrastructure spending.
It is putting words in our mouths, suggesting we are going to turn the taps on as far as alcohol is concerned. The tap is already on. I do not know what planet this woman lives on. They have been running around saying they have turned the tap off on alcoholics. Goodness me! It is like they are living in a parallel universe where no one drinks anymore. You only have to step out the door of this place, walk anywhere around Darwin, Palmerston or Katherine. Heaven help us, if any of them went to Alice Springs. Let them suggest they have turned the tap off there; that no one can access alcohol. What a joke!
The reality just defies what this government continually tells us. They tell us crime is on the decrease, violent assaults are on the decrease, and drinking is on the decrease. Everything is getting better; people are getting richer, house prices are falling, there is plenty of land availability. That just defies logic. And here we are now, with a Treasurer who marched in here and told us this is a responsible budget.
Prior to political life, I was involved with a superannuation fund. I was North Australian Manager for the Australian Retirement Fund and had quite a bit to do with the way that fund operated and was run. I took a bit of interest in the way things operated. I understand a trustee of a super fund has a fiduciary obligation to the members or policy holders of that particular fund. A fiduciary obligation means a trustee should act as a prudent person would with someone else’s money; that is, you are not spending your own money where you can be reckless and do things with it. In actual fact, you have to be much more careful when you are using other people’s money. That is what a fiduciary obligation is all about. You have to be very careful.
It was an interesting interjection from the Leader of Government Business who said: ‘There are no bankrupts on our side of parliament’. I am unsure if there are any bankrupts on our side of parliament either. However, he seems to miss the point. The point is not whether individual members of this parliament are bankrupt or not; the point is the Northern Territory is heading for bankruptcy. That is not how a prudent person operates. It is not the fiduciary obligation that a trustee of a superannuation fund would be allowed to get away with. You have to be much more careful with other people’s money. You cannot run around throwing it here, there and everywhere. Labor, whether it is in the Northern Territory, federally, or otherwise, is not very prudent with other people’s money.
A few examples: the carbon tax. We are not going to fix a single thing in our environment or our air by imposing this carbon tax. However, who cares? It is only the citizens of Australia; they can afford to fork out more, let us hit them with another tax.
The minister loves to bang on about the Building the Education Revolution, the BER. He says it is a wonderful thing. We received a couple of school halls in the Northern Territory. He does not care about the cost to the rest of Australia. The fact that this is known as a fiasco around the rest of the country, for very good reason, does not bother him. He seems to think it is quite okay.
The home insulation plan was another one of Labor’s wonderful schemes. The pink batts scheme - where did that go? This is all just wasting other people’s money: cash for clunkers, the citizen’s assembly and the mining tax. We are bringing in a mining tax to penalise the one profitable sector in our economy. Detention centre riots, the break-out of refugees, the enormous number of boats that are now arriving in Australia - Labor does not care about the cost. It does not care about the billions that have to be thrown at these problems. The list just goes on and on and on.
It is really quite alarming. GP super clinics were promised. They say they are wonderful things up here. They promised 64, 11 have been delivered, one in the Northern Territory. They think they are going to get another one. Again, hope overrides reality. The national government is just as bankrupt as this government is.
The only concern I have is this government does not seem to recognise the situation. They are not going to turn anything around; they keep denying there is a problem. I put it to the voters in the Northern Territory that maybe the opposition has not fully discovered the extent of this problem, but at least we recognise there is a problem …
Mr CHANDLER: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker! I move an extension of time for the member to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr TOLLNER: Thank you, I will not take much longer.
This is one thing I will say to the voters of the Northern Territory: the Country Liberals might not know the extent of the problem. We do not know the level of debt this government has got us into; we do not know the financial arrangements around the prison, the waterfront, or a whole range of other things such as the Power and Water Corporation. We are keen to get to the bottom of that. However, we have recognised there is a problem and that is the first step. When we go to the polls in August, voters have a clear choice between the Country Liberals who recognise there is a problem and will act to fix that problem, or vote for the Henderson team which denies there is a problem, try to paper over the cracks, try to convince you white is black and black is white, and night is day and day is night. It does not matter what they do, they will try to convince you they are doing something else.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, to sum up, I was horrified with this budget that came down. Things are coming to light I did not think the Treasurer would let come to light. The fact is, in a couple of short years, if we were a company, we would be declared insolvent. In a couple of short years, every single cent Territorians pay to the Territory government will be expended on interest payments alone. There is no money for extra roads, for better schools, for better hospitals - for any of that. Why? Because this government, in 10 years, has sold the farm completely. More than $1bn in windfalls from the GST - $1bn they never knew they had coming - they managed to not only blow, but blow a whole range of other money they also picked up, in addition to borrowing money at goodness knows what rates or who from, to the point now we are in this almost untenable situation.
To top it all off, as I said in a presentation yesterday, we no longer have the safe and reliable pair of hands of Costello and Howard in Canberra and the surpluses they created. What we have now in Canberra is a terrible political joke of people who should not be in office and who are prepared to spend the legacy of governments before them, to the point now where there is really nothing the Northern Territory has as a backstop.
We need to change things quickly. This last budget highlights our urgent need for a major review of all Territory finances and the way we do things in the Northern Territory because, at the moment, things are not right. They have created so many problems for us here, it is time for a change. I hope, come 25 August, we will see a change of government in the Northern Territory.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I respond to the budget that was put to us on Tuesday by this Henderson Labor government - a deficit of $491m, a budget black hole, as my colleagues have been outlining tonight.
I listened with great intent to the Minister for Child Protection who spoke about this budget, this deficit, being just like a credit card bill. He likened it to a personal credit card bill. Of course, everyone has a credit card bill, and it is really nothing to worry about. Well, it is something to worry about, I can tell you. As someone who has been involved in business as a child with my family, and as an adult for at least the last decade, this level of debt is something you lose a great deal of sleep over. You worry about it when it is your personal debt, when you have put yourself on the line, and you have taken considerable risks to get yourself further in life. This is something you lose a great deal of sleep over.
I hope and pray the Treasurer, the Chief Minister, and other members of this government, are losing a whole deal of sleep, worrying themselves sick about the level of debt they have put each and every Territorian in. It concerns me; it really worries me. Anyone who has had anything to do with business and debt knows this level of debt is unsustainable. This government has put us in a position of great exposure and vulnerability, and I dread to think what the future holds if this Labor government retains power in August this year.
Tonight, I will talk about how this budget affects the business of child protection in the Northern Territory.
We have a government which equates spending with success in child protection. There is one thing we know for certain in the Northern Territory; the two do not correlate. Spending money and saying they are successfully providing child protection services in the Northern Territory is a misnomer; it does not equate.
Yes, this government has allocated an extra $7m towards child protection for the next financial year and they have their spending up to $177m. That alone is what we are expected to be very excited about when it comes to child protection. I, as the shadow minister for Child Protection, am not confident, pleased or excited about an additional spend, because this government, as we all know - as I have mentioned many times over the last 18 months - is extremely dismal when it comes to managing child protection in the Northern Territory.
There are a few areas I will point out which were of great interest to me when I read the budget papers. The area out of home care is a great concern to all stakeholders involved in child protection. We have had a shortfall of over 100 foster care placements in the Northern Territory for at least the last 12 months. This situation has not improved; it has remained much the same over the last 12 months. The foster care system is in disarray and dysfunction.
The government has handed over responsibility for recruiting foster carers to a non-government organisation called Life Without Barriers. This NGO is going about the business of trying to, once again, fix the system that is broken, make up for years of lost time, and drag people out of possible ignorance when it comes to foster care because it has been off the agenda for so long. It is trying to entice them into looking after our most vulnerable children in the Northern Territory. However, we have a shortfall 100 foster care placements.
I am told that, instead of foster care places, which we do not have, the government is spending a fortune on private residential care places, which cost up to 10 times as much as a foster care place. We are not receiving a very clear representation on this part of the budget. It is not being reported very clearly because it is an acute embarrassment to the government that they have failed when it comes to out-of-home care for children in the Northern Territory.
The other area I wish to raise tonight is the issue of caseloads. We read in the latest reform report that caseloads remain at a critically and seriously high, unsustainable level. For example, in the Barkly remote and rural, child protection workers are supposed to have less than 20 cases on their caseload and, in the Barkly, there are 112 cases per child protection worker. The situation is unsustainable. They have five times as many cases as they should have.
This is a very serious situation. It comes down to a very long-term and critical recruitment and retention problem the Department of Children and Families has been trying to bring under control for many years. They cannot do it; they are not equipped. The situation was left to slide for so many years they cannot get on top of it. This is an area we will respond to if we get to government. We will respond to it very quickly because, unlike the government, we have a greater understanding of why we have a critical and serious recruitment retention problems within the Department of Children and Families. These poor social workers are trying to do a good job with caseloads which are unrealistic. They are a burden which leads to burnout, stress, and dissatisfaction with their jobs which, ultimately, leads to them packing up and leaving town. We have seen that many times.
The other area of interest I will raise tonight is the issue of the time it takes for the department to process child protection notifications. When a notification is made to the department, they are classified into three areas: a child in danger, which is the most critical area or category; a child at risk; and a child of concern. We have a slight improvement in those figures over the last 12 months, thankfully. The Department of Children and Families has something to celebrate - not get overly excited about – as there has been a slight improvement there.
Only 45% of the cases categorised in the area of children of concern are meeting the timeliness requirements of being dealt with in five days. So, 45% for that category is still way beyond the standards required when it comes to the department responding to these children at risk of abuse and neglect.
This government has a long way to go when it comes to properly managing the business of child protection in the Northern Territory - managing in the way the Territory deserves and Territorians can feel proud their government is doing the best they can. Obviously, there has been about 10 years of taking their eye off the ball; 10 years of hoping these things will just manage themselves, rather than be managed; and 10 years of a series of ministers mismanaging and, then, passing the buck to the next minister who has mismanaged - and so on and so forth. It is a diabolical history of failure.
I will talk briefly about one of my favourite topics; that is, Alice Springs. I read in the Alice Springs News they did an analysis of this Northern Territory Budget 2012-13, and only 3% of the entire budget goes to Alice Springs, which is just staggering. It really demonstrates just how little this government is committed to Alice Springs and to the people of Alice Springs.
We have heard a too-little-too-late statement by the Chief Minister earlier today, given the atrocities that have occurred in Alice Springs over the last 24 hours of those two poor young women who were raped in Alice Springs by three men, and another poor gentleman who was assaulted by four youths last night, saying in response we now have a government that, after 11 years, decided: ‘Gee whiz, with 113 days to go to the next general election, let us implement a zero tolerance strategy to crime in Alice Springs’. It is something the local people of Alice Springs have been demanding for years. As long as I remember, people have been jumping up and down, particularly over the last 10 years, for a zero tolerance approach to crime in Alice Springs. So, 3% of the budget goes to Alice Springs - that says it all.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I put on the record that I am truly appalled by the gravity of debt this government has placed us in. It is so incredibly unimpressive. It should be of great and deep concern to each and every one of us. We are exposed. Our future is looking very grim if we are put in a position of insolvency, as my colleague, the member for Fong Lim has outlined. It is a distinct possibility. We cannot bury our heads in the sand when it comes to this budget and the possible critical situation we could find ourselves in. Look no further than Europe, at countries that have placed themselves in extreme debt - debt they are unable to pay - and you can see the road we are heading down with this terrible Budget 2012-13.
Mr CONLAN (Greatorex): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, there is so much here it is hard to know where to start. I will pick up on what the member for Fong Lim said about John Howard and Peter Costello - those two dynamos when it came to economic management. I thought it would have been good if we arranged a five-minute catch-up with Peter Costello and Delia Lawrie, the Treasurer? Even if we arranged a couple of minutes, a little fireside chat. I am sure we could have all chipped in, flown her down to Melbourne to meet with Peter, and he could run her through how to manage the books, how to balance the books, and how to run a responsible budget’.
Looking back, I wish we had done that because now, on the eve of an election, what do we have? There are 130-odd days to go. Potentially, a new government could come to power in the Northern Territory and, on Monday morning, the 27th, we will open the books and see the true state of what it is. It is going to be pretty ugly.
We are at $491m, and there are bets on that it is much more; that you are not quite telling us the truth. I wish we had arranged that meeting because no one has been in a better position than us to be able to do that. Peter Costello is a good friend of the Territory. He is a good friend of Terry Mills. He was a good mate of Jodeen Carney’s, so one of us would have been able to pull that together. Instead, no, she lacked the advice, the expertise, and she has her grubby little hands over the Territory coffers. What she has left us with is absolutely despicable.
I concur with everything that has been said in this House today about the state of the Territory finances. To hear, by 2015, the own source revenue of the Northern Territory will not be enough to cover the interest rates on that debt is extraordinary. That is an absolutely extraordinary place to be. That equals insolvency. Much has been said about that situation. It was articulated perfectly in the Leader of the Opposition’s budget reply yesterday. I could reread that. I could put it back on the record. This could be the member for Greatorex’s speech. Reiterate exactly what the member for Blain said yesterday, because he pretty well summed it all up. He said the most striking thing about the budget was the lack of imagination. It is a government lost for ideas. Well, hello! No doubt about it. Talk about lost for ideas!
This zero tolerance issue is unbelievable. It really is pathetic. I do not know how you can sleep. I do not know how you can look at yourself in the mirror in the wake of a disastrous law and order issue in Central Australia. It was always going to come to this; it was always going to happen. Imagine if you employed this zero tolerance strategy 12 months ago. The community was screaming out for it in January 18 months ago, one of the worst summers in the history in Central Australia - or two, three or five years ago. They have been screaming out for it for years. Imagine if you did that. Imagine if the Chief Minister, after the tsunami of crime as it was portrayed last year, said: ‘Right. I have had an absolute gutful’.
If he said what he said today, which was a result of a dorothy dixer from the government: ‘Okay, I have had a gutful. That is it. I will not tolerate it. It is now a zero tolerance regime in Central Australia’, those two young ladies might have had a nice evening camping out under the stars overlooking the beautiful, majestic MacDonnell Ranges without fear of being attacked, let alone raped at gunpoint for God’s sake. That is the headline.
You could imagine what happened this morning on ABC News 24. We all cringe a little, don’t we? We watch ABC News 24 and they run through the newspapers. They have heavy hitting journos covering pretty important stories across the country from The Age, The Australian to The Sydney Morning Herald. They get to the Territory and it is: ‘Hippo and Croc in G-string’ or something. Oh God! They all have a chuckle as the camera comes back on them. Not this morning. This morning it would have been: ‘Tourists raped at gunpoint’. That is what the country woke up to this morning - and it is not Darwin, it is Alice Springs. It is phenomenal.
You talk about your alcohol regime and your law and order regime. I cannot understand how you can actually think it is okay. I just do not understand how you can think that everything is okay as a result of that and numerous other incidents.
My place was broken into last night and the night before - twice in a row. Did you know that? The night before, on Tuesday night, they jumped the fence and pinched the stereo. My wife and two children were there alone, mind you. I cannot explain the anxiety that causes me. Nevertheless, my wife woke up this morning and said, ‘Strange they did not pinch any grog’, because two weeks ago they did. Two weeks ago, they jumped the fence and raided the fridge and stole all the booze. That is the third time they have done it in my place. Three weeks before that, they stole a car from my driveway. I do not know, maybe I am being targeted, but there is a bit of crime going on in that particular neighbourhood at the moment. She said: ‘It is strange they did not take the grog this time’. She opened the fridge after the stereo went missing and there were, I think, four beers and a couple of cans of Diet Coke sitting in there. That was all was left in the entertaining fridge outdoors. Anyway, this morning she woke up, walked out, opened the fridge - and guess what? The four beers were gone. They finally came back and got those four beers and the couple of cans of Diet Coke too which, I believe, were not much use, so they sprayed them around the back and left the empty cans lying around.
The most extraordinary thing about that is that I feel lucky. I look at this headline here and I took at those people, these two young women, these two backpackers, coming and investing their money, their time, and their holidays in the Territory, despite the bad publicity we have had. They said: ‘No, we are going to come anyway’. This happens and I feel lucky. I feel lucky that all they did was take a $100 CD player we could put a CD on and listen to while we are enjoying the outdoor Territory lifestyle, and a dozen beers. God, I got off pretty easily.
I cannot believe what is happening in my office at the moment. My electorate officer worked for Barry Coulter. She is very experienced, she has been around for a number of years - a couple of decades, in fact. She worked for Hon Barry Coulter, as his electorate officer, in the 1980s and 1990s. She said: ‘You know what is happening, I cannot believe. It is hard for me to explain to you, Matt, because you would not have known this. When I worked for Barry Coulter during the euthanasia debate, his office was just inundated with people coming in because it polarised, as everyone knows, the community’. It polarised and compelled the community in so many ways, and they felt a need to go to their MLA and tell their story and what they thought and felt about euthanasia, essentially - yes, or no, yea or nay. They just needed to tell their story about it, because people felt strongly one way or another about euthanasia. She said: ‘It is a bit like that in Alice Springs at the moment. People desperately want to come into the office’. I have never seen anything like that it, certainly not since I have been working with you for the last five years. There has been nothing quite like this. People are coming in. They just want to come and let their MLA, the local member for parliament, know how they feel about it, and what has happened - just to tell their story; to say they have been broken into, that their friend next door has been assaulted’.
This is real stuff. I am not just making it up to try to be colourful on the last day of parliament. I really wish I could talk about something else. You think we love talking it about it? We are sick and tired of talking about it. ‘All you do is talk down the town’. God, I would love to not talk it down; love to not do stuff like that. I would love to talk about other issues for a change; it would be really nice to talk about other things.
However, this is the issue; this is what is happening. My office is inundated with people, with families who have been here for 20 to 30 years, and those who have been here for five minutes. They just want to come in and tell their story. As I said, I feel lucky. The law and order issues, the lawlessness, assaults against the person, break-ins, property assaults and property thefts are now becoming almost a rule rather than the exception. It is a sad state of affairs not only when it is reflected in the statistics, but when people say it is a matter of not if, but when.
Instead of an assault or break-in being a one-off in a small country town - let us face it, it is Alice Springs, it is a small country town. It is a wonderful, iconic, cosmopolitan centre, but it still has that country charm. That is how people see it, locals and non-locals - wide open streets, quiet hour on a verandah on a lovely sunny afternoon with the breeze blowing across your face. This is how people see and feel about a town like Alice Springs. To have this happen constantly is remarkable. You could roll out your swag and camp underneath the Sydney Harbour Bridge and feel much safer than you would at the moment doing exactly the same thing in Alice Springs.
This is proof. All those two girls did was say: ‘We are backpackers, we want to save a little money. We might just park the car underneath the MacDonnell Ranges.’ They probably had a couple of glasses of wine, sat back and said, ‘This is great. Why don’t we just camp here?’, and pull the seat back. We have all done it. It is a great Australian way. It is something they do in Europe every day of the year. It is perfectly acceptable to do that. But, no, no way. Alice Springs - holy cow! To be faced with such extreme sexual assault - and these guys were armed with a firearm - is unbelievable. I am gobsmacked.
This happened about a kilometre from our place and there were a number of other places in our street and around that region that were hit. The whole town is being whacked every now and then. The place is being smashed, to be honest, with law and order business. There seems to be a theme around my area. I said to my wife: ‘Okay, lock the doors and make sure you sleep with a golf club’. What are you supposed to do? My wife and I are both from the city. She came over from Perth and I came to the Territory from Brisbane. We are very well aware of this stuff but you do not think about it in quiet, charming little communities such as Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Katherine, or even Darwin. Darwin is a big city now, isn’t it? However, in remote and regional parts of the Northern Territory, it is the last thing you would expect.
It has reached this point now and it was always going to. Do you feel embarrassed? The Chief Minister must feel something. It is almost like ‘told you so’. I wonder if he is sitting in the office thinking: ‘Those guys have been saying this for a long time. God, if only we had listened’. Yes, if only you had listened. How hard can it be, and what is wrong with that? What is wrong with getting a grip on it? What is wrong with listening to the people who live in that community? You talk about politics – well, if anyone was playing politics with these issues it was you guys because you did nothing and, now, two girls have been raped. That is it; you did nothing and that is what has happened. That is the end result.
It is a direct result of your lacklustre approach to law and order in Central Australia, and your arrogance towards this side of the House and the three, four, five members from Alice Springs - we have a fifth member over there on the other side. It is almost an indictment on him for not being able to stand up in Cabinet and be heard. Maybe he is just bullied in Cabinet. I am guessing that is probably what happens: ‘Oh, sit down, Karl, and shut up’.
As far as the rest of us go, we have been saying it for a long time, as members before me and all of us: the previous members for Braitling, Araluen, Greatorex, and Macdonnell have been saying it for a long time. It was always going to happen, and you guys, in your arrogance, failed to listen and, now, we are at this point. What next? That is the thing - what next? Holy cow! I could think of a couple of things worse than this. I will not articulate them, but I do not think it is as farfetched anymore. I would have thought this sort of thing only happened in New York, Los Angeles - those big, smoky populated towns - not a lovely, sunny little place like Alice Springs.
However, it does, and it happens regularly. This is not a one-off. Assaults are happening all the time. It ranges from a couple of beers being taken from the fridge to murders. What is happening in the place is why my office is being absolutely inundated. I say that with my hand on my heart, because it is what is happening. I am not saying it because I want to try to embellish the point by turning three people coming into the office into 300. That has happened before but, literally, there are dozens of people coming into my office. My office is pretty central and visible in Alice Springs. People go to the post office and, on their way back, or past or whatever, they are calling in and they are saying: ‘I cannot believe what is happening’. Now, we have a zero tolerance approach. A reaction to something - it is just reactive, not preventative. If you only listened.
I read from the budget paper today, and I learn from my colleague, the member for Araluen, that only 3% of the budget has gone to Central Australia. Well, that is extraordinary. Let us have a look how you sell Central Australia in the budget paper. The Central Australian region, which occupies 41% of the Territory’s land area. Huh, 41% - it is home to 18% of the Territory’s population. There are about 41 000 people living in the region, along with 27 600 in the Alice Springs region. Despite all that, and how you have built it up, and how important it is to the Northern Territory, you only allocate 3% of the budget towards it. It does not seem to make sense. It does not make sense. Where is the money? Where is all the money going?
Are you mentioning the Mereenie Loop? I cannot believe you actually had the audacity - well, I can believe it; I should not be surprised. I should not be surprised, but I still am a little that you actually had the gall and the guts to mention the Mereenie Loop. This takes the cake. It has been on and off. Clare Martin said she was going to do it all those years ago and, then somehow, it fell off the budget paper. I could be mistaken, but I thought the member for Karama, at one stage, said they were putting it on hold, it would not be done. They were going to do the inner loop or the outer loop or something. It has been a bit of a moving feast. The goal post has changed with the Mereenie Loop. However, here it is; it has appeared again:
What are they going to do? We are:
So, it is back on. The Mereenie Loop is going to be, somehow, sealed again. I would like to see you do it. I wonder when it is going to happen. That has been an absolute disaster.
That is in the electorate of Macdonnell, or is it Stuart?
Ms Anderson: It is Macdonnell.
Mr CONLAN: It is Macdonnell. I am sure, member for Macdonnell, you know exactly what is going on out there, and why this is not happening. It is the failed negotiations, I believe, with some of the local people? From my understanding it has been stalled negotiations, almost non-existent. It has not happened. However, we see it again. Apparently, it is going to appear; it is back on the map.
The debt situation is really quite extraordinary. To get ourselves into a position where our own source revenue will not cover the interest payments on the debt by 2015 is despicable – it is really bad. Any business would have gone to the wall. We all fear, on this side, the Territory is going to the wall. What happened to the great Northern Territory and the dream that was the NT with self-government? What happened to it? Even when you were elected in 2001 there was a sign of democracy, wasn’t there? We did not want a dictatorship; we did not want regimes in forever and a day. I do not begrudge democracy. We have changed governments in this country without a single shot being fired. That is one of the great things about it.
There are good governments and bad governments of both persuasions. By 2001, the CLP had probably run its course. That was a time for change, and everyone looked towards you and gave you their endorsement. There were high hopes. So many people who lived in the Northern Territory had prayed, wished, and longed for the day a good Labor government would come to power. The expectation was enormous. For a couple of years, you did all right. Looking back in history, and my time in the Territory for those few years, you got on with a few good things. You were a new, excited, government, and there were many legislative changes you wanted to make. You had some things you wanted to do and, for all intents and purposes, you seemed to tick along okay.
However, then you, obviously, lost your way. The eyes widened when you saw the money rolling in through the GST: ‘This money - my God, look at this money. No one has ever seen this much money in their life. I cannot believe it’. Then, the wheels started to come off and they have been coming off for a long time. You guys are like the Flintstones - no wheels. You are running along, lifting it up, and losing momentum big time.
Today said it all. That announcement by the Chief Minister in Question Time was symbolic, if nothing else. It was many other things, but it was symbolic of how pathetic things have become, how the momentum has gone, and how desperate you are to react and say: ‘We are now employing a zero tolerance regime in Alice Springs and are going to fix it all now’. There are 100 examples out there of the sinking ship, and I cannot think of one off the top of my head. Like the Italian cruise liner. The captain jumped off the ship as it sank and had all these excuses and reasons why he did it. There are a million stories like this in history of really sad attempts to clutch and cling to a last remaining piece of credibility. It is a sign of such desperation, and everyone in this House can see through it.
Even the Chief Minister, as he made that announcement today, realised how ridiculous and sad it was. Is he sitting up there thinking: ‘God, how did I let it get to this point?’ It is him who has let it get to this point. Let us remember, he rolled your best chances of leaving a decent legacy. He gave Clare Martin the tap on the shoulder. If there was any chance of you guys walking away with your heads held high and leaving a reasonable legacy for the Territory, it was with her. Who was to know that at the time? We all knew it because none of us put much stock in the member for Wanguri. However, everyone was prepared to give him a crack, give him a go - and that is his legacy. Anything you had built up over the six years under the previous member for Fannie Bay has all gone and, basically today, what the Chief Minister said summed it up. It was like his epitaph. It was almost like his final words.
We look through history and think of turning points that changed the course of history, or what someone is defined by. That guy, he said that then. Or you look at sporting events. You can look at any time at a sporting event. Greg Norman picked up the soft 4 iron instead of a heavy 5 iron in the 1986 Masters, and sliced it off into the woods and blew the lead to Jack Nicklaus. You would say that was the defining moment of that particular tournament. Through history, it is littered with those defining points.
What happened here today was that moment when the member for Wanguri said: ‘We are going to now embark on a zero tolerance regime in Alice Springs in the wake of this headline: “Two tourists raped at gunpoint”’. God, I hate even saying that. That was the moment he will now be defined by. That is the legacy he will leave. Everyone will say: ‘Well it is too little, too late’ - absolutely too little and it is far too late. It is far, far too late for you, Chief Minister. It is over. No matter what the outcome of the election, no matter what it is, if the Labor Party in the Northern Territory is re-elected in 113 days, it is still over for you because that is your swansong. That will be your defining moment, and it is a sad state of affairs. That is the legacy the current Chief Minister has left all of you, government members: far too little, far too late.
It is just sad now. I have a Thesaurus here full of all these words ‘despicable’, ‘disgraceful’ - all that kind of stuff. It is now just sad. I actually feel sorry for him because he has lost it. He has lost the battle. The thing about politics and political parties is he is taking you with him. You are all going down with the ship. The people have lost faith. Can you imagine - members for Araluen, Braitling and Macdonnell - if we walk down the street tomorrow - which we will be; we will be in Alice Springs tomorrow - and we say: ‘Guess what? Hendo has just embarked on a zero tolerance policy. Wow! Guess what?’ Can you imagine the reactions? Can you imagine what people are going to say? There is no way I could even repeat some of the stuff that comes into my head about what people would think of that ...
Mrs Lambley: Too little too late.
Mr CONLAN: Yes. That is just such a polite way of putting it, and it does not even really actually do it much justice because it is so bad. The fact we have reached this point is so bad ...
Mr TOLLNER: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker! I move an extra 10 minutes for the member for Greatorex to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr CONLAN: Thanks, member for Fong Lim.
To draw all this back, obviously, we need to be relevant about the budget. To me, law and order is the most pressing issue in my life at the moment because our place has just been robbed – twice. In fact, three times in three weeks, so I am very close to it. If I have not been close to it before, which I have, I certainly am now. This is something we face every day, and I feel I am one of the lucky ones compared to some of these other people who have faced the wrath of the lawlessness in Central Australia.
To see these modest increases in policing and into Central Australia - 3% of the budget allocated to the region - really shows your lack of commitment and respect for the place. You say in here - and I think you gave up. I have heard the member for Stuart say on a number of occasions: ‘We are never going to win any seats. No one ever votes for us in Alice Springs’. Well, it is your own fault people are not voting for you. Some people do vote for you down there, but it is your own fault you do not have enough support ...
Mr Giles: They ticked the wrong box, actually.
Mr CONLAN: They ticked the wrong box, did they? Some people do. However, the fact that you are not receiving enough support to win a seat is not our fault; it is your fault. Alice Springs is not a Utopia for conservative ideologies. It is because you guys are hopeless, no one has any faith in you. I might as well say it one more time considering this will probably be my last speech in this parliament. You had a chance in 2005; you had every opportunity. You had a much better Chief Minister than you have now. You had your A Grade team; some of your best performers. You had Toyne, Syd Stirling, Clare Martin, and the member for Johnston, who was at his best.
You were at your best and you were not so bitter. You were not so angry and rotting from the inside with anger. Now, it is as if you are determined to leave this place without a single friend in the world: ‘I am going to take them all down with me. If I am going down I am taking them with me!’ You will not have a friend left, mate, if you keep this up. In those days you were much softer, much better; a much better member of parliament, a much better minister. You had your A Grade team and you had a chance to win the support and capture the hearts and minds of those in Central Australia, particularly in Alice Springs. You came within 100 votes of winning the seat of Greatorex in 2005 election with a big name. You failed to capitalise on the momentum you received. So, it is your own fault that Alice Springs does not seem to like you at the moment.
I guess that is why you have only allocated so much money to the place. It is one of those vicious cycles, isn’t it? ‘They do not like us, so we do not like them’. No one ever steps back and says: ‘Okay let us put a halt to this, draw a line in the sand. We do like you, we will show you. Now, let us start to try to win that respect back’. It is not happening. It is: ‘You do not like us, so I do not like you, and you can all go jump’.
There is so much here and I had not made too many notes; I had not prepared a structured argument. I knew exactly what I wanted to say, because we have been saying it for such a long time. The government has not listened to what we have been saying, and that is why we are in this social and terrible financial situation.
What scares me is, if the Country Liberals form a government in August, then we are not going to be left with much. In fact, we are going to be left with nothing. We are going to be left with paying off debt. So, the thing we have to be very careful of is these social problems do not continue to spiral out of control because of the unavailable resources to fix them. That is why we need some very sound financial management. We believe we have the team to do it. We certainly have the expertise. Look around, this is a good group of people sitting on this side of the parliament. Our candidates who have been preselected for other seats are first class. I believe if we were given an opportunity to form a government, then we will have no trouble. It will be hard, but we certainly have the capacity to rein in the spending, control the debt, and also address these enormous social problems which are affecting our great regional communities. In my view, there is none greater than Alice Springs.
We do not - and I certainly do not - support the budget. It is a blight on the Northern Territory government. Sometimes, it is hard to wrap up, isn’t it?
Members interjecting.
Mr CONLAN: That is right.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I have taken up a little more time than I wanted, because we only have about two-and-a-half hours to go before they shut us down. I know a number of other parliamentary colleagues would like to put their views on the public record in this, the last day of parliament.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I contribute to something I am very disappointed in, because there is nothing for my electorate, or nothing for the bush. I will just put a list of a couple of my communities on the record so, on Monday, I can show them they actually have nothing in this budget.
I will start off with nothing for Santa Teresa; nothing for Docker River; nothing for Imanpa; nothing for Ampilatwatja; nothing for Arlparra; nothing for Harts Range; nothing for Bonya; nothing for Finke; nothing for Titjikala – and I will come back to Titjikala, because I have something to say on Titjikala Police Station; nothing for Mutitjulu; nothing for Haasts Bluff; nothing for Alcoota; nothing for Areyonga; nothing for Mount Liebig; nothing for Kintore, except an admin centre at the school; nothing for Papunya, except renovating the clinic; and nothing for Hermannsburg, except a couple of extra bores that have to be put in because of SIHIP going in there in September to put in a couple of new houses.
It will not alleviate the overcrowding, because they will actually demolish the existing houses and build on the same service site, and only build a few houses at Hermannsburg. There are over 20 people living inside my brother’s house.
There will certainly be no men’s centre that has been promised. There has been a football oval promised at Kintore. There is nothing in the budget papers. I will certainly be taking all this around to Santa Teresa and Kintore where all the stuff has been promised, and talk to the people who will understand me.
To go back to Titjikala, I had a phone call last week, just before coming to this budget week. The phone call was from a constituent who said there is a police station at Titjikala, but it is empty. It has no computer there, and the police go there once a week from Santa Teresa. If you arrest a man or a woman, you have nowhere to lock them up at Titjikala. A big police station has been built there, but it is not manned. It is an hour-and-a-half to Alice Springs, and an hour-and-a-half to Santa Teresa because the police are stationed in Alice Springs and Santa Teresa. It is really appalling that this trickery has happened after promise made to remote Aboriginal communities. We have learned about the bag of tricks this government is good at, wrapping it and putting a beautiful bow on it, and taking it out to deliver to remote Aboriginal communities.
Titjikala is very upset because Titjikala is only 74 km from Alice Springs. There are people who come into Alice Springs, buy alcohol, and go back to Titjikala. An hour-and-a-half is a long time to wait for police to arrive from Alice Springs or Santa Teresa. Someone could be killed in that time. If there is a brawl you cannot lock the people up because there are no holding cells. That is a pretend gaol, a pretend police station which has been built on a remote Aboriginal community. That is just not on. That is a real gammon police station. It is not manned, not even a computer inside, and you have to wait an hour-and-a-half for police officers to come from Alice Springs and Santa Teresa. It is not fair for police from Santa Teresa, who are looking after a population of over 300 and might have disturbances there, to do an hour-and-a-half travel by road that is corrugated for them to come to Titjikala. That is not fair. It is just a pretend police station which has been put out there, manned once a week, with no computer, an hour-and-a-half either way from Santa Teresa or Alice Springs.
The other issue I want to raise is the Minister for Essential Services made a comment yesterday. I also note the Minister for Essential Services stated in his speech that, with respect to power, water and sewerage: ‘we have relieved the burden on Territory households’. I have to ask: do Territory households include the households at Ampilatwatja, because the sewerage system at Ampilatwatja has not functioned properly for years? It was documented that sewage was spilling out of a sink in one house, and was dumped locally in an effort to provide a quick fix for the problem. You would think this is old news; it has been discussed in parliament and in the media. However, in the Northern Territory under this government, desperate problems like these take years to fix. It is an environmental health disaster that would not be allowed anywhere but in a remote Aboriginal community.
In other areas there is little functionality to spending. A good example of this was people have gone out to Ampilatwatja to look. I certainly went out there and the sewerage system was still being ripped up. They had backhoes on the community. People are still living under the same conditions. People are living underneath trees, 25 to a house, 17 in some cases, eight in others, and sewerage is not functioning. This problem which has been reported over and over again – definitely on the ABC - should not be neglected or not heard by a government on the opposite side of this House, whose members continuously say it is the only government that looks after Aboriginal people.
Ask the Aboriginal people and see how good your report card is when you go out to remote Aboriginal communities. You certainly will not be getting an A. You will be getting D-minus or C. Everywhere across the Northern Territory, you would be a flat out getting a C in your report card. You will get D-minus.
I complement some of the things my two colleagues from Alice Springs, the members for Araluen and Greatorex, have said. I grew up in that town. I went to Alice Springs when I was eight years old. Alice Springs was such a beautiful town to walk around in. We used to walk from The Gap to the Walk In, watch the movies and go back. We had a relationship with everyone - the Greeks, Italians. We played softball with the Diano sisters, the Hatzimihails - and we were friends with everybody. It did not matter whether you lived at the golf course or the old Eastside or, as we did, The Gap. We were referred to as The Gap angels. We grew up with people like Jenny Lillas and were just kids from Alice Springs. We did not class ourselves as black kids, Greek kids, or white kids. We were kids who played around in Alice Springs, grew up together, and went to the same school at Traeger Park. It is really sad now to see this beautiful little town we grew up in, we had our children in, and our children also love, turn so drastically to something very horrible.
The problem we all must admit is we have been sweeping it too much underneath the carpet. We have been brushing it underneath the carpet. We have all stood back and said there is not a problem. If somebody raised an issue in Alice Springs: ‘Oh, you are racist’. It was not racist; people were all trying to deal with the issues.
Today in Question Time, we heard the Chief Minister coming up with a zero tolerance, giving all power to the commissioner to do what he can in Alice Springs. Well, one thing, it is good to have zero tolerance, but all the gaols are full. Where are we going to put all these people once we have picked them up in Alice Springs because we have zero tolerance? Where are we going to take them, because the gaols are overflowing? Where are we going to put these people? Are we just going to clean up the streets for a couple of weeks until it all goes silent again, until nothing happens? We must have a long-term strategic plan for all our regional towns - not just Alice Springs but Tennant Creek, Katherine, and Darwin.
There is this trend of people coming into town now, and we can no longer sit back and say: ‘Oh, we will take them home. We will do a country visit, put them on a bus, and take them back’” Do you know why? They would beat you back into town. The buses come after them; they have already got a lift and they are back in town. We have to cater for these people, but we have to ensure, with this social interaction, social engagement, there is also social mannerism. We talk about social mannerism when we talk about social engagement and interaction with people.
People who are born and bred in remote Aboriginal communities come into town and are living underneath the bridge. I went around to Hoppy’s the other day to see my brother and his family. I had a news journalist from The Centralian Advocate with me because I took her to introduce her to a few of the people. The house right next door to where my cousin and my brother lives was empty. I asked him: ‘What happened to all those people who were living there?’ ‘Oh, they got kicked out by Territory Housing, but do not worry, because they just got moved over to The Gap camps’. Out of mind, out of sight.
You just cannot do this kind of stuff. There are people living back up in the hills again, and underneath the bridge. My cousins are all living underneath the bridge. I still drive past, and go and sit at Kentucky Fried Chicken and 24 Hour. I have seen an increase, over the last month, of these kids. I have stood in this House and praised YSOS for the work they do, but it has become too complicated and too hard for them now, and they are struggling. They are struggling; I see it all the time. We were driving past a couple of weeks ago when YSOS was taking some kids home, and these other young girls on the other side near the taxi rank - and I would not repeat the language in this House that was used on the YSOS people. They just have no respect for them now.
If you talk to people in remote Aboriginal communities - and I sit down and talk to these people when I am inside their lounge room, when I am sleeping with them - the problem they see is you have built all these houses in town, so more and more people are coming into town. Those new existing, beautiful houses you have built there under the normalisation are now overcrowded and they are spilling. They have more and more people living in those new houses in the town camps than ever. When you keep building more there and fewer on the remote Aboriginal communities, of course, you have to expect an influx of people. They are coming in because you are building more and more houses for them.
If you want people to remain in the communities, then build the houses on the communities. I will go back because I briefly spoke to someone this morning about IHANT. The Minister for Public and Affordable Housing said in this House there are about 200 houses that have been built under SIHIP. Well, IHANT used to build 100 houses a year. If you go back and have a look, IHANT distributed 100 houses a year. It did not matter which community. Communities applied - two houses would go to Papunya one year, four to Hermannsburg, two to Santa Teresa, might be one to Titjikala. Everyone knew they would receive something every year.
You are 800 short of your target, even if you compare IHANT 13 years ago to what you are building today. You have not alleviated any overcrowding in remote Aboriginal communities; you have not built one extra bedroom. The houses you are soon to build at Hermannsburg will not alleviate any of the problems in Hermannsburg. You are taking my sister, and my aunty mother out of my brother’s houses. There are only two moving out. He will still have 21 people living in that house.
You are not alleviating any of the overcrowding, all you are doing is taking one house off that site, building one there while they live in a tent while they are waiting for their new house to go on to the same service site. It is untruthful to tell a community you are building 26 new houses when, in fact, you are building six or eight. You need to be truthful, you need to say to these people, you are not receiving 26, 28, 19, or 17, you are receiving five or six because you will build on your existing site. People can then say to you that you will not alleviate overcrowding because there are so many people living in these houses. If you are talking about good quality of education and health then you have to start addressing these problems: people having real employment, people living eight or nine to a house so the kids can get up and go to work.
Madam Deputy Speaker, this budget has given nothing to Central Australia and to remote Aboriginal communities. I will take the budget papers to my areas when I start my leave on Monday and will show them exactly what you have given them. I know there have been some promises made in these communities for football ovals and men’s centres, but I cannot see it in the budget paper. I will be telling people because I am the only one who speaks their language.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Deputy Speaker, it is an interesting debate so far. I hear things about the ALP. I refer to my colleague, the member for Fong Lim, when he was talking about the ALP here and Hendo’s team not wishing to be associated with ALP.
It seems as if the government is moving towards the CLP on a daily basis. It is very interesting, as a result of this headline in today’s paper, ‘Tourists raped at gunpoint’. Crime is out of control in Alice Springs and the Chief Minister’s answer to that is: ‘This is terrible. What are we going to do about it? Oh, let us have a zero tolerance policing system’.
I remember the mid-1990s when Shane Stone introduced the term ‘zero tolerance policing’. He went to New York City, which has a 40 square mile radius, where they have 42 000 police officers so there is nearly one on every corner. They introduced a zero tolerance policing system over there and it worked. It was working here. I go back to mandatory sentencing because that is where we seem to be going. With zero tolerance policing we may go to mandatory sentencing. I do not know what you will do with all these people when you charge them in courts. What will the courts do with them? How are we going to solve this? Where is the budget for the massive increase in the number of people you are going to arrest and put through courts? That is what I am assuming when you say we are going to have zero tolerance policing, because that is what it is about.
We heard the Minister for Alcohol Policy today say, no, they are not going to lock up drunks. In fact, if you are consuming alcohol - I do not know too many people who will open a can of beer or a drink and walk around for a day with it open. That is absurd. Why would they do that? Maybe I need to find all the people who are walking around with open alcohol containers but not consuming it. That seems a bit strange to me. Maybe that is the case or that is what the Minister for Alcohol Policy believes.
Here we have Hendo’s team. You do not want to be associated with the ALP. They are now starting to adopt CLP policies from the mid-1990s. I recall very well the mid-1990s when the then Leader of the Opposition, Brian Ede, followed by Maggie Hickey as leader, stood up and cried: ‘You cannot do this, this is terrible. What are you going to do?’ I cannot remember the exact rhetoric, nor have I had time to go back through the Parliamentary Record to dig up what they said, but I do know the ALP was against all this. They were against mandatory sentencing. It is all on the record; anyone can go and check that.
If we are moving towards zero tolerance policing - and I do not have a problem with that, I believe it is actually a good idea - we need to be fixing the problems. When you look at zero tolerance, though, we have an issue: the gaols are full, there are no deterrents; people are walking around the streets thinking they can do whatever they like. Eventually, someone has to actually say: ‘You cannot’. We have a massive problem with people in our community understanding what they can and cannot do.
In the budget, I do not see the ability for getting more school-based police officers actually in classrooms and teaching young people about what they can and cannot do, and what the community’s expectations are: they cannot just walk around and do these sorts of things. There are a few more things that I will deal with a bit further into my presentation tonight.
Regarding the zero tolerance policing in Alice Springs, let us have a look at the figures the Minister for Alcohol Policy gave us today. Overall in the Territory, assaults are up by 17%. If you go to Alice Springs, well, it gets worse: assaults in the last 12 months are up by 33%. I will just say that again for members opposite: assaults are up in Alice Springs by 33%. In March 2011, there were 433, we have gone to September – 348; December – 418 - this is the quarters - and now we are up to 464. When you look at Darwin, it is up 15%.
If we are going to take a zero tolerance attitude towards these sort of things in the community, where are we going to put all these people? What are we going to do? Put them in court and put them on bonds and say: ‘You have been a bad person, do not do that again’. Now, we are going to clog up the courts. We have nowhere to put them. The government wants to build this new, billion dollar Hilton - what do they call it? The Holtze Hilton in Howard Springs. We have this billion dollar gaol which is going to cost us about $60m. I saw some figures the other day where, if we had borrowed the money to build it, we would be about $40m a year …
Mr Giles: They have $24m left over every year - where does it go?
Mr STYLES: That is right. I do not know why the government just did not borrow the money. Mind you, that looks bad on the books, which brings me to another point. I was looking through the budget papers for 2012-13, and I got to page 145 under ‘Community Support Services for Frail Aged People and People with a Disability’, and I saw there is almost $15m-worth of services that have been transferred across to the Commonwealth government. It says under Footnote 2:
Well, that just saved the Northern Territory government $15m.
Mr Giles: What in?
Mr STYLES: Well, in Community Support Services for Frail Aged People and People with a Disability. Under ‘Clients accessing community support services’, it has the estimate for 2011-12 as $4.4m, which is going to drop down next year to $2.105m. Under the ‘Occasions clients access professional support services’, which also has a footnote, budgeted in 2011-12 for $77m, the estimate was $64m, and they have budgeted $63m in 2012-13. There is an actual drop from what they thought they were going to have to spend at $77m, down to $63m. That is because these things have been transferred across to the Commonwealth.
Had we actually had to provide those services, that is another $15m or thereabouts which goes on to the amount of money the government would have had to borrow which, if my memory serves me correct, would have tipped us over the $500m. That is $0.5bn extra the government spent last year. That is $0.5bn. These are extraordinary figures for a government that just keeps spending.
There was a classic recently. I heard about the air-conditioners at the new Nemarluk School. I do not know how the people designing this put an air-conditioning plant right opposite the very people who opposed the building. It is almost like rubbing salt into the wounds where the government cranked it up and, obviously, got its contractors to crank it up. The complaints came in thick and fast. What happened? Somebody in the government rang up and said: ‘Well, just pull it out and put in split units’. I heard a figure of $800 000 thrown around. That is another $800 000 of borrowed money. If you did not have to do that, you would not have to borrow that much money. It is absurd, when you are designing these things and you know you have a problem, that someone in the government does not say: ‘Put that out the back so we are not going to drive the people across the road nuts’. That is fairly basic planning. However, I am not surprised.
When you look at the issue of full gaols at the moment, I am aware the gaol rings the courts - I am assuming they do exactly the same in Alice Springs - in the morning and say: ‘Do you know there is no space here? You cannot put anyone in today so you might have to adjourn it until next week or when, perhaps, we do’.
I am also reliably informed there are people let out slightly early because they need to get rid of some of the prisoners. I sincerely hope that is not happening, but I am reliably informed it is. Maybe the government might tell us - and I am happy to be corrected by people on the other side - and categorically state that is not happening. If the gaol rings up each day and says to the people in the court house: ‘You can only lock up three people today’, it is a lottery. So, if you are a defendant and have been bad, it is like a lottery. ‘Will I be locked up? That depends on whether there is a bed there for me or not’. How are we going to cover all the issues revolving around zero tolerance policing?
I do not see in the budget an enormous amount of money for youth services. What are youth doing? The youth of today, if they are not corrected and given some guidance, are possibly going to be the offenders of tomorrow. We used to have a crime prevention unit in the police department, but that has gone. We do not need one of those; we do not need to worry about crime prevention. The Neighbourhood Watch system has been changed totally. When I talk to people they say: ‘We do not want to sit in our lounge room and operate on the net. We want to talk to real people. We want to have real barbecues. We want to get real action in our street, in our neighbourhoods, and in our parks’.
We need to invest money in schools. We need to get people back into classrooms, to teach them what the community expects; that there are ways of going about things. We need to deputise these young people in schools so we get the information. Police do not pluck all their information out of the sky; they rely on people and intelligence. Today’s paper! - they rely on people in the community who are confident they are going to be protected and covered if they give information to the police. However, they only get that confidence by dealing with police in times when they are not locking up mum and dad or somebody in the household. It comes from good crime prevention and community policing strategies. Here we have Wednesday’s paper, front page:
Innocent Live Behind Bars ...
It has a photo of Mr Vincent:
... while the guilty go free.
If you have no space in your prisons for these people, you cannot lock them up. You have to put them on good behaviour bonds and on home detention. There are issues going on every single day. If you pick up Tuesday’s paper, it is terrible. I get the paper delivered in the morning, and the first thing I do is open it up. I am looking for the bad news because I know it is going to be there. We seem to be getting worse. I listen to members of the government say: ‘Well, we are locking more people up than you ever did. We are spending more money on this than you ever did’.
The problem is we are not getting the results. People will say: ‘Here are the statistics, and this and this and this’. However, I did not hear the member for Karama say today: ‘Yes, total assaults in Alice Springs are up 30%, they are up in Darwin by 15%, and overall they are up 17%’. I did not hear those statistics. I heard that from others. I heard the member for Karama say: ‘You have to be a little careful about statistics because if you get a few, it changes things and it can skew the end result’. Well, vice versa. When you look at figures of 33%, 15% and 17% are not just 1% or 2%, they are real percentages. The people in Alice Springs are seriously suffering.
I congratulate the Chief Minister for finally recognising what the CLP brought in - 12, 15 years ago we were looking at that – when we said zero tolerance policing was the way to go. What we do not see in the budget is how is he going to back that up? How is he going to back that up in Katherine? How is he going to back that up in Darwin? How is he going to back it up in Alice Springs?
I wish the commissioner all the very best of luck. I sincerely hope he succeeds, but I do not see where the government is going to support him. Where are they going to pluck this money from? Borrow some more money? Well, they are going to cut some money somewhere, because this is going to be an expensive exercise. They will just borrow some more money and let someone else pay it off. It seems to be the way. When you go through history and have a look, Labor governments get in, they run the debt up and, then, the Conservatives and the Liberals have to get back in, sort out the shop, get the place back in order, pay off the debt. Then, when Labor gets back in, up goes the debt again. They just spend their way out of everything, waste money, and keep spending, spending, spending. It is really amazing.
It is only in very recent history, in 2007, when the federal government changed hands from the Coalition to Labor, we had zero debt, money in the bank, and Australia was looking really good. I remember going to a meeting where Peter Costello - this is 12 months, maybe 18 months, two years, after the election - addressed the people about the current state of the nation. He thought his legacy, his one good thing he could do for Australia, was pay off Labor’s $96bn of debt - back in those days; if you translate that through to current day values, it would be worth much more today. In those days, $96bn in Labor debt, he paid off, along with John Howard and their policies, and left money in the bank. Of course, Labor got in, and what did they do? They spent. We are up to a $156bn or something at the moment - and still going. It is unsustainable.
My mother always taught me, when I was growing up when I was a teenager, ‘You cannot live beyond your means’. The only time my mum said you could go beyond your means, is if you needed to borrow money to buy a house. There are certain things you can do. However, you do not load yourself up with debt to the point where all your income is simply going to pay the interest on your debt. That is an absurd position to be in: when all the income of the Northern Territory will only just cover the interest bill on the money we owe. That is in a couple of year’s time.
When I saw those figures and people were starting to digest this budget, I was appalled. When I moved here 31 years ago, I brought some tiny little kids up here for a better life. I thought: ‘Great. The Territory is a great place!’ Well, I tell you, I watched this place deteriorate over the last 10 years. I know the government will say: ‘The CLP had its issues’. Yes, we did. However, we were getting on top of some of those issues. If you look at youth issues, for instance, when the Country Liberals went out of government in 2001, there were six juveniles in the Don Dale Centre. How many are in there today? Overflowing! What is this government doing for youth? We talk about - somewhere in here, just a moment, I will have a look.
There are some figures here where we have increased some of the youth funding, but it is nowhere near enough. Why do youth get into trouble? Well, one reason is, quite often, they have not had any instruction. There are some parents out there who either cannot, will not - just cannot be bothered, or are either affected by alcohol or other drugs, who do not teach their kids what is expected. Who else is doing that? I ask you. Can anyone in this House tell me who else is actually doing that? Not many people at all, unfortunately.
The situation is, as a community, we need to provide far more activities for our youth. We talk about the lack of police facilities. When you get your young people - and today we tabled a report titled Gone Too Soon. Youth out there are struggling; there is no guidance, no leadership from many parents. Certain people in their community need to have that leadership, role models. We have good role models in schools. There are welfare teams in schools, although they are struggling to maintain their presence.
Why do kids go out and do that? If there is no leadership they cannot go home because of physical, emotional or sexual abuse. They just want to get out of the house and will not go home until the early hours of the morning when they know they can at least have a couple of hours sleep. They are supposed to wake up in the morning and comply with the government’s policy of Every Child, Every Day.
There are many kids who are struggling. They are struggling to get enough sleep, to find a place to sleep, and to find enough to eat. I recall very well, as a school-based police officer, dealing with young kids who had to steal food so they did not starve. This is a First World country but, only a few years ago, kids were struggling to get enough to eat so they committed crimes.
I will not mention the two kids who come to mind, but they are children who have been mentioned in this House before. I dealt with them. You report that they struggle. Why is it that these kids commit suicide? Why do they attempt to commit suicide? Because they are struggling. I believe the turnover of staff at Family and Children Services is horrific, although I hear from the Minister for Health they are trying. I do not know whether you are going to succeed. There is so much more we need to do before we reach that crisis point.
Look at the graffiti situation in the northern suburbs. Why is that happening? Because kids are bored. There needs to be many different structured things for kids to do and opportunities for them to do it. We used to have some user-pay events. We have to find people who are going to help these youths.
That reminds me of a place called Skateworld, which existed a couple of years ago. It was a great place. Kids went there in droves. When the building was sold, the operator approached the government and said he did not have that sort of capacity; there was not that much money in it. He did say on Friday nights 400 kids used to go there - 400 kids off the streets, in Skateworld where they were safe, where bullies were not allowed to run the place, there were no pass-outs and the parents would come and pick them up or they made their own way home. There was entertainment there for 400 kids at a really cheap rate. When the building was sold and the lease was up, the guy approached the government and said he needed a helping hand to get started. ‘No, sorry, cannot do that’. So where are those 400 kids now? I do not know. They are out there somewhere, struggling.
You need to have those types of things. I am a believer that to pass the message on to kids we have to educate them, especially if you are going to introduce zero tolerance policing. This is all the more reason to teach young people what is going to happen.
My colleague, the member for Macdonnell, raised an interesting situation. She said she grew up in Alice Springs. She went there when she was eight years old and it was a great place. I remember the movie A Town Like Alice. When I first came to the Territory my mother had some very good friends who lived there - one of her bridesmaids lived in Alice Springs so she used to travel there a great deal - the reports I received were that it was such a lovely place. I have been there many times in the early days when it was a lovely place to visit. It was very welcoming. I do not know whether I would want to walk down the mall on an evening on my own now. That is a problem. Why is it happening? Because these people believe they can do whatever they like. What is the government doing about that? They say they are going to do this, they are going to do that, we are going to have zero tolerance policing, but that is going to be expensive. I do not know where the extra money is in the budget. I would be happy for someone to tell me where to look because I have looked and I cannot find it.
When we look at alcohol policy – where do I start? The cost of the Banned Drinker Register – an enormous cost and what do we have? I talk to people. It is one of the questions I ask given I am the shadow minister for Alcohol Policy. Everywhere I go, when I doorknock, when I am at my shops on Saturday mornings, or at barbecues on Sunday mornings, I ask people about the Banned Drinker Register and what they think about it. What do they think about being targeted for the behaviour of a few? I run past our habitual drunk legislation which we will introduce. People love it. I have talked to off duty police officers and they love it. The government says the police said they have the best tool they have had. Well, it is the best tool the government can give them, but there is a better tool - and it is the one we will introduce should we win the 2012 election on 25 August. I will just repeat that: the people we talk to love what we are going to introduce, because we will get the drunks off the streets.
The interesting thing is the Minister for Alcohol Policy uses the term ‘turning people off tap’. I ask the minister to go back and have a look at what the legislation relates to. It relates to takeaway alcohol sales. I do not see any taps in takeaway bottle shops. I was in one just recently, and I have a look around and I could not find a tap. The only tap I could see was out on the lawn they used to water their garden with. However, there is no tap in takeaway. It is actually a little misleading when the government says: ‘We are turning people off tap’. They make a big song and dance about it: ‘We are going to turn people off tap’. In actual fact, all they are doing is preventing that person from buying takeaway alcohol, unless that person has a number of driver’s licences or a number of different forms of identification. There are people out there, I believe, who have multiple forms of identification in different names. They might be banned on this one, but they just produce another one. They get someone who is a non-drinker to buy it.
Then again, are we setting the police up? I mentioned this earlier in the debate on liquor. The police officers are stretched at the moment just trying to deal with criminals. There is so much going on - just look at the paper. Here we are: ‘Innocent Live Behind Bars’. There is a 72-year-old in the hospital who, at one stage, was fighting for his life, now in a serious but stable condition. All that guy did was go out and say, ‘Can you quieten down please, I am trying to get some sleep’, so he was attacked. These are the things that people should be thinking about if they are pretending they do not know about this or, if they are the offender, they should be thinking about the consequence of this. Sadly, there does not appear to be too many bad consequences.
These people can be on the Banned Drinker Register - and they may be. I am interested to know, when the police eventually catch those people who assaulted that man at Hudson Fysh the other day, whether or not they are on the Banned Drinker Register. Again, I have spoken to police officers and asked what the problem is with the secondary supply issue. They say: ‘Well, there is a whole lot of people sitting around in a big circle and there is a pile of alcohol in the middle; no one seems to know who bought what. People say if they wander off to relieve themselves, somebody steals their alcohol’. Do the police then take a report on the fact that some alcohol has been stolen? How far do you go with a group of people sitting around who are drunk?
What we would like to see the government do is to pick up on some of our ideas and actually put in some real mandatory rehabilitation, where these people who are beyond helping themselves are taken away and given some real rehabilitation, because if we do not, it is just going to get worse. The government will say: ‘Yes, well, we have more people reported for this and more reported for that’. We just here all this rhetoric that means nothing, because the situation is actually getting worse.
If we do not fix the problem - and in the northern suburbs people are now sitting around in parks. There are larger groups gathering and they are becoming more aggressive. They are becoming more aggressive to ordinary taxpaying citizens of the Northern Territory, towards kids, and they are humbugging people. I was at the shops in one of my suburbs - I will not mention the particular suburb – where a woman came up and said to me: ‘I am really sick of these people being around the place. My daughter went up to the shop the other day and got touched up by one of these people. They were sitting there in a large group. She walked past them and one of the males got up and walked over ...’ - and this is a 12-year-old girl, thanks very much - ‘... and she was touched up’. She said: ‘This is appalling’.
Three days before that, her son was driving in town, and a drunken person walked out in front of the car. He had to slam the brakes on, the car behind them nearly piled straight into them. Then, they copped this mouthful of abuse while this drunk person walked around the side of the car and, out of the blue, king hit the guy sitting in the passenger seat through an open window - king hits him, breaks his nose. This woman told me: ‘A few days later, my daughter went to the shops over here ...
Mr Giles: Police?
Mr STYLES: Sorry?
Mr Giles: Any police?
Mr STYLES: No, police. It was reported to the police.
Mr Giles: Yes, but no one turned up?
Mr STYLES: No, you have to go and report it. The poor police – I will pick up on that interjection by the member for Braitling. Police officers spend so much time being the highest paid data input people in the Northern Territory; the PROMIS system consumes so much of their time. The government needs to do something about it, along with the commissioner, and those in the police department who can come up, hopefully, with a plan. The problem is police have to input so much information - they get a job, they go out, they get what they can, they come back and they have to put all that information in. Police officers, when overtime is frozen, have to do that in their own time because they have so much to do. The police department and the police force, from what I have been told, are seriously stretched. It is because of the cumbersome PROMIS system which is not streamlined. I remember quite some years ago, an offer was made ...
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request a 10 minute extension for my colleague.
Motion agreed to.
Mr STYLES: I think there were a few noes, Madam Deputy Speaker. I will try to be brief because there are others ...
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: We go on the voices, member for Sanderson, and it was definitely the ayes.
Mr STYLES: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I have used up my time so I am going to make a very quick summary.
I will make a couple of points. One of the things I note when we talk about seniors is on page 146 of Budget Paper No 3 for 2012-13 it lists Support for Senior Territorians and Pensioner Concessions. Under ‘Pensioner concessions recipients’, it has Footnote 1. I will read the first part of Footnote 1:
That is not quite correct because, in Alice Springs where seniors use gas to heat their small units so they do not freeze in subzero temperatures, they are not reimbursed for those energy costs. I ask the government to consider that.
The other issue is the Council of the Ageing has had its budget cut and there is no increase in its budget in the foreseeable future. It is struggling to provide services to seniors, as the peak body to represent the views of seniors. Their roof was leaking prior the last Wet Season and government could not help to get a bit of tin on the roof. These are the things where they need extra support.
There is a slight increase in the amount available for the Pensioner and Carer Concession Scheme, and the seniors out there are grateful for small mercies.
On page 29 of the budget, in Multicultural Advancements there has been a reduction of $21 000. I do not know what we are going to do about all the refugees settling here.
The other issue which is going to arise is the incoming workers on 457 Visas for the INPEX plant. I do not know who is going to provide the pastoral care and support services these people might need within their community established in Darwin. How are we going to facilitate them? Is the government going to ask INPEX to pay for that as well, as it has had to pay for roads, roundabouts, and all those other things?
The value of grants is up $100 000; however, there are community groups who need capital works done so they can become self-sustaining. The idea is for multicultural groups who have facilities - if we get them up to the standard where people can utilise them by hiring the facilities out when they are not being used by that multicultural group – can then have an income. They can do their repairs and maintenance and will not be coming to government. That is not going to happen if the government does not do that.
Moving on, I have spoken about youth. In Racing, Gaming and Licensing there is the necessity for fabric building. There are many people out there who are employed in the racing industry. I looked at some figures in New South Wales recently where it was about one in four. I actually thought that was quite remarkable. The person who told me that figure, I think is now the chair of the New South Wales racing industry. He is a gentleman I spent some time with a couple of years ago being briefed on a number of issues.
One of the issues I want to talk about is law and order, particularly in the northern suburbs. The cute thing is the government tries to rewrite history. Today, the Deputy Chief Minister and, I think, the Chief Minister also, were talking about the fact that the CLP froze police numbers: ‘You did not do anything in the early 1990s; you froze police numbers’. Well, I direct those people to go back and look at history, as to why that happened. I will enlighten the members for Karama and Wanguri.
The reason there was a freeze was because the then ALP government sent in the razor gang and slashed an enormous amount of our budget. I stand to be corrected; however, given the Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister have access to far greater resources than I, they might like to check that figure. It was around 20% of our budget that was slashed overnight. If I recall, in those days the budget was only about one-point-something billion dollars. There was over $200m slashed from our budget. I recall that, as public servants - I was a police officer then - we were actually struggling to be paid. The government had to manage that, and build all the facilities they built in the Territory. All the while, we were suffering. The reason we could not employ anyone is because we did not have any money, courtesy of the Australian Labor Party government in Canberra. So, do not try to rewrite history, please, those members, because you just have to go back and look at the facts.
The sad thing is, particularly in the northern suburbs, we have issues such as - I know the Chief Minister likes to think the shopfront is great but, across the road, you have a police station. The actual shopfront is consuming enormous an amount of resources. If we look at those issues, we get increasing people in the parks.
I have people from other electorates coming into my office and giving information about what is going on. I try to pass that on. I was at one of my shopping centres last Saturday - lo and behold – a huge group of people was sitting out the front. Some of them had alcohol, some of them did not. I am assuming that Coca-Cola is not a yellow coloured liquid, Coca-Cola is still a black coloured liquid. They had Coca-Cola bottles with a yellow liquid in them, sadly. I mentioned this to someone in charge at the police station and there was a police vehicle that came through, drove around three times, and continued to drive off. A different police car came back some time later. Actually, it might have done something and moved these people on. However, that is the problem I am hearing of more and more. As people gather and become, I suppose, gamer at what they want to do out there, it is an issue. I accept the government is trying to do things, but I just do not think they seem to have the right ideas about what is going on.
Madam Speaker, I have taken up, probably, more than my share of time. I still have about four pages I would like to get through but, in the interest of giving other members in this House a fair go, I will conclude my remarks on Budget 2012-13.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I will try to fit within the 20 minutes because there are many people still wanting to speak. Tonight is a special night; it is the last real night of sittings ...
Madam SPEAKER: You actually have 30 minutes, member for Nelson. .
Mr WOOD: Thirty minutes? Well, I will try to fit it well within 30 minutes.
Mr Vatskalis: Take 20.
Mr WOOD: Yes, okay. Put a bet on that. I had better not, knowing me.
Just a couple of things. I will make one note at the beginning. The member for Sanderson spoke about mandatory sentencing. I will put on record I do not agree with mandatory sentencing.
I agree with mandatory punishment - and I believe there is a vast difference to mandatory sentencing. Mandatory sentencing is a very unjust form of punishment, which I have said all along. If people do something wrong they should be punished; that is different to sentencing people because there are different forms of punishment besides putting people in gaol. It should be horses for courses, not just – I will probably criticise today - a 3% efficiency dividend over the lot. One should look at these issues on their merit. However, I digress.
I will say a few words about some of the things happening in the budget in relation to my local area, then some broader discussion on the budget as a whole. I never intended to go through this budget bit by bit. I always find budget papers difficult. I find estimates much better. I find looking at what departments said they were going to do through annual reports a much better way to see whether the government is on track. I will talk first of all about what is in the budget in relation to the rural area. To be fair, there is not much. I say that because I can read out what is for the rural area of Litchfield.
Howard Springs Road - great, $8.5m. That is well and truly needed. The traffic that builds up waiting to get through the lights on Howard Springs Road in the morning is sometimes 2 km long. Howard Springs Road has had no major changes for the last 20 to 30 years. It is the road that goes to the Howard Springs Nature Park. The amount of growth in that area has been enormous and the $8.5m is welcome and timely.
Of the $4m for the Arnhem Highway only a small amount is for our rural area; the Arnhem Highway goes all the way to Jabiru. However, I recognise there is some new money for the Arnhem Highway. In some places – not all - the Arnhem Highway desperately needs an upgrade. With the amount of traffic which will come from Mt Bundy of trucks with rocks for the INPEX project, it is going to need upgrades and repairs.
The rock pool, the waterfall, and the pump house at the Howard Springs Nature Park is happening, but it is happening slowly. I have been there several times. I try to put a good spin on it. At times, the park is still lovely, but people do not visit. Hopefully, that can get a go on; however, that is in last year’s budget. There is $0.4m for improvements in walking trails and an adventure playground which I thought was going to be part of the whole package originally. However, someone has decided to split the budget into two. Again, that is money which was set aside last year and has now been revoted to this year, so it is not new money.
Regarding the swimming pool - well I am not blaming the government exactly because there was a great deal of argy-bargy between the Freds Pass Management Board and the Litchfield Council, which delayed the introduction of a swimming pool to the rural area. However, we do have $1m down. It is revoted money because it was in last year’s budget for infrastructure. There is $11.5m for a new rural swimming pool. It is not clear exactly, because in the budget it talks about the following years, although I understand it will start in 2013-14. It would be good to have clarification.
There is also some money for Taminmin College, $2.7m, which is revoted money. And that is it.
Where have we missed out? We were hoping the extension to the bicycle path would reach Coolalinga this year. There has been no industrial land opened up in the rural area at Humpty Doo and we have people screaming for industrial land in Humpty Doo. There is a $64.9m referral in the budget to developing industrial land, but my understanding is that is not necessarily for the rural area. We have no retirement village in the rural area, which is very disappointing. Parts of the rural area are quite old now. People moved there in the 1960s and 70s and want to stay there and retire. However, the government has not made any land available or put up any options for private development of retirement villages in the area. I am disappointed that has not happened. I will be pushing again, in next year’s budget, that land is set aside and developed for retirement villages, and that we get industrial land as well.
Talking in general about the budget, it is good to see money being set aside for barge landings and airstrip upgrades. However, how come we are spending money on airstrips and barge landings if we do not know who owns them? If their five-year leases are running out, who is going to own those barge landings? That has not been sorted out. If we are putting public money into a barge landing that will not be owned by the government, I just simply ask the question: what is going on?
There is $1.5m for the Central Arnhem Road. It is still not a public road, so how is it we are spending public money on a private road? Sure, people use it to get to Gove. I do not have a problem with that, I have been on the road myself. It requires a permit for most of that road, therefore, it is not a public road. Why has that not been sorted out? Then, you can legitimately spend that money on a public road. If people want private roads, then they spend money from their own budgets.
It is good to see there is money for the Marine Supply Base. It will certainly be a great facility. Funnily, it is put under Palmerston and Litchfield. I know it is technically in the Litchfield Shire, but you would have to be pushing uphill to tell people that the Marine Supply Base - it is actually not in Litchfield, I beg your pardon, it is in East Arm. So, I am not sure how it fitted under the Palmerston and Litchfield category in the budget.
It is good to see there will be some funding for special education upgrades of $9.45m. I went out to the Nemarluk School the other day. I know there has been criticism about the air-conditioning, but that notwithstanding, the school is a fantastic school.
There is money being spent on trade training centres at Ngukurr, Groote Eylandt and West Arnhem Land - quite a considerable amount of money: $3.5m, $5.2m and $2.8m. I am not against training and getting people into different trades. The question I am asking is: what jobs are they going to have at the end? Are we building people up for failure, or have we a plan that says we are putting all this money into training centres and we are training these people. Well, I have seen this before where you train 20 welders and there is only a job for one. What happens to the other 19 welders? What is the plan? Do we fly people out to places such as INPEX and the abattoirs? Do we give these people a goal in being educated, or do we just educate them and they become a statistic which looks good on paper but, in reality, has not achieved anything in the long run?
Government employee houses has revoted money of $31.127m. I am hoping that will go towards, as the CTC said, the inequity between Aboriginal government workers who are sometimes not entitled to employee housing.
For the Palmerston Hospital there is $10m. I believe it should be called the Palmerston and Rural, or Palmerston and District Hospital. The whole idea is this hospital is supposed to serve the area, and it should be given a broader name. I still think it is actually in the wrong spot. It should have been on the corner of Howard Springs Road and the Stuart Highway, which would have given access to all rural people. It is going to have a problem with car parking, the same as RDH has. I looked the other day, and unless we are going to have some multistorey car parking there - we are? Very good. I do not want a repeat of RDH where you nearly have to go to hospital after walking from the car park to the hospital to get treatment, it is that far.
There is some money for the rural arterial road network. I am not sure what that road money is for, but it is revoted money.
Youth justice - I am interested to see whether there is money for diversions there. I cannot see any.
Regarding climate change, it just says there is $7.79m for research into the benefits against the cost of a solar array. I would love to get into the questions of whether solar electricity is worth the effort. That is something we might ask of the Estimates Committee, and see whether the value of some of these green policies the government puts forward are real.
I believe the government does not have any other option but to go into deficit. I was talking to Daryl Manzie on Top FM this morning. He and I were reminiscing about the times when the CLP government went into deficit to fund what is the Crowne Plaza down the road here, and the hotels at Yulara. It also went into deficit to build this building and State Square. Why did they do it? To keep the economy going. They came under criticism for it; they went into a public private partnership with this building. The government is being criticised for going into a public private partnership with the prison. That is exactly what the CLP did with this building and Multiplex. I believe Mr Anderson had a say in this building. Other governments in other times did exactly what this government is being criticised for.
Whilst I do not believe we should be heading further into deficits, if possible, we are a growing, young economy and we have issues other places do not. We have one-fifth of the area of Australia with 220 000 people. That is about 1% of the total population - might be a little more. We have a small population, large area, remote communities - a difficult area to fund.
How many people in the rural or remote areas want their road fixed, at an enormous cost, to go to 50 people at an outstation? How many roads out there - I have travelled some of these roads - need upgrading? We do not get much money for roads from the Commonwealth, especially in local government.
If people understand local government funding they realise money comes in on a population basis, not on horizontal equalisation. If you want an example of what would happen if Mr Abbott decided to get his way and fund the Territory on population, look at the existing example of what happens with local government funding. Local government is the section of the Commonwealth funding pie that is not distributed on horizontal equalisation; it is distributed on population. That is why local government receives such a small amount of money in the Northern Territory. It is then distributed on horizontal equalisation. That is why some of the communities near Darwin and other centres do not get as much money as they would like, because that money goes out to the remote councils.
I hope Mr Abbott does not get his way. It would be an absolute disaster. If we had a deficit and then were told we only had half the GST, we would be in big trouble.
There is nothing necessarily bad by being in deficit, but the government needs a clear plan to pull itself out of that deficit. It needs a strategy it promotes. The opposition is saying our prisons are full. You either have more money put into building more prisons, or that could be going into further deficit. How do you balance the two? I am not sure.
The member for Macdonnell said there is nothing for this place, nothing for that place, nothing for that place, nothing for that place. The government could put something in that place, something in that place, something in that place, something in that place, and the deficit gets higher.
I asked the Minister for Correctional Services about the prison. I am disappointed the prison farm is not in Katherine. I am also realistic that would add further to the deficit. I am disappointed the bicycle path is not going down to Coolalinga, but I am also realistic that, sometimes, you have to say: ‘Hang on, for the benefit of the Territory we cannot afford that at this time’. There has to be some realism that not all promises will be kept at this stage. It would be nice if a minister said: ‘We have not taken that off the agenda; we have just moved it a bit further up the budget’.
That was the same with the Bellamack special school. I sat at a meeting recently where the government had spent more money on Nemarluk than probably was originally budgeted for. The original budget was not quite as much as …
Dr Burns: None of it came out of the 30, mate.
Mr WOOD: Okay. However, it is a tight budget, and not everything could be achieved. I would have liked the government to say: ‘Okay, we are in deficit. Let us find out where the inefficiencies are’. The classic one is the air-conditioning at Nemarluk. I asked before: where is the good planning? Are we wasting money by not doing things right the first time? If we waste money to replace the air-conditioning because it was too noisy, who is at fault for doing that? Was there a sound engineer to check whether this was the right equipment for that school …
Dr Burns: I will speak to it if I get an opportunity.
Mr WOOD: Okay, that is good. However, I am using it as an example; I am not picking on the school. Minister, I visited the school the other day. It is a wonderful facility. I went out there today and gave them a couple of books, by the way, minister. One of them is called The Woman who Changes Her Brain and the other one is The Brain That Changes Itself. These are really good books about the elasticity of the brain ...
Dr Burns: I need one of those.
Mr WOOD: Yes, I know. I gave them because I was so grateful for the work they are doing there, and the tour they gave me of that school. More people should go out there and see the good work they are doing and the happy faces on the kids who have a school with space.
What I am saying is get the planning right the first time. I asked before how much it costs to move one department from Palmerston to Casuarina, or Casuarina to Darwin. I hear stories: ‘We have moved to a new place, I need a new desk. We need some new petitions, we need new carpet’. The whole building has to be rewired because the computer is going to go here instead of there, because there have to be new points. The telephones have to go here. What is the cost of that? Was it necessary? Did they have to move in the first place?
I am saying if the government really believes it is a tight budget, then it needs to be saying they are going to tighten up and become more efficient. I do not like the 3% efficiency dividend. It has been happening since the ALP came into power. How many times can you cut a department? If you have a department such as the Sacred Sites Authority, which - I do not know - might have 10 people, they have a job to do. They look at applications for mining or subdivision. So, you cut them. Now, the mining company has to wait three or four months before the applications are approved instead of two months, because there is not enough staff. Then, you create inefficiencies and the public gets annoyed because they are not being served properly.
You might even get places where you have to cut the vehicles back. Instead of three vehicles, there are two vehicles. This means some people cannot go out and do their jobs. They have to wait until there another vehicle returns.
If you want to cut departments, then you need to ensure it is targeted at the right places that will not affect services to the community. I know many departments will go: ‘Ooh, we will hide our inefficiencies’. At the same time, I do not think just having a bland efficiency dividend requirement across the board is the right way to go. It is an easy way to go about cutting costs. Whether it is an efficient and a fair way to go, I do not believe that is the case.
Regarding consultancies, I remember when the first Chief Minister came in, the great promise by the ALP was they would cut the number of consultancies. Well, I have a question - and it is still on notice. I would love to see how much consultancies are costing. I see small jobs, sometimes. Take the bicycle path. It went from Palmerston to Howard Springs. It will be done by a consultant engineer. Why can we not do that in-house? Have we got rid of all our skilled engineers and designing people? Have we not been able to keep up with private industry by employing the skilled people we need? We do not employ the skilled people but, then, we go and spend all the money on consultancies. Sometimes, those consultancies would be down south. Why are we not using more in-house ability to do some of these - especially the smaller jobs? Maybe the Tiger Brennan Drive is a fairly complicated engineering program; you might need a fairly big company to design that. However, if we can do more in-house, then we need fewer consultancies.
I have asked how many airfares are used by every department, whether they are international, interstate, and intrastate, and whether they are business or economy. I know some of our higher echelons in the government departments have within their contracts that they are allowed to have business class airfares. We have problems attracting people here, so you are caught between the devil and the deep blue sea. You either attract people here with things such as business class airfares, a nice house, and high wage, or we do not get them at all.
I was asked recently if I think politicians should fly economy. I think they should. I do not think the minister and Chief Minister should; they have plenty of work to do on a plane. However, some of our public servants can occasionally fly economy if they flying interstate. We all have to pull our weight in making sure costs do not blow out, and we are showing that, although we are in deficit, we are going to do our best to ensure the deficit does not increase.
In things such as safety, how many cords in the entire public service does the government own and require to be tagged? If you have a television on the wall, why does it have to be tagged? I do not know what is going to happen to it - it is sitting there. I can imagine power tools and, maybe, extension cords need to be tested every now and then, but every school, and my building at Howard Springs has tags all over it. There are tags for the toaster, the battery charger, and the television. Someone is making a fortune. If it is about $1 or 50 - I do not know what it costs per tag - someone is making a great deal of money. I am not against safety requirements, but where does common sense come into it? Has someone evaluated how many people have died from faulty cords on televisions? Or did we just decide to make it mandatory across the board and we will live with the cost to government of a couple of million dollars to get tags?
Road safety is the same. Nowadays, you can hardly do work within a certain distance of the road and you have to use witches hats, a flashing arrow, and lollipop girls. I am only painting a bus stop, for Heaven’s sake! So, the bus stop contract is double the price; it is $10 for the paint and $10 for the safety. You only need a couple of reflective signs to show there are people working there.
I might have mentioned a case before, where a surveyor in Alice Springs had a contract worth $50 000 and he had to have safety people which cost him another $50 000. So, the contract is worth twice as much. One bloke probably has a laser up the road there, is doing it himself. Common sense! We made this bland rule that anything within 5 m of a road will need 300 witches hats, two lollipop girls, blinking arrows everywhere, 40 km/h signs, 60 km/h signs, 80 km/h signs,. Sometimes, they have gone home, which is worse, especially on the Stuart Highway. There is nothing worse than going down the track and everyone has gone home but there is still a 40 km/h sign standing.
I do not begrudge it on major roads, especially when people are working on the roads. There should be adequate safety signs, but there are times when it is a little over-the-top and I wonder how much it costs. How much has that added on the contracts? I tried to ask about it during last year’s budget but the time ran out before the answer came. I will try to ask it earlier this year.
I accept this government had to go into deficit; these are difficult times. The GST has not gone up as much as people expected, but the government should show it is going to tighten its belt as much as it is saying we should go into deficit to keep jobs and economy going. That is what they have not told people: ‘We are going into deficit. We did not want to go this far into deficit, so we are also going to do our best to save were we can’ - and that will be sensible savings. The opposition should be reminded that, in the history of the Northern Territory, governments have gone into deficit to keep the economy going. I remember Yulara, the Crown Plaza – I forget what it was called then …
Ms Purick: The Sheraton.
Mr WOOD: Oh, the Sheraton, that is right. I remember this building and State Square. They were built to keep the economy going and the government would have gone into debt. As I said before, this was a public private partnership.
I will say one other thing today. It is in reflection of what the Leader of the Opposition said about the prison. I understand the prison is a very costly facility. I am not the sort of person who can argue about public private partnerships. People with greater skills in economies can tell you whether they are better or worse than going into debt yourselves, if the economic experts in this area want to debate it.
What I am a little concerned about is I was not sure whether the opposition was saying they would stop the prison. I am pleading with the opposition, if they got into power, not to do that. I will explain the reason I am doing that. I spent much time in this parliament arguing the prison should stay where it is. I believe we need a new prison, and anyone with any humanity in them who goes to that prison and sees the maximum, minimum, and medium security prisons says it is a dump. It is an antiquated dump! It is not suitable for looking after prisoners in this day and age. It is out-of-date and inefficient. I would not want to see that kind of prison used again. We have overcrowded prisons - you have heard it from people today. We need a new prison and a new way of doing things.
I need to give a little history. I was involved in discussions about the siting of the new prison. As anyone knows, I argued strongly for it to be built on the existing site at the Berrimah Farm. I attended a number of meetings with engineers, architects, Correctional Services people, planners, and other people who said the prison could not be built on the existing site and not on the farm. I also visited nine prisons interstate to see how they were done elsewhere, and I have also visited two prisons in America.
A member interjecting.
Mr WOOD: That is right. These are the reasons why the prison could not be built. The existing site for the prison is too small, and there needs to be at least a 400 m buffer all the way around. Half the land is flooded or waterlogged during the Wet Season. I went past that prison during Cyclone Carlos and half of that land was a sheet of water. It comes down off Berrimah Farm and off Tivendale Road. The cost to fill the land would be just as expensive as building a prison.
The existing building would not come up to OH&S standards, and the place would have to be rewired and all other services newly installed. The existing facility is overcrowded and poorly designed, making it difficult to properly monitor without using many staff. It is an inefficient facility for monitoring. The increased cost of building a new prison while prisoners are still there would be very costly. You cannot just go in and start building, you have to either move prisoners out, or check that the contractors have no things on them they should not have, and ensure tools are all packed away. It is very expensive to build a prison on top of a prison.
The prison had the highest number of lightning strikes in the Darwin area. When they showed me the plans, there is a square in the middle of the prison. It has the highest number of lightning strikes in the middle of the prison. So, if you are going to build a prison based on IT security, cameras, computers, and all that sort of thing to make it efficient, you are not going to want to put it where the most lightning strikes in Darwin land - and they land right on Berrimah.
If the prison could be built on the existing site and used as part of the neighbouring Berrimah Farm, I thought that might be something we could do. The high voltage line coming from Channel Island to Knuckey Lagoon would split the prison in half, and Correctional Services said no way would they want the prison to be cut in half.
I looked at Berrimah Farm. It still contains contamination and is still used for laboratories. The land is flat near the highway, but then just drops off, which makes visibility difficult.
Could the land be used for something more valuable, such as residential or industrial land? When we are looking at the cost of the prison, the sale of this land can offset that. We are just looking at the cost. The prison will move - there is valuable land there to be sold - and the farm could be sold. There are assets that can offset some of the costs, and that has not been brought up in any of this discussion. I looked at every way possible to keep …
Mr CHANDLER: Madam Speaker, I move an extension of time for the member for Nelson, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Mr WOOD: I just lost my bet, Madam Speaker.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, member for Brennan.
I have looked at every possible way to keep the prison in that area. I have walked over the land, visited the prison, and viewed maps. We put prison designs all over the land, and it was not going to work. It was not for want of trying but, in the end, I would have been a fool if, after being given all the advice from the experts, I threw their advice out the window and persisted with my original belief that the prison should stay where it is.
One thing that does disappoint me in this process is that governments never invite the opposition to meetings. I know everything is about political point scoring these days - do not tell the enemy what you are doing - but I wonder, if a member of the opposition had attended these meetings, would the CLP have a different view today? That is what disappoints me. I know I am in a special situation, and I get asked to attend meetings but, sometimes, if we were a bit more inclusive in some of the decision-making there may not be as much opposition to things. People do not know and come from a position of what they think; it may not be correct. The reason they do not know is they did not have a chance to get the information to make an intelligent decision about anything government does.
If the opposition believes there should not be a new prison - I am totally against that. We need a new prison. I have visited the prison several times. It is not a good place if we are going to turn people’s lives around. Prisons are about paying back to the community - for sure, there is a certain element of punishment. You see prisoners on the road cleaning up Tiger Brennan Drive. That is what they should be doing. However, we should also be trying to ensure they do not come back to prison, so there has to be some rehabilitation. The existing prison is not capable of doing that. It has some good areas there. It has the working area where they made the rails for the bicycle paths. They have been building some of the low security prison units that will eventually end up in the Katherine Prison Farm. There are some good things there; there is no doubt. However, there should be work for everyone. I hope, with the new prison, there will be work for everyone - no one should be sitting down.
I visited prisons in Victoria, New South Wales, Western Australia and Ohio, and our prison is well below par. People think American prisons are all about breaking rocks. The prisoners I met in Ohio do not do that. With good education facilities in the prisons, they are very smart prisoners. They work on, in some cases, therapeutic communities. They are pretty smart places. They put many people in prison; however, they try to do much work to ensure they do not come back.
I hope if the Country Liberals are the next government they will not take the popular view. It is easy to say: ‘Throw people in prison and chuck the keys away’. We do not need that approach today. We have to be intelligent enough to say that might sound good, but if people come back into prison time and time again you know it is not working ...
Mr Giles: It is not working now.
Mr WOOD: It will not work with the prison we have, that is for sure.
There are many other reasons people return to prison. This is not the fix; it is part of the fix. There should be more money put into early intervention. Do you find money in the budget for early intervention? I do not think so.
There needs to be more money put into when people come out of prison so they can get a job. People need to follow-up those people to ensure they are not getting into trouble anymore. They need to go back to a community where there is a job, they are not overcrowded, and have a place they are proud of. If it is nicer to come to town they will be back in town.
The funny thing is, several people write to me from prison. I visit a prisoner who is a non-Aboriginal person who comes from Darwin. He has come from Darwin society and has found going into prison has been extremely traumatic. He has found it extremely difficult to cope with going into prison. Yet, an Aboriginal person thinks it is all right. On one hand, you have someone coming from middle-class society who, all of a sudden, is hit by what prison is really like: concrete, steel, plain meals, not much to do, your liberty taken away. You might get an Aboriginal person from a poor place which is overcrowded, with people humbugging them. When they get to prison no one is humbugging them, they get three meals a day, a bed, and they think that is pretty good. So, you see the different effects prison has on people.
The way to even it up is to ensure anyone going into a prison has to work - that is part of their punishment. If they do not work they do not get things such as television, pool tables and those things.
It is mentioned in the budget, so I am not 100% sure whether there was reference by the Leader of the Opposition to stop building the prison. The Country Liberals may have an issue about the cost of the prison. Maybe they can work out another arrangement; I am not the expert on that. However, we need that new prison. If it can have a good vegetable garden and an industrial kitchen, some of those people who have cognitive problems can be held there - which is a problem at the moment. If we can train people and get them back out into society and become productive human beings, then we should continue down this path. It is a very difficult area; a very expensive area. It is not just about a prison, it is about all those areas around the prison.
As I said, I do not see large amounts of money going into early intervention. That is fault in this budget. We need to stop people going to prison and, then, we will not have the 1000 people in prison. I actually do not like the new prison; that is why I pushed for the prison farm and the work camps. However, the reality is in a graph, it will show that, by human nature, we are going to fill that prison. Yet, I believe we should be spending more of our money to ensure people do not go to prison – in early intervention.
Madam Speaker, I have mixed feelings about this budget. I sometimes call it the good, the bad, and the ugly - and there is certainly a bit of that. That is all I want to say.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Speaker, I am not going to start tonight by ranting and raving as one could do, looking through some of these budget papers. Seriously, I do not think the budget reply speech is the time to do that. The time to do that is, perhaps, when you get the chance to digest and dissect the information through the Estimates Committee. That is, in reality, where you get to understand far more about the budget, the state of the economy, and what our government is up to.
I am going to start by something a little different tonight. I am going to congratulate the government for putting together a budget and the papers, just as they do, as any other government would do in the position they are in. What I find, looking through the budget, is there is nothing but advertising. There are probably three or four of these books we could just toss aside, because they are just advertising how the money is going to be spent in different areas. However, it does not really tell you how the money is going to be spent. It is full of headlines, particularly the highlights paper. It is like reading a number of media releases.
The Estimates Committee, for me, is where you get the chance to really dissect the budget and get a better picture and understanding of what government is doing today, and how it is actually spending the money. In essence, congratulations, because this is what any government would do in your situation.
It is also a little difficult to respond, particularly as the shadow minister for Education, when you have to take so much in. I listen to what other ministers were saying, and I have listened to different ministers respond. I know if he gets the chance tonight, the Education minister will respond. However, I am responding before the Education minister has spoken. It would have been nice to have him respond first so I could hear what he has had to say. Again, it is a difficult situation.
I will pick up on a point the member for Nelson raised earlier about opening up a government to the point where they are sharing information with the opposition. As the member for Nelson said, this is all about politics; it is all about them and us and so forth. I actually agree with him on this point; that if more information was shared with the opposition, perhaps we would come up with better ideas, better policies and even, in some cases, support the government because it turns out it is a very good idea. I can recall, late last year or early this year, being able to take up the opportunity provided by the Education minister to travel around to a few of our schools in more remote locations.
I had, essentially, put together a remote education policy prior to going out on some of those trips. I can tell you – and I think I have said it here before - when I got back I tore that policy apart, threw it in the bin. It was through the experience that was offered to me by the government that, essentially, enabled me to put together what I believe is a far better remote education policy than I had before. Who is going to benefit from that? Well, if the Country Liberals take government, the people of the Northern Territory will benefit from that better policy. Had we taken government with, perhaps, our old policy, maybe we would not be in a better position. Maybe education in the bush would not improve. However, I guarantee you the policy we have today is in a far better position than it was prior to going on that tour, and I thank the minister for Education. Whether it is the Labor government that is in office after 25 August or the Country Liberals, the fact that our policy is a better policy today because of the exposure to what I saw firsthand at the coalface in the bush, means Territorians will be better off. Education in the bush will be improved and the standards will rise. Through sharing that information there will be better outcomes for Territorians, whether we have a Labor or a Country Liberal government.
I am all for what the member for Nelson said: there should be more information sharing between government and the opposition. I know we can request briefings and, sometimes, you receive briefings. However, I often come out of them with less information and more confused than when I went in. If they were to provide those briefings - particularly with industry, if it was the case of a prison where you have experts in town talking about the prison - and the opposition was afforded the opportunity to be involved then, perhaps, you would see more support from opposition. Whoever the opposition is in the future, you would see more support, and better policies would come out of it. The member for Nelson is on to something there.
I will cover a few areas. I will cover some local issues, a little under Parks and Wildlife and, of course, Education. What worries me about this budget more than anything is we know, before too long, we will be spending more than $1m a day to pay back the interest on the debt this government has put us in. Can you imagine if there was no debt, and we had ministers with $1m in their pocket every single day? We could go to a different school every day and say: ‘Here is $1m’. We could go to another school, go to another organisation, go to some NGOs, with money you have because you are not spending it to cover off on debt. That is a sad thing because debt is something that, structured in the right way, would be like buying a house.
It is true to say it is far wiser to buy a house than it is to buy a car, for instance. I bought a few cars in my life, and I have seen them depreciate over the years. The opposite happens with housing. If government spends money on infrastructure, there are reasons to go into debt. However, if government is going into debt to cover recurrent costs, we have real issues.
In the areas of Brennan, and Palmerston in particular, most people I have spoken to in recent days are really suffering with the cost of living. There are many things people speak about, but I will talk first about the boat ramp. This government promised the boat ramp in Palmerston and, after quite a few years, most of the boat ramp was delivered. We are still waiting on the caretaker quarters there. It is taking a long time for the government to sort that out, to go to tender, to have it completed so people can lock their cars and have proper facilities there so people can come back and find their vehicles are in one piece and not damaged.
The other thing people speak to me about all the time - and I have written to minister McCarthy about it a few times - is the Roystonea Avenue/Temple Terrace intersection. That intersection desperately needs to be upgraded when the new extension, which has been completed since about December last year, finally opens up to Lambrick Avenue. The top intersection of Roystonea Avenue/Temple Terrace is already struggling, particularly in the morning when all the Army chaps are heading out to Robertson. There is absolute gridlock. That is the place you people want to build this new hospital and it is only going to become worse. That intersection desperately needs to be upgraded.
The cost of living would have to be the highest area of concern people speak to me about. It comes down to what it costs people to buy land here in the Territory. This is not just exclusive to Darwin and the Palmerston area, we know it is the same in Alice Springs and across the Northern Territory. It comes down to the lack of land release in the last few years and not keeping up with demand which, obviously, in a market driven economy, causes the prices to go up.
I have heard the Treasurer say, time and time again in here, that the government has no say in what the cost of land is; it is purely market driven. I looked closely at the Johnston development - and I will read off here. The cost of the initial land the government owns - it is Crown land which has not cost them anything, to which they then apply a cost. I know they are trying to do the best thing by the taxpayers by raising some money but, essentially, everything they do from that point on is going to add to the cost of land. For the developers who tender for the land, there is a cost. The land is then developed at cost. Then, in the case of Johnston, I believe there was about a 17% dividend paid by all new owners of the land. Then, there is the profit the developers have to put on, which is fair enough. Then, of course, there is stamp duty on top of that, particularly for investors and people who are not entering the market for the first time.
So, one, two, three, four, five steps in that process, of which three of those steps the government has an involvement in. One is the cost of land; two is the 17% dividend; and the third is the stamp duty. So there are three steps in that five-step program where the government absolutely does influence the cost of land.
I have spoken to quite a few people about ways we could, perhaps, reduce it. I have spoken to previous ministers of this House of both persuasions, and have talked about ways you could actually reduce the overall cost at the end of the day. One ex-minister of this House said one way was you could basically go out to tender, the same as you do now to developers, but provide the land up-front at no cost to the developer on the basis they provide infrastructure for the Territory. It might be a new school. I believe the original suburb of Durack had a similar program where not the total cost, but much of the cost of the Durack Primary School was borne by the developer.
If you were to give a block of land – be it 10 km by 10 km - and told the developer it was going to cost $100m for the land which they then develop, and then have to divide it to make the most out of it they possibly can, at the end of the day, it is the people buying the land who are going to pay that huge amount.
Turn that around, and provide the land at either no cost or at a reduced cost on the basis that the developer then provides infrastructure which would have to be paid for by the government at some stage - whether it is a school, roads, parks and gardens, a golf course, or even lakes. Have the developer provide that essential infrastructure, which makes for a better community. However, at the end of the day, they have not paid huge amounts of money for the land in the first place. Who is going to benefit in the end? It will be the people buying the land, the people investing in the Northern Territory, because they are not forced to pay as much as they once did, or do today. So, there are better ways to do it.
I will move on to Parks and Wildlife. I really worry about our Parks and Wildlife not providing the experience they once did. I have heard a few times that there are no new rides in our parks. Theme parks, even on the Gold Coast, reinvest every single year in new rides, because they understand the market they are catering for is, of course, limited. You might say people travel from all over the country to go to the theme parks on the Gold Coast – they do. Essentially, it is this same market they are drawing on each and every year. So, unless they invest in new rides, they are not going to get people back into those parks. Because they do, they have people coming back time and time again.
That is what we want with our beautiful parks in the Northern Territory. I do not think we, as a government, over the years have invested anywhere near enough in reinventing some of these parks and providing new rides, basically, to attract those people back.
I heard the member for Macdonnell, Alison Anderson, say we put all our focus into just one side of our culture; that is, Indigenous culture. If you go to parks like Nitmiluk, you will read signs - in all our parks across the Northern Territory - which focus on one thing: Indigenous culture, and talk about the Dreaming. It is so important, and we should still focus on that. However, at the same time, what about the geology? What about the science behind the ground we are walking on? What about having signs on not only the Indigenous Dreaming and how that is so important to them but, at the same time, the science of how the waterways were created over the years, the Wet Seasons, the waterfalls, the rock formations, and what minerals are found in the ground here. We could capture a whole new market of people wanting to come to our parks …
A member: The bird life.
Mr CHANDLER: The bird life, and flora and fauna. I was astounded at how many people travel around the world to study birds - amazing! It blew me away. I thought everyone was just interested in dogs but, apparently, there are people interested in so much of our diverse wildlife, our birds! To be able to attract those people - we have some of the very best people in the Northern Territory. In fact, in my own electorate, I have a lady who would be one of the foremost people with knowledge of birds in the world, who travels the world. To have that at our doorstep - that opportunity, that corporate knowledge - and not take every advantage of it is just damn right silly.
If we could tap into that market where people from all over the world could come to the Northern Territory to see our beautiful wildlife, our beautiful birds, and to have interactive tours with those people - not 10 minute start-up jobs I have seen in the past. I hate it when a tourist comes all the way to the Northern Territory and they talk afterwards of being so disappointed because it was a $10 tour with a $10 tourist guide. We need to focus on lifting those experiences and providing the very best.
I can remember years ago going on a cruise on the West Alligator - might have been the East Alligator - where there was an Indigenous chap who was the funniest man I have ever come across. He had the billy spinning in his arms and so forth. However, the experience they provided for the people - and that boat was full of people from all around the country; in fact, there were Italians and people from around the world - was first class – absolutely first class. We have many first-class tour operators today. However, we need people to leave the Territory having such an experience they do not talk to one person, they talk to many people, and those people want to come to the Territory. Sometimes, it is not all about advertising on the big screen - and I use movies as an example.
I am more focused to see a movie someone has told me about than because I have seen the ad in the paper or on TV. If someone said to me, ‘Oh, you have to see this movie’, you can hear the enthusiasm in their voice. That is what we have to tap into and ensure when people leave the Northern Territory, they take the enthusiasm with them and it drags other people here.
Yet, we see declining numbers in people visiting our two iconic parks - the Territory Wildlife Park and the Alice Springs Desert Park – year after year. We have had a GFC and this has put pressure on states across Australia in bringing tourists into Australia and getting tourists from within Australia. However, we have seen it year after year, but we have not seen a government coming up with a strategy which can meet the challenge. That is what is missing.
I see, in 2008-09, the Territory Wildlife Park had 77 000 visitors and Alice Springs Desert Park had 91 000 visitors. The following year it dropped down at the Territory Wildlife Park to 72 500, in 2010-11 65 000, in 2011-12, 54 000, and is estimated this year at 55 000. Alice Springs Desert Park, in 2008-09 had 91 000 visitors; 2009-10, 74 500; year 2010-11, 67 500; 2011–12, down to 53 000 people; and the 2012–13 estimate is only 53 000 people again. You are not even expecting there is going to be a huge increase. I want to know what the strategies are to get it back to where there are 100 000 or more going through these parks. If you took the numbers of children coming just from our schools, out of those numbers, you would find it horrific.
It is fantastic - do not get me wrong - the children should have access to our parks and so forth. However, if you want to really create a sad picture, take away those people who are not paying to get in, such as our schoolchildren, and start to have a look at how much money is actually made from a full-paying adult, for instance - a visitor to the Northern Territory. It is quite sickening. It is really sickening, yet, the impost to run these parks is getting bigger and bigger every year, and the numbers are falling. I do not see a strategy from this government - certainly no investment in the budget papers - in how we are reinvigorating our parks and getting them back to where we are attracting more than 100 000 visitors through each of our iconic parks.
I was disappointed in various comments from the government that the Leader of the Opposition’s budget reply did not cover off on any plan, any vision. Yet, I have read through it, and re-read it, and I can see page after page of where our vision is of what we would do to change things. It is quite wrong to say there is not a vision from this side. The policies we are developing at the moment have developed, have been completed. Many of them have already been released and more will come in the next few weeks. This budget reply is full of areas we will focus on, because we have listened to the community.
That is something I do not think is really evident within the 2012–13 Budget Papers from the Northern Territory government. One telling story, though, of course, is the shortfall for this financial year of $491m. That is what Labor has spent over and above what they have received. It is true we are to the stage where the taxes we pay - the income the government earns locally - is being completely monopolised just to service the debt. If it was not for the GST revenue coming into the Territory, we would be insolvent - the Territory would be insolvent. There are probably bigger companies around the world employing more people which have gone broke because of bad management because they have become insolvent. It has to be acknowledged that $491m is $100m more than this government said this time last year. You wonder why we question what has happened in the last 12 months!
Of course, one of the biggest concerns is the off-budget funding: the Darwin Waterfront Corporation, the Northern Territory Major Events Company, Indigenous Essential Services, the Power and Water Corporation, and the Territory Insurance Office. The fact is we have heard the shadow Treasurer talk about how this government is parking major debt into these organisations which, basically, makes these budget papers - the budget papers I have in my hands - sound that bit better. If you were to pile all that debt into here as well, it would be a very sad turn of events. It is sad, because it is my children and, perhaps, my children’s children, who are going to be paying off this debt into the future. Sadly, that is wrong - absolutely wrong. It has been said time and time again here we have to learn to live within our means.
From a personal experience, I know what it was like, many years ago, getting into debt myself - struggling with a mortgage, having a child with a disability, where my wife had to give up work to care for him. We did go into debt - serious debt - and are still working hard to pay much of that debt off. And this is years later. Every single time I make that payment on the credit card, for instance, I get angry because I think: ‘If I had not spent it’. People say you make mistakes in life. You know what? I made thousands of mistakes, because every time you put something on a credit card, you know it has to be paid back. Every one of those cards has been paid back. It is hard - it is damn hard - because you are struggling to meet some other arrangement, to put food on the table in a household, for instance, and every time you have made a huge payment on a credit card because of previous spending, it hurts because you go without so much into the future because of many decisions you made over the years. That is why so many people fall into credit card traps today. Now, we have a government falling into the same trap.
A Country Liberals government will not ignore the real costs of living pressures facing Territory families. You cannot ignore the stress young families are going through today. The speech from the Leader of the Opposition touched on some of the things we have to prioritise as a government. Come 25 August, if the Country Liberals take government, we will start to implement the policies. It will not be an easy road. In all the discussions we have been having as a shadow Cabinet, it nearly brings you to tears when you have all this vision and all you want to do for the Northern Territory, and you have that bugger of a shadow Treasurer sitting in the corner saying: ‘We cannot afford that’.
Why can we not afford it? Because of bad financial management, because we overspent in times when this government was reaping the benefits of GST windfalls. It was like winning lotto every year, year after year, and that was spent, and we have gone further and further into debt. Had it been saved for a rainy day, or put into the debt that already existed, perhaps we would not be in this situation today.
We talk about this government and the federal government; how the Labor side will try to tell you how well the GFC was managed in Australia because of all the money they spent to keep the economy turning over. That may be true, but do you know what? You come off a base where the Prime Minister at the time, Kevin Rudd, took over a country in perhaps the best financial position it has been in possibly ever. Yet, time and again, we see conservative governments taking over from Labor governments and they are never left with a great financial position. Usually, there is major debt. Because of that situation, you find conservative governments are often left hung out to dry by the electorates because they know they have to do what is financially sensible, which is to bring the budget back into a managed budget. Deficits are fantastic, but if you bring it back to where you had a zero at the end of the financial year, where you have expended what you have spent, you are far better off than if you have gone into debt.
You can do Google searches and look at graphs where Labor governments have spent and have gone into debt, conservative governments have been elected and, because the budgets have gone out of control, they have had to bring it back in. Then, they get back on their feet, the country or the state is turning around and, then, a Labor administration comes back in. The strange thing, though, is there are 25 members within this House in the Northern Territory. If we each had to write 10 things we wanted to see for the Northern Territory on a piece of paper, I guarantee you at least eight of those things would be the same. I do not think there are many different views in this House about what is good for the Northern Territory, what we would like to see happen in the Northern Territory, how the Northern Territory will prosper, and how we could do it.
It so happens the Labor way and the conservative way of going about things are completely different. The outcomes are probably similar with what you want to achieve. However, it is the method you use to reach them I struggle to understand - how Labor governments get it wrong so often and conservative governments have to bring the books back in order, which history proves. It is an extremely tough gig.
Madam Speaker, I have two speeches here that I would like to go through rebutting some of the things said by a couple of ministers in here, but we do not have much time. I will go straight to the budget papers. I go to Education. The reason I want to go here for the moment is the reason I get frustrated with these books we have placed in front of us is because, in three different areas - and the same thing happened last year and I think the year before - where you are trying to go through and find out figures, in different budget books you will see different figures for what, essentially, looks like the same thing. I could be wrong; I hope I am wrong.
Take the Palmerston Senior College Special Education Upgrade Stage 2. In three separate places within these books - in this, it is page 103 of Budget Paper No 3, it has $0.8m, so $800 000; in one of the other budget papers, it talks about $2m; and in another budget paper it talks about $750 000. I would really like to know from the minister what is going to be spent on the Palmerston Senior College Special Education Upgrade Stage 2. Is it $750 000; is it $800 000; or is it $2m?
It could be there are different programs in there. We may be able to get to the bottom of it at Estimates. However, I have run out of time and we are nowhere near it, thank you, Madam Speaker.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Speaker, I was expecting another colleague to speak before me, but that is okay; I will be very brief.
In regard to the budget, there is much comment about the provision of funding for the exploration programs within the Geoscience Division of the Resources Department, and that is welcome news. It is a very important initiative and it should be continued out of this budget cycle, and well into the future.
It was under a Country Liberal government that the exploration program was first established. We have to remain minerals competitive, not only against the other states of Australia, but also with the minerals competitive countries overseas such as Canada and the countries in South America. So, that is welcome news.
It is also welcome news that there is still funding and support being given to the various research institutions in primary industry and horticulture which, again, is important. We must undertake ongoing research in regard to existing crops and pastures where we have issues; for example, with Panama disease in the banana industry. We have to get on top of that, or stay ahead of it as best we can. Work is under way to try to find banana species which are Panama disease-resistant. Hopefully, one day very soon, the scientists will work it out, because bananas and mangoes are the two main crops that are our future for the primary industries. With every Australian man, woman and child, consuming 15 kg of bananas per year - and that is just fresh fruit - that is definitely where the future of the horticulture/agriculture industry is in the Northern Territory, along with the mango industry in the Top End, and other vegetables and melons in Central Australia. So, it is important we continue to research programs and to support that industry.
Perhaps there should have been something in there about new crops and new pastures we could have been researching to further expand the industry. There was no reference anywhere in the budget papers I could find in regard to any new agricultural precincts being investigated in the Top End or elsewhere. Sometime in the very near future we are going to have to look at where we are going to expand our industry; where the next Lambells Lagoon, Acacia Hills, or Centrefarm is, for example, because we have an abundance of good land and water in various areas of the Northern Territory. It was disappointing I did not see anything in the budget papers or in the explanatory notes where government was considering looking at new agricultural precincts.
There was not much comment in regard to the commercial seafood industry, which I thought was a little disappointing. Perhaps of all the resource industries in the Territory, they need the attention of the minister more than they are getting at the moment. They have challenges with the Commonwealth government trying to come in over the top and put marine parks all around our waterways with very little consultation. Just because the general population does not see the commercial seafood industry because they are not close to our coastlines does not mean it is not out there. When people go to a restaurant - from the research I have been told the industry does - they generally want fresh seafood caught in the Northern Territory. The good scheme we have is the Buy Local scheme - identification of fish products which have been harvested or caught in the Northern Territory. That scheme should be commended, if not expanded in some shape or form.
One question I have is in regard to the minerals area and the $1.95m that has been allocated under community - or something of that nature - to ensure active mining operations operate in a manner which supports sustainable development of the environment. I am unsure what that is about, or how far $1.95m goes. I am interested to hear from the minister exactly what that is all about, given it was not in an area associated with the resources, the mining, and the areas outside.
There was no comment at all in regard to the extractive industries and any support the government may be providing towards that industry, other than upgrading parts of the Arnhem Highway. Of course, the extractive industry is the main user of that highway, and will be more so a user as material is sourced from the Mt Bundy quarries.
It is interesting that much money has been spent on the intersection of the Howard Springs Road where there is going to be much traffic from the new gaol, the workers camp, and the schools in that area, but not much money has been allocated to some other main roads in the rural area that will be used quite extensively to service and provide materials for the proposed gas plant.
I heard the member for Nelson’s comments in regard to money allocated for two main roads, the Arnhem Highway and the Howard Springs intersection, but there was little mention of monies, programs or specific projects for the greater rural area, as I call it. Yes, there has been money allocated to Taminmin College. However, I did not see anything specifically referencing a positive learning centre for the rural area. There is more money going to the Palmerston High School in regard to its positive learning centre, and rural students use that centre. Sadly, we have the centres and they are needed. I have written to the minister requesting government give serious consideration to establishing a positive learning centre in the rural area for the need, sadly, that is growing in that area. It is disappointing it was not referenced here.
Also, as government and community, there is a great need to start working on developing a separate library from the Taminmin College library. It is a shared facility with the community. It is a large school and it is about time the government took the initiative and started to work with the Litchfield Council, the community, and other stakeholders in regard to separating the facilities. They are short staffed. They provide great services given the facilities they have at the moment and the staff they are allocated. However, we need to start seriously thinking about how we can service the rural area better when it comes to educational institutions and activities.
There really was not any other reference to activities which involve the greater rural area. That is disappointing. The main ones are, of course, roads and educational facilities. Several of the schools out there are old. Humpty Doo Primary School is an old school and has been in operation for 30 years. Perhaps they did not specifically ask for anything in particular, but they need some assistance, like anything that gets a little old needs a bit more maintenance and assistance than when it was a bit younger. I will be writing to the minister asking him to visit Humpty Doo Primary School so he can see firsthand how they need a little more attention than they are getting at the moment.
The school does a fabulous job. The council is good, the teachers, the staff, the families are all very supportive and work hard; however, it needs a little more attention from government given it services a large part of the rural area. It has about 25 different ethnic groups. It has a large Vietnamese population, a large Asian population as they are from the Lambells Lagoon area - the farming area. That school, in particular, does need a little more attention than it has been getting in the past.
Generally, I will leave comments in regard to other parts of the budget to my colleagues. I would have liked to see a little more attention to the greater rural area. I have always maintained the most pressure, the most challenges, will be in the greater rural area. It provides the water supply for Darwin; the extractive materials for Darwin, Palmerston and the rural areas. It is the fruit bowl of Darwin, and people continually want to come and live in the rural area. It is under much pressure, and I would like to have seen a little more attention from government across the ministerial portfolios in regard to these very salient facts.
I will leave it at that, Madam Speaker. I will be taking up various issues contained in the budget with the various ministers on behalf of my constituents, in regard to my shadow portfolio areas. However, it is a bit disappointing in how they have gone about it and how they have put in priority lists where a large percentage of the population are living; that is, in the greater rural area of Darwin.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, the member for Goyder, for her very speedy response. I know we are pushed for time, and I will follow the same approach.
I start by congratulating the Country Liberals team for providing a very coordinated effort in supporting the Leader of the Opposition, Terry Mills, in his fantastic budget response. He really pulled the budget apart and uncovered the deficit, debt, deceit, and hidden agendas that are littered throughout the current budget which has just been tabled. Many of my colleagues have spoken in the Chamber about the high levels of debt the government has placed the Northern Territory in. Terry Mills gave a fantastic overview in providing the 27 questions the government must answer within two weeks, about where the money is being hidden.
Two speakers ago, the member for Brennan, Peter Chandler, gave a good synopsis about the issues surrounding the debt, and the member for Fong Lim, who I heard speak, also raised the issue that, in a few years time based on the figures, our own source revenue will be outstripped by interest repayments at $1m a day. Any normal company in those circumstances would be trading insolvent. There are serious questions in those 27 questions the Leader of the Opposition has tabled, that the government must answer.
We know the government is in serious trouble. All you have to do is look through the infrastructure budget and see what is actually listed. Look through Budget Paper No 3 at the expenditure which has been occurring through programs. I sat down with Terry Mills, the Leader of the Opposition, at the start of the week when the budget was tabled. As soon as it was presented, I asked where their money has gone. Where is their money gone? It has all gone on borrowings and interest. It is a government that is now riddled with debt - absolutely riddled with debt. It put every Territorians in a perilous position where they have to have a government that lives way beyond its means - much worse than any other Territory household.
It is very interesting when you go through, in my portfolio responsibility of shadow minister for Infrastructure, and look at the capital works and estimated capital expenditure for 2012-13 as detailed on page 11 of Budget Paper No 4. Once again, this is a government that is all smoke and mirrors, talking up its capital expenditure when, in fact, it is actually not doing that. I have raised the issue on several occasions over the last few budgets, about how the government commits to some enormous figure but, in fact, it actually does not do it.
This year, we see on page 11 the government is saying it has an infrastructure budget of $1.0384bn but, in fact, if you look at the numbers more carefully, they have a revote of $454.7m. That is money not spent in the current financial year they are actually rolling over. Then, look at how much they are planning on rolling over next year, and it is $431.2m. They are actually bringing in 43% of the budget they are planning on spending and they are talking about from last year, then they want to rollover another 41.5% into next year. In actual fact, it is only $152.5m new money that they are actually spending in infrastructure. $152.5m is what they are really putting into this budget because so much is carried over from last year - $454.7m - and they are actually going to carry over another $431.2m into next year. It is not about what they have to say; it is about what they do.
In Question Time today, the member for Katherine raised some very important questions after we had already exposed election promises that were not going to be delivered, and lies and cover-ups within this budget and previous budgets. He raised a question about the Katherine bypass which had a substantial amount of money offered towards it in the 2007 federal election campaign. I have in front of me Budget Paper No 4 for 2009-10. In that budget it said:
That $10m is included in one of the record infrastructure spends they like to talk up as part of the infrastructure budget every single year. Was that done in that financial year? No.
Go to the 2010-11 financial year and look for exactly the same thing. In Budget Paper No 4, page 40, it said for Katherine minor new revoted works, which is carry over again just to fill the numbers of the budget to make it look like they have plenty of money in infrastructure:
They must have spent $10 000 somewhere but they did not do the work then.
In last year’s budget, 2011-12, on page 37:
So, now they have spent $270 000 on the Katherine proposed heavy vehicle diversion.
We know the work has not been done, but they are including this money in their infrastructure budget. It raises the question: did they ever receive the money and, if they did not receive it, why did they include it in their budget? If they did receive the money, where did it go, or did you have to give it back to the Commonwealth? They are very important questions because you can make any announcement and put any money to it and include it in your capital works budget but, when you continue to roll it over or you never do it, it has never had any meaning in your infrastructure budget, so it is all smoke and mirrors.
I go back to the point that they are only proposing to spend $152.5m of new money in this infrastructure budget because $454.7m comes over from last year. However, enough on the infrastructure side of things and the debt and deficit.
It would be remiss of me not to talk about the situation in Alice Springs and the comment made by the Chief Minister in response to Question No 1 during Question Time today. He knew Alice Springs was coming up as a topic. He already had an MPI on his table which was later withdrawn. He had to be prepared for the onslaught and vitriol that would have come from our side about their reluctance to do anything. He said, ‘I am going to take a zero tolerance approach’ like it was something new.
He has always had zero tolerance for Alice Springs. He has always been intolerant of Alice Springs. He has no tolerance level. If he did have some tolerance, he would have put some commitment in the budget two days before. This did not happen overnight; this has been brewing for years because of their inaction.
He comes in here, zero tolerance, Hendo is toughening up. What a load of rubbish! Too little, too late. ‘I put the Police Commissioner in charge’. What a load of rubbish! Was the Police Commissioner not in charge last week? Was he not in charge yesterday or the day before? Every time I ask for the police van to go to the Northside shops - please Police Commissioner, please, please, please. However, we are coming into an election now; it has been turning up. It has only been three-and-three-quarter years while we have been waiting for something to be done. However, it is starting to come up now it is election time. Now, the Chief Minister is taking a zero tolerance approach. He is putting the Police Commissioner in charge. What about the Housing Department? Get Territory Housing off their backsides and get them doing something.
Start showing leadership! I called for leadership last week from the Minister for Central Australia, the member for Lingiari, and the town council. They are the three decision-makers. Start doing something! What did we see two nights ago? Two women raped by three men, allegedly with a rifle involved. Absolutely deplorable! That fellow last night who was also assaulted - this is a regular occurrence.
Figures were released about the assaults today. Those assaults are appalling. There is a 33% increase on the quarter from when the Banned Drinker Register was first introduced - a 33% increase in a three-month period on the quarter from when the BDR was first introduced. You are trying to say it is working. The BDR is a load of rubbish. That is why the Country Liberals are going to scrap it. If it was working, we would tolerate it, put up with it, mea culpa, and admit that it is not working. Every Territorian is inconvenienced. There have been nearly four million transactions with people having to show their ID, and nothing is getting any better.
The crime in Alice Springs is worse than Darwin. A population of 28 000 versus the population of Darwin, of which I have an estimation of around 110 000. How can the crime be so bad down there, and the Chief Minister walked in here today and said: ‘I am toughening it up’. Zero tolerance! He has a zero tolerance for Alice Springs, otherwise he would have put investment into the community, built infrastructure in this budget, supported our economy, and backed tourism. Instead, through his complacency and his lack of action and attitude, we have now seen our tourism industry suffer yet again.
We will get that incompetent Minister for Central Australia - the bloke who should be run out of our town - saying we are talking the town down. It is not talking the town down when two women are raped, with an allegation of a gun - that is not talking the town down. If I do not stand up here and advocate for the people of Alice Springs, I am doing something wrong. I am talking leadership; that is what it is about. The Chief Minister is not a leader in this debate, or in Central Australia. Do not walk in here at 11.50 pm and tell us you are going to toughen up. Do not walk in here and tell us you are going to try to toughen up. Now, the Police Commissioner is going to have all charge.
What is Territory Housing doing? What is it doing to evict bad tenants? What have you done, minister, to fix the Housing Act; to make rules that say tenants cannot have visitors for six weeks, 12 weeks, three months, or six months? Wauchope Street flats are a disgrace. They are getting calls all afternoon about Wauchope Street flats. A bus pulled up there with 20 people in it yesterday, who caused trouble in the flats, went and camped next door illegally - no rangers to move them on, no response from police. I am not sure they received a call, but there was no response from police. They were drinking all night, fighting, and partying. I have had to try to fix that tonight while I have been sitting here, because you will not do anything. That used to be a pensioner complex. I will tell you what leadership is; it is about making decisions. If the Country Liberals come to power, those Wauchope Street flats will be for over 65s. No more mucking around, we will bring it back the way it used to be; Wauchope Street flats will be for over 65s only. Make some decisions.
I am sitting here tonight receiving e-mails from Elliott Street flats. I will read them out to you; I will not tell you who they are from. I got one at 5.57 pm, which went straight to one of the officers at Territory Housing who I will not name. It says:
The Corrections system in Alice Springs - here we are spending $10m building a new gaol to teach people how to drive. You have a growth town policy, which has failed, where you said you were going to put MVRs in every growth town and start giving people licences. Think about some alternative ideas. The $10m could have gone into a whole lot of different work. It could have gone into infrastructure to support the economy. You could have spent $5m building a temporary training centre, taking everyone who has a licence or a minor drink-driving problem, and trained them in a centre for a week’s intensive training and put them back out into the community.
You could have fixed their cars, you could have involved CDU and CAT, and a whole lot of training providers, and fixed their cars so they are roadworthy. Give them licences, intensive training, and drum it into people's heads about drink-driving. Teach people what a standard drink is, because people do not know. Half the people are not literate, and do not understand numbers. They do not even understand what 60 km/h on their car is. They do not even understand the numbers on the speedo. They think E is ‘enough’ when it should be E for ‘empty’ on the fuel gauge.
Start teaching people. You could have done that for $5m, or whatever it cost, and put the rest of the money into supporting our tourism industry. You could have put the 20 extra police on the street the Country Liberals have committed to. You could have funded the Assistant Commissioner of Police we have committed to putting in Alice Springs to take charge. These are things you should have done.
This budget is a deplorable budget. I hear stories from the prison officers about what is going on at the gaol. ‘Why are you back here?’ ‘Well, I came back because I needed a new hearing aid’. ‘How did you get back?’ ‘I committed a crime so I have come back to gaol. Can you get me a new hearing aid and can I get my teeth fixed while I am here?’ That is not what gaol is about. We all want rehabilitation in gaol. The member for Barkly, the Corrections Minister said: ‘All you wanted to do was build a big hole’. We are sick and tired - that is frustration; do you understand it? Gaol is about punitive measures. Sure, rehabilitate people, but no one is being rehabilitated in that place; no one is participating. They sit around, play pool, eat out of a vending machine all day, get paid, and are allowed to smoke.
In how many government buildings in the country are you allowed to smoke? But you can smoke in gaol. What about the health risks on the prison officers? It is a punitive place, toughen up! The prison, public housing, police - get something happening, some action. It is not just about a Police Commissioner at 11.50 pm - that is not zero tolerance. It is about taking back control of our streets.
This is an emergency. I have people up hill and down dale asking me to call for the Army to come in. I am not going to be sensationalist or populist, but that is what people want. They want the Army to come in because you have failed. They want the Army on the streets, on every corner, ensuring not just tourists, but residents are safe.
Our economy is in the doldrums because you are not acting. It is not just about the financial investment, it is about the peace and safety people have when they walk down the street. The women are sleeping with handbags under their pillows in case they are stolen, and the blokes have baseball bats.
There have been some tragic events in Alice Springs over the years with deaths, murders, and interracial crimes - they have been tragic. I am as fearful as you could be that there will be a major riot in Alice Springs. It concerns me; it really worries me. It could never happen, we could go through like this forever and a day, or we could have that one match that slipped and started a bushfire. All it takes is that one match in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong fuel. That is all it takes.
Madam Speaker, I am sorry I get a little emotional about this; it really gets to me. At the Northside shops - the bottle shop - something needs to happen. I support free enterprise and private business. People should be allowed to come and go. I do not like restrictions, I do not like prohibition, but something needs to change. Everyone has had enough; I have had enough.
I put out a newsletter about four weeks ago asking people in my electorate what they thought about the bottle shop at Northside. Did people want it open, did they do not want it shut, or did they want something in between. I have had a stack of responses right across. The people who do not like alcohol are, naturally, going to ask for it to be shut. There are people who are so concerned they want it shut because they do not feel safe. There are people who are on the other spectrum saying: ‘How dare we sacrifice our principles as individuals who do the right thing for the people who do the bad thing? That is not right’. I agree with that; I do not agree with sacrificing and I support business. I fully support business. There are people in the middle asking: ‘What about this, what about that?’
I have come up with a proposal for my electorate: if the CLP gains government - even if we do not I will advocate for it - as soon as we can, we will work with licensing and shop owners and change the times that shop operates. Currently, on Monday to Friday, it opens at 2 pm and shuts at 9 pm. On Saturday, it opens at 10 am and shuts at 9 am, and Sunday it does not open at all. On Sunday there is not much trouble, and the police will tell you the same thing. It is during the week there is big trouble, particularly on Tuesday. On Saturday, there is nowhere near as much trouble as during the week when it operates from 10 am to 9 pm.
I am going to go back to the electorate, around Braitling - I will be doorknocking there all next week and the week after - all those places in the near vicinity and expounding it. I will be standing at the shops at Northside next week in the evenings waiting to talk to people who want to have a chat. I will propose a potential solution. It is not a definitive solution, it is a potential solution. That is, the bottle shop to open at 10 am and shut at 7 pm. It will be opening earlier, which I know the government will come out and play politics about opening up the rivers of grog, all those sort of things. However, I propose it opens at 10 am in the morning and shuts at 7 pm at night, two hours earlier, which allows people to purchase less alcohol at night in that area. It also allows two hours of shopping for people without being in that influx of drunks, which tends to be more so at night. We will trial that for six months.
We will also ensure that police van is at the Northside shops every day in the afternoon until closing time, from 1 pm until 7.30 pm, to ensure they have the operational requirements to be able to clean up that shopping centre. We will trial this for six months to see if it can work. This is a proposal I am putting to the electorate. The police van will be there every afternoon until the bottle shop shuts. The bottle shop will be opened at 10 am in the morning and shut at 7 pm at night, Monday to Friday. Saturday trading will continue the way it currently is, and Sunday it will remain closed. We will trial that for six months and see if it works. If it needs a slight variance, we may retrial it. If it is not working, I propose it is shut completely.
That is the question I will put to the electorate. I will see what they think. I know these things are risky in a political sense, but people want something to change, and the only thing I can offer is a potential solution to try to make a change in that area. It is not about me trying to put more grog down people’s throats. I am extremely sad to be at the point where I am now trying to change, or propose to change, alcohol times to manage a social issue that is out of control, when I would rather be fixing the back-of-the-room stuff, getting people working and off welfare and changing the whole psyche about people being alcohol-dependent.
However, that is the proposal I will put to the electorate. I put it sternly because that is the best proposal I can come up with as a happy medium for all. If it is not working, it will shut, and if it is working, we will look at how we can continue that as a trial basis into the future to try to make improvements around Alice Springs.
On Indigenous affairs - and I am sorry, minister, I did say I would be quick on this ...
Dr Burns: You have had eight minutes.
Mr GILES: I am sorry. If you would like me to sit down, I will sit down ...
Dr Burns: No, no.
Mr GILES: I do not mean to hold you up. I have said before, you are one of the main castigators, minister for Education and Housing, of the Country Liberals and our policy base.
Well, we have a stack of policies. We have released quite a few already on Indigenous affairs. One of them was around our first circles concept with traditional owners - one group in the Top End and one in the bottom end of the Territory - meeting with the full Cabinet twice a year to talk about policies, issues, implementation - not to guide how we form our policies, but to provide advice and direction. It is a very important idea, and it would be a first in Australia’s history, with a representative group such as that meeting the full Cabinet. It is not designed to take anything away from any other representative bodies, whether they be land councils, health organisations, local government, or anything like that. It is designed to be another layer to provide support to people and try to re-engage people where they have become disengaged under Labor.
We have also proposed reform in the local government area. In that reform, we have said not every shire is doing a bad job. In fact, we do not believe anyone in shires is doing a bad job in the work ethic department. We think the model was a problem from the start. It has disenfranchised people; it has taken away people’s power and voices. It is a very bad model to not have your head office within your shire boundaries. It does not even support you economically. To me, that is just ludicrous. I have used the word ‘toxic’ before, because it does not matter where you go, shires are the topic of conversation - they are toxic. Regarding how shires manage, I know they have engaged a consultant now to remarket themselves and probably come out and fight the Country Liberals as part of the election campaign. I am sure Labor will get some of the shires on board to start their fight. That is how Labor plays the game. However, that is one of our other policies.
We have also committed $50m over four years - $12.5m a year - to support outstations and homelands, recognising there is a very strong connection to country. People have had properties under-invested, and we know much of that under-investment in outstations and homelands, combined with the shires and with a many policy failures, is driving people into town. So, we are starting to reverse that trend and take a different focus in the Northern Territory: we are about decentralising and supporting the regions, not just urbanising everyone which is creating many problems in the Northern Territory.
Yesterday, I spoke about welfare, the Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP), the perils of welfare without mutual obligation in the form of sit-down money with remote area exemptions being applied, and the reluctance of Centrelink to adhere to its guidelines on participation reports on people.
People in this Chamber, and many throughout the Territory, would know I am a firm advocate of economic development and employment. My biggest criticism of the intervention is there has never been an economic component to the framework of it. The intervention has done many good things and many bad things too, but there has never been an economic development arm. In Indigenous affairs there are many agencies, including Indigenous Business Australia, Indigenous Land Corporation, Aboriginal Benefits Account and many other funding bodies. There is a very uncoordinated approach in the way this is delivered by the federal government. There are better ways we can do that such as combine that with reforms in CDEP to remove the Newstart and quarantining component to encourage people to participate in CDEP, streamlining the way ABA, IBA, ILC and the other bodies come together to deliver services, particularly around the provision of infrastructure development for economic development. For example, in a hypothetical sense, strip shopping centre complexes in places like Wadeye or Yuendumu, some of the government current growth towns, would be a fantastic thing so people could start businesses in these communities.
There are better ways to streamline that and, for that reason, one of the Country Liberals’ policies proposes a national partnership agreement with the federal government on economic participation and economic development. Within that proposal to the federal government we will be asking for a reformist approach around CDEP and Newstart, and the removal of quarantining from CDEP. We will be asking for a greater say in how economic programs at a federal level are delivered in the Northern Territory. We are not putting our hand out as mendicants saying, ‘Give us all the money’, but we are trying to provide leadership through a recognised framework - that being a proposed national partnership agreement - to try to deliver better outcomes on the ground. We think we can work together rather than apart. I have not spoken to the leader of the Coalition or federal government. This is a proposal from our end trying to take the initiative to show the leadership to achieve reforms in this area. It is an important initiative. I am not sure whether Labor or the Coalition will be receptive, but it is an important proposal to try to achieve change.
While I agonise over a very weak Chief Minister around his comment of crime in Alice Springs and other areas of the Territory is a direct component of urban drift, I recognise we cannot just criticise those who are drifting into urban areas. We must recognise the government’s failures and why those people are drifting into our urban centres as economic or social refugees and the concerns around that. Those people are also marginalised. While we criticise, on one hand, because we want action and a tough law and order approach, on the reverse side we are trying to decentralise and develop in regional areas so people are happy to go back to their country.
One thing that is not talked about – minister, I am moving away from the budget for a minute. One thing people do not realise is that before settlement, Australia was made up of many countries. In the Territory, there were many countries - different people from different areas. As people were mixed together troubles came - the mission movement and so forth. The member for Stuart will acknowledge what I am saying. Many people moved on to different country, different areas. Mixing together caused problems. If you tried to close down two countries in some parts of Europe now and move people together, there will be certain trouble. What is occurring, more so now, is where that conglomeration happened many years ago, now there is urbanisation, or the urban drift, that is having another direct impact. It is affecting everyone and everyone is a loser ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, I will just advise you that it is 9 pm and the House does now adjourn.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I think the House is of the view that we would like to continue, so I move that the motion be put.
Madam SPEAKER: The question is the House do now adjourn?
Motion negatived.
Ms PURICK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move that the member’s time be extended.
Motion agreed to.
Mr GILES: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I heard that enthusiasm coming from the member for Arafura. I am just about to congratulate her in an adjournment speech and she does not even have the respect to give an ‘aye’. I might have to rethink that ...
Ms Scrymgour: Come on, Adam, come on.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Mr GILES: It is all just frivolous. I am about to finish up shortly.
I was commenting about the different countries, or the different nations in the Territory, coming together at one point in time. They are now coming together in urban centres, and that is causing a whole lot more trouble. That is one of the components that has underpinned the Country Liberals’ policy of decentralising and trying to support the bush and grow the Territory in that area.
Madam Speaker, let me finish up by talking, once again, about Alice Springs. The Chief Minister’s zero tolerance tough-boy approach today fell on deaf ears. If there was any sincerity, it is too little, too late. His idea that the Police Commissioner should now take charge of police in Alice Springs - it really puzzles me that he was not in charge yesterday. I have said the prison needs to toughen up, the police need to be given that extra 20 police the Country Liberals will provide them with, and Territory Housing needs to toughen up.
In all of this, one question comes back to me regarding what is happening with the crime in Katherine, Palmerston, Tennant Creek, and Alice Springs. I was thinking about it the other day. We have these really expensive Chief Minister’s Offices in all these areas, and you have to wonder what has been going on. These Chief Minister’s Offices are wholly politicised. I am not attacking the individual - maybe in a minute, but not now - but they are highly politicised. Ex-government advisors from here, Labor Party members from there, are filling up the Chief Minister’s Offices, particularly in Alice Springs. Maybe it is not particularly in Alice Springs, but across the board. However, in Alice Springs you have a number of staff working there. The member for Stuart, the Minister for Central Australia, who should be run out of town for his failures, knows these people.
The future candidate for Namatjira is working in the Chief Minister’s Office. This is the candidate who used to work for the shires and got the shires so wrong. Now, he is working for the Office of the Chief Minister, with the member for Stuart as the minister, running all out over Namatjira, telling everybody he is going to build men’s centres here, ovals there. There is nothing in the budget. Alice Springs is burning while he is out there playing political games.
We want people in that office who do the job. All the other staff in there who are political appointees are incompetent. No wonder Labor is so hopeless in Alice Springs - look at the gumbies you have running the show! They cannot get anything together in the office. If they cannot get anything running in the office, how are they going to run a political campaign? How?
You have the future candidate - who is telling everyone he is the endorsed candidate, but he has not been publicly announced yet - running around everywhere: ‘I am the man, I am the man’. Let me remind people, he is the man who was in charge of the shire who caused all the problems in the first place. Then, we see the lovely lady who was temporarily in charge of the Chief Minister’s Office, is now moving to Darwin for a promotion - and good luck to her. She is a lovely lady.
We have a replacement coming in. The replacement is a lovely lady too, but you have to ask about your selection. When I used to apply for jobs, even for this job, I put my credentials on the table: ‘This is what I have done before. I think I have done a good job here, there, and everywhere’. I am not attacking this lady personally; I know it will come across that way. The head of Territory Housing in Alice Springs, which is one of the three pillars of failure, is moving over to head up the Chief Minister’s Office. I hope she does a good job. I hope things work. However, you have to ask: when that ain’t working there, how is that going to work? That is not a hard question.
You have an office full of political operatives running political games and you have Des Rogers running for Namatjira against the member for Macdonnell. He should be in town fixing the problems, not playing political games. There is no way he should be out there. You wonder why you have problems. You have all these political games going on.
If I try to have a meeting to help someone: ‘You have to go through the Chief Minister’s Office’. You get in there and they talk their political jargon. I understand part of it, but when you have someone who is really trying to help, you do not play games.
You will not fix Alice. I hope you do. I hope the person in charge of Housing who is going to the Chief Minister’s Office does a good job. I hope she is part of the solution, but what has come out of there so far has been absolutely nothing.
I have just jogged my memory on a very important point before I sit down. I wish the member for Brennan could remind me of the name of the policy - I am pretty sure it is Every Child, Every Day. I want to quickly touch on that. How much money does Every Child, Every Day receive? We will find that out in Estimates. Every Child, Every Day in Budget 2011-12: Middle Years Education, under Key Deliverables, for students attending over 80%: budget for non-Indigenous, 99%, estimate 93%; budget for next year, 94%; actual 81%. What have they done this year? They have gone from 99% to 93% to 94% to 81% of an outcome. They have decided not to target 99% as an 80% school attendance: ‘We will lower it to 83% and we might be able to meet our targets then’.
Indigenous, Middle Years Education, Every Child, Every Day - and this includes all Indigenous Territorians, urban and remote; and we know urban has a much higher school attendance and participation rate - 80% of the time is only four days out of five a week. The estimate is 25%. You can only get 25% of Indigenous kids to school 80% of the time. Of those 25% who attend and are in Year 9, only 22% of the 25% who attend 80% of the time actually meet Year 9 writing standards. Does that make sense in an Every Child, Every Day, every school scenario? They are supposed to go five days a week, but let us say it is only four. Only 25% of kids are turning up four days a week and, of those 25% turning up only four days a week minimum, only 22% are meeting the Year 9 benchmark. Every Child, Every Day. Something does not seem to be working.
Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I am sorry I took more than eight-and-a-half minutes.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Speaker, I was going to let my colleague, the member for Fannie Bay speak. I will not take long to speak on Budget 2012-13. It has been interesting listening to the member for Braitling, and other members of the CLP, in their contribution to the budget, but particularly the member for Braitling. He said there are many criticisms in regard to the intervention. This was the man who championed the architect of the intervention, Mal Brough. If we look at some of the issues in Alice Springs, particularly the urban drift we see in many our regional towns, much of this can be attributed to the intervention and people moving from their remote communities into Alice Springs.
The member for Braitling likes to have his cake and eat it at the same time. On one hand, he champions the cause of Mal Brough and the intervention and, when it suits him, says there are many things to be criticised. I am glad he has had an epiphany and has suddenly changed his mind. He has gone around the communities, which I reckon is all part of his charge for the seat of Lingiari at the next federal election. I believe whilst the member for Braitling will run for the seat of Braitling, let us watch this space and watch the member for Braitling go for the federal seat. I actually think he finds this parliament is a small pond, and he feels he is a big fish in a small pond. Going federally will see him go into the big pond, which is where his heart really lies.
If you believed members opposite regarding the negativity and the dire circumstances of the Northern Territory, you would think that nothing was happening. It could not be further from the truth. There are many things happening – and certainly many positive things. As I reflect on probably the last budget of my parliamentary career, we have been through many since 2001. I remember when we came to government in 2001, and the appalling state the CLP left us in. I have heard these members opposite saying conservatives are the money managers; they are the ones who can manage the budget and bring it back to surplus. I remember what had happened when we inherited government in 2001, so it could not be further from the truth.
We have people on the others side who have selective, short memories, particularly in relation to the bush. There are members opposite who often say: ‘Oh, it is always negative. They are always looking back at the past regarding the bush’. I suppose that is true; we often do go back in history. It is always important to look back in history at the consecutive budgets and money this government has injected into the bush. This budget is no different. Since 2001, it has been this Labor government which has built on infrastructure and programs that have been vitally important in the social fabric of those remote Aboriginal communities. I think of all the schools and health centres which are vital infrastructures in our communities, where we did not have appropriate clinics, where nurses working in many of those communities did not have decent accommodation to live in.
Madam Speaker, I remember when you were Health minister, and we visited Maningrida and nurses were just about falling through the floors in their accommodation. This was what was acceptable to the CLP. They were in government for 26 years. My other colleague, the member for Johnston, would remember Maningrida School. In the second biggest community in the Northern Territory, where there was a community population of over 2500 people, the school had not had infrastructure funding for many years. It was because they were political pariahs; the CLP had felt they were too close to, and voted, Labor so they were penalised. It was hypocrisy for members of the CLP, one after another, to come trotting in here all day sprouting their negativity and saying nothing ever happened. Well, there was a great deal that happened, and there have been some fantastic initiatives built in, particularly in my electorate of Arafura.
I ask the member for Braitling to have a look at the Alice Springs News, particularly the 13 September 2000 issue. Erwin Chlanda ran a series of stories in the Alice Springs News about the stabbings. I am not saying that what is happening today is okay; I am saying these are complex social problems. He hit at the heart of it, and it is something we recognise: alcohol is a major factor. The Minister for Alcohol Policy has constantly talked about the initiatives of Enough is Enough and what we need to do in clamping down on alcohol-fuelled violence in Alice Springs. It needs to happen throughout the Northern Territory, and that is happening. Everyone needs to be supportive of making sure we can deal with the issue of alcohol.
Turning to my electorate of Arafura, the new training facility for Gunbalanya and Jabiru for the VET programs will be welcome. That builds on the fantastic West Arnhem College which has been established. It is welcome. The mining sector, the tourism sector - all of the sectors in that region - will welcome that training facility to be able to provide VET programs in Jabiru.
I was recently at Wurrumiyanga formerly called Nguiu, and the barge was in. Receiving that $2m for the barge facility and having that barge landing completed will be welcome. I am happy to see that $2m in the budget.
Regarding the $4m for the Arnhem Highway, recently I drove on that highway over the Easter period and after the Easter weekend. There has been some work done since the Wet Season, so the $4m will be welcome. I know the minister for roads will continue to talk to the federal minister because, with the growth in Jabiru, the expansion with ERA and INPEX, there has to be some working together between us and the federal government to look at some major roadwork funding to build, widen, and strengthen the Arnhem Highway.
The family centres in Gunbalanya and Maningrida will be welcome. In Maningrida there were plans to attach it to the school. In Gunbalanya, the family centre - built on West Arnhem College, with Gunbalanya School - has taken over the running of the childcare facility and have integrated that closer into the school. That money in the budget is also welcome. It was great to see that.
The upgrade for the health centre at Pirlangimpi is a long time in coming. I thank the government because there have been some OH&S issues, and that funding to upgrade the health centre is welcome.
The upgrade to the water supply for Maningrida is also welcome – part of the $7m which will also upgrade facilities in Lajamanu and Ntaria. In Maningrida with the new subdivision, the upgrade of the water supply is welcome.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I welcome Budget 2012-13. It is responsible. I know members opposite have harped on the deficit. The Treasurer has explained why we have had to maintain that. It can be maintained. For Territorians, particularly for Aboriginal people living in remote communities, there is continued spending on essential infrastructure.
In stark contrast to the Leader of the Opposition and his budget speech, it is amazing how the member for Macdonnell - I was listening to her and I think that was the first speech she has made in recent times. This is a member - hypocrisy with a capital ‘H’ - puts out all doom and gloom for Macdonnell which has always been there. She has been quite inactive as the local member. It was interesting, she did not say anything about the lack of policy and direction the Leader of the Opposition had in his speech.
The member for Macdonnell, the candidates for Stuart and Arnhem - I have heard members of the CLP in the past say: ‘The Aboriginal members of the ALP should stand up and speak their mind and say things’. Well, I ask the Aboriginal members of the CLP, the member for Macdonnell, and the candidates for Stuart and Arnhem: where do you stand? Where do you stand on your leader who cannot be bothered to even put out his policy? He has put out a political policy on outstations. When you read the detail of the outstation policy, it is a farce, and is actually quite insulting to Aboriginal people that they have tried to sell this policy.
I talked to my constituents in Maningrida after they went there. We have talked in detail, and drilled down to the detail of the CLP policy. The smoke and mirrors of the CLP need to be seen through. For the smoke-and-mirrors member for Macdonnell, who comes in here and paints the doom and gloom and says nothing has happened – well, what has she been doing as the local member for the last six years? She has failed as a local member. She has failed her electorate. She has failed to advocate and to try to get things happening.
It is the same with the candidate for Stuart. What does she think? These are women who are quite vocal, have been quite vocal, and have strongly advocated people should be taken off welfare and we need more jobs in communities.
I challenge the candidates for Stuart and Arnhem, and the member for Macdonnell. Come on, you guys have always stood in here - well, the member for Macdonnell has stood up here. The candidate for Stuart was quite vocal in the media, and, suddenly, silence. I believe the Aboriginal members of the CLP have been silenced. All of the Aboriginal members of the CLP have been told they cannot shame the CLP: ‘We do not want the focus to be on blackfellas in the bush. We do not want you to talk, because this is all about moving. Let us just trick Aboriginal people, let us talk the rhetoric, but very little in action’. I find that totally offensive. Aboriginal people are not stupid ...
Mr Westra van Holthe: What have you mob done for them?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: More than you have. And the member for ...
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms SCRYMGOUR: I pick up the interjection from the member for Katherine. You are a disgrace. You have not even been preselected, member for Katherine. You have not even been preselected and you sit here …
A member interjecting.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: And you - your treachery on stamp duty and what you did in Lajamanu, you ought to be ashamed of yourself! You sit there and ask what we have done ...
Mr Westra van Holthe: Yes, what have you done?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Well, there are many things we have done. I tell you, I can depart this parliament very proud of my 11 years in this parliament and what I have done for my electorate. I can walk out of here, I can sleep at night, and know I have had an electorate that this Labor government has actually invested in, in infrastructure and programs. This is a government that has not turned its back, unlike you guys who turned your back for 26 years. So, do not sit there and tell me that nothing ever happened.
You are a disgrace, and you have not even been preselected. For goodness sake! You are sticking up for a leader who is spineless, absolutely gutless, and is knifing you in the back, and has also knifed the poor member for Drysdale. This leader has a track record of saying: ‘Not my problem; it is the party’s problem’. This bloke is absolutely spineless, has no substance, and manages to duck and weave all the time. His sidekick, the member for Port Darwin …
Ms Lawrie: The wannabe?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Yes, the wannabe Chief Minister ...
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! I remind the member we are talking about the budget. Relevance. She seems to have strayed from the topic.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Braitling. There has been considerable latitude in the debate this evening. I recall the member for Greatorex’s contribution. Thank you for the point of order. Member for Arafura, you have the call.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. They have glass jaws on the other side; I have always said that. They can get extensions of time and talk. They stand here, exhaust themselves and literally knock themselves out, they spin so much. They talk about the Labor spin! The spin from the Liberals is just amazing. They spin and just about knock themselves unconscious. Their spin amazes me.
Member for Braitling, I was complimenting you. It made my heart sing a little when you said there are criticisms in relation to the intervention. You have seen the light and that is fantastic. I hope you mean it and it is not just political spin. You have genuinely - particularly communities like Maningrida. I have been standing in this House for 11 years talking about places like Maningrida. There are many examples in Maningrida - models that can be adopted or looked at, particularly with jobs.
The Labor government has always had a Jobs Plan. Going from 2001 with Syd Stirling right through to our government, the Jobs Plan we have has to marry with the federal government’s roll-out of its jobs plan. You talked about the revamped CDEP. I would like to look at places like Maningrida having the flexibility of topping up the salary and giving people a full-time wage because it made people feel part of - we all want a job, we all want to work.
When you talk to Aboriginal men, particularly in the Maningrida region, who have been working for a long time - my colleague, the member for Johnston, would remember old Mr Don Wilton who worked with Bawinanga Aboriginal Corporation for nearly 40 years – 40 years that man worked for and not one day off! He worked on CDEP top-up up until Mal Brough brought in the intervention and removed CDEP. To see that man who had worked for 40 years, not a day off, absolutely gutted because he lost his job was a disgrace. When I look at the intervention I see the injustice that happened to people like Don Wilton and those decent men at Maningrida, who worked every single day for their families, and who lost their jobs because a federal government felt CDEP was sit-down money and it was not an employment program. It is an absolute disgrace.
It had worked, and you have seen it, member for Braitling. You have seen places in Maningrida where we have 23 enterprises built from CDEP, and Aboriginal people driving that process of that economy. That is what we have to get back to. That is certainly something I have been very passionate about for 11 years, and proud to be part of this government because there has been a great deal of infrastructure money that has come from this government to assist communities such as Maningrida to move forward.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the Treasurer, and I support Budget 2012-13.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Katherine, before I call you, I point out to members that, almost simultaneously, the Deputy Clerk and the Speaker have advised me regarding Standing Order 67, Digression from Subject. Under (c), it does not apply to the particular debates of second reading of an Appropriation Bill, or supply bill.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Katherine): Madam Deputy Speaker, I find it quite incredulous tonight to hear part of the contribution from the member for Arafura - incredulous that she should come in here and sprout the word ‘hypocrisy’, as she used in reference to the member for the Macdonnell. I remind the member for Arafura and the House, regarding hypocrisy. Let us cast our minds back some time ago - well, we are talking 18 months I guess - when the member for Arafura bailed on this government. The member for Arafura bailed on the Labor Party. Looking back at the reason for that, I seem to recall it had something to do with the failure of this government in Aboriginal affairs policy. So, for the member for Arafura to come in here and start bandying around the word ‘hypocrisy’ is just unbelievable. How can she stand there with a straight face, with any credibility at all, when she has none? She proved that tonight. She has none and, to bandy around the word ‘hypocrisy’ in reference to the member for Macdonnell - well, we all will draw our own judgments. I am sure the people of the Northern Territory will judge that as well. Although, I guess they will not get to judge the member for Arafura at the next election because of, course, she is bailing once again. I guess for a different reason. It will be the rat deserting the sinking ship.
Anyway, that is not how I wanted to start the contribution to the budget debate tonight. Tonight I respond to what is, in my view, a pretty darn ugly budget for the Northern Territory in 2012-13. It is ugly in many ways, and I will spell out those ways as I go through some portfolio responsibilities, but also as the budget relates to the Katherine electorate. I have four portfolio responsibilities. I am going to focus on one particularly tonight, and that is tourism.
I find myself drawn to tourism - notwithstanding I have spoken about it many times in this House before during all sorts of debates on MPIs and other debates - because it is an extremely important part of the Northern Territory’s economy. In fact, tourism is one of the key economic drivers in the Northern Territory. It employs more than 10 400 people directly, and almost another 10 000 indirectly. That is around 20 000, or 9% of the Territory’s total employment. Tourism contributes around $710m in direct gross state product, and another $853m additional indirect gross state product. That brings tourism’s total contribution to the Territory to around $1.6bn - not small fry by any standards.
Yet, it could be so much better, if only this government would accord this vital part of our economy the importance that it deserves. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Tourism has had a number of ministers in the 11 years of the Henderson Labor government, and has been relegated to junior ministry status by having it vested with the current minister who is, at best, lacklustre. I hope the minister does not take that personally because it is not about her personal attributes; it is about her capacity to drive tourism to where it should be, as it was under the previous CLP governments, as one of the most important areas of policy and focus which delivered key economic outcomes to the Northern Territory.
What have we seen happening in tourism in the past 11 years? What have they done? What has this government done to tourism since coming to power in 2001? What they have done would make you cry. A little melodramatic perhaps. However, without the melodrama, they have forced tourism businesses to close their doors, and that is a fact. Let us examine why.
For one thing, visitors to the Northern Territory have been on the decline since this government came to power. I wonder if that is a coincidence. In 2000, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, there was a total of over 1.5 million overnight visitors to the Northern Territory. This was comprised of intra-Territory, interstate and international visitors. In the years between 2000 and 2005, those total visitor numbers dropped from 1.54 million to 1.38 million. When you break that down, total domestic visitors dropped by 7%, and international visitors declined by 18%. That was in the first five years of this government: visitors to the Northern Territory down by 7% and 18% respectively for an average fall weighted at 10%.
I could rattle off all of those figures but, instead, Madam Deputy Speaker, I seek leave to table some statistics from the Australian Bureau of Statistics which show tourist numbers in the Northern Territory from 2000 to 2005.
Leave granted.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Let us remember, 1 540 000 overnight visitors to the Northern Territory sank slowly to 1 380 000 in 2005 – a decline of 10%. Funnily enough, I do not think there was a global financial crisis going on during those years, so we cannot blame that. The Northern Territory government cannot blame it.
Let us now warp forward to 2011 and go to Tourism NT’s website and look at the statistics on visitor numbers. The number of domestic visitors in calendar year 2011 to the Northern Territory was 891 000. That is a decline of a further 141 000 visitors to the Northern Territory, which equates to a fall of almost 14% from 2005 until now. Turning to international visitors, from an 18% decline from 2000 to 2005, international visitors have continued to decline by a further 59 000 people or 17%. That is quite consistent, though, is it not? Under the administration of this government, with its several ministers, and its current minister, a fall in the first five or six years of this government of 18% and, for the same amount of time from 2005 to present, 17%. Well done, Labor.
This is not a joke. I did not come in here to make light. This is deadly serious because this government has allowed one of the key economic drivers in the Northern Territory to go from swinging in the trees to dragging itself through the mud, which has visited upon tourism-related businesses in the Northern Territory the worst possible outcomes: closed doors, falling revenues and profits, and job losses. To the minister, congratulations, well done. I hope you can hold your head high when you go to Alice Springs and talk to tourism operators there.
Since this government came to power in 2001, total tourist numbers have declined from 1 540 000 to 1 180 000, or more than 23%. Do you know what effects that 23% has on the bottom line of business? Well, I suspect no one on that side of the House knows what effect that would have, because I do not think any of them have ever run a business. I could stand corrected. Unless you have someone on your side of the House that has, perhaps, run a business, been involved at that level, I do not know you would really understand how these types of statistics actually play out on the ground. Since this government came to power, almost a quarter of visitor numbers, almost 25%, have declined. That is hardly a very good record. What has this government’s response to the decline been? Absolutely nothing.
Budget allocations for Tourism for the last six years or so were: in 2005-06, $37m; in 2006-07, $38m; in 2008-09, $42m; in 2009-10, $42m; 2011-12, $41m; and in 2012-13, again, $41m. I have not done the figures and broken it down so far as to figure this out exactly, but I do not even think those budget allocations for tourism have kept pace with CPI. They have, in fact, declined in real terms.
Also, let us have a look at what Tourism gets in the percentage of the total budget for those years. I am not going to do all the years, but let us just have a look at a couple of them. In 2005-06, the total budget for the Northern Territory was $2.523bn. The percentage of that figure allocated to Tourism was 1.5% - 1.5% of that budget went to Tourism. Now, in 2012-13, the paltry $41m that has been allocated to Tourism is just 0.9% of the total amount of money the Central Holding Authority has authorised for budget expenditure - 0.9%, a drop, a fall from 1.5% of the budget to 0.9%. No wonder tourism is in the doldrums.
Let us face it, this government loves to tout the spending of money as an outcome. We hear it constantly in this House. We do not see any results on the street. We do not see any real results, but what we have is a government that constantly says: ‘But we have spent this much money. But we have spent more than you ever spent’. I remind the government that spending money is not an outcome. Money is an input. If you do not get any value for money, you do not have any outcomes, and vice versa. They can hardly crow this time that they are spending more money on tourism.
This minister and her predecessors have allowed tourism to decline in every respect. It even commands a smaller and smaller slice of the budget pie. Not only is the current minister lacklustre, but she and her predecessors have failed to command enough respect with their own Cabinet colleagues to secure a budget allocation that gives tourism any chance of growth in the Northern Territory. That is, of course, another hallmark of this government.
Here you had an opportunity to invest in tourism, a sector within the Northern Territory that contributes so much to the economy of the Territory, driven by private enterprise and risk, and you have ignored the principles of good government and continued to invest in non-productive assets with policies. Remember, tourism is one of the three economic drivers in the Territory, along with mining and cattle, yet it is in the doldrums for a whole raft of reasons.
Are there any excuses? I have heard the Tourism minister, the Treasurer, and the Chief Minister blaming everything on the global financial crisis and, of course, they like to throw the strong Aussie dollar into the mix as well. Sure, that is the problem.
Did this situation take the government by surprise? Sure, the global financial crisis was a tough time, but what about the Aussie dollar? Did that sneak up on you? The Aussie dollar has been climbing since this government came to power in 2001. When I look at the graph I might not have brought down with me - no, there it is. I have drawn some rough lines where the government came into power in 2001, where we are now, and it has been rising ever since.
I seek leave to table this document also, Madam Deputy Speaker, because the minister might like to look at it so she can understand what I am talking about.
Leave granted.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: It started at around 55 when you first came into power and has jumped up to about $1.03. The question I have now is: what has this government done to mitigate the effects of the rising Australian dollar? What did your economist - you must have economists who advise you - tell you what the trends are, what they are likely to be, and what the impact will be? Surely to God, you have an economist or somebody with some expertise you can tap into to give you advice on how to mitigate the effects of things such as the rising dollar.
Did you employ any of these strategies, if you were advised of them, to mitigate these effects? I would really like to know what has been done to mitigate the effects of the rise in the Australian dollar in tourism. From where I sit, all I see is a decline in the Tourism budget year after year after year. Remember, we went from 1.5% to 0.9% of the total allocation for the Northern Territory.
Tourism is in decline so I guess this government is thinking: ‘Let us spend less’. I do not know what this is all about. What is more, they spend less on the real, productive, and private-sector focus part of the Territory’s economy. I do not understand that thinking. They had an opportunity, over the past 10 years, to heavily invest in tourism - whether that be destination development, marketing overseas or whatever - to try to boost tourism in the Northern Territory to keep the economy afloat, to keep the businesses afloat, to keep people employed in that sector. Yet, they have, over the last 11 years, squandered that opportunity because they keep going back to spending their money on non-productive items. The shadow Treasurer and the Leader of the Opposition have canvassed that issue time and time again.
There is much to say but so little time. I am not going to talk too much about essential services or local government; I am going to save that for the Estimates process. However, I will say one thing about local government; that is, I am waiting with bated breath to read the financial sustainability reports on the shires. All of us in this House recall the minister hid the last financial sustainability reports done on East and West Arnhem Shire Councils. I understand the latest reports are due to be handed to the minister some time this month. The minister has already spoken in this particular budget debate.
I throw out the challenge to any journalists listening this evening. Why do you not see if the minister will commit to making those reports available publicly before the August election? More importantly, for the sake of the shires, will she provide a copy of those sustainability reports to the shires prior to the next election? Maybe if the minister has the opportunity, she might like to get up in adjournment and give that commitment. Given the culture of cover-up that is also a hallmark of this government, I somehow doubt it.
As my colleagues have already spoken about in this place, I also have very significant concerns about our levels of debt. By 2015-16, we will be almost in a position where our own source revenue will not be able to meet the interest payments on our debt. If I was in that position personally I would be very afraid. I would be afraid of how I was going to meet those responsibilities and repayments from my budget. Perhaps we will have to start digging into the GST revenue to top up those interest payments. I imagine the expectation out there is GST revenue will actually be used to improve the lives of the people who live in the Northern Territory, as opposed to paying off Delia’s credit card.
What all this really means, to use an analogy, is when Mr Trucking Company Owner goes into the MVR and pays thousands of dollars in registrations, he might ordinarily expect that rego payment would be put into the roads his trucks drive on. Mr Trucking Company Owner expects the government might apply his registration money to those roads that shake the life out of, and rip the guts out of, his trucks. That is a pretty reasonable expectation. That will not happen if this government continues down the current slippery path it is on. Mr Trucking Company Owner’s registration money will go into paying off the interest - just the interest - on this government’s mounting debt.
Then, there is the cost of the prison - the $300m prison that went to $495m. We now discover by the time it is paid off, it will have cost Territorians - in the total amount of money that will have been paid out - $1.8bn. The Treasurer likes to get a little cute around that figure: ‘Yes, that is not $1.8bn in today’s dollars and that will be reduced over time as the CPI takes effect’. Nonetheless, it is still a figure people in the Northern Territory should be worried about.
I will move on to talk about a few local issues in Katherine. I note the budget is not all bad for Katherine. It is not good; it is not all bad. We have an amount of $7.7m, I believe, allocated for patient accommodation at the hospital. That, in itself, is a nice initiative. I certainly welcome that money being spent in Katherine. However, it highlights the lack of strategic planning and the shallowness of the government when it comes to thinking about the future of a place like Katherine - and the hospital, of course. The hospital is in a flood zone. I have said this before in this House and I will say it again: every time there is a Level 2 flood warning, patients need to be evacuated. Those patients are either taken to Tindal or flown to Darwin.
In a cracker of a Wet Season, we can have two or three Level 2 flood warnings. I will not belabour the point, but someone needs to start thinking strategically about major and critical infrastructure such as hospitals when they are situated in the flood zone. Parts of the Katherine hospital are now 75 years old - it celebrated its 75th birthday last year or the year before. I remember saying then that I hope by the time it is 100 it will not be there anymore; it will be somewhere high and dry.
I move on to the renal unit. There has been a fair bit of hoo-ha in Katherine about the location of the renal unit. Last year, it was spoken about in the media. Since then, it has gone through two stages of development consent; the subdivision being the first of those stages which was approved. Then, in March this year, the Development Consent Authority approved the building of the facility. I do not think I need to table it, but these are the minutes from that meeting. I listened to a fair amount of what the Health Minister had to say in the last couple of days about the budget, and health and renal facilities. He has spoken about - and I imagine they are all federally funded - renal facilities that are going to be built out bush. Yet, there is no mention that I can find in this budget paper - unless someone can point it out to me - that talks about the renal unit in Katherine.
If this government was so hell-bent on getting this done - let us go back to the process. The process started without any consultation about the location of the facility. Departmental personnel within Lands and Planning, as I understand it, were simply asked to find a block of land. They found the cheapest and most easily accessed block of land that already had power, sewerage and water connected. I guess they closed their eyes with a pin in their hands on a map, in went the pin, and that is where they decided to put it. That is about as far as the strategic planning went for the renal unit which, in my view, should be a part of a new health precinct in Katherine. Why not put it in the location where the future hospital might be? That is a tough one, isn’t it? But, no, because there has been no strategic planning, this government does not have a clue where it is even likely to put a hospital. Moving right along - no renal unit.
In the last couple of days, we have had some debate in this House during Question Time about another couple of issues; one being the cultural precinct and the other the bypass. I will talk about the bypass. It was the subject of a question today in Question Time. The member for Braitling spoke about this in his budget reply this evening. An amount of $10m was allocated a number of years ago - and it has been in three previous budget papers - for the bypass in Katherine, for the road train diversion. The minister was quite right in what he said: there were a number of designs. I seem to remember that four options were put to the people of Katherine. One was no change, and the other three options were different routes for the heavy vehicle bypass. All of those options were knocked back by public comment and opinion. It was felt so strongly by a number of people in Katherine that none of those options were suitable. I distinctly remember the minister saying words to the effect of: ‘We will have to go back to the drawing board and come up with a new plan or a new design’ …
Ms PURICK: Madam Deputy Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move an extension of time for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Thank you, honourable members.
We had a situation where the ball was back in the minister’s court. He made a commitment that he was going to go back to the drawing board for a new design. I have not heard any utterances from the minister or this government with respect to the road train diversion around Katherine.
Consequently, it is a fairly safe assumption to draw, because of the minister’s - well, I will say - laziness, lack of urgency he has applied to this project, that $10m has gone. I am yet to discover - and I guess Estimates will probably clear this up, because the minister’s answer today was not all that clear whether the $10m promised by the federal government through Anthony Albanese, and in which Warren Snowdon had a big hand - whether that money actually came into Northern Territory government coffers, or it was just sitting there on an accrual basis ready to be handed over when the project began.
I do not know that is the case, because I notice in the budget papers that original $10m amount actually started diminishing after the first year. I guess $20 000 or so came out after the first year, which I assume was spent on consultancy and design work. There was some more money taken out of the $10m in the second year, presumably for more design work and consultancy. I am assuming the $10m was actually in the hot little hands of the minister, so to speak, because he was able to access it and spend some of it. If that is the case, where on earth is that money now? Where has it been pushed off to? What sort of arrangements has he made with the federal government to spend it elsewhere? A couple of questions there to prepare yourself for in Estimates, minister.
The cultural precinct in Katherine - again the subject of a question in Question Time, and the minister not really giving any clear answers to the questions that were asked of him. We are in a position where $6.5m, or thereabouts, has been spent thus far getting the Godinymayin Yijard Rivers Arts and Cultural Centre up to where it is now. It is almost complete; there is internal fit-out work yet to be done.
We had an interim board which oversaw the initial stages of this project. We now have a permanent board which is, in fact, set up as a company. On the expectation that reasonable and substantial ongoing funding for recurrent costs would be provided by the Northern Territory government, the board has engaged an executive officer. That executive officer has resigned from her job down south and has moved to Katherine. She has, as I understand it, bought a house. Her partner has also resigned from his work. He is on his way here now, if he is not here already. So, we have a couple who have completely uprooted their whole lives to move to Katherine to take on a significant role in what will be a very significant asset for the Katherine community. Yet, we now discover there is no line item in the budget, and no specific mention of recurrent funding for the cultural precinct.
I was intrigued to hear the minister’s answer in Question Time yesterday about this. He referred to two budgets. He said they were working on two budgets, or something like that. I wonder whether this government is running two sets of books …
Dr Burns: Oh, come on!
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: I pick up on the interjection from the minister.
Dr Burns: I think he is talking about a couple of budget proposals. That is what I heard.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: I will check the Hansard.
Mr McCarthy: We are going to have an opening, but you are not invited!
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: I pick up on the interjection from the minister. This is the type of bloody-mindedness we have come to expect from the member for Barkly. This man has some history. He has opened the door; I am going to walk through it now ...
Dr Burns: Let us not talk about history.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: It is recent history, Burnsie, not 10 years old.
We have the history of this minister who sat in a meeting with the previous Mayor of Katherine and was asked by the previous mayor: ‘Why do you not do anything for Katherine?’ His bloody-minded answer was: ‘Well, what do you do for us?’
Mr McCarthy: That is a lie! That is a used car salesman by the sound of it.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: That is what I was informed, minister.
Mr McCarthy: You were told wrong.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, order!
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: We do not have to degenerate into a slanging match …
Dr Burns: Let us get it over and done with.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Yes, let us get it over and done with.
The other part of this is, if I go back to 2005 - and I have a copy of a letter the previous Chief Minister, Clare Martin, sent to Mr Bill Daw, Chairman of the Katherine Regional Cultural Precinct. I seek leave to table this document also.
Leave granted.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: I am going to read a little from it. It says:
Dear Bill
The way my mathematics works is that is $7m minus the $200 000 to replace the baseball diamond, because that did not need to happen. That is $6.8m. What I do not see in the budget papers is the remainder of the Northern Territory government’s contribution to this commitment by Clare Martin. We know the Northern Territory government has committed – is it $3m or $3.5m? - so far to this project. The remainder came from the federal government. So, there is still a big invoice coming your way, minister. I let you know that in advance because the problem we have with the cultural centre - it is a bit of a Catch 22 you could almost say. This cultural centre can become commercially viable, but only once Stage 2 is built and you have sufficient recurring funding to employ the people needed to run it to make it commercial. Once it gets going and starts to become commercially viable, the imposition on government should reduce because it will be able to generate some of its own revenue.
What we need – and I put the challenge out to the minister - is a commitment to Stage 2 to get this thing up and running, and a solid commitment to the recurrent funding required to get the staff in place and have the operational expenses taken care of. Unfortunately, the minister did not commit, despite him saying on 8 KTR a couple of weeks ago there would be recurrent funding. Then, of course, he obfuscated around that and started talking about private sector investment, philanthropists, and all that sort of thing. He realised he had put himself in a difficult spot and had to use weasel words to get out of it.
Madam Deputy Speaker, my time is at an end. This budget is really quite ordinary for Katherine, and I can only hope a CLP government will commit some more to the Katherine region ...
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Katherine, your time has expired. Please resume your seat.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Madam Deputy Speaker, I speak in support of the budget, the Treasurer’s fifth. I do not think any budget is an easy budget, but I do not think the Treasurer has ever had an easy budget. This one was particularly difficult in circumstances where post-GFC, private sector investment has not returned to those levels, the federal stimulus funding has been withdrawn and, in some respects, the Territory government is left as the last person standing to ensure the economy functions until that private sector investment kicks back in. There were some very difficult, deliberate decisions made by the Treasurer and this government to ensure we kept putting that funding in, particularly in infrastructure, to ensure the economy functioned well and we kept people in jobs. Very important, difficult decisions have seen a very tight budget.
A few people have commented it is not an election budget. It is really important that you frame your budgets according to the economic circumstances you are in, not the electoral circumstances. Obviously, that is what we have done, because this is a very tight, difficult budget, and has confounded some public expectations about what you do in the last budget of your electoral cycle. It is important to always budget for the economic circumstances you are in.
We have made some important decisions in our budgets over a period of time now about how we support Territory families and people living in the Northern Territory. They are things that people can take for granted. At Parap Primary School and Stuart Park Primary School at the start of the school term at the start of this year, talking to parents about the Back to School Bonus, they really appreciated that money was coming in, and the time at which it came in, to help them get back into school, particularly post-Christmas with those first credit card bills coming due. It is a really important budget item we have and is there again in this budget, the same as our childcare subsidy. We are the only jurisdiction that provides a childcare subsidy to offset childcare. They are critical things we do to support Territory families.
The Minister for Transport spoke about the bus services we provide for students and seniors. There are things we do in our budgets to provide services for Territorians, recognising where we live and some of the challenges we face. It is important, as a government, to ensure we have those things we do to help Territorians out.
In this budget we have invested money into the Royal Darwin Hospital, with $22m to continue upgrades to increase the number of beds in the emergency department and short stay unit, and provide two additional operating theatres at Royal Darwin Hospital. In some respects, the best health news in this budget for people living in my local area is the money we are putting into Palmerston Hospital. Investing into the Palmerston Hospital over time, while it is good for Palmerston, also provides relief for the Darwin hospital which is the hospital most of the people living in my area use. The Palmerston Hospital is a very important initiative, not just for the people of Palmerston. There is $10.3m for an early works package in this budget to commence construction of the $110m Palmerston Hospital. The effects of that are going to be well received in my electorate. I commend the start of that. It is very important for people living in Palmerston, and it is going to have a very important effect on people living in Fannie Bay, Parap, Stuart Park, and The Gardens.
Another initiative we have in our budget which has been popular over time is the concession of $8500 to assist senior Territorians and Pensioner and Carer Concession Card holders downsize or buy a home. That is of immense interest to people living in my area. They are going to be making decisions, over future years, about where they choose to retire. We want them to choose to retire in the Northern Territory. That is the kind of initiative that will help people make those decisions. It is critical it is in the budget, and it provides support for people making those life choices. We want them to stay in the Territory. That is a very important budget initiative.
Something the minister for Housing might discuss - which we have discussed in this Chamber before - are the four housing initiatives we have in place to try to make it easier for people to get a home, and when they are in a home, to be able to afford it. One of the things we want to try in the Territory is the affordable housing scheme where you pay rent of 80% or below the market rate.
The first stock is going to be in my electorate, in the village at Parap. This is our first major redevelopment of a public housing site, which is another added bonus. It will be opening later this year; it is nearly finished. We were touring it the other day. It looks fantastic; it really is a schmick set-up.
These are critical decisions we are making to build stock into an affordable housing company that will have long-term impacts on where we live. It will start from a small base, but it will grow and make a very large difference to many Territorians’ lives over the future years. The establishment of the Venture Housing company is critical. I commend the minister for Housing and the Treasurer. I have toured that new development with the Treasurer a couple of times and she has taken a keen interest in what we are doing, making sure we are providing affordable housing to Territorians.
We have to be careful in how we frame this budget to ensure we are doing what we need to do to prepare for INPEX. The minister for Infrastructure spoke a great deal about some of the works. We had to frame a very careful budget, bearing in mind the need to keep people working and living in the Territory before the INPEX project really gears up.
Madam Deputy Speaker, this is an excellent budget, very well framed and thought through. I am happy to commend it to the House.
Dr BURNS (Education and Training): Madam Deputy Speaker, I have listened carefully to the debate; I have been present for most of it. Essentially, this debate on this budget comes down to two different views. One view is from government, that we believe it was necessary to go into deficit to support jobs, families, and the Territory gearing up for major developments. There has been an opposing view put by the opposition, which really says it is very undesirable to go into deficit, the budget is unsustainable, and the debt is unsustainable. That was clearly articulated by the opposition.
In the end, the people will make the decision on the budget. That will be part of their consideration. The Leader of the Opposition, in his budget reply, said:
It comes down to the people, whether they believe government’s position will benefit them in the longer term or they believe the opposition. It really did not take the Opposition Leader long to backtrack on important elements of his budget speech. In his budget speech he said:
Within an hour he said no, in the first term they would identify when they could return to surplus.
So, already, we have seen the Leader of the Opposition backtrack. We saw the weakness of his position. We saw him uncertain about his plans for the Territory.
We put a budget of certainty here, and you only have to look interstate to see what has happened. I will quote directly from an answer given by the Treasurer to a question earlier this week about the Victorian budget:
I suggest to Territorians, despite all the promises about costs of living and undertakings by the Leader of the Opposition, he will head in exactly the same direction as Ted Baillieu.
It has been very interesting for me to hear the aspirations. Along with the criticism, there have been many budget bids come from each member opposite. I will not detail them, but I am sure they have been noted on both sides. He is going to have this inordinate problem where he wants to return the budget to surplus. Then, he is also going to have this problem of putting down all these budget bids that have come out tonight during the course of this debate.
I will spend some time on the Leader of the Opposition’s speech, because it needs to be critiqued. There needs to be criticism of this speech. A few perspectives need to be brought forward for the public, the media, and for the future, because this is my last budget speech. I have been around long enough to recognise a few things.
I was absolutely amazed, dumbfounded, and gobsmacked when the Leader of the Opposition started talking about a black hole. It took me right back to 2001-02. It is all here in this letter of demand, if you like, that he has given - all these 47 questions, and right up the top is the budget black hole. It was the opposition that went back to 2001-02 in this Territory parliament because, when we came to power, we discovered a black hole in their budget of about $130m. It has been obvious from the member for Port Darwin that he has never accepted that. He has never accepted they had a black hole, and this is somehow some sort of payback:. ‘You said we had a black hole, but you have a black hole in your budget now and we are going to prove it. We are going to ask all these questions. We are going to amass all these bits of information, and we are going to vindicate ourselves for what happened in 2001, when the Labor Party came to power’.
I have a quote from Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass:
Well, I have a memorandum - in fact, I have about 150 pages of memorandum here. It is a report of the Public Accounts Committee into the budget shenanigans of the CLP when we came to power – their last budget. The budget shenanigans around the budget estimates and the black hole were exposed. The memo I am going to read from - and this is a pivotal memo in the history of the Northern Territory’s political and budgetary history - comes from the then Chief Executive of Territory Health Services, Mr Paul Bartholomew. I will be tabling this after. It is accessible on the Internet, but I will table the whole report for those who are interested. I am sure there are many new members on the other side who are not aware of this history. The memo said:
There was a dissenting report. I could go on for hours about this, but they brought it up, they are the ones who talked about the black hole. It needs to be spoken about. What happened out of that is the government got an independent person to come in - Professor Percy Allan - to look at the black hole. Not only was this budget fiddle about the estimates, we found a $137m black hole. Professor Allan said in his report of the findings:
The last four budgets incorporated unrealistically low growth forecasts for government final consumption expenditure.
It was a political decision for them to create this black hole. His major recommendation was that we should:
We have done all those things, and it is absolutely futile and deceptive for the shadow Treasurer and the Leader of the Opposition to suggest there is some game going on off-line, off-budget with things such as the waterfront, and there is a lack of transparency in our budget. We accepted the recommendations; we implemented a Fiscal Integrity and Transparency Act. It is all in our budget books. This is just smoke and mirrors on the part of the CLP, just like the smoke and mirrors which was revealed when they lost government.
How many other budgets had they done the same? We will never really know. However, we did get to the bottom of it as a Public Accounts Committee. I am proud to say I chaired that Public Accounts Committee. For the members who were not present at that time, never forget their deception around budgets, and never forgive it because they have never said sorry. They have never confessed. They have never said: ‘We were wrong’. They still maintain there was never a black hole in 2000–01. I say shame on them.
That is what this exercise is all about - these silly 47 questions from the Leader of the Opposition. Leader of the Opposition, I have more questions on what you said in your budget speech, and I will go on. You attacked the convention centre; you have always hated that. That has always been something you have tried to downgrade.
You mentioned the surplus then you backtracked on it. That was absolutely reprehensible.
I will digress a little because there was a bit in your budget speech where you said:
You then went on to talk about:
I do not know where you got the figure of $800 000. I place on the record that I will take responsibility for what happened. Yes, air-conditioners were installed and were within Australian Guidelines in their noise levels. We had a complaint from a particular person who lives along Stedcombe Street who has been extremely antagonistic, and remains antagonistic, about this whole project. Rather than have the school move in there and have this person complaining in the media, etcetera, I said to the department: ‘I know the air-conditioners conform to standards, but is it possible to have something quieter on Stedcombe Street?’ They said: ‘Yes, we can put split system air-conditioners in. Bakewell school needs a new air-conditioner. The air-conditioner that was installed facing Stedcombe Street could be installed in Bakewell school’.
The all-up cost, I am advised, of removing the air-conditioning plant that had been installed, and reinstalling it at Bakewell, plus the cost of the split levels, was $57 000. The cost, I am advised, of Bakewell acquiring a new air-conditioner – essentially, it is a new air-conditioner - was $20 000 and $10 000 to have it installed and commissioned. If you take $30 000 away from $57 000, $27 000 was still within the envelope of the project, and still within the contingency fund. I was trying to do the right thing by the school and also the person who complained. I will take it on the chin.
I do not want to see an engineer in Construction and Infrastructure blamed - some members opposite are throwing stones at the design people and the engineers - I will take responsibility. I do not have any problem with that. It was $27 000. I have given the reasons why, sometimes, ministers have to intervene. Sometimes, there are other considerations which are political considerations, and considerations to those kids and their parents. Who wants a serial complainer writing to the paper continuing to complain about the noise from the air-conditioner, ruining those kids entrance and settling-in period into that school? I will take responsibility for that. You were completely wrong in $800 000, Leader of the Opposition, and that brings into question just about every other figure in your speech, as far as I am concerned.
He went on, as I mentioned today, to talk about government employees. We have given an undertaking. We have staff caps in place, but we have said there will be no sackings within the public service. You said in your budget speech:
He went on to say:
Then he went on to say:
This is the Leader of the Opposition who talked disparagingly at one stage about senior public servants. He defines that as anyone who earns more than $110 000 a year, the AO8s or SAO1s come August. There are quite a few of them. He called them backroom boys, carpet strollers and those characters who walk around with clipboard folders and do not provide service to Territorians.
This is what this man who would be Chief Minister thinks about public servants. He obviously has a hit list of senior public servants. There will be an absolute blood bath should he get into power.
I will always remember when Clare Martin came to power, she told us, as a very new Caucus, that there was going to be no sacking, no blood bath, and no massacre after 27 years. She believed the public service was a professional body and would work with the incoming government. That was what she wanted, and was the message she gave to all the senior executives.
There is quite the opposite message being given by the Leader of the Opposition. He has a hit list. He also has a list of people who know who they are, who are not on the list. He has, obviously, been having conversations. That is the inference I get from what he said: ‘They know who they are. You will be right, mate, but that bloke over there he has the crosshairs on his head’.
Most of these senior public servants are on contracts. You are going to have to pay them out. Is that factored into your budget calculations? The loss of knowledge through vindictiveness is a bit like Pol Pot coming into power, or Joe Stalin having a purge. This is all about personalities and vindictive behaviour. I am really concerned about what he said at the end:
I take from that he has had conversations with individuals saying: ‘If we get into power you are getting a promotion’. I say to all the public servants who might be listening to this, who might be interested, and to the media, I think the whole issue of merit and promotion based on hard work and study will fly out the window. What will happen if promotion is based on cronyism? Promotion will be based on political affiliation and that is a very dangerous thing.
However, I believe this is the man to do it. After all, this is the man who offered Leo Abbott a job all those years ago, in return for him standing aside as a candidate. He said Tony Abbott was part of it. He was offering him a job. He denied it, but he was. He said:
He did not keep that promise anyway. Here is the bloke who is offering all sorts of inducements and favours to people such as Leo Abbott. It does not surprise me in the least that he is offering inducements and favours to people in the public service who are ambitious, who will throw their lot in with someone like the Leader of the Opposition. It is despicable. If it has occurred, if it could be proved, it would be against the law. It would be against PSEMA. It comes very close to what many people would call corrupt behaviour. I am not accusing him of that. I am saying there is a big question in my mind about what is going on here.
I know it is late, but I also want to talk about his statements in terms of the …
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. If he is not going to accuse members then he does not use the terminology. I ask that he withdraw it.
Dr BURNS: I withdraw Madam Speaker. If it has occurred, it is very questionable behaviour.
Mr Elferink: Fine, we can live with it.
Dr BURNS: Okay. Let me turn to his statements about the private sector and its relationship with any government he might lead. He said:
So he does not completely dismiss the sale of government assets. We know the Government Printing Office and NT Fleet are part of that, as happened elsewhere.
Fair enough. Then, the next part:
This is code for privatising services within the Northern Territory government. There is nothing more certain than that. I say to people such as the good people who work at the laundry at the hospital, and the range of service providers within the Northern Territory government: look out, because privatisation is on their agenda. They want to reduce staff numbers, that is part of their political platform. They are going to go down the privatisation agenda. That is all code for privatisation.
I will finish because I know it is late. One thing that really caught my eye, as a former Planning minister, is where he said:
Here is the one buried in there. It really jumped out at me. He said:
What does that mean? That means blocks of units in the suburbs. That means blocks of units in Johnston. That means blocks of units in Sanderson. That means Jingili people having to put up with blocks of units that have been put there by this special planning body authorised by the Leader of the Opposition. I can see the white shoes walking all over this. I say to Territorians: be very wary of these planning proposals. It needs to be scrutinised. What are your plans? Who is going to be on this authority? What sort of building heights and where? Where? Where is it? I will just wind up now. I talked about the memo. It said:
Well, I have made a memorandum of it here today in my predictions, my analysis, of what the possible future Chief Minister of the Northern Territory might do. It is all hidden in there and we should all be very concerned.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend this budget to Territorians. It is a responsible budget. It does go into deficit. It is subject, as with all of these things, to laws and rules we brought in following the CLP fiddles, games, and shenanigans that went on in 2001 around the budget estimates - the way they wound them back so they could look as though they were having an increase in funding for the 2001 election. Also, the very real black hole that existed then ...
Mr Elferink: No.
Dr BURNS: Well, here we go, he is saying no. So, there is no repentance there at all - no remorse whatsoever of what they did in 2001. They cannot be trusted in 2012 either.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Deputy Speaker, it is great to have an academic on the team in Cabinet.
Minister Burns scrutinised in great detail the proposals put forward by the opposition - the would-be if they could-be. The very worst ever budget reply from the Leader of the Opposition was a case in point, where the man went out and led with his chin, and backflipped within an hour on one of his core commitments within his speech. Minister Burns tonight has just taken us forensically through quite a few proposals that were put forward, and thought bubbles from the Leader of the Opposition - no policy behind it, just thought bubbles. Reading through the messages those thought bubbles are sending - well, the messages were pretty clear: if you are not on his favourite list, you are getting the chop if you earn more than $110000. If you have not already had the call, ‘You are okay, son’, watch out. There is no security or job tenure for anyone earning over $110 000.
That is quite extraordinary for someone whose party aspires to be a government in any jurisdiction in this nation to come out and say. I actually do not think - in this modern day and age where we apply acts regarding the independence of the public service such as the PSEMA - anyone in opposition around our great nation would propose that. However, we saw that unedifying moment here on Wednesday during the Leader of the Opposition’s budget response.
It was always, I thought, quite useful for minister Burns, the member for Johnston, to remind the party of just why the Territory Labor government brought in the Fiscal Integrity and Transparency Act. Why now, when you have budget books and papers published, which are scrutinised through an Estimates Committee, they are audited by the Auditor-General? You do not get a greater level of transparency than is required to be met under our Fiscal Integrity and Transparency Act.
I will just go there as well. Also required is the pre-election fiscal outlook which is handed down when government is in caretaker mode in August by the Under Treasurer. I challenge the opposition to put forward their costed policies so they can be tested through the prism of whether or not they come within the budget parameters over the forward estimates. Quite frankly, the budget contributions from the members opposite - as the minister for Education quite rightly pointed out - were a mixture of the normal doom and gloom we are used to, and how terrible the Territory is because Labor happens to be the government - we have heard that. They are a bit of a broken record on that subject, and it is absolutely predictable; we have heard all their speeches and scripts before.
However, there was a tinge of aspiration in their contributions; their little personal shopping lists of what they would like to do and see implemented. They all have to be costed. Put them into your election commitments and cost them, if you have any credibility. So far, you have no credibility. So far, no one believes you because the beauty of the Territory is it is small enough for people to have a chat to each other about what someone said to someone, and what someone was promising someone, and who said what. People compare the stories; they can compare what they are hearing.
The thing about government is there is a rigour applied to what you say when you are a minister. There is a rigour applied to what you say when you are a member of the Caucus of the government. If you say you are going to do something, you have to deliver it. You actually have to have costings against it and to have a plan about where it sits within the forward estimates of any budget, at any given time. In government there is a rigour; in opposition there is this - as I am fond of quoting the Chief Minister - scattering of fairy dust that occurs. They wander around promising to the person they are having the conversation with: ‘Yes, yes, we can do that’.
Quite astutely, the Leader of Government Business took us through the messages the Leader of the Opposition was sending through his budget response; the message to the white shoe brigade of: ‘Do not worry, stick with us, we will have our own special planning powers and, if there is a particular project you want to get up, we will be taking care of that. Come back, Arafura Harbour; we will have canals there. We will chop through East Point. The mangroves around Bayview can be chopped up as we want and put in the canal estates’. It was a quite interesting series of messages the minister for Education was able to scrutinise in the Leader of the Opposition’s budget response.
I am still completely flabbergasted at the paucity of the response, but also the scary level of going back to the old days of the CLP arrogance and the silver circle – the ‘we will take care of our mates; we will take care of those who helped take care of us’ messages that were interwoven throughout the entire budget response. There were no plans, no costed policies. There was a real opportunity this week to apply some credibility to the would-be if they could-be opposition which wants to be the government - the Leader of the Opposition who aspires to be the next Chief Minister.
It is an election year; there was an opportunity for him to step up to the plate and say: ‘Here are the things we are going to do, here are the costings to it, here is where we are going to apply the savings, and this is how it all adds up’. None of that - not a shred of credibility in anything he had to say; no costings, no definition. Within an hour, at a media conference, there was an unedifying backflip on the one thing he hung his hat on: returning to a surplus. Totally embarrassing! No wonder he spends most of his time looking over his shoulder at big Dave wondering: ‘Is the knife is coming in today? Is there another challenge on for the leadership?’ It is quite extraordinary.
Territory families have benefited from the fact we stuck true to them through the tough times, through Budget 2012-13. We have stuck true to them with the concessions and subsidy schemes which are the best in the nation in supporting Territorians, and the families and the seniors, with the cost of living.
Victorian Libs have slashed it. We know that is on Terry’s quiet list he will pull out of the bottom drawer if he ever gets a chance to pull out the bottom drawer.
We will continue to provide quality health and education; to invest in our law and order and our policing; to build our housing stock across the Territory, remote and urban; and help Territory businesses to gear up for growth, to ensure we are keeping their businesses strong, their doors open, the staff opportunities there because of the contracts they are getting through that all-important capital spend.
We look forward to scrutiny in Estimates with the 27 Dresses list. I do not know if anyone has seen 27 Dresses, but it is about a hapless bridesmaid. We have the 27 questions from the Leader of the Opposition, and not one policy - not one policy. It reminded me of that movie, 27 Dresses, the hapless bridesmaid. I look forward to the scrutiny. All those 27 questions are very easy to answer. It just goes to show how lazy the opposition is, because the answers are there in the budget papers. But, no, they are not going to read those budget papers, or get someone to help them read them - one of their staff. They have been adding staff so, surely, there is someone who can step them through it, give them a little hint about which page to look at to check out the Department of the Chief Minister; the waterfront figures are there.
It is always good being the Treasurer of the Territory when you are up against the member for Port Darwin. I give you the tip: the only one worse than that was the member for Katherine. Member for Brennan, you should have had a tip at shadow Treasurer, it would have been a little more challenging than dealing with ‘Uh oh, the member for Port Darwin puts his foot in his mouth again’. I am looking forward to Estimates.
Madam Speaker, I thank members who contributed to the Appropriation debate. After the Clerk reads the title of the bill, I will be moving that the committee stage be later taken.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I move that the committee stage be later taken.
Motion agreed to.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I put on the public record the great news about the Golden Heart Awards 2012 for Tennant Creek and the Barkly. I outline the award categories. For Best Business/Industry - Small (1 to 10 employees), the winner was Laurie Fuchs, for 30 years of service to Elliott as a mechanic. Laurie is an outstanding citizen of Elliott in many ways, and a brilliant mechanic who works on cars, windmills, and bores. He is honest, has integrity, and has often quietly helped people with mechanical repairs for no payment.
Best Business/Industry - Large winner was Anyinginyi Health Aboriginal Cooperation for being a provider of primary healthcare for people in Tennant Creek and north Barkly communities. Anyinginyi has been running for nearly 30 years and offers many primary health services. Anyinginyi is committed to improving the health of all people of the Barkly.
Customer Service Award (Individual) was won by Roddy Calvert for her outstanding contribution to customer service since 1988, and her passion for Tennant Creek in the delivery of this service. Roddy has worked at Battery Hill since 1988. She treats visitors with respect, honesty, and a cheerful persona. Roddy has produced on her own two booklets What to Do and See and What’s for Dinner, Breakfast, Lunch and Tea for the visitors to the Barkly.
Rising Star (25 years and under) winner was Karina Files for her energetic, willing, and capable service to many areas of Tennant Creek. Karina has also received this award for promoting a range of events, as well as encouraging and fostering the development of Tennant Creek as a tourism destination in her capacity as Industry Officer for Tourism NT.
Best Team Juniors winner was Desert Storm Track and Field Barkly participants for their performances at the NT Championships in Darwin where they won seven gold medals, seven silver medals, and eight bronze medals. For most of the group, it was the first time they have ever participated on an international-class track, and they performed extremely well.
Best Team Seniors winner was Tennant Creek Tigers, AFL Barkly, for their enthusiasm and passion for the game since 1989 that recently resulted in winning the 2011 representative game against Mount Isa. Players for this successful team are selected from teams throughout the Barkly.
Best Coach winner was Wayne Green. As the main organiser and coach of Little Athletics, Wayne takes the time with every child to ensure he or she gets the most out of the experience. Wayne not only has outstanding coaching skills but works tirelessly to raise funds to go toward more opportunities for the children.
Best and Fairest Competitor winner was Matthew Green. In 2011, Matthew broke the Northern Territory record and won the gold medal for discus as part of the Desert Storm Cluster. He led the Desert Storm Barkly Under 12 side in Katherine, and was selected for the NT squad. Matthew was named the Senior Boys Highest Achiever at Tennant Creek Little Athletics presentation night.
Best Referee winner was Alison Haines for her work as a volunteer parent official at the Tennant Creek Little Athletics. Alison takes a lead role as an age group chaperone, and is always willing to officiate, with a tape measure or a recording sheet in her hand.
Rising Star (25 years and under) winner was Nicholas Corbett for representing the Clontarf team at many levels. Nicholas represented the NT Under 15 side at the national championships in Canberra, the NT Under 15 side at the Indigenous National Championships, is team captain for Junior and Senior Clontarf and made the All Stars Clontarf team.
Best Visual Artists (Individual or Group) winner was Delvina Beasley for being a prolific painter who works to preserve her culture through her art.
Best Performing Artist/s (Individual or Group under 25 years) was Kirsty Eberl from Kirsty’s Ballet School. Kirsty is passionate about dance and runs her ballet school each Saturday so children of all ages can learn to express themselves through a variety of dance genres, including ballet and tap. The school is a fantastic outlet for children, and Kirsty is a wonderful teacher.
Best Performing Artist/s, (Individual or Group under 25 years) winner was High School/Anyinginyi Singers for their positive work in writing and performing a rap song aimed at raising awareness about foetal alcohol spectrum disorder. Called Strong Baby Strong Life, the song confronts a major problem in our community and urges pregnant mothers not to drink alcohol because of the harm it can do to their unborn babies. This group wrote the song and created the clip in two days. The song has been uploaded to YouTube where it has received about 1500 hits in just a couple of months.
Rising Star - Arts (25 years and under) winner was Luke Evans. Luke is a focused and quietly keen young man who is a naturally talented artist. He was very impressed by visiting graffiti artist, Narisha Cash, and incorporated the skills he learned into his own style. Luke is also a very talented guitarist whose passion for the arts is truly inspirational.
Best Volunteer winner was Helen Kempe, for her role as volunteer within the town and the wider Barkly region where she is well-known throughout the pastoral industry as a tireless organiser and worker. Helen has one of the biggest and best photographic histories of the Barkly, having documented its social history over several decades. Helen is passionate about the Barkly’s history and, to this end, has assisted many groups and organisations with historical matters. Her dedication to the Country Women’s Association is, literally, icing on the cake.
Best Volunteer Group winner was Rotary Club of Tennant Creek for 30 years of volunteer charity work within the community. Rotary has not only remained an enthusiastic fixture at many Barkly events and assisted many individuals as well as community groups, but has extended its generosity for international projects such as Interplast, Polio Plus and Volunteer Services Abroad.
Best Community Event winner was Tennant Creek Christmas Tree. This is the longest-standing community event in Tennant Creek which has become a well-established local tradition. In the true spirit of Christmas, a free-for-all town party is held for families with each and every child receiving a gift. Funds for the event are raised throughout the year by the committee. The Tennant Creek Christmas Tree epitomises the generosity, friendliness, and spirit of our community.
Special Achievement Award for Long-standing Committee Membership winner was Marlene Hicks. Marlene’s name is synonymous with voluntary community work. She has served the Lions Club for 35 years, as well as many other committees such as the Barkly Australia Football League and Tennant Creek Women’s Refuge. Marlene started in 1976 at Barooga Lions Club and, 10 years later, moved to Tennant Creek. Her 35 years with the Lions and being a voluntary committee member with so many organisations makes her a deserving winner of the award.
Outstanding Community Contributor (under 25 years) winner was Rowan Salerman for his involvement with youth as an outstanding community police officer. Rowan engages youth on a personal level and generally cares for them. He is earnest and determined about wanting the town to be a safe place for everyone.
Community Care Award winner was Emmerson Resources for its support of the Clontarf Foundation and dedicated involvement in other areas of the community. Emmerson Resources has proved itself as a company which is proud to be a part of the Tennant Creek community.
Hero Award - Youth (25 years and under) winner was Grant Hanson for the example he sets as a fine role model for youth. Grant is our youth hero because he has demonstrated commitment to school, work, and the community. He is a responsible, community-minded young man who has made many people proud of his journey in life so far.
Hero Award - Open (over 25) winner was Stewart Whilley for his unwavering dedication to youth in the community. Stewart’s work with youth goes beyond guiding and mentoring. He truly cares about them, listens to them, fosters their self-development, and offers genuine support not available from anyone or anywhere else. Stewart has helped dozens and dozens of young people to re-engage with the community, and has gained their respect en masse.
Outstanding Cattle Station winner was Brunchilly Station for leading the way in cattle production and encouraging their hard-working staff in many ways. Everyone at Brunchilly is part of a family atmosphere, and the managers are keen to help develop career opportunities for their workers. Brunchilly supports local businesses, encourages visitors to enjoy station attractions, and is also involved in research and development.
Outstanding Clinician (doctor, nurse, health worker) winner was Celina Bond for the confidentiality, discretion, compassion, and kindness she offers to patients which has earned her the admiration of many. Celina is dedicated to her job and provides a continuity of care and trust as a nurse.
Outstanding Education Achievement winner was Grant Hanson, a Year 12 student at the Tennant Creek High School who has completed all his schooling locally. Grant is a role model for other students. He is currently undertaking a school-based apprenticeship with the Barkly Shire Council.
Community Pride Award winner was Barkly Shire Council, Service Centre, Elliott. Under the management of Brian Phillips, the Barkly Shire Council Service Centre in Elliott has flourished. The service centre’s CDEP workers keep the township clean, tidy, and welcoming, and everyone involved is proud of their achievements.
Outstanding Non-Clinician (administration, maintenance, drivers) winner was Bevan Stokes. Bevan is known widely as the man who picks up people to take them to their appointments at Anyinginyi. More than just a bus driver, Bevan plays a vital role in encouraging people to attend clinics.
The 2012 Great Big Golden Heart Award is the biggest golden heart of them all and is awarded to someone whose community spirit, care, and dedication to task is admired by all. The award goes to someone who has worked quietly and tirelessly over many decades to make Tennant Creek and the Barkly a better place ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Barkly, your time has expired.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Speaker, tonight I commend a talented and dedicated person in the sport of equestrian events, and will talk a little about what it takes to become an equestrian coach, and how we need to support this sport more, as it is a good sport and provides so much for young people.
Most people dream of owning their own home, but I know many a young person who dreams of owning their own horse. Over the last few years, I have come to know the horse people - as I call them - and they are an amazing group of people; whether they are a senior person involved in dressage events, or a family involved with pony club events.
When events are on at Freds Pass Reserve, an array of well-groomed horses and well-presented riders is a sight to be seen, and both rider and horse are immaculately presented. Countless hours go into preparing the horse for pony club or dressage events. I know many a mother who has risen at 5 am to plait tails and manes, and put pretty things on a rump and shiny stuff on the hooves. Clothes are ironed to within an inch of their clothing life, and riding gear polished and buffed so well you can use them as a mirror.
Many people get a bit mixed up over horse events. I can fully understand this situation as it has taken me the best part of three years to come to grips with the styles and events of dressage and all that surrounds equestrian events. Plus there are funny little things; for example, there is no such thing as a white horse in equestrian, it is a grey horse even if it is white. Then, there are the horses. I still do not know the difference between a warm blood versus a thoroughbred versus a quarter horse versus an Arab horse, but I do know the colours of appaloosa, palomino and pinto. Then, there are the ponies that come in different shapes, sizes, and colours. A pony is not just a pony as many of us would think. It could be a Shetland pony, a Welsh pony, or an Australian pony. Whatever the type of horse or its size or colour, they are all well-groomed, well-presented, well-cared-for, well-mannered, and provide great entertainment for many people. We only have to look at Freds Pass and Darwin shows and the number of people who sit patiently for a long time watching the horse events, especially children. They all enjoy the horse events.
The history of equestrian sport dates back more than 2000 years. The classical art of dressage is not new. What we see today as a highly technical and exacting discipline had its origins in the cavalries of ancient Greece when the Greeks introduced dressage training to prepare their horses for war. It continued to develop as a military exercise through the Middle Ages with a three-day event including dressage, cross country, and jumping tests designed to reflect the range of challenges horses faced in the Army. The word ‘dressage’ is a French word which roughly translates as training, and is considered the classical foundation for all equestrian training. Dressage tests the ability of horse and rider to display both athletic prowess and supreme elegance. Dressage requires precision, technical excellence, and harmony between horse and rider.
The classical method of training the horse for dressage goes back many centuries. The very spectacular jumps and gymnastics of the Haute cole ‘high school’ which entertained thousands of visitors to the Spanish Riding School had far more practical applications. Horses were trained to leap and kick out to free themselves from the melee of the surrounding foot soldiers. These horses responded to weight and leg signals from the rider, leaving both hands free to wield weapons, hence the more highly trained the horse, the better chance of survival for its rider. It went from the cavalry parade ground with its display of military horsemanship to the art of dressage as we know it today.
A second form of horsemanship is jumping, which requires horse and rider to navigate a course of jumps that fall if slightly knocked. The highest level is 5-star grand prix. At this level, the maximum height of a vertical jump is 1.6 m. The maximum width of a spread triple bar can be 2.2 m. Obstacles on a jumping course may include parallel rails, triple bars, water jumps, and simulated stone walls. Jumping was the first equestrian discipline included at an Olympic Games. Also known as show jumping, jumping as we know it today developed out of necessity.
Until the 18th century, hunters were able to gallop across open fields in pursuit of foxes but, when fences were built in the English countryside during the process of enclosure, riders and horses needed to adapt, and jumping was born.
Australia’s Edwina Tops-Alexander is the leading female rider in the world, and currently ranks seventh overall. Her best horse, Cevo Itt du Chateau, stands at just 15.2 hands high, a small horse comparatively, but a big jump is an amazing feat and accomplishment.
A third event is called eventing and is considered the triathlon of the equestrian. It has three phases, being dressage, cross country, and jumping. This is the event that attracts the most interest in the Olympics and that Australia has done exceptionally well in, in the past.
How do people get to be riders at Olympic level? They have to be coached. In the equestrian world, coaching is an art and a special skill in itself, as the person must be a proficient rider as well as be able to coach. In many other sports, a coach may not necessarily need to be a first-class participant in the sport to be a good coach, but in equestrian coaching the person must be very proficient in riding, care and knowledge of the horse, and have capacity and ability to be a good coach.
Under the rules of Equestrian Australia, the first level is introductory coach. I am pleased to say we have one person at this level and it is Vanessa Lines in the Top End. There is no one else in the Territory who has any level of coaching, and that is sad. I will come back to that point later.
To achieve this level, one must undertake studies and various riding activities. They must demonstrate they have strong knowledge of horse care and management including grooming, care, feed, when to undertake vet visits, and maintenance such as dentistry and foot repairs. In the riding area, they must be able to walk, trot, and canter up to preliminary dressage level. Then, they have to undertake coaching tasks, which is only flat work and involves no jumping. Before they get to be a proper coach, they have to undergo assessment from an accredited coach educator who has to come from down south to the Territory.
The next level is Level 1, which involves similar horsemanship and care and management. However, the riding component requires riding skills and knowledge up to novice dressage and jumping to 90 cm. I understand Vanessa is keen to pursue coaching qualifications, and this would be a welcome move as we need qualified coaches in the Territory to help with training and improving our riders.
We have excellent riders at senior levels, some of whom have competed interstate, and we have an abundance of junior riders, many of them showing great promise. However, to assist them in their sport, we need more coaches and people to help with training. I ask the government to take greater interest in this sport as many people who go on to Level 2 and 3 are usually nationally acclaimed; Level 3 being the people who coach our Olympians. Wouldn’t it be great if we could get people through from introductory to Level 2, then Level 3, and really bring the spotlight on to the Territory? Wouldn’t it be good if we could have homegrown coach educators, which would mean people would travel to the Territory to become accredited?
While many people enjoy watching dressage, not many people really know what the sport puts back into the Territory. The sport brings great pleasure to many people, provides a good learning opportunity, provides the basis for future careers involving horses such as cattle work, racing, horse care, and management and, of course, polocrosse, and is a great contributor to the economy.
Equestrian is part of the picture, with the other part being pony clubs. In the greater Darwin area we have many pony clubs, with my club being the Noonamah Horse and Pony Club – having, of course, the most handsome horses, superb and good-looking riders, and wonderful families. I enjoy their events, watching the riders and talking with the families. Pony clubs teach children from an early age how to care for animals, responsibilities, fairness, being a good competitor, and enjoyment of an outdoor sport. Perhaps getting up at 5 am in the morning is not so good, but the end result can be worth the hard and early work.
Back to Vanessa Lines who is why I started this speech in the first place. Congratulations on achieving introductory coach level, which has been a long and difficult road. I wish her the very best in her future coaching studies and activities, and hope one day to see her go all the way up to Level 3.
I say to the government, give more attention to this wonderful sport and support the clubs in any way possible, because it is a good sport for all ages. Congratulations, again, to Vanessa Lines.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, the member for Goyder. I learned a little about horses I never knew. I have a share in a racehorse. I hope it is a thoroughbred, but it is out being spelled at the moment, and it might come back as a pony. Who knows?
I just quickly say thanks to four members of parliament who are leaving very soon. I will start with my colleague, the member for Drysdale. It was very interesting listening to the condolence motion yesterday. The member for Fong Lim spoke about the people who were in the galleries. He reflected on how it is almost like a past era; and those people are gone who had connections with the current party. I was sitting here during his speech thinking about how there is a new era coming in, and those connections are linking up.
Ross came in here as part of a new wave of people - the 12 members of this side of the Chamber. He was, and continues to be, an integral part of our team. Just as the team is moving forward on to the next level, it is very disappointing to see him go. He has provided a fantastic contribution to our team. He will move on and continue in his passions in life, which still is being a bit supporter of Palmerston, and a motor sports fanatic. He wants to go into the mining sector or similar, so I wish Ross all the best. It has been good working with Ross for the last four years.
I also acknowledge you, Madam Speaker. It is always difficult - this is my first term, as you know, Madam Speaker - being in the role you are in, trying to be somewhat of a referee, and copping it from our side and so forth. You and I have shared a wink, a laugh, or different things from time to time - although you should not have kicked me out yesterday. But that aside ...
Madam SPEAKER: I hope you are not reflecting on the Chair, member for Braitling, because I will have to throw you out now.
Mr GILES: I am not reflecting on the Chair. It is late, it is late.
Madam SPEAKER: It is not that late!
Mr GILES: I know you have had some health issues, and I hope that you, when you leave, spend a great deal of time with your family, and look after yourself. I hope you have enjoyed your time here. I think it has been 11 years you have been in the Chamber and held ministerial positions and the Speaker’s role. I wish you all the best, and thanks very much for a warm welcome when I first came in here. I hope I have not been too much of a rowdy customer for you, Madam Speaker, but it has been fun.
The member for Johnston, the Leader of Government Business and the minister for Affordable Housing - I quite often agitate the minister for a whole range of issues, including SIHIP and public housing. I have to say minister Burns has always been very responsive when I have asked him for assistance. He has always been a very polite gentleman in conversation, and it is always good to have a conversation with him. He adds a great deal of value and character to the parliament. We do not see eye to eye on policy and politics but, in moving towards the end stage of his career, he appears to have taken on a more personal role recognising some of the failures, some of the positive things, and how to improve areas. He has moved more to the middle ground. I recognise that and believe it is a good thing. Personally, in my job, when I needed to call and get something done - although the list seems to be endless - on a number of occasions he was very responsive. He will spend a great deal of time with his family. I thank him for that role in the Chamber and his responsiveness to me on some things.
The member for Arafura also came to the Chamber in 2001. That must have been a big year when everyone walked in. She reached the height of the Deputy Chief Minister and held some very senior portfolios. She was the first Indigenous woman to be elected into the Northern Territory parliament and the most senior Aboriginal person Australia-wide. I know from my travels before I came to the Territory, many people spoke of Marion. Whether it was in New South Wales, Victoria or Canberra, many people looked at you as a - I do not know if shining light is the right expression, but someone who is a lighthouse to show - I do not say that in a negative way - there is opportunity and a pathway for people. That is fantastic. I have enjoyed talking to you and working with you.
I sincerely hope the Country Liberals are elected into government at the end of August. I am not taking anything for granted. It is a very hard thing, but I like to think we could. There are many things we could do in government, particularly in the areas where you work, Marion. If you take the role that you said you are going to take, I welcome the opportunity to work with you in the future. That will be fantastic because you are committed.
We do not see eye to eye, and you are very fiery and feisty, but it is good to see that people have front. That is fantastic. I really mean that; I think you are fantastic. Thanks very much for all your efforts in the Northern Territory. You probably believe you have done a fantastic job in areas. Some things you can improve, some things you have done a fantastic job. You will walk away with your head held high knowing you have provided a shining light for many people around Australia, not just in Arafura or the Northern Territory. Well done, and congratulations.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Braitling for his kind words.
I am going to quickly contribute to the adjournment. Every day in this position I have felt honoured to have been elected for 11-odd years as the member for Arafura, a position some may think is not much. There are members opposite who have ridiculed me and thrown disparaging comments about past glories, yesterday’s hero, etcetera, across the Chamber. It is with amusement that I often look at them with pity, and hope they can, at some stage in their life, find some peace and harmony within themselves to come to terms with the most honoured role one can have, which is to be a duly elected member representing a diverse number of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people in our electorates.
Some of my experiences, both as an Aboriginal woman and a member of parliament representing the electorate of Arafura, have often been a roller coaster - up, down, and around - sometimes exhilarating, sometimes lonely and very depressing. It is important to acknowledge we are all here today because we have been elected by people who have faith and trust that we will do whatever it takes to represent them in an honest and fearless way.
My journey into this parliament recognised and highlighted that struggle by Aboriginal women for humane conditions and the right to be safe, and to be recognised politically. More recently, I have reflected upon that progress and the choices our women have made to assert women’s rights in political, social, and economical arenas. We have seen substantial progress.
With specific regard to the Northern Territory and this place, Darwin, that I love - my home - the vibrancy and optimism is, to a large extent, a product of the rich and cosmopolitan blend of races, ethnic groups, and cultures that are reflected in our population. When I was elected to parliament, I paid testament to both my parents to acknowledge the part they played in my personal journey. Up until her tragically premature death in 1992, my mother was the constant source of wisdom about life, human values, and my strong Tiwi culture. More than anyone else in my life she has been my guiding light. I use, and have always used, my parents as an example of the many older Territorians, of whom many have been women, who have committed their lives to this place, and who I consider to be amongst the most important stakeholders in the ongoing enterprise that is our future.
I have made many friends in my journey, and many of those wonderful, strong, proud women I am going to miss - those women who have taken me under their wings, who have guided me in the path going forward. Along with those women, many men - strong, proud, traditional, cultural men - have been so privileged to have had their respect and support for over 11 years. Tragically, when I have looked back over the last couple of weeks, in many of our bush electorates, many of those men and women who have been my mentors have all passed away.
I reflect on this position, and all of the members for Arafura. They were strong men - whether it was Hyacinth Tungutalum, who was the first Country Liberal member to this parliament, the man who I was proud to call father, followed by my uncle Stanley Tipiloura and, then, Maurice Rioli - who have all, tragically, passed away.
Given the 11 years I have been privileged to be in this position, it was time to evaluate and to go forward. I just want to say to many of those women - and I will take the opportunity over the next couple of months to see them and hug them one more time; and, hopefully, it is not the last time I am going to hug them – and thank them. All of us know just how lonely it can be. I think of the members for Nhulunbuy, Arnhem, and Stuart.
As women, the task is of representing diverse bush electorates, and having not just the women, but also the men and those cultural barriers. Just because I am an Aboriginal woman does not mean I can just step over those barriers. The barriers I have are probably the same barriers the member for Nhulunbuy faces. I will get around to those women, particularly my friend, Esther Djayhgurrnga. We have been very good friends for 11 years and I still find it hard it to pronounce her surname, so I always call her Esther D. I will get to see her.
I pay special tribute to Esther as she is someone I have admired for many years, because she has stood in the face of many struggles to be where she is as the principal of that school. To see Gunbalanya School turnaround, particularly over the last 12 months, is testament to her, but also to Sue Trimble, a non-Indigenous woman who is co-principal. Both those women show black and white can work together, can get the outcomes, can work and walk in harmony with each other and, for the sake of our kids, get those outcomes. I am looking forward to seeing them.
I recognise and put on record that Sue Trimble is currently undergoing chemotherapy for liver cancer. She has been a stalwart in the community of Gunbalanya. She has assisted Esther whilst going through her own battle with cancer. Those two women have held each other and walked through this battle. I recognise both women, and all the women in that electorate. I will get around to talk to them.
Jo Vandermark a non-Indigenous woman who was an old educator, very early in my career walked me through the whole issue of language and using language as a tool for English, and was a fantastic source of pride. There have been so many of them: Helen Bonsharp in Maningrida, Helen Williams, and Casmira Munkurra, Eunice Alsto, those strong Tiwi women who have been the backbone of the health system and are currently fighting their own battles with cancer and undergoing treatment. I am looking forward to getting out of parliament and back out into the electorate, saying thank you to those women - Aunty Mary and Aunty Daisy in Minjilang. I will not stop the connection or the relationship I have with those women; that will continue post-politics.
I am looking forward to 25 August, to the outcome of the election. Hopefully, the Australian Labor Party will be returned to government, but I will have that conversation with the member for Braitling after 25 August.
Madam Speaker, I am certainly not retreating from the political world. A new door opens, and a new chapter in my life will begin.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Speaker, tonight I also speak on some departing members, come 25 August.
The first person I would like to farewell is my colleague, the member for Drysdale, Ross Bohlin. Ross and I worked in the police department together in crime prevention. We shared some time and space together and Ross spoke to me on a number of occasions about his interest in politics to the point where he joined the Country Liberal Party and was, subsequently, preselected.
Ross has chosen not to participate in the next election. Ross, obviously, has a huge interest in motor sport, in the mining industry, and things mechanical. I suspect Ross, when he leaves this House, will go on to bigger and better things in either of those areas. Ross is a competent person in relation to motor sport. He is an accomplished racing driver and mechanic, and very knowledgeable about all things mechanical. If he gets into the mining industry in relation to training or participation in a managerial role, I am sure he will do very well. I will look forward to having conversations with him in the future about how he may be doing far better than us financially in roles he may choose.
The next person I farewell is the member for Arafura, Marion Scrymgour. If you will excuse me for referring to her by name, it would be nice on the record to say goodbye to Ms Scrymgour, a great adversary.
It is interesting in politics. One thinks one understands what it is like in this House, then when one gets here one finds it is quite different. Without good adversaries, you will end up with mediocrity. Without the two sides of politics - or three but, generally speaking in Australia, it is two sides of politics - without the ying and the yang, you do not have accountable government. The toing and froing in this Chamber is tempered with some of the discussions you have with members opposite in committee stages, in committees themselves and, of course more recently, where I spent some time with the member for Arafura on the youth suicide committee. It demonstrated to me, if we all cooperate in some areas where we can, then we can achieve results, hopefully.
There are, of course, philosophical and political differences that divide us from time to time, and encourage some fairly vigorous and feisty debate. I must say the member for Arafura is good at giving it, and she also is fairly good at taking it, from time to time. Although none of us like to take some of the criticism we get in this House, it actually makes us better and stronger people. Some of the comments and constructive criticism I have received from the member for Arafura has sharpened my political skills, and probably made me a better person and, hopefully, a better representative for the people in my electorate.
The next person I farewell is the member for Nightcliff, Madam Speaker, a former neighbour before both of us were in politics. It was interesting days. It is interesting when you are the umpire. As we know, in any sport, event, or anywhere there is an umpire, not all sides agree with the umpire’s decision. You have put the Speaker’s position in a very high position in the minds of most people in this House. I certainly have admired the way you have made the calls. It is a very difficult position. I have not always agreed with those calls, but the thing is you have generally been consistent. Whether we have agreed with them or not, you have been consistent over the years, and you have done a fairly good job, if one takes the philosophical beliefs and the politics out of it. It is always a difficult job. I wish you well in the future. I hope you are able to enjoy a long and fruitful life, and a well-deserved break from a lifetime of very dedicated work. Madam Speaker, you leave this House with my best wishes, and good luck to you and your family.
I saved the other one for last; that is, the member for Johnston. The member for Johnston and I have crossed swords on occasions before getting into politics, and we have crossed swords in this House. It is very interesting when you get to know people from the other side. I have - I do not know what words I could use - perhaps a reluctant admiration for the member for Johnston. I do not agree with him on most occasions, but there are times when his wit and his humour have brought a good laugh to this Chamber. As I said, I have a reluctant, or begrudging, admiration for his tenacity and his intellect. He has been a very good member for Johnston.
We share a school which is in his electorate and my electorate, and I am about to inherit many of his constituents in Wagaman as a result of a redistribution. The member for Johnston has a reputation of being a good local member. I am sure he has served those people well and, perhaps, some of them will be sorry to see him go. It is inevitable that all who come into this Chamber will, at some stage, have to leave, and he has chosen this time to leave. He will not be forgotten, and the people on the other side of the Chamber will find it hard to fill his shoes, given his commitment to the Labor Party.
It is always admirable when people commit to things. Although you do not believe philosophically what they believe in, you have to admire the dedication the member for Johnston has given to his side of politics. One has to give credit where credit is due.
To the four members who are leaving, I wish them the very best. It is an interesting and challenging job. I believe many people in the community do not fully understand the commitment required from all members of this House - the 25 members who are here who believe in what they do. Whether we believe in the same philosophies is, obviously, a point of difference we have in this House. I believe most people in this House work very hard for what they believe in, even if I believe those on the other side of the House may be misguided.
Madam Deputy Speaker, that is what we are here for: to discuss the points where we believe we can help improve the situation. It is our job, and the four members departing made their contribution. I congratulate them for having the tenacity and the intestinal fortitude to put their hand up to come into this House and fight for what they believe in.
Mr HAMPTON (Stuart): Madam Deputy Speaker, I also acknowledge the four members who are coming towards the end of their political career. It is really important, as other members have done tonight, to acknowledge the contributions they have made - some shorter than others but no less significant.
First, I acknowledge the member for Drysdale, Ross Bohlin, who has been my opposition spokesperson over the last three-and-a-half years on different portfolios. As some members have said tonight, you do not quite understand what this job is all about until you are into it and, sometimes, thrown in at the deep end. Over the last three-and-a-half years, Ross has done his best in his portfolio and as a local member. I sincerely wish him all the best in the future and with whatever endeavours he takes on. I know he has a passion for motor sports, particularly mud racing, so I am sure he will be able to become involved in that area of his passion.
To my colleagues on this side of the House who are leaving, I feel I have grown up with them. My political career and experience began 11 years ago when many of their elected membership and political careers began in 2001. I gained a job as an advisor in 2001 and I feel like I have grown up with them over the past 11 years. In the early years, I looked up to many of them and studied what they did and said in parliament. I listened to it all the time on the Internet, so I feel a really close affiliation to the three members on this side who are retiring.
I thank Madam Speaker for her support and advice. I do not know how she does it sometimes in that chair, particularly during Question Time. She has done a fantastic job. We all know about the personal challenges she has had to deal with in regard to her health. She has done a fantastic job in dealing with those issues as well as sitting in the Chair and dealing with us mob in the Chamber during Question Time. To the member for Nightcliff, thank you for your friendship and your advice.
To the member for Johnston, I enjoy, and have learnt a great deal from, his performances in the House. The most I have taken from the member for Johnston is just how hard he works as a local member, and someone who knows the workings and the standing orders of this parliament. It has been a really invaluable thing for me to be able to watch him over the past 11 years.
My colleague, the member for Arafura, has been a great friend and a great mentor for me over the last 11 years, particularly the last six years I have been a member. I have not forgotten the time she gave me a poem, which I keep in my top drawer here on the left hand side, all about the job and about battling demons and some of the critics out there. I shall keep that poem in my top drawer until my last day in this Chamber, member for Arafura. I respect your courage, and what you have achieved. You have not lost that fire in the belly and that is very important and something I will try to aspire to.
To all those members who are retiring, I wish you and your families all the best into the future.
I will finish by acknowledging a gentleman I have known for 25 years. Many times in this House over the last six years I have been a member, I have made my condolences in my adjournments, remembering those who have passed on. This one is particularly difficult. I have known this gentleman for 25 years of my life. He was a hard stockman. He was very close to my children. He is their grandfather, my father-in-law, who passed away on 14 April this year. I will talk a little about his life.
We had a wonderful service at the Alice Springs Basketball Stadium on 23 April – just a week ago. He has been a part of my life for 25 years. As a father-in-law, he was everything you would expect. He was a hard man, an ex-stockman from Camooweal and Mount Isa. I learnt much from him regarding the values of life and family. I certainly will not forget our bush trips. I remember one trip where I was bogged and he taught me how to get out of a bog in a sandy creek, and told me a few things that I should have known, for sure. He was a great man.
I place on the public record the eulogy read out at the service by his niece, Hayley Iles from Mount Isa:
The funeral was held in Alice Spring at the basketball stadium. There was a huge turnout from the community. Many of the old friends and members of his family from Mount Isa came. His brother, Johnny Turner, a very talented man, sang many of Slim Dusty’s songs at his service, and his niece, Hayley Iles, read the eulogy. Heather Laughton, a local lady, was the MC for the service.
I thank Allan Rowe and the people at the Gillen Club for allowing the wake to be held at the Gillen Club after the service in recognition of this old man. He was a fantastic man, a hard man, but a great family man.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
TABLED PAPER
Pairing Arrangement – Members for Arnhem and Drysdale
Pairing Arrangement – Members for Arnhem and Drysdale
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have before me a pair document signed by the government Whip and the opposition Whip. It is for the members for Arnhem and Drysdale, and is from 10 am to what has been referred to here as stumps, which I assume means the end of the day.
I table that document.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise you of the presence in the gallery of Year 5/6 Stuart Park Primary School students, accompanied by Mrs Ildiko Sarmany and Mrs Jacqui Murray. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr Tollner: What a great bunch of kids.
Madam SPEAKER: Very nice children they are, member for Fong Lim.
MOTION
Referral to the Estimates Committee
Referral to the Estimates Committee
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, as members would know, there are actually three motions here which are linked, so I propose to deal with them as swiftly as we can; we have a great deal of business today.
The first motion, to read it to the House, is in relation to referring the budget and Appropriation (2012-13) …
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, can you just move the motion, please?
Dr BURNS: Madam Speaker, I move –
- That pursuant to paragraph 2 of the order of the Assembly dated 2 May 2012, the Budget Papers 2012-13 together with the Appropriation (2012-13) Bill 2012 (Serial 208) be referred to the Estimates Committee for inquiry and report.
Mr Elferink: Keep going, we can do all three at once if you like.
Madam SPEAKER: It will not take very long.
Motion agreed to.
MOTION
Next Meeting of the Assembly
Next Meeting of the Assembly
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move –
- That the Assembly at its rising on 3 May 2012 adjourn until approximately 1.30 pm on Thursday, 21 June 2012, or such other time as notified by the Speaker, with one hour’s notice being given to the government and opposition Whips and members by the Speaker, or such other time and/or date as may be advised by the Speaker, pursuant to sessional order.
Motion agreed to.
MOTION
Routine of Business for Thursday, 21 June 2012
Routine of Business for Thursday, 21 June 2012
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move –
- That the Routine of Business for Thursday, 21 June 2012, be as follows:
(1) Prayers
In Committee: report of the Estimates Committee consideration of the Appropriation (2012-2013) Bill 2012 (Serial 208) and Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee consideration of the financial and management practices of the Power and Water Corporation as referenced in its Statement of Corporate Intent for 2012-13; and
Motion agreed to.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, in relation to item (6), I have been asked whether or not the adjournment will happen on that evening. I advise it will be as a Wednesday night, so every member may adjourn.
LIQUOR AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 205)
Continued from 28 March 2011.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I respond to this bill and can say at the outset, whilst we understand the intent of government is to prop up its failing alcohol action plan, the Enough is Enough campaign, we will not be supporting this bill because it is too little too late and will not achieve what this government has been trying to achieve.
The Enough is Enough alcohol campaign has been an abysmal failure. Even if you look at the conduct of the drunks that infest our streets on a daily basis, it is clear whilst there might be people placed on the register, they are still obtaining alcohol. This government has not been able to deal with problems of alcohol in our community because it was not prepared to do what was necessary and make the actual hard decisions of using the criminal justice system as a way to achieve the health outcomes. Our policy does and, given the opportunity by votes of the people of the Northern Territory, should we be elected into government, we will introduce it.
I am frustrated we are not going to spend as much time on this bill today as it deserves. One of the reasons for that is we still have the appropriation debate to go ahead. It is now Thursday; it will be the last opportunity, essentially, for most members to contribute to the appropriation debate. This last minute desperate gasp to breathe some life into a failed policy is not going to be something that I, and members on this side of the House, will spend a great deal of time giving credence to.
The one thing I will note is government is attempting, in one respect, to do something we, on this side of the House, have been unashamed talking about; that is, the criminalisation of public drunkenness. The government has now moved to issue on-the-spot fines for drinking within 2 km. It takes the 2 km offence out of the Summary Offences Act, an act that deals with public behaviour, and moves it into the Liquor Act. Whilst I understand the rationale behind that, I am not entirely sure that rationale is entirely justified. That is a side issue and I will not dwell there for long.
However, if you breach the act you will cop a fine. If you do not pay the fine that matter will convert, ultimately, to a warrant of commitment because, I presume, the courts will deal with these minor fines on an ex parte basis. As a consequence, the government has finally decided to move into the area of criminalisation of public drunkenness. However, rather than doing it in a fashion that is comprehensive and necessary, it is doing it in a piecemeal fashion designed to do nothing more than add window dressing to the next media release.
We and Territorians are unconvinced. If you look at the comments on the NT News website in relation to the stories that are run on public drunkenness, the public is now so cynical and so critical of the failure of this policy that, every time the government tries to wave it as its standard, the mockery and derision which is poured upon that standard is manifest for all to see. The government has lost credibility in this. Whilst it speaks of the toughest alcohol laws in the country - and perhaps that is true - it is insufficient to meet the public expectation. Because this government could not bring itself to make drinkers responsible for their own actions in a meaningful way, it has tried to compromise its way through this policy and, like every other compromise in this field, those compromises are failed attempts.
I pause briefly to talk about one component of this legislative package which will bring prosecutorial difficulty to any prosecution brought under this act. This is in relation to the application of the word ‘nuisance’. In the legislation, the application of the word ‘nuisance’ is not defined and, therefore, I was referred in the briefing to a common law decision relating to how ‘nuisance’ can be defined. There are no shortage of common law decisions that deal with what objectionable words are, offensive language is, disorderly behaviour is, riotous behaviour is, and what, for that matter, nuisance is.
The problem we have is, from a prosecutorial point of view, you have to be able to demonstrate to a court the points of proof, or the elements of the offence, are made out. In the instance where a person is fined under this legislation and they determine to plead not guilty in relation to a charge brought against them or, for that matter, even if they determine to plead guilty and the matter is proceeded by way of a court hearing, then you find yourself in a situation where you have to meet the necessarily elements of the offence. One of the elements of an offence is you have to demonstrate a nuisance. To that end, somebody then has to be annoyed as a consequence of that nuisance provision under this legislation. I can well perceive a magistrate sitting in front of a prosecutor, who reads the precis out to him, and will ask for evidence of a person being annoyed by the result of the nuisance activities of the accused.
This is not entirely dissimilar to the same problem you run into with the Traffic Act ‘drive under the influence’. You can exceed 0.05% and commit the offence - that is a straightforward concept. However, ‘drive under the influence’ could be attributed to a person who is driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol, drug, or psychotropic substance, which means a person driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, but is below 0.05%. Then, as a consequence of that, you have to demonstrate the other element of the DUI offence, which is loss of effective control of the vehicle. That means when a person is charged with DUI, it is almost automatic that a secondary qualifier or supporting charge has to support the DUI; that is, the person was driving under the influence of alcohol or a psychotropic substance and lost control of the vehicle.
To demonstrate to a court there is a loss of control of the vehicle, the next consequence is you have to charge them with some other offence: their vehicle strayed from the lane, strayed over some double white lines, or a single white solid line, or something of that nature. Consequently, whilst there is a capacity for an on-the-spot fine here, I expect if a person was to be arrested and charged for the offence the government is intending to create, the arresting police will also have to turn to the Summary Offences Act to find some other offence to support the concept of a nuisance that is being introduced in this legislative instrument.
I was advised during the briefing this would create an offence of a new nature in behavioural offences. I am under sufferance to imagine how that is possible. The Summary Offences Act provides for offences which are already of a nuisance-like nature. When you look at the Summary Offences Act, for arguments sake, disorderly behaviour would be a supporting charge to a breach of the offence the government is trying to create with this particular offence, to satisfy the concept of nuisance. In doing that, what you have actually now done is required a police officer to charge a person with a supporting charge to support the element of nuisance in the charge the government is trying to create. A fairly pointless exercise when, in the Summary Offences Act, there is already an offence of disorderly behaviour. Why the hell do you not just charge them with that in the first place and be done with it, and give them the fine for that?
I would like to hear from the minister how the minister is going to navigate through this particular issue. It is, in my opinion, not particularly well thought out because this issue will come up the first time there is a not guilty plea in relation to one of these offences. It will not be long before this offence will find its way into the realm of redundancy in the same way that ‘drive under the influence’ has become redundant under the Traffic Act. I suspect the ratio of people being charged with ‘drive under the influence’ compared to exceeding 0.05 is probably 10 000 to one. That is a guess, but, in my years as a police officer, I recall only on one instance charging a person with driving under the influence, and that was under the influence of cannabis. I had to demonstrate several other offences just to make out the DUI offence.
This offence falls into that same problematic category. I suspect how this will, ultimately, manifest itself once you find yourself in a situation where there are not guilty pleas being entered into in relation to this, is the courts will only accept the evidence if there is evidence of some other breach of the Summary Offences Act, thus qualifying the requisite nuisance.
I do not accept the argument that nuisance is some new category of offence; it just does not work at any logical level. The Summary Offences Act as it stands now is designed to deal with the concept of nuisance and how nuisance inflicts itself on the people of the Northern Territory. It is this lack of consideration which betrays what this legislation actually is: a last minute ditch attempt to put out a media release to demonstrate to the people of the Northern Territory this is a government continuing to be tough on alcohol.
The government has had its opportunity. That opportunity has come and has passed them by. They have failed miserably in their fight on alcohol abuse in the Northern Territory. It appears that $20m - or whatever it is - worth of advertising has not achieved the results the government wanted to achieve. The ALP’s Enough is Enough campaign was more about the tag line ‘written and authorised by the Northern Territory government, Darwin’, than it was ever about really responding to alcohol problems in our community. If the government was serious it would have taken decisions which were, essentially, unpopular, Moreover, it would have been seen by some of their traditional supporters as being onerous and burdensome. The government could not bring itself to go to that place, so the result was a comprise. The Banned Drinkers Register and its variant expressions of toughness was the compromise result.
I open the newspapers on a daily basis. I opened the newspaper yesterday: the dreadful incidents in The Narrows. Other incidents we read about on a daily basis; some of them are sub judice so I will not refer to them in any length. However, a number of times we realise alcohol is the direct contributor. The government promised to have stopped this stuff by now. It has not stopped.
We would have spent more time on this bill in front of the House today. It is not good policy; it is bad policy trying to support worst policy. As far as we are concerned, on this side of the House, it does not earn support. I also say I am disappointed the government has seen fit to find itself retiring early on repeated occasions during parliamentary sittings earlier this year, only to be trying to push other items of business through at the last moment during budget sittings. I suspect, in my more cynical world view, this is more about government being able to load up the Notice Paper on the last day with business than allowing members on this side of the House to have their clear and free voice on their appropriation replies.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, today I will give my qualified support for the bill, because I have said a number of times before, I would rather a government tried something than did not try at all. It is an attempt at least. I am on record as saying there should be some mandatory involvement of people who have alcohol problems in rehabilitation programs. I have used the example that we have legislation at the moment which allows government to put people into places such as the secure care centre in Holtze. To some extent, this is looking at a means of coercing people into rehabilitation, but does not go that far.
I will get on to that particular subject for a moment. I take the member for Port Darwin’s words; I believe he has always been a supporter of the idea of mandatory detention for people who have continual alcohol problems. However, before we really go down that path - and I am also saying it to myself as a supporter of that process - I believe we really need to base that on evidence that mandatory treatment will actually work. The reason I say that is we were talking to Amity before this bill came to parliament. The CEO of Amity Community Services, Bernie Dwyer, noted he believed people who went into voluntary rehabilitation were far more successful than people who were forcibly put into rehabilitation programs.
We obtained some materials from various places. One was some work done in Canada on the effectiveness of mandatory coerced and voluntary treatment. The evidence is very difficult to find one way or the other. In fact, this report from Canada was done by the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse. I am just looking for a date, but it was, obviously, done fairly recently in 2006. It said, under the heading, Effectiveness of Mandatory Coerced and Involuntary Treatment:
- There are relatively few published studies specifically examining the effectiveness of mandatory treatment’.
I will take a couple of quotes from their document. It said:
- A 2001 international longitudinal study of cases involving civil commitment of individuals with alcohol problems indicated that the health of the clients who had undergone treatment
had improved overall and was, on average, superior to other clients undergoing treatment at the same facility at other times.
It said further down:
- Although it is often thought that individuals mandated or coerced into substance abuse treatment are less successful than those who enter voluntarily, evidence suggests that treatment
can have a positive effect on a person’s substance use abuse behaviour despite being coerced to participate. However, this conclusion is largely based on evidence from coercive
treatment regimes and not from mandated treatment settings.
The New South Wales Legislative Council issued a report on the Inebriates Act. The Legislative Council Standing Committee on Social Issues issued a report on that act. Chapter 5 of that particular act talks about the evidence of compulsory treatment. I will go to the section there on that specific issue. Under the heading, The Effectiveness of Compulsory Treatment, it says:
- Unfortunately the Committee was unable to find significant evidence of the efficacy or otherwise of compulsory treatment of individuals with drug or alcohol dependence.
That is noted throughout. They certainly had trouble finding any evidence that could show, one way or the other, whether compulsory treatment is effective. In fact, they say:
- They reviewed 170 publications in relation to compulsory treatment. Only 18 of those pertained to effectiveness, and 83% of those were methodologically unsound. That tells you very
little about the effectiveness of compulsory treatment - and that is an area about which plenty has been written.
They took anecdotal evidence on effectiveness. The anecdotal evidence from one person at the Kirketon Road Centre said:
- Whilst it is clear from a large body of research that an individual’s motivation for change is critical to the success of treatment, it is not clear how effective compulsory assessment and treatment is.
Dr Glenys Dore from Macquarie Hospital said:
- The difficulty is that this patient group do not want these services, they do not want to go to detox, or they do not want to go to rehabilitation, or they do not want to go on methadone programs ...
They would prefer to be using drugs and alcohol. The services are there, but they either do not want to use them or in some cases they have gone to all those programs and they are still not
succeeding.
She went on to say:
- There are some patients for whom we simply do not have treatments that will be successful. There are cases of individuals that we just do not have adequate treatment services for or they do
not exist. We do not know when we will have them. We do not have medication that controls everyone’s addiction. So there are some individuals who will not survive their problem with addiction ...
And it goes on.
There is another case from Ms Diane Paul from the Herbert Street Clinic:
- … many clients who are initially lacking motivation for treatment do manage to complete the program and choose to go into rehabilitation post-detoxification. Our main challenge is to get clients
through the first three days, get them through the withdrawal process so we can actually have a chance to work with them.
The conclusion from that committee stated:
- What is clear from the information before the Committee is that the evidence relating to the efficacy of compulsory treatment of non-offenders is scant. A few methodologically sound studies
that have been published had equivocal findings, with mixed outcomes for those subject to coercion. Anecdotal evidence related to the Committee was similarly variable. In the Committee’
s opinion, the absence of any substantial evidence base for benefits of compulsory treatment raises serious questions about the ethics and cost-effectiveness of instituting a compulsory
treatment regime.
The committee in New South Wales had some concerns about whether coercion or mandatory rehabilitation was effective. The New South Wales government, in December 2006, responded to all the recommendations and added a few additional issues. It would be interesting to look at some of the areas that were being looked at. It asked whether it is appropriate for people to be compulsorily detained in the interest of their relatives. If not, what would the rationale for compulsory detention be? That would apply to many families in the Northern Territory.
I do not have time to deal with this whole report; however, what has come out is the New South Wales government decided it would establish a new secure four-bed involuntary care unit colocated at the Nepean Inpatient Withdraw Facility which will have the capacity to accept up to 50 patients per annum during the trial. Further details to the proposed new short involuntary care are dealt with in later responses.
I have just received - it took a bit of looking, but I rang the hospital that conducted the trial and this was the executive summary. I will read the short evaluation of the involuntary drug and alcohol treatment trial October 2010. It said:
- In NSW, there has been an option for the involuntary treatment of people with severe alcohol and drug problems for almost a century. This had previously been provided under the Inebriates Act 1912.
However, a review of that Act, recommended a 2003 Summit on Alcohol Abuse and subsequently conducted in 2004 by the parliament of New South Wales Standing Committee on Social Issues,
concluded that the Inebriates Act 1912 is ‘fundamentally flawed’, and recommended that it be ‘immediately repealed’. The response of the New South Wales government to the report on the
Inebriates Act 1912 recommended the establishment of short-term, involuntary care to protect the health and safety of people with severe substance dependence who have experienced, or are at risk
of, serious harm and whose decision-making capacity is considered to be compromised due to their substance abuse.
Subsequent trial legislation … was enacted to permit a trial of alternative involuntary treatment as a possible replacement to the Inebriates Act 1912.
As I have only just received this report, I may have to talk in the third reading. I will check to see what the results of that review were because this particular bill is now introducing, to some extent, coercion - coercion by ‘We will manage your income, therefore, we want you to go to the tribunal to get assessed and we want you to get treatment’.
We are looking at a move to a form of mandatory rehabilitation. We have not gone that far, but we are giving people a push and a shove. It is worthy of debate that we look at what the evidence is regarding whether that type of process will work. This is why I say I give qualified support based on I would rather try something than not try something at all. I am asking the minister that there be a guarantee that, if this bill is passed, in two years time there is a detailed review of the effectiveness of this process - if the government is still in power - to look at a range of issues; to see whether those people who have been income managed have actually been rehabilitated. It is no good introducing legislation for a purpose and, if that purpose is not achieved, legislation is not worth looking at. So, there needs to be a reasonable time for the review, and I believe two years will be a reasonable time.
We also need to have statistics about who is being income managed, who has been charged, or who has received infringement notices. I refer to whether they are Aboriginal or non-Aboriginal because I want to ensure this law is applied evenly, regardless of race, so there is no criticism of whether it is being dealt with just for a particular purpose.
I also would like to know how many people are income managed, and how many of those are Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal. We need to have those statistics if we are to find out whether this particular legislation is effective. I will say again, there is no point introducing legislation that has a particular purpose if you find out, in two years time, the purpose of this legislation has failed. I really would like something from the government to say there will definitely be a review.
Some of the concerns I have - and by the way, I thank the department for the number of briefings. I also thank the Police Commissioner who gave us a briefing as well. However, there are a number of issues which need to be touched on. One is the definition of ‘nuisance’. The member for Port Darwin has much more legalistic knowledge than I have. However, the Police Commissioner was concerned about how the test of the word ‘nuisance’ would stand up in court. As part of that review, it will be good to see whether that is, in fact, an issue or not. It has been raised that there will be difficulty assessing whether a person is a nuisance.
In relation to the nuisance, I must admit, I still feel we are just tinkering around the edge of public drunkenness. I know the minister will say: ‘A person does not have to be drunk, they have to be a nuisance’. However, generally speaking, they will have been drinking and, if you take the definition of ‘nuisance’ as in the second reading, from which I will quote:
The term nuisance is used to describe an activity or condition that is harmful or annoying to others - for example, indecent conduct or a rubbish heap - and the harm caused by the activity or condition – for example, loud noises or objectionable odours. Nuisance is addressed at stopping bothersome activities or conduct which unreasonably interferes with the rights of general public. It includes conduct that interferes with public health, safety, peace or convenience.
If I saw a person walking down the street doing that, there is probably a pretty good chance they are drunk. That is why they are doing all these things. Most people when they are sober, unless they have some other problem in their life, do not do those sorts of things unless there is a reason to get them into that situation. If I run into a bunch of people who have had too much to drink and I have to get out of the way because they are yahooing and carrying on a bit, but they are not within the 2 km or they are not in a regulated area, nothing will happen to them unless we get them on some other law. Those people are in that state of being a nuisance because they are drunk.
We are saying here we are going to pick up people for being a nuisance, and the reason is not being termed as ‘public drunkenness’, it is simply because they are only drinking. I believe the two go together: they will be drunk; that is what is causing the nuisance. If it was one beer, I do not think these people would cause a nuisance. In reality, they will be drunk and they will be causing a nuisance.
The other issue I have is, to some extent, it is a discriminatory law not based on race here - I am not talking about that, I am talking about where the offence occurs. We have a series of laws that say if you, as a member of the public, happen to be within 2 km of a licensed premises, in a designated area, or one of the other regulated areas, then you are protected from people who are nuisances. If I happen to be in an unlicensed area, say, halfway between Cox Peninsula Road and Acacia. We are miles from any regulated areas. but there is a bunch of people there causing a nuisance on the side of the road. They have alcohol, they have thrown rubbish on the side of the road, and they are carrying on. They do not come under this law. So, to some extent, you have a law that applies either happily if you are a member of the public to some parts of the Northern Territory, but to other parts of the Northern Territory it does not, even though people are creating the same issue. That is a matter that needs to be looked at.
We also have the issue of all the different forms of regulated places. We have the whole area of Alice Springs, parks in Palmerston, and designated areas in Mitchell Street - that is another area which needs to be looked at and reformed if we are going down that path.
Another area I am interested in is the law about encouraging people to get rehabilitation. The problem I have is those people who get an infringement notice in a designated area are more than likely not going to be on welfare. I might be wrong, but I believe the people you pick up are not welfare recipients. The people you might pick up within the 2 km area are more than likely going to be welfare recipients.
You will have one group of people you can, after three infringement notices, advise are going to have their income managed to get them to go to the tribunal. However, the people you might pick up in Mitchell Street might be on a fairly good wage in the public service, and are not going to be required to have their income managed. I would love to see that happen; that would certainly cause a bit of a stir ...
Dr Burns: Only if you are earning $110 000.
Mr WOOD: I thought you might mention that, member for Johnston.
Ms Lawrie: It is subject to orders, Gerry.
Mr WOOD: That is right, but I am just saying ...
Ms Lawrie: Keeping off the grog for 12 months, for example. They are subject to orders.
Mr WOOD: Yes, yes. I am just highlighting some differences and one group of people will be income managed and the other group will not be. We know which group will be income managed ...
Ms Lawrie: Taxpayers.
Mr WOOD: Yes. That is the facts as they are.
Another thing concerns me, and I cannot find it in the act. I did not bring it up at the briefing because I only thought of it recently. Is there any appeal mechanism for a person who is put on income management?
Ms Lawrie: Yes.
Mr WOOD: If there is, minister, can you explain where it is now, because we had a look and I could not quite see it, so it might be in something else. I believe that is a really important issue. CAALAS wrote a letter. It talked about natural justice, and I would have thought in the case of natural justice there must be some methodology in the bill to show a person can appeal against the decision made by a tribunal. If that is there, that would be good.
I know the government is trying to do something. I understand, from the point of view of the opposition, to be consistent they did not agree with the swipe card system. That is fair enough; that is their right. They are saying: ‘We did not agree with that and we do not agree with this’. I do not think they are necessarily saying there are not some good things in here, but, from a point of view of a policy they have put forward, this would not be consistent with that policy.
My point of view is that no one has the magic wand when it comes to alcohol and drug issues and abuse in the Northern Territory. I would rather see the government give it a go, but I would put that with the proviso that there will be some definite report back to this House, with a detailed review and statistical analysis of what has been put forward, to show that it is actually working. If it is not working, I d hope the government says: ‘We tried, it did not work, let us try something else’.
I am concerned, of course, we all tend to get up here, and have a particular viewpoint. I am one who has said I support mandatory rehabilitation, for two reasons: (1) because when people cannot help themselves they need to be helped; (2) the community can get sick and tired of their freedoms being interfered with because people are, basically, a nuisance. I also take into account there are people looking at that.
The New South Wales government did a trial at Nepean Hospital. I believe it would be better for all of us - and even me before I went down the path of saying this is the only method to ensure that method actually would work – to certainly be looking at what trials are around. As I said, I am not looking at this from a purely health perspective; I am looking at it also from a public nuisance perspective. The safety of the public is something that should be given equal weight in relation to mandatory rehabilitation.
That is what we apply, to some extent, to the secure care centre people. If they have a cognitive impairment which can be dangerous to themselves and to the public, we make a special law which allows those people to be taken off the street to be given treatment, to have various safeguards to ensure their freedoms are continually checked. It is not something which should be done lightly. It is a bit of a two-edged sword, but I am certainly willing to do some more reading to see what research is being done.
I am told the New South Wales government is rolling out more facilities for involuntary treatment. That is why I received that information this morning from the Nepean Hospital. Victoria is now doing trials on involuntary treatment as well. I believe it is a really important issue for parliament to be discussing. It is too serious a problem to get really stuck into one side or the other.
I understand we are getting close to an election, and I will live with that. However, it is one of these social problems we come across in our society where we have to be willing to keep a clear head, an open mind, and be willing to try things and ensure we bring the community along with us. The reality is - let us face it - most of these people we are talking about will be Aboriginal people, because that is the majority of people in our prisons. They are the ones who are involved in the alcohol-affected crime.
That is not to say non-Aboriginal people do not have an alcohol problem. You are looking at someone who lives in the real world, and I know many of those people have. However, they are not necessarily the ones you see. Unfortunately, the ones you see are the ones people complain about the most. They will be picked up because they will be seen to be more of a nuisance.
I understand the legislation does not have any discrimination in it. However, I hope when this law is carried out it is carried out evenly: if an Aboriginal is a nuisance they are treated the same as a non-Aboriginal person who is a nuisance. It is the way the law is carried out - we need to ensure it is done in an even-handed way.
I have given my qualified support. I have asked the minister some questions. I hope the minister can give me some guarantees there will be a proper review in two years time. That is enough time to see if it is working. Then, we will see whether this law needs to be repealed, amended, or continued as is.
If I am allowed in the third reading, if I have more information - I will take your advice, Madam Speaker - on the review of the effectiveness of the involuntary trial in New South Wales. However, if I cannot, I will take your word on that, Madam Speaker …
Madam SPEAKER: In a third reading you are not meant to introduce new information. Member for Nelson, you have five minutes and then a possibility of a 10-minute extension at the moment.
Mr WOOD: I believe I have the page; it is hard when you have to do it on your feet. This says:
- New South Wales has determined that, overall, the policy objectives for the legislation are valid and the terms of the act remain appropriate to securing those objectives.
It says the trial - and I presume this is the trial for involuntary treatment:
- The trial demonstrated positive clinical and psycho-social outcomes for patients during the involuntary period, including providing the opportunity for medical conditions and physical health to be
properly assessed and addressed, and enabling patients to complete an extended period of abstinence that they would not be able to complete as voluntary patients; improved social relationships;
slight reductions in symptoms of mental health such as depression; 80% of involuntary patients take up post-discharge voluntary aftercare; positive outcomes are maintained post-discharge for
patients assessing aftercare, with the majority of patients observed by the after-care service to have better general, mental and physical health than six months previous. The support most
commonly provided to clients in after-care related to relapse prevention and medical treatment.
- Other major findings include the legislation, to the extent it has been tested, has held up well as a legal document. The interests of the dependent person have been maintained as paramount.
Co-location of involuntary patients with voluntary drug and alcohol patients work so long as there is effective planning and building staff capacity for change management regarding involuntary
treatment principles.
- The trial has successfully engaged families and carers of those people admitted. There are a number of limitations relating to the trial and evaluation which require further consideration and
would be addressed in any plan for further implementation.
The trial at Nepean ...
Which is Nepean Hospital:
- ... did not capture, treat the same cohort of people as those admitted under the Inebriates Act 1912 with people receiving Inebriates Act court orders being a more socially disadvantaged group
through the Drug and Alcohol Treatment Act, though the Drug and Alcohol Treatment Act was clearly intended to capture all groups irrespective of social status.
- The implementation task force determined that the new legislation does not exclude patients typically captured under the Inebriates Act.
I will read the conclusion, Madam Speaker:
- New South Wales Department of Health, in consultation with the involuntary treatment trial implementation task force, has considered the evaluation of the trial and determined its review of the
legislation based on evaluation that the policy objectives of the act remain valid and the terms of the act remain appropriate for securing those objectives.
The independent evaluation of the trial by KPMG found the new system of care to be more effective than treating people under the Inebriates Act. The new system is effective by providing
appropriate treatment and supportive aftercare. It is also more consistent with contemporary values regarding human rights and dignities of severely substance dependent people.
New South Wales Health proposes further implementation of the Drug and Alcohol Treatment Act 2007 in New South Wales through establishment of two state-wide involuntary
treatments, supported by a state-wide system of referral, assessment and review.
Once the system is operational it is proposed to repeal the Inebriates Act 1912. The timing and management of repeal of the act will be negotiated ...
Etcetera. My understanding from this morning’s conversation with the Nepean Hospital ...
Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I move the member for Nelson be given an extension of time, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: What I was told by the lady from Nepean Hospital this morning is it has been reasonably successful, and they are trialling it in other parts of New South Wales now. I will also read something which might be of benefit, while I have the time. I mentioned it before. This is the evaluation of the involuntary drug and alcohol treatment trial which was in October 2007. There is a conclusion here:
- Based on the findings of this evaluation, the evaluation concludes that:
co-morbidities in a controlled environment, as well as the provision of supportive aftercare.
I think that was said before:
- …
The new system of care is more effective than treating this cohort under the existing treatment systems.
Of course, with that kind of care comes a financial burden. I still think this is where the Commonwealth needs to start to step in. Our alcohol problems extend from alcohol, and alcohol is made by companies, and companies make big profits. I know they are taxed; I understand that. However, a set proportion of that money, similar to the Living with Alcohol program, is a requirement the Commonwealth government must make to rehabilitation. The New South Wales government saying if you want to go down this path it is going to cost more money. The Territory government is looking at more work for police and for administrators through the tribunal. All that costs money.
This all comes down to one basic thing: alcohol abuse. I believe the alcohol industry - especially the breweries, the big companies that make alcohol - need to step up to the plate and put a substantial amount of money into rehabilitation. It is their product. We hear much in the container or packaging industry about product stewardship. Well, I say to the breweries here is an example where the concept of product stewardship should exist; they produce a product. Most people deal with that product sensibly, but there is a group of people in our society who do not. Because of that, our society pays a pretty big price in taxation, health costs, and in the cost to families and our communities.
I believe our government - and I am not saying they do not do it - needs to put more pressure on the Commonwealth government to put more money into these programs. They are expensive, but the Commonwealth collects the taxes from the breweries, and that is where our money should go. If we are going to achieve some changes in the alcohol problems we have in the Northern Territory - some positive changes - it is going to require financial assistance. The Territory government cannot do that on its own; it does not have the power to tax the breweries. The Commonwealth government does and they should set aside a percentage of that taxation income for more rehabilitation programs that are required, especially in the Northern Territory - if they really believe in closing the gap. I say most - not all - of the reasons why we have a big gap in the Northern Territory is associated with alcohol and welfare combined, and alcohol is certainly a key part of that.
Madam Speaker, as I said, I have qualified support for the bill that has been put forward today and I certainly am interested in hearing the minister’s response.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Speaker, first I will address some of the issues raised by the member for Nelson. When he mentioned speaking to people in the industry about whether mandatory rehabilitation will work, I can enlighten the member for Nelson as I have had meetings with quite a number of people who are in the industry of providing Alcohol and Other Drug services.
When one sits down and explains our policy from this side they give us support because they believe it will work. There are people out there who are beyond help. I agree with the member for Nelson regarding mandatory rehabilitation. When people are beyond helping themselves, they need a helping hand to get back on track from the community. Some of these people may not want to do that but, when you are beyond helping yourself, and beyond that ability to make those good decisions, sometimes the community has to help you. We do that with people suffering mental illnesses. We do it with a whole range of issues. Therefore, I do not see why we cannot do that in this particular instance.
I also agree with the member for Nelson when he said people are usually okay when they are sober. I have worked with habitual drunk legislation in Western Australia as a police officer. I have said in this House before that I have seen it work. I agree these people can be reasonable people when they are sober. You just have to get them to be sober so you can help them back to the path of either responsible drinking, abstinence, or whatever the outcome that particular person wants.
However, it revolves around alcohol abuse. When we ask why people do that, one has to look at what the very basics are in our community; that is, accountability, responsibility and consequences. If you do not have those three things then you have people being able to make choices to consume copious amounts of alcohol without fear of too many consequences. There are people in our community who just do not believe there are any consequences. When we look at the current form of mandatory rehabilitation and secondary supply, those things do not seem to be working at the moment. We seriously have to look at doing something quite different.
The member for Nelson also said these people are dangerous to themselves, and also dangerous to others. People who are out there inebriated fall over, get into fights, walk onto roads, get run over and, sadly, some get killed. They are also a danger to others because they do things that cause drivers to, for instance, swerve around to miss a pedestrian who is inebriated and hit a pole, or roll the car. That person then suffers either death. injury, or trauma. The other thing is if you are in the unfortunate position where you are in a road accident caused by someone who is drunk and that person dies, you have to wear that for the rest of your life. These are the psychological consequences of excessive alcohol consumption in our community.
We can see why the government is trying to do things. I do not blame them. They have a major problem. It is 11 months in, and there are well over 2000 on the BDR. They seriously need to try to revamp what we believe to be poorly thought-out legislation. They are fiddling around the edges. There are a couple of things in there that I believe are positive - not that we are going to support this legislation – such as issues around the gap orders may be okay. Sadly, it is a bit like shifting the deck chairs on the Titanic. They seem to be failing. There are more and more people going on the Banned Drinker Register. There are no deterrents. The government is desperately trying to fix what was poorly thought-out legislation.
We have to do things such as go into further changes upon changes. Even when we finish this debate, there will be further changes required to this legislation. It is a bit like a dog chasing its tail, or the old story of the rabbit going down a rabbit warren. We are just chasing around trying to fix this and fix that.
When you are out talking to people about this particular legislation, it is interesting. I have spoken to a number of police officers who are at the coalface. They said it is becoming more and more complicated. One of the questions put to me by a serving police officer was how on earth do less educated people understand all the different aspects of this legislation when they are trying to explain to them that there is this and there is that. Of course, it is going to be all sorts of different exempt areas, regulated areas, and defined areas, and anything else the government dreams up, to try to prop up this legislation.
We see terrible incidents occurring, 11 months after the legislation is introduced. As I said, well over 2000 people are on the Banned Drinker Register, yet, we still see people lying around the streets and the parks drunk. These people still appear to be getting their alcohol through friends, cousins, partners, or what have you. The good citizens are still suffering the consequences of verbal and physical abuse by drunks in our streets and parks. We had the terrible situation recently at Hudson Fysh Flats in Darwin with the 72-year-old man, who simply went out and was asking people to be quiet. What happened? He was stabbed in the back and the poor guy is still in a serious condition in hospital.
The people responsible for these ghastly deeds need to be in rehabilitation - mandatory rehabilitation, real rehabilitation, not the optional kind the NT Labor government pedals at the moment. We all hear them saying this and that. They talked about secondary supply. When you talk to serving police officers out there about secondary supply, they do not have time to scratch themselves, let alone go out and try to find, from a bunch of drunks, who bought what and who gave what to whom, who left the circle, and who stole their alcohol. These are some of the things they say when the police are trying to ascertain what exactly is going on with people out there.
These people need to be in real rehabilitation. Yes, we still have issues. Why are those people not in rehab? Well, I do not see in the budget money allocated to actually give real rehabilitation; that is, where people are taken away - those who cannot help themselves, those who are beyond help and perhaps are a danger to themselves and other people - into rehabilitation.
In my travels around talking to people in the Alcohol and Other Drug Service providers - the NGOs and the like - when I sit down and explain to them, they actually understand where we are coming from and support it. I know in closing remarks the minister will stand up and say - I can see it now: ‘The police force say they have the best tool they have ever had’. Unfortunately, they do not have the best tool available, but they have the best this government can give them. That is a bit sad, because there are better tools available. I would be happy if the government picked up on some of our initiatives and actually went out there and implemented those, because we firmly believe, as do the majority of people in the Alcohol and Other Drugs Service industry, that our side will work far better than the government is at the moment.
Of course, the minister will stand up and say: ‘That is all rubbish. We have the industry saying this is the best tool and it is all great’. I expect that is what the minister is going to say but, behind the scenes, there are some major problems with their legislation and their policies.
There are still only 400 beds in the NT, and that includes sobering-up shelter beds. The government says they have all these rehabilitation facilities going and it is all great, but there are still only 400 beds. I will be happy for the government to say they got it all wrong, there is more here and there is more there, and produce the figures to demonstrate that figure is incorrect.
Secondary supply is still a major problem out there. There are stories, when you wander around, walk into a supermarket and talk to people. I recently drove to Alice Springs and asked people on the way how they are handling all these issues. There are some major issues, and those issues are probably something that could form a whole other debate.
Sadly, those in the public who are afflicted by this terrible addiction still do not seem to be able to get sufficient help to get themselves back on the straight and narrow. What do we see? There are plenty of media releases at the front end; however, when you talk to the people who are responsible for trying to fix this - the public servants and the non-government organisations - there is not enough support at the back end. Look at the budget and the government will say, ‘Yes, well we have put in all this’, but it is still going to be insufficient to truly fix the problem.
I note, though, in a couple of media releases, one in February, the Chief Minister said: ‘Yes, we are going to go to the Commonwealth’. I agree; the Commonwealth needs to help. The member for Nelson mentioned the Commonwealth receives much of the taxes and it needs to stump up some money to help us fix this problem. However, if you do not have accountability, responsibility, and consequences, the problem will continue to grow.
I was at the budget lunch where the minister, in her capacity as Treasurer, gave an expos on what the budget is going to do and how wonderful it is going to be for the Territory. There were a few holes in it. However, as I left the budget lunch I walked out thinking: ‘Well, I did not hear anything about this, that, and a few other things’. I was confronted by a group of drunken people sitting outside the Holiday Inn - drunken behaviour, drunken abuse, people screaming and shouting at one another. As the Minister for Alcohol Policy’s counterpart on this side of the House, I thought: ‘I hope the minister comes out this end of the building because she will be confronted with exactly the problem all the other good people and good taxpayers in the Northern Territory have to face’.
When you talk to various people around Darwin, in Alice Springs, and along the way, they say when they go to use public barbecue facilities or public facilities, they are confronted by people who abuse them, will not move, and will not allow the public to use public amenities. People call the police; however, if the police are tied up they do not get there. They destroy people’s Saturday or Sunday outing at these public places, when they simply get a mouthful of abuse. Most of these people are taking families and kids with them. People tell me they are disgusted they cannot use these public facilities because their kids are then confronted with the hurling of abuse.
Other people I talk to work in and do the maintenance in the parks around Darwin. I have not spoken to them in Alice Springs, but it is plain to see by the newspaper articles the state of law and order in Alice Springs - it is quite sad. I know, from talking to police officers there, they do their very best. The problem is they are constrained, obviously, by budgets, directions, and government policy. However, when you talk to the workers out there - I was talking to one about a week ago, and that person told me several years ago they used to go through the parks and there were people sitting there drinking. They, would, obviously, report it to the police; the police would do what they could, and these people were not aggressive. However, sadly, this person was saying the trend now is these people are becoming very aggressive and literally telling these workers where to go: ‘Go away. Leave us alone’. They use huge amounts of expletives and foul language I dare not repeat in this House.
____________________
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Year 5/6 Stuart Park Primary School students accompanied by Mr Lachlan Griffin. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
____________________
Mr STYLES: This is our future, Madam Speaker - there they are. There is the future, and we can wave to the future up there. These are the young people who will inherit the problems we do not fix. Our job in this House is to fix the problems so these young people have a better life.
The minister will say: ‘Yes, we are doing that and we are going to do a far better job than you would ever do on your side of the House’. Obviously, we differ. The people we talk to say: ‘We just want to get the drunks off the streets’, and that is exactly what the Country Liberals will do. They are sick of walking in urine and human faeces. They are sick of tripping over people. They are sick of getting humbugged and sick of groups of these people - the very nature of the groups they are in and the condition they are in - intimidating people.
I have old people in my electorate who will not go to the shopping centre without being in a group of people or without being escorted because they are afraid. I can assure the minister - especially some of the women - will not use the ATM at the shopping centres because they are afraid. It is really sad when you doorknock people and are sitting in their lounge room and an old lady who deserves all the respect the community can give says: ‘I am too afraid to go up to the shopping centre on my own. I walk out and get humbugged. I have a bag of stuff’. There are people humbugging them.
I am assuming this is going on all over the place. I receive reports these people are humbugged all the time. Obviously, some of these people used to buy 4 L casks, but they buy a 2 L cask and go home because they like to have a little drop over a period of a couple of weeks. They are humbugged for that alcohol. Now, people are starting to get very aggressive in the way they are humbugging other people. It is very sad, indeed.
Obviously, the problem exists, the government is aware of it, and is now trying to find ways to fix it. Now, we are going to issue people with infringement notices for drinking in various places. If they are causing a nuisance we are going to give them an infringement notice. The infringement notices, generally - as the member for Nelson alluded to and I agree with him - will be predominantly in relation to within 2 km of licensed premises, and will be Aboriginal people in our community who are on welfare payments and are probably the people who can least afford to pay these fines. Many of these people - not all of them but a core group of people - who fall into the category of being beyond making decisions to help themselves; they have simply chosen to go off and live that particular lifestyle. Then, they get to a point where, without any help, it is probably not going to be easy to turn back.
What happens? They receive these infringement notices and, if they get three of them, they go on the Banned Drinker Register. If they do not pay these things, what happens? They go to court, these things are heard ex parte, they turn into warrants of commitment, and these people, sadly, are going to end up in gaol.
I wonder whether or not this is the government’s answer to mandatory rehabilitation; where they use this particular model to get these people into gaol and, then, they will run mandatory rehab programs in gaols. That is something that is almost akin to recriminalising public drunkenness. If people are in these areas and get an infringement notice, then end up in gaol, someone is going to say: ‘If I was drunk out there, how did I actually end up in prison?’ ‘Oh, well, it was the non-payment of fines’. It would be interesting to see how the government handles that particular issue. That is something the Labor government said they would never do.
We, on this side, agree you have to get these people into mandatory rehab; it is just how you do it. I am interested to see, in the near future, how the government will do this.
How does a large proportion of people this legislation targets understand what the issues are, given that police officers are saying it is complicated? We have 2 km rules, regulated areas, designated areas, special licence areas, exempt areas, and special exemptions. When they are talking to people who, perhaps, do not understand how the law works and have limited education, police officers are tearing their hair out and saying: ‘They just do not understand and you cannot even explain this to them, because they all just sit there and look at you with a blank look on their face’.
My colleague, the member for Port Darwin, addressed the issue of the definition of ‘nuisance’. I will move on to others, as he did a fairly good job of putting that to the government.
These people should be in rehabilitation. The government says they have the toughest laws in the country - in fact, I have heard the minister say in the world. These are the toughest laws Australia has ever seen. In 2001, when the CLP left the government benches, there were 13 457 apprehensions of people taken into protective custody. The next full set of numbers I have access to is the 2008-09 year, when there were 94 400 apprehensions for protective custody either in police cells, sobering-up shelters, or taken home by Night Patrols. We can see the problem, over the last 11 years, has been getting progressively worse.
If we use income management as a way of forcing people into the tribunal and into some form of rehabilitation, that is going to be an interesting task. I agree with the member for Nelson asking how we are going to do that. That needs to be even-handed across the board. If the government thinks this is going to be an easy process - it has to negotiate, obviously, with the federal government to get the process set up so it has the ability to do that.
There are a number of questions which are going to have to be asked after some of these amendments are in place, and we will see what happens and what we believe is going to arise from that particular issue.
Regarding minister Macklin’s Stronger Futures legislation, the federal government has said income referral decisions are made by the Northern Territory government, and referred to Centrelink for application. Well, it is going to be interesting to see how the federal government handles that particular issue.
Moving on to some of the changes to proposed section 101U as per the proposed amendments: a person can receive a BAT notice for drinking in a house they are house sitting within 2 km of a licensed venue within a designated area, but not for drinking in the park opposite the licensed venue. So here we have a situation and the government needs to ensure this does not happen. It will be interesting ...
Ms Lawrie: That is not true. You are so wrong.
Mr STYLES: ... to see how that actually plays out.
There are changes which are needed and the government does not appear to know who it is targeting. We moved some amendments when we were discussing the PACSM bill about having figures put into annual reports so we could actually be given a clear picture of how it is working, who it is working for, and who it is not working for. I say again if they had adopted some of the opposition’s proposed amendments, we may be able to track, very clearly, what is happening there.
In this legislation, we also need to deal with a couple of issues in relation to police officers searching people for alcohol and other things. I note under the Police Administration Act, the Juvenile Act, and the Misuse of Drugs Act, there are powers for police to conduct the search themselves. When you are dealing with the same gender, that is okay. When you do not have people available of the same gender under that other legislation, police officers can direct a member of the public or, for instance, a medical practitioner to search people. We do not have the ability to do this in the Liquor Act. In relation to consistency, we need to move across and have that power, and that issue should be considered.
There are a number of questions we should put to the government. I do not know whether we have time to debate them here today. What is going to happen in relation to the non-payment of fines? What is going to happen to our gaol population? We note the gaols are overflowing. There are probably insufficient deterrents for people. They just seem to think they can do what they like out there. That is the message I get from police officers who have to deal with this. People who work in the courts are quite amazed at some of the situations which are occurring at the moment, and the predicaments the community finds itself in ...
________________________
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Sanderson, I will just acknowledge these young people. Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Year 11 Darwin High School Legal Studies students, the Step Up Be Heard class, accompanied by Ms Michelle Elliott. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
________________________
Mr STYLES: Thank you, Madam Speaker. They are some more of our future, and it is nice to have them here ...
Ms Lawrie: Do not put them off too much, Peter.
Mr McCarthy: They will be deconstructing this debate, Peter.
Mr STYLES: Oh, good. Well, it gives them something to think about, and some alternative ideas. We like that because people should question not only us but, in particular, the government and the government policies, and whether they are going to work or not. I encourage people in Legal Studies to talk to stakeholders, go out into the community and talk to the people in the Alcohol and Other Drug areas and ask them what they think. Do not take my word. Go out and ask, and I am sure you will get the same answers I did: there are some serious concerns about the legislation which currently faces all of us in our community.
Madam Speaker, the amendments the government is introducing have the effect of almost recriminalising public drunkenness ...
Ms Lawrie: No, they do not.
Mr STYLES: ... and if you work that back - I pick up on the interjection by the minister. If people are going to end up in gaol because they are out sitting there drinking, that is just another way around - and it is a cute way - of recriminalising public drunkenness. These people will probably end up in NT gaols, as many of them already are for alcohol-related issues - something the Labor government said it would never do. It is going to be interesting to see what the minister says and actually what happens out in the real world.
There are all sorts of interesting articles in newspapers. I note there is one in today’s newspaper in relation to the Northern Territory’s ability to govern itself. It would appear we are losing the ability to govern ourselves. When you look at The Australian today, in an article by Sean Parnell, the headline is: ‘Blueprint ready if Northern Territory drink plan fails’. It would appear the federal government is getting ready to take over more aspects of what is, and should be, the realms of the Northern Territory government. Why? They had to do it with the intervention, they are now doing it with alcohol. The federal government is stepping in. We are in, perhaps, the awkward situation where the federal government may step in and take over more and more of what should be the Northern Territory’s responsibility. Why is that happening? Well, probably because of the failure of the government policy - serious failures in relation to child protection and alcohol management.
It is interesting - I have said it before and I will say it again - we do not mind if the government moves further towards CLP policy; in fact, it would probably be a good thing. The government will say they are talking to people out there and everybody reckons it is great; it is full steam ahead and everything is right. Well, I do not know who the minister and her advisors are talking to, but if it is the same people I am talking to, then we are all getting two different stories. What we see in the community, is the community is sick and tired of it. We are still seeing people lying around the streets and in our parks, and the results of alcohol-fuelled violence. We do not see any huge reductions. I know the minister will get up and say: ‘Here are the statistics, here is this, and there is that’.
However, the fact remains people out there are not seeing any difference. They still see the same people, they are still getting humbugged, and they still have the same concerns. They are tired of wearing the consequences for the behaviour of a few. From our side, we will target the people who are actually causing the problems and creating the issues the public is so very sick of.
There are going to have to be some more amendments to this very quickly to try to fix up some of the issues. It was put to me the other day it is a bit like when Churchill was referring to Russia in 1939. The quote is - and I suggest this alcohol issue is quite the same:
- It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key.
I believe the key is a change in policy. In nearly 12 months not much has changed. The situation needs to be overhauled again. It is sad it has not worked. I agree with the member for Nelson: you are better off trying something than not trying anything at all. I will give credit to the government, they have tried. However, I do not think they have it right, they have it wrong. We need to have a serious look, as a collective group of people in this community, to try to fix some of the problems we are all affected by.
On this side of the House, we believe the key is real mandatory rehabilitation. The Country Liberals’ policy of removing drunks off the streets and giving them real rehab - not the optional type that the Northern Territory government has - will actually fix the problem. I might add the majority of people in the Alcohol and Other Drug industries actually agree that is a better way to go. I would not come into this House and propose something that all those people thought was a waste of time and was not going to work, because that would just be a bit silly.
We do believe we have some serious answers. We are talking to people - and I acknowledge that the government, the advisors and the member for Nelson have all quoted some research from other areas. We have had a look at some of that. However, we have a unique set of problems in the Northern Territory which are not replicated anywhere else in the world - not in London, where people were talking about floor prices, and Canada. It could be similar, but we have a unique set of problems. You can draw on that information and I am happy to …
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Sanderson, you time has expired.
Mr STYLES: The clock does not say so, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: The clock finished then.
Mr STYLES: It is still showing one minute to go.
Madam SPEAKER: No, the red sweep just went around, member for Sanderson.
Ms LAWRIE (Alcohol Policy): Madam Speaker, for the students of Darwin High School, you just met the parliamentarian nicknamed Eeyore. He is the harbinger of doom and gloom. According to him, there is nothing going right in the Territory at all, ever, anywhere ...
Mr WOOD: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The Treasurer should be directing her remarks through the Chair.
Ms LAWRIE: I will direct my comment through the Chair, absolutely …
A member: She should withdraw.
Ms LAWRIE: I withdraw Eeyore.
Mr STYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I acknowledged in my speech the government was doing several things wrong. The Treasurer is misleading the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Sanderson, that is not a point of order. Resume your seat
Ms LAWRIE: Clearly touched a nerve.
Mr Styles: No, you are misleading the House.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Please continue with your closing remarks, minister.
Ms LAWRIE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I will go to the issues raised. However, first, I will give a synopsis of the legislation we are debating because we have students in the Chamber. We are debating the next tranche of amendments to legislation designed to turn the problem drinker off tap. There is no legislation like this anywhere in Australia. We are yet to find anywhere in the world that is trying to go to the source of the problem – the problem drinker - turning them off tap due to their behaviour. It is a behaviour-driven reform, rather than reforms that look at alcohol restrictions across our society. There is a reason for it.
Alcohol is the main cause of violence in our society. Data shows it is alcohol which is fuelling about 60% of violent crime in the Territory. Clearly, we have unacceptable levels of violent crime. We also have unacceptable levels of antisocial behaviour. All the analysis shows it is alcohol fuelling the majority of that. Equally, research shows alcohol actually costs the Territory $642m per annum in relation to the economy and social costs. That is the cost of the people in the health system dealing with trauma victims as a result of alcohol, whether that is stabbings, bashings, or car accidents because they were DUI. About 80% of our prisoners are in gaol because they committed alcohol-fuelled crimes. The costs, obviously, impact on that. There is also the entire alcohol and other drugs delivery service rehabilitation and treatment, quite aside from the clinical assistance required along the way.
Do we have a major problem with grog fuelling crime and antisocial behaviour in the Territory? Yes, we do. As statistical data, Indigenous Territorians drink at 1.7 times the national rate; non-Indigenous Territorians drink at 1.5 times the national rate. It is not just an Indigenous issue; it is a whole-of-Territory issue. Australians are known as the great drinkers of the world. However, whilst the majority of people can handle their grog, there is a significant minority of people where grog is the cause of a great traumatic series of consequences in their life through health failures. The rate of renal failure in the Territory is just one example. Of course, it is often the cause of homelessness, neglect of families and, fundamentally, alcohol-fuelled violence leads to tragic outcomes for the victims, and the offenders are gaoled. If you look at many of our lifers in our corrections system - people who will be looked up for 20-plus years - alcohol fuelled that crime.
Did we have to do something about it as a government? Yes, we did. Listening to the member for Sanderson, the shadow minister for Alcohol Policy, you would have thought in 2001, when we came to the end of the 27-year regime of the CLP, all was good out there. He quoted protective custody at around 14 000 a year. I will tell you why the figures were so low: you had a four-year freeze on police recruitment in the Territory.
I am the member for Karama, I cover the suburbs of Karama and Malak. I tell you, I was born and raised in Darwin; been here four decades. Karama in 2001 had groups of drunks drinking in the parks and around the Karama Shopping Centre. Malak had groups of drunks in the parks and around the Malak Shopping Centre. Seriously, the amount of antisocial behaviour, public drinking, and incidents arising out of that was phenomenal. Do you know what the main thing was that people said to me, when they were electing me? ‘We do not even bother trying to call the police anymore because they do not turn out’. When we got to government, we realised why. You froze police recruitment for four years. We literally did not have the capacity in our police service to respond to the incidents, to the calls.
This government has invested in police - a phenomenal investment in police. We have, I think, something like an additional 450 police out on our streets today as a result of our investment in police. We have another 94 police funded in this Budget 2012-13 - thank you to the Commonwealth funding.
It is just absurd to pretend this is a problem which has occurred in the last 10 years - absolutely absurd to stand on the other side and pretend it is just since Labor came to government. We acknowledge we have an unacceptable level of alcohol-fuelled violence and crime in our society. We acknowledge the level of antisocial behaviour is unacceptable. That is why we invested in these reforms in the first place. The Enough is Enough alcohol reforms are a $71.5m investment in tackling the problem; investing in our police resources to tackle the problem. We have put nurses into watch houses. We have put database systems in the watch houses - for the first time. Protective custodies before these reforms where never, ever even identified and entered into a data system. We had the revolving door of drunks going through the watch houses with no system behind to support any triaging of them regarding their health, any referrals into the health system or, indeed, even knowing who it was and how many times they were coming in and out. These reforms bed in place all of those significant changes just at the watch house.
Do not get me started on the furphies you ran in here today in this debate about ‘where is the funding into rehab?’. Pure laziness or deliberate misleading - I really question which it is. Probably a combination of both, member for Sanderson.
In this budget alone, we are putting in an additional $4m to enhance urban and remote treatment and rehabilitation services which includes outreach services, withdrawal support, and clinical support. In this budget alone, we are putting in an additional $4.4m to continue support of the Banned Drinker Register, to provide support to the police around enforcing those bans. There is $4.2m additional to support the SMART Court, which is the court with the powers to put people into mandatory rehabilitation and treatment rather than gaol - for the low-level offenders, not the violent offenders. The violent offenders go to gaol.
There is support for the Alcohol and Other Drugs Tribunal. There is no tribunal of this nature anywhere in Australia. We set it up and we are supporting it. Yes, they have many referrals going to them and, yes, they have found it hard to get those people to come before the tribunal. That is why we have the legislation amendments we are debating today; to give the tribunal ex parte powers, and to give them - as the member for Nelson quite appropriately put it - that coercion power to get welfare recipients on income management - up to 70% of income management - so there is a genuine hip-pocket reason why they would be compelled to go to the tribunal and have their issues dealt with.
As I said, we are funding nurses into Darwin, Alice Springs, and Katherine watch houses to provide that important level of health screening. To stand over there and pretend there is no funding to support rehabilitation is a nonsense. What we have done is added an extra 24 rehabilitation beds into the rehab system, on top of the 400-odd beds we have in the system - 14 of those beds in Darwin, and 10 in Alice Springs.
We have also worked with the health sector. There has been something like 120 health intervention training systems around AOD that have occurred to complement these reforms. There has been training for about 50-odd GPs to complement these reforms. The proof is in the pudding. In the first six months alone, we have 2100 drinkers on the Banned Drinker Register. The police have said it is the best tool they have ever had. Alcohol-related assaults are down across the Territory. In the first six months, alcohol-related assaults dropped 12% in Darwin, 13% in Palmerston, 11% in Katherine, and 8% in Alice Springs. That is data directly from the police PROMIS database. Rehabilitation, as I have said, has been boosted.
Not only that, when you are coming into the hospital system because you have an injury, the other thing that really has been boosted is treatment times for withdrawal clients have dropped from eight days to less than three hours. So, the referral systems have dropped from eight days to less than three hours.
These reforms before us are designed to build on the success of the first six months. We are giving police new powers: those on-the-spot infringement notice powers. Within the CBD precincts at Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs, if you are drunk, or have an alcoholic drink in your hand - not even having to be drunk - you cop an on-the-spot infringement notice of $70. If you do that three times in a year, you are on the Banned Drinker Register.
I pick up on the good question from the member for Nelson regarding people, obviously, infringing in that way rather than the 2 km plus nuisance outside of the CBD zones, who will tend to be the non-welfare recipients. To be honest, I think there will be a real mix. That point you made was that they could be the wage earners. These reforms are about changing people's behaviour. If someone is walking along Mitchell Street, at whatever hour, with an open drink in their hand and they cop a $70 on-the-spot fine. Someone in that situation is going to ask: ‘Why am I getting a fine?’ Bearing in mind we will advertise and promote these reforms coming into place. I believe in letting people know what is happening in the law. Public awareness is crucial, and we have already been running advertisements on television. If someone has copped an on-the-spot fine, the police will say: ‘You cannot have an open alcoholic drink in the CBD’. By far, the majority of people will not want the fine again and will not do that again. There are, of course, people who do not get the message the first time. By the time they cop their second fine, the conversation we will have is: ‘You get this another time, mate, and you are on the Banned Drinker Register’.
Not many will be foolish enough to go through to Banned Drinker Register at Strike 3, but those who do can be dealt with before the tribunal. They will be clinically assessed, all of those things. Equally there are the ex parte orders that can apply if they do not turn up to tribunal, and the orders can be around banning them from drinking for 12 months - all of those things. The orders are what the tribunal chooses to make. So, there are consequences for those who are not just the welfare recipients.
Yes, there are significant consequences for welfare recipients, but that is picking up the community sentiment where they see people who are not working, who are receiving taxpayer funds as welfare recipients, and they are trashing their lives through grog. So, manage their income so they cannot keep having that amount of money to spend on grog.
I asked my agency to have a look at an example of where these things are starting to already come through. I will quickly turn to where they are, because we looked at the Family Responsibilities Commission in northern Queensland and how that is working. The other thing we have in place in the Territory already is through the child protection system. The quarantining of welfare payments is occurring and some orders have been made. I will go to the Family Responsibilities Commission example in Queensland. Both the Alcohol and Other Drug Tribunal and the Family Responsibilities Commission are tribunal bodies whose members are formed of community members as well as expert medical and legal members. Both bodies work in the civil jurisdiction with no criminal sanctions. Both make orders seeking to address social problems.
The Family Responsibilities Commission is already a body authorised under the Commonwealth Social Security (Administration) Act and has been provided with direct power to make a person subject to income management. The Commonwealth bill provides that other authorised bodies, like our tribunal here, may be declared as authorised bodies and to exercise the same power as the Queensland Family Responsibilities Commission in making a person subject to income management.
One of the things you do when creating change to law is go out and consult with people in the field. I will pick up again, member for Nelson, on the research you have done on mandatory versus voluntary rehabilitation. Consistently, people in Congress in Alice Springs who deal with the consequences of the drunks all the time have told me to look at the Family Responsibilities Commission in Queensland, at how it works; it really is a good model to look at how we can make the tribunal work. They really have urged, I guess, consideration of those extensive powers. It was also in the discussions with Congress and others such as Bernie Dwyer from Amity, where that whole testing of mandatory versus voluntary came up.
Essentially, what I was being advised throughout is that the jury is still completely out on the evidence based around the effectiveness of mandatory rehabilitation. However, in some overseas studies and some of the early studies here in the trials in Australia, what it is starting to show is, in short, it is better than nothing. As you said when you read out the trial results, it is, first of all, a withdrawal period. It is off the substance for a period of time. It is a period where the health checks can occur. It is a period where that social engagement can occur. It is a circuit breaker in their life. I believe you quoted the figure of 80% who went on to do other treatment out of that trial. For some they generally do. That is a great thing and it works.
The general prevailing view of the experts is, of course, voluntary rehabilitation gets better outcomes because of that personal will to want to change your life. However, in the absence of that, mandatory increasingly is seen as very much a tool to put in play, which is why we scoped mandatory into the reforms in the first place, through the tribunal powers, but also through the SMART Court powers.
Regarding your question, member for Nelson, around the importance of doing a review, understanding the data, and having the statistical data for review, I fundamentally agree with you. Embedded in the funding for the Enough is Enough reforms is funding for evaluation. We have also exchanged correspondence with the Commonwealth around the evaluation. We would like to do evaluation, not just of these reforms, but of the broader Commonwealth prescribed areas initiatives across the Territory.
It is important to look at it in its entirety, so we absolutely have to evaluate these reforms, not just for the sake of the Territory, but also for the sake of the nation, because there are other jurisdictions. South Australia and Western Australia have entered into the debate of whether they have reforms like these. I believe it is important because we are not the only place in our nation where we have drunkenness issues. It is important because we have gone first with reforms of this nature, that we genuinely evaluate them so people can see the results - so we can see the results.
The view you have of keeping your mind open to change - absolutely. As you said, there is no one magic solution to this. It takes a range of initiatives to intervene in people’s lives to get constructive outcomes, without a doubt. It is oft times generational change that you are really striving for. You want immediate change, medium-term change, but it is sustainable long-term change you need to strive for as well. Therefore, evaluation is critical. I can absolutely commit to getting in and reviewing the efficacy of these reforms, evaluating them, ensuring all the statistics and data are being collated, including, member for Nelson, the statistics on Indigenous and non-Indigenous and the income management statistics. All of that data that you want - absolutely not a problem. Will there be a review? Yes, there will.
What I cannot commit to today standing in the Chamber is a point of view regarding Year 2. What I want to do is go back to the experts and ask about the point of view regarding Year 2; whether that would be good, helpful, or what is the most efficient and effective way of doing a review? Is it Year 2, is it Year 3? Some people argue it is Year 5. I do not know. I would not want to wait five years - that is too long. There needs to be a far earlier point than Year 5. Is it Year 2 or Year 3? I need to rely on the advice of the experts who undertake this research and evaluation, rather than make it up here in the Chamber. I am genuinely committed to the review. Would it be Year 2 or Year 3? I cannot give you that answer today. I certainly would not accept an answer that it has to be Year 5. That is too long for the extent of the reforms we have undertaken.
The other answer I want to give first - I will touch on nuisance in a moment – is I will go to the other concern you had, member for Nelson, about the appeal process because it is a very valid issue. When the tribunal makes a BADT order it requires a person to be subject to income management. If the person does not agree with this order they may seek review of the BADT order under Division 4 of the Alcohol Reform (Prevention of Alcohol-Related Crime and Substance Misuse) Act. Section 41 provides for a review, on application, by a banned person for variation, extension, or revocation of a BADT order, which includes orders relating to income management. An applicant is required to attend the hearing of the application. The tribunal must provide a notice of the decision to the banned person after the review. If the person does not agree with this decision they may appeal to the Local Court - section 68. First of all, there is a review mechanism within the tribunal. Equally, if they still do not agree with the outcome of the review, it is appealed to the Local Court.
The other issue I want to touch on is the one raised by the members for Port Darwin, Nelson and Sanderson in relation to ‘nuisance’. To say there is no definition of ‘nuisance’ in the bill and, therefore, the new offence provision will not work, I disagree with, obviously. I sought specialist legal advice on this matter. I have received specialist legal advice which says having a definition of ‘nuisance’ in the bill would limit and constrain the ordinary and natural meaning of the word.
Just as every member of this Assembly would have a view of the type of behaviour this word would cover, courts have been considering what it means since medieval times. There is a well-established body of law which says what ‘nuisance’ means. ‘Nuisance’, in this context, means interference with the rights of the public to peaceful passage and enjoyment of public places, free of unacceptable annoyance or interference from the behaviour of others.
There are other NT laws that have offence provisions which refer to creating a nuisance without providing a definition. These laws include laws about public health, conduct in taxis, and residential tenancy. By having a definition of nuisance, behaviour that might otherwise not be classified as a nuisance could, potentially, be brought into question. Take shouting, for example. Without question, shouting can constitute a nuisance. Under the new offence provision, a person who has an open container of alcohol and is shouting in public within 2 km of a licensed premise can be given an infringement notice if their shouting is causing a nuisance. That infringement might lead them to be placed on the BDR if it is repeated. On the other hand, a frustrated parent who may be enjoying a family picnic with a glass of champagne and shouts at their unruly kids to get their attention to return home is unlikely to be creating a nuisance. If the bill contained the definition of a nuisance which said shouting constituted a nuisance, that parent could be at risk of being given an infringement notice. The courts make these judgments and the courts have made sensible judgments on these to date.
__________________
Visitors
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, do you mind if I acknowledge these young people who I think you would probably be interested in?
Ms Lawrie: Karama Primary School!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery - I believe there may be two school groups, but I am not sure - Year 4/5 Holy Family Catholic Primary School students accompanied by Miss Racheal Joyce and Mrs Bernie Kenwrick ...
Ms Lawrie: No, Holy Family is not there yet. That is just Karama.
Madam SPEAKER: That is just Karama. We will welcome them for later, and Year 5/6 Karama Primary School students,
Ms Lawrie: Holy Family is coming in now in the blue, Madam Speaker. Karama is in the green, Holy Family in the blue.
Madam SPEAKER: Okay, and Karama Primary School students are accompanied by Miss Renael Carolin, and Ms Georga McNicol. On behalf of honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome. Welcome to Holy Family, as they are coming in.
Members: Hear, hear!
_______________________
Ms LAWRIE: Welcome, Holy Family school and welcome, Karama Primary School. These schools are about two streets from where I live in Karama, one in one direction and one the other direction. I love these schools; I visit them regularly. Hello …
Mr Wood: Within 2 km?
Ms LAWRIE: Within 2 km, absolutely. A short walk to both.
The other point I want to pick up before I close is the member for Sanderson continues this line that the new offence is a backdoor method of simply making drunkenness a crime, or criminalising drunkenness. No! Neither offence requires the person to be intoxicated. The offences are made out of if the person is drinking liquor at a regulated place. You do not have to be drunk, you can have the can open - not be drunk, just have the can open. You are wrong to lead with that. I know that will not stop you, member for Sanderson, from leading with that furphy, but you are wrong.
I have captured the questions which have been asked by the member for Nelson, and I have touched on the nuisance issue for the three members who have contributed. The last remaining issue is the one of the non-payment of fines. I will just go to that because that would have covered all of the issues which have arisen in this debate. I am very conscious of the time, Madam Speaker, so I will go quickly.
The issue is, just recapping, the non-payment of fines. Other non-payment of fines go to the Fines Recovery Unit. Failure to pay a court-ordered fine or an infringement penalty results in enforcement by the Fines Recovery Unit. The Fines Recovery Unit has a number of sanctions available to it which uses driver’s licence suspension as an effective tool. Imprisonment is the last resort and can only be imposed on breach of a community work order. The community work orders would come well and truly before then. To date, the Fines Recovery Unit has not imprisoned anyone for non-payment of fines. An extreme gymnastic stretch there from the member for Sanderson - getting it wrong again.
I will recap. We will have very strong, different political viewpoints on how to tackle public drunkenness, and the causes, effects and the harms it is doing on our society in crime and antisocial behaviour. However, it is very early days. What we are seeing is alcohol-fuelled violence dropping in the Territory. There are hideous incidents which occur, without a doubt - hideous, distressing incidents, and we have seen those this week alone; one, of course, at Hudson Fysh Avenue, and separate incidents in Alice Springs.
Nothing beats, I guess, prevention, and these are preventative tools. This is about trying to get people restricted from that takeaway alcohol. It is not prohibition. You can never prohibit; people will always find a way of getting hold of that substance. However, they are genuine tools which have genuine consequences to people’s behaviour. Very early data shows they are absolutely taking us in the right direction in reducing alcohol-fuelled crime and antisocial behaviour incidents.
Member for Sanderson, you have a very different view of our community to me. I live and work around Darwin, and I move regularly in and through Palmerston. I meet with many people. Obviously, they know me through being the Minister for Alcohol Policy and having introduced these tough and fairly radical reforms. The consistent feedback I am getting is it has become much quieter since they have come in place. Yes, there are places where drinkers are still hanging out and where police are still having to attend. Consistent feedback is support for the reforms; that it has become much better, much cleaner, with fewer people around in the parks. A classic example is Raintree Park. You will see people sitting there, what I call the morning after, at around 10 am. They are not drinking, they are not shouting, they are not causing a nuisance, they have come out of wherever they have been overnight and are sitting there waking up. They have not slept in that park at night. Yes, there are some patches, and Parap Road is still what I describe as a hot spot. However, we have policing activity there. These laws in the Chamber today are around dealing with the issues of places such as Parap Road.
Madam Speaker, the member for Sanderson and I will always have a different view of the world, and I say thank God, because debate and diversity brings a focus to all of this.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Ms LAWRIE (Alcohol Policy)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
MOTION
Note Paper - Select Committee Report on Youth Suicides in the Northern Territory –Gone Too Soon: A Report into Youth Suicide in the Northern Territory
Note Paper - Select Committee Report on Youth Suicides in the Northern Territory –Gone Too Soon: A Report into Youth Suicide in the Northern Territory
Continued from 27 March 2012.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, as a member of the select committee investigating youth suicide in the Northern Territory, I speak in relation to the committee’s inquiry and the report which was tabled in the March sittings by the chair, my colleague, the member for Arafura.
I acknowledge the chair for the particular passion she has for tackling the subject of youth suicide, knowing only too well the devastation she has seen, not only around the Territory but in her own country on the Tiwi Islands, which has suffered one of the highest suicide rates in the world, and how that community has grappled with and endeavoured to address the loss of its young people through the Tiwi for Life Project.
It is, indeed, disturbing to learn of those stark and alarming statistics; that the Northern Territory suicide rate is three-and-a-half times the national average and, with it, there is a steady increase of suicide amongst our Indigenous young people under 18, and also an increase in young women completing suicide, with girls now comprising up to 40% of all suicides of children under the age of 17 years.
During this term of parliament, I have been a member of several parliamentary committees and they all do important work. However, this one has been one of the more difficult personally because it has dealt with such an incredibly tragic subject: suicide. Suicide, in anyone’s language, is awful. However, young people’s lives ended way too soon makes it all the worse.
As a committee, we dealt with the subject at a very raw level as we heard from individuals who shared their experiences of loss of loved ones, children, family members, and even a couple of young people who shared their stories of depression, alienation, attempts at self-harm, and attempts of suicide.
We heard from a whole range of professionals working in the field. This is certainly not a complete list, but it included youth workers, counsellors, teachers, nurses, doctors, psychologists, psychiatrists, police, and traditional healers. Through the collective experiences of the many individuals and organisations we heard from we were able to build a picture of the multitude of factors which can contribute to the pressure cooker situation - as one person in Tennant Creek described it - which leads to a young person in the depths of despair and hopelessness seeing no alternative but to end their life.
This concept of suicide is so incredibly difficult for us to grasp. I was touched, during the hearing in Central Australia, listening, via a translator, to two very senior men from the Ngaanyatjarra Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Women’s Council and their role as nungkeri, or traditional healers as they explained. They explained with some bewilderment they had no word for suicide; no way to tell, even as healers, if someone was unwell in their mind or spirit, and so unwell as to contemplate ending their life, though they were able to identify the triggers associated with suicide and self-harm such as cannabis, alcohol, jealousy and shame. We heard this story many times when we went to Indigenous communities.
The other notable, if obvious, thing about this inquiry is there are no easy solutions for our society to fix this issue. Whilst government policy and properly targeted and resourced programs have a big role to play, we need, as a community, to go to the grassroots of young people’s lives. While the contributing factors might be identified, as indeed, the nungkeri were able to identify, it is knowing how to address and grapple with these factors and causes, both tangible and intangible.
Without a doubt, this was a considerable body of work collected during our investigation. We collected many hours of evidence through 16 hearings and 45 written submissions. Members of the committee thank all those individuals who either appeared to provide evidence or did so by what were, generally, very well-prepared and detailed submissions.
This report, with its 23 recommendations divided into four areas of focus, provides an appropriate framework for sectors across government and non-government organisations to work with people and communities to address and turn around youth suicide.
The first key area is about building strong, healthy and resilient communities, with recommendations focusing on the development of infrastructure for community activity, service delivery, and public awareness. Within this key area, the committee heard, time and time again, about the need for activity to engage youth, especially in our remote and rural areas.
We heard about the importance of engaging youth through sport, for instance, and the importance of sport for individuals as a collective through a team where there is a unity of purpose and support, an opportunity to achieve and be physically involved and, importantly, something in a young person’s life that they can look forward to - team practice for a game in the lead-up to what would be, perhaps, a weekly competition.
As we learned during the evidence provided by an expert in sports psychology, Professor Colin Tatz, what commonly features for those contemplating suicide or self-harm is they have no hope and nothing to look forward to.
We also heard through CAALAS about the importance of youth programs and the irrefutable evidence that they improve kid’s lives. Indeed, they went as far as to say youth programs should be regarded as essential services. This was a view shared by the Northern Territory Council of Social Services.
All the well-intentioned programs in the world; however, will struggle on the service delivery end so long as we have constraints to enable service delivery: funding cycles; capacity to staff programs, including the challenges of recruiting and retaining suitably qualified staff; not to mention the practicality of housing them; as well as the need for infrastructure for youth activities
We learned also through our investigation about the overlap and the duplication of service delivery. Of course, a big part of building strong, healthy, and resilient communities and, with it, strong, healthy, and resilient young people means putting the spotlight on public and community awareness. The main target, clearly, needs to be around prevention. I will talk a little later about the critical need for postvention.
We heard of many programs which focus on the core need for the emotional health and wellbeing of our young people. Schools and education featured in much of the evidence we received - schools being regarded as places which are safe and, frequently, havens of normality in kid’s lives. While there are a number of very successful programs delivered in schools, the programs KidsMatter and MindMatters seemed to feature in many of the hearings we held. However, of course, schools do not, and should not, be the sole domain of raising public awareness. Indeed, for our disengaged youth who are not attending school, there needs to be other avenues and campaigns to reach and capture these young people. Public awareness needs to extend not only to our young people, but right across our communities.
The second key area of the report’s recommendations is about identifying and helping those at risk through increased counselling and mental health services across the Northern Territory. Our capacity to effectively provide timely, accessible, flexible, culturally-appropriate and, above all, coordinated counselling and mental health services around the Territory is, clearly, a challenge. However, it is one we must rise to.
Our geographic challenges aside, with remoteness, we discussed at the hearing in Tennant Creek the very real fact that most suicides and attempts occurred during the night and outside of the hours of normal service providers. While counselling has an enormous role to play in early intervention and prevention and, indeed, postvention, we heard, for instance, from Wesley Mission the need to provide training to people not necessarily to be counsellors, but to be able to recognise the possible warning signs, to be able to ask the right questions to direct to an individual and, then, to the right service provider. Equipping individuals with these tools, especially young people, is so very important when we know young people at risk will invariably turn to other young people.
Regarding the provision of mental health services, we heard much of the need for a service which is geared towards young people. To that end, the federally-funded service headspace was raised and praised on a number of occasions. Members of the committee took the opportunity to visit headspace in Palmerston, to see for ourselves what headspace was like. We found it to be a place that is bright, vibrant, slightly funky in its dcor, and welcoming - all of these factors making it very youth friendly. We met with staff and some of its clients. Importantly, the physical location of the service in Palmerston means it is very deliberately accessible, but also has a discreet entry away from mainstream shoppers and pedestrian traffic.
The importance of this had been highlighted earlier in the day for the committee at a hearing in the Litchfield Council offices, where we had a number of people from Taminmin College talk about the negative experiences. One person in particular talked about the negative experiences of a student from their school who had been referred to a mental health service in the city, and how alienating that experience was for that young person to walk through the door of a place clearly signed as a mental health service, sitting in a very drab waiting room with patients exhibiting very visible signs of mental health issues - all the things which, for a young person, would make them fearful of being stigmatised and unlikely to return.
Although headspace is nothing like this, it meets a need to engage with and provide a tailored service to youth who do not want to be labelled as having mental health issues and, indeed, may not have mental health issues, but may, instead, walk in wanting to talk about issues of low self-esteem, depression, and things that are happening in their home lives. The two headspace services in the Territory clearly offer an incredible service, and attempt to offer an outreach service as well. However, what is needed is an investment to create permanent headspace services located in our remote areas. Recommendation 14 calls on the Northern Territory government to lobby the Australian government to establish and fund headspace centres in Katherine, Tennant Creek and Nhulunbuy and, then, from each of those locations, with the capacity to deliver outreach services to the more remote areas.
The third key area of focus in the report is about helping the bereaved and stopping the contagion, with recommendations that focus on: a review of emergency procedures policy in schools; a review of debriefing procedures policy in schools; provision of bereavement training; to have all hospital and emergency department’s capacity of conducting suicide risk assessments; and the establishment of mandatory follow-up support procedures.
While early intervention and prevention are so critically important, the need for postvention following a completed suicide is equally as critical to deal with the inevitable grieving and the reality of contagion, or copy-cat suicides, or clustering, in the wake of a young person taking their life. In the same way that schools need to be prepared for emergencies such as fire and bomb threats, they need to have a response plan for a critical stress incident such as a suicide. That is not just in response to a current student, but also recognising the loss of A former student who may still have contacts with their old school through their peer group, siblings, or extended family is also important as part of that plan.
The fourth key area within the report was around smarter service delivery, with recommendations 19 to 23 focusing on the importance of data collection and the formation of a Northern Territory suicide prevention coordination committee. In this key final area, the committee heard about the need and the importance of effective data collection to be able to drive evidence-based policy. Understanding the true extent of suicide amongst our young people, episodes of self-harm, the symptomatic cry for help, and for completed suicide is all too important. But, also important is a mapping exercise and development of a database of the existing services, what it is they provide, how effective they are, how they are funded, and how they interact with other services.
Whilst additional resources are always welcome - and, indeed, the report has called for additional resources - we also need to understand exactly what it is we have in place right now, how these services interact with one another, how effective they are, and how they are funded, in order to find the very best efficiencies.
The formation of a new Northern Territory suicide prevention coordination committee, with a high-level interagency level representation, is very critical to addressing youth suicide in the Territory because suicide does not sit with any single agency. I am not going to read Recommendation 23 because it is very lengthy. It is deliberately so because it is detailed and very explicit in spelling out the need to formulate an action plan for 2013 through to 2016, and why it is that a high-level interagency group of people is needed to drive that.
Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, as I draw to a close, I will highlight evidence we heard in my own electorate during a fairly full day for the committee, which included hearings with the East Arnhem Shire Council, the Galupa Marnggar Suicide Prevention Group, and a very valuable community meeting at Yirrkala. Indeed, all three of those hearings were very valuable.
The Galupa Marnggar Suicide Prevention Group has been in existence for a number of years, and was formed by Yolngu community leaders in response to a succession of suicides completed and attempted at the community of Gunyangara, also known as Ski Beach. That community has been free of suicide for some time because of the grassroots action and a singular commitment of community leaders to deal with the issue of suicide. What this has highlighted is the fact that community solutions, driven by ownership of the problems - and that includes addressing alcohol, substance abuse, and training to be alert to the early signs of a troubled individual who may be at risk - are all part of what is necessary to drive a grassroots campaign.
The Galupa Marnggar Suicide Prevention Group meet regularly at what is known as the Causeway, in an outdoor setting, where they talk openly about suicide and mental health issues and work collaboratively with other stakeholders from the government and non-government sector - and this includes the Wesley Mission. Most importantly, they own what they do. They have their own network of people within their community who look out for others who may be at risk.
Their work and the success they have achieved in reducing suicide is widely recognised. During hearings, I spoke with witnesses in Tennant Creek, Katherine, and Alice Springs during our tea breaks, and all of them knew of the work of this group.
The key driver of the Galupa Marnggar Suicide Prevention Group is Gayili Marika. She was recognised for her achievements last year with a very special award and national recognition for her work in the area of youth suicide. In fact, next week, they are hosting, in Nhulunbuy, a two-day conference appropriately titled ‘Back to the Roots’. This two-day conference has a number of guest speakers and places are fully subscribed. I look forward to being at the opening of that event next Wednesday. On the following day, the Thursday, we look forward to our Minister for Indigenous Development, the member for Arnhem, who will be attending that conference and addressing the group.
In closing, I obviously look forward to hearing the other contributions from members of the committee. It has been a good committee to work with. We have all been on the same page in wanting to learn about suicide, what the issues are and, importantly, what it was we could report back to government by way of what was quite a substantial report into how we think suicide needs to be addressed in the Northern Territory
I thank you, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, member for Fannie Bay, for your participation, the members for Goyder and Sanderson, and reiterate my thanks to the chair of the committee. I also need to thank the very hard-working committee secretariat. There was an awful lot of organising to do around our hearings - a bit like herding cats sometimes, when you are trying to get all members’ schedules lined up to be in the same place at the same time. However, there was a good level of cooperation. There were probably other places we wished we might have been able to get to, but we always have upon us the constraints of time.
I thank the committee secretariat, Mr Russell Keith, Ms Julia Knight, Ms Maria Viegas, Ms Lauren Copley and Ms Kim Cowcher for their very hard work in assisting us, including drafting of the report.
On that note, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I commend this report to the House.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to comment, albeit briefly, on this report. I commend my colleagues on the opposite side who were part of the committee, and also my colleague, the member for Sanderson.
Youth suicide, or any suicide for that matter, is a very tragic state of affairs. It was a difficult subject to review, investigate, and research. It is difficult for many people, particularly those who have struggled themselves in regard to their mental wellness and wellbeing. It is often a subject that is unspoken about. Thankfully, in these current times, it is spoken about and addressed far more seriously than it has in the past. Much work and research still needs to be done in regard to this very difficult subject.
It is something that goes across all sections of our society. No one is immune from suicide or attempted suicide or self-harm. It does not seek out any particular race, creed, religion or age. It is not just applicable to people who live in the bush or the urban areas; it goes across the board. I guess that makes it a very difficult subject in itself to tackle, because you never can tell where people are going to present themselves with problems. Sadly, in the course of our work and investigations into youth suicide, we discovered there are many people who have not, or do not, present with any kind of mental health issue, and end up taking their own lives. That is going to be one of our biggest challenges as a community: to find those people and have them spoken with, treated, and managed, such that they do not get to that state of despair where they want to end their life and leave this world forever.
I thank all the people who met with the committee, from the professional medical people through to the artist from Wales who did live theatre to help young people. I particularly thank the couple of people who shared their personal stories with me. They are in my electorate, and they had either read Hansard, or someone had brought it to their attention. So, to you, Barb, and to you, Jill, out there, thank you for talking with me and sharing your stories about your losses, and also about how you had been through troubled times. I appreciated it and I will always treasure what you gave to me.
I thank my colleague, the member for Sanderson, for supporting the committee and me in this. I thank the chair and the members for Nhulunbuy and Fannie Bay because there was no disagreement in how we had to tackle this issue. We all had the same vision, which was to try to understand why it happens, where it happens, and how we can stop it happening. It was important to have a cross-section of people to talk to, including the professionals, which I appreciated very much. It was a great learning experience for me. I also appreciated the secretariat support staff and all the work they did in drafting the report, and the input they gave to make the work of the committee as good as it was in producing the final report.
We have heard the recommendations. I sincerely hope the government takes all the recommendations seriously, which I am sure it will, and will lobby both the federal government and other agencies to get funding and assistance - for example, for another headspace in the rural area, and in Katherine or Tennant Creek. That requires commitment from the Commonwealth government, as well as other agencies, to manage these establishments if we are successful in obtaining funding.
Once again, thank you to all my colleagues and to the secretariat. To the people out there who, perhaps, are listening, it is never too late to step forward and ask for help. That is what I ask people to do because, whilst it may seem there is no hope or there is no way out of the black hole, there can be. All they have to do is step forward and find a friend. Someone ran that campaign - I do not know which group it was – which said we should ask our friends or neighbours: ‘Are you okay today?’ We should adopt that and always do it.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Madam Deputy Speaker, I support the report and commend it to the House. It was a very challenging committee to be on and a very - what is the right word? I do not want to say rewarding, because it was not that way in a sense because we had a very emotional journey with much of the evidence we heard. Compelling might be a better way of putting it.
It was a very compelling committee to be on, and I thank my colleagues on the committee, from the leadership of the member for Arafura, the deputy chair, the member for Nhulunbuy, and also my colleagues across the floor, the members for Goyder and Sanderson. We came together as Territorians to deal with what is a very difficult and challenging issue which has personally affected probably every member in this Chamber. It happens, unfortunately, to many Territorians and we are a small place. We all have been affected in one way or another by someone who has completed suicide.
It was a very challenging committee. We had excellent participation from witnesses; very cooperative participation. Everyone who came to the committee came willingly with experience, information, and ideas they wanted to share. We also visited many places across the Territory and had some fascinating, very deeply-moving, eye-opening conversations at times. It was a very challenging committee.
Together, we have created a report, with recommendations that mean well. We had some debate and much discussion over the time of the committee about what we wanted to do, which has led to a very good report. I make my most important point that, sometimes as a committee, you can deliver a report with recommendations and you can say: ‘Tick, done, that is excellent. We have fixed this problem’. That is not the case with something like suicide. It is not enough to write a report and make some recommendations. Those things that will prevent suicide are in many ways community-based and are away from what government does. We need to do more, and we need to do some of what we do better. This report goes to much of that.
This is not the case of a committee meets, issues a report and, suddenly, the problem is fixed. Suicide goes much further than that. We heard some excellent testimony from different witnesses from across the Territory about the things they have done at a community level which have been quite inspiring and have led to much success in reducing attempted and completed suicides.
This is a complicated issue. One of the biggest complications we heard from all witnesses is the difficulty in identifying early someone who might want to complete or attempt suicide. We constantly talked to different witnesses about points of intervention, or intersection. School is a very big point of intervention, and there are different programs you can do there. We have recommendations that go to that, and they are excellent because school is a good point of intervention. Unfortunately, sometimes the people who are going to attempt suicide are not going to school. We often heard about that. The people who are likely to attempt suicide opt out, so they are not going to be at school, which is a point of intervention for us. They are not going to be going to the local footy club and kicking the footy around, as the member for Nhulunbuy touched on, because they are opting out. They are not necessarily attending those places where we can make a difference.
We, obviously, want to do the best we can. The fundamental differences occur often at that community level. We heard some excellent evidence from Mount Theo about how they went about reducing attempted and completed suicides. I will read from some of the testimony:
- … it was not someone from the outside saying this is what needs to be done.
Quite literally, our counselling and mentoring program, which we called Warra-Warra Kanyi, began with the brother of a young man who had passed away. Literally, the day after that
happened he came around to see me and said: ‘We need to drive around and go and see the other young men and start talking to them about this because I am worried about them’.
This was … the genesis of the program.
As a government, we can support people when they start community programs, but you cannot manufacture community - or it is very difficult to manufacture community. This was one young man making a difference. Then, from that point, the Mount Theo program grew, and it made a massive difference to the lives of people of Mount Theo. It reduced the number of attempted and completed suicides significantly, to the point where there were not any by the time we were talking to them. They created a mentoring network. Suddenly, this community knew what they were doing. They were caring for each other, caring beyond self, and they were getting many referrals directly from young people.
It is worth noting - again, this is from their testimony - that the professional counsellor had been in that community for five years, and then had assumed the role as professional counsellor for the last two. She had been living in the community for an extended period of time and, as a result, she had very strong relationships and very high levels of trust within the community. So, it was not just a case of saying, ‘Here is someone with the skills set from university who knows what they are doing’, and putting them into a community and saying: ‘This is the person you talk to’. She was someone who was local to that community, who happened to have that skill set. That is an extremely rare thing; that is not something you can do overnight in every community. However, it was a demonstration, again, of the importance of community and of having relationships of trust.
Where we saw the best programs that led to the reduction or the absence of attempted and completed suicides is where the community had made an effort to stand up. That is No 1 of our four points we identified, as a committee, for further action. No 1, Building strong, healthy, and resilient communities. Other areas are around identifying and helping those at risk, helping the bereaved and stopping the contagion, and a smarter service delivery are really important as well.
However, it starts right back at that first point. That was a question I asked of many people. We heard from many different service providers who provided excellent programs which, if people were in them, they helped them; they did not go on to complete or attempt suicide. However, the difficulty was getting them into that program. It was not so simple as they just entered it. We have this whole mass of people in our general community who are at risk, and we do not know they are at risk. You have a great service, but the difficult question no one can really answer well was: how do you get someone into the service? That is where you go right back to that very step around community, and the story of that young man at Mount Theo who stood up and said, ‘I am going to make a difference’, and visited everyone, then put in countless hours - and is still putting in countless hours - to make sure Mount Theo has community. At that level, they are reducing attempted and completed suicides. They talk about how it is not an easy thing to do; it involves much sacrifice.
It is really a fundamental point to make: that, as well-meaning and well-intentioned as we are, and as well-thought out, as well-argued as these recommendations are, these are not a panacea. That is something we need to discuss and work so much on: that level of community involvement. That was something which came through quite clearly in much of the evidence we heard.
Regarding helping to grieve and stopping the contagion, we heard very good evidence from the Coroner who was the last witness to appear before the committee - a very impressive witness who spoke with great passion and detail. In some ways, the best thing about having the Coroner speak to us - and he should have been either the first or last witness and he was our last witness - was even though we knew the statistics are of people, he spoke very impressively and passionately about them being people. These are more than statistics; these are people. They were not a case file for him; they were someone’s life. He had been dealing with the bereaved and he understood very well the importance of postvention – to use the phrase we heard a great deal – the importance of talking and working with families after a completed suicide to stop contagion, or to reduce the impacts of that suicide on the family and friends in that circle. I thank the Coroner for his evidence. It was a very moving session. He spoke with profound wisdom and it was very good of him to come along. His appearance was very helpful to the work of the committee and reinforced, in many ways, much of what we had already discussed. Having evidence from the Coroner was critical.
It was about those personal stories which we heard from different witnesses who spoke to us. We heard directly from people who had been affected and moved by suicide. The member for Arafura, as our chair, was particularly instrumental in running the committee to ensure we dealt well with people who were often in pain when appearing before our committee. There were times that were very difficult for all involved, and I believe we got through those and heard some very important testimony as a result of that.
The other group I thought was particularly important in the evidence they gave - and the member for Nhulunbuy mentioned them – was the people we sat down with at Ski Beach. They had a very similar story to that of Mount Theo and Aaron, where they had these ladies who were out there waiting to hear whether there is domestic violence – and this is quoting from the transcript:
- ... or, someone has had a fight in town and they are going to come back. And we used to hear that, when they went to town, or there was a domestic violence that would lead to a threat of suicide or a suicide.
So now we have people on the ground … waiting to hear for that, so that they are prepared to go and stop it; now we have reduced … dramatically, because of this group.
They were prepared, as volunteers, to wait and, as soon as they heard of anything they knew would lead to someone being at risk, they immediately acted. They were a strong volunteer group of people who could deal with people. Again, it comes down to that fundamental level of the community taking interest and being involved. I thought that came through time and time again. It was, perhaps, some of the most critical evidence we heard about the importance of community.
The members for Nhulunbuy and Arafura spoke at length to the specific recommendations in this report. I wanted to speak to some of the lessons we learned from witnesses who came before us.
I acknowledge, while I am on my feet, the efforts of the committee secretariat which supported us. It was clear during the time we were acting as a committee, that they were very involved. They cared about what we were dealing with. They had much work to do. We crammed a great deal in, in the six or seven months we were working. I thank Russell, Julia, Lauren, Kim and Maria. I hope I have not missed anyone. They did much work. As the member for Nhulunbuy said, it can be difficult managing all our diaries, especially in that short period of time, to ensure we could get to everywhere and do everything. More importantly, it was clear they were taking a very deep level of interest as well. Their efforts have also contributed to what I believe is a very important report with some very important recommendations.
We all came together as a committee with the clear intention of doing our best to tackle a very significant issue in the Northern Territory. I like to think what we have done is going to make a difference - a great deal of difference. However, it is going to be a permanent challenge. That is probably one of the big things: it takes constant and persistent hard work and a desire to be part of the community. That was clear: this is an ongoing challenge. There are many recommendations in the report which are important and will go a long way, but there is an ongoing challenge. I thank all my colleagues for helping prepare what, I believe, is an excellent report.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I support the report. I thank colleagues from the House on the committee, and I thank the member for Arafura as the chair. I thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and the members for Fannie Bay and Goyder.
It is interesting because, often when you have committees made up of two groups of people with differing philosophical beliefs, you can clash as to how things should and should not be done. From my view, this is a truly bipartisan committee, where we all walked into the room, and all knew there was an issue. I do not think we knew quite the extent of the problem, but we were enlightened by a large number of truly wonderful people. They are the people who work in this industry to try to reduce not only attempted suicides, but completed suicides.
There are a number of things I have learnt in my life. One of the greatest lessons I learnt is that there are things that I know, things I know I do not know, and things I do not know I do not know. It was the third reason I was really grateful for participating in this committee, because some things I learnt were very enlightening, and some very sad.
I would like to relate a story - one that is very close to home - of a member of my extended family who completed suicide some years ago. In particular, it is a message to those who may read this about the importance of the work the committee did, and the importance of the recommendations of the report. We lost this person, and the most pertinent point was that at the funeral - in fact, after the funeral - we were gathered around at the cemetery. There was a large group of a dozen people talking, and the theme that went through is they saw this person doing odd things. The first person explained the odd things they saw my relative doing, then the second person had a different set of odd things and, by the time we went around the people in the group, everyone could see that alarm bells should have been ringing - everyone had seen some behaviour that was not typical of the nature of the person.
It is when these things happen - if we do not understand and we are not aware of the signs that people are in trouble - for many reasons they get themselves into trouble. However, if we do not actually have the ability to identify that people are struggling, nor the confidence to go and ask them whether they are okay or need a hand, then we are doomed to have repeated, unfortunately, people committing and completing suicides, and that is sad.
However, I believe the report goes a long way trying to ensure we, as a community, work as hard as we can to prevent that from happening. In the report are a number of recommendations. What I would like to see occur is the ongoing commitment. I can assure all members of this House that all of us who are on that committee, on both sides of politics and the Independent member, have the ability to work as a team to prevent this. This is something that should be apolitical and receive bipartisan support. I can assure all my colleagues who are on that committee, irrespective of whoever wins the August election, I will be supporting, either from opposition or government, all the recommendations we made in this report.
There is a recommendation that we adopt the ASIST program. This would have related to the case of my relative. Had people had the ASIST program available to them - through community groups, through schools and any other organisation which can deliver that knowledge to people - we would be, as a community, in a far better position to identify the risks and people who are struggling with a whole range of different issues.
I am a great supporter of school-based policing - it is one of my favourite topics - also school-based nurses. One of the things I learnt was about drug dogs, especially in communities. We heard from the Tiwi Islands the evidence about the massive issue they have over there with various drugs. Having drug dogs around to prevent young people getting involved in drugs would be of great benefit. We need, through education, to empower youth to resist the temptation of drugs and to understand what they are, what they do, and why they should not partake in those drugs.
There needs to be a commitment from both sides to take the recommendations of the report, implement them in the community, and try to reduce the number of people who take their own lives. I am very grateful for the opportunity to utilise the knowledge I have had for most of my working life, especially working with young people, in the area of community issues and problems. It gave me an opportunity to have an input, but it also gave me an opportunity to learn so much more. As we go into the future, I feel I am far better prepared to deal with some of the issues - both in the provision of government services and also on a personal level.
I thank the people on the committee, our support crew - they have all been mentioned. The problem when you are the last speaker is everyone else has done all the thanking and you can almost just say: ‘Well, I thank all those people mentioned without taking up the time of this House;. However, I thought you did an excellent job. The report and the people who pulled it together in the end - you guys did a fabulous job and you should be commended for the hard work you put in, not only pulling the report together, but also making it all happen.
To the non-government organisations, the individuals, and the government organisations who gave evidence to us, we support you. The report has highlighted how much work we need to do, as a community and, in particular, as a parliament, to support you people out there - the people with the passion, caring, and commitment you have. It is so important we support you people to do the job. It is hard for us to go on a one-on-one basis and do what you do. Our lives are consumed with so many different facets of trying to make our community a better place.
I salute you guys because you are out there saving lives. People use that word flippantly sometimes. People say: ‘You are going to go out and save some lives’. Well, to you people who work in that industry and help people out there, you truly do go out, on a daily basis, and save lives. It is hard to quantify how many lives you save. However, deep down, all of us in the community should be aware that you work hard, are dedicated, and achieve fantastic results.
Therefore, there needs to be more financial and human resources allocated to you guys so you can do your work better, do it further afield, and work with those people out there to educate them so they, too, will have the skills and knowledge to identify those in our community who are most in need.
We all have needs and wants; however, when you are in a situation where you are contemplating suicide you are in the greatest need and the direst of straits anyone in our community can be.
I commend this report to the parliament. I commend it to anyone who reads it. I assure them, as a parliament, we will support those people at the front line trying to save people, and also provide grief counselling to those who have lost loved ones. It is a tough gig, and they need all the support they can get.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I ask that not only we commend this report, but we support it from both sides of parliament.
Mr VATSKALIS (Children and Families): Madam Deputy Speaker, today I bring the House’s attention to the findings and recommendations of the bipartisan parliament select committee inquiry into youth suicide in the Northern Territory tabled in parliament on 27 March 2012.
First, I wish to commend the committee for the comprehensive report Gone Too Soon: A Report into Youth Suicide in the Northern Territory. The inquiry and subsequent report demonstrated determination to consider all of the factors which play a part in the tragedy of suicide of young people in our community. The recommendations are an inspirational, thorough, and honest appraisal of the current issues facing the Northern Territory and outline a proposed whole-of-government approach addressing youth suicide in the Northern Territory.
Suicide touches many of us. The heartache that is caused for those left behind, and the devastating impact, extends far beyond immediate family members and into our schools, workplaces, and communities. The Australian Bureau of Statistics figures released in April this year indicated that the suicide rate in the Northern Territory decreased for the second five-year period in a row. The rate per 100 000 people in the five-year period 2006 to 2010 in the Northern Territory was 19.7% per 100 000 population, compared to the national rate of 10.4% per 100 000. This represents an 11% decrease in the rate in Northern Territory, compared with 22% per 100 000 in 2004 to 2008. However, the suicide rate in the Northern Territory is still the highest of all jurisdictions, and nearly double the national average.
The highest rates of suicide in the Northern Territory are occurring in Indigenous and non-Indigenous males living in and around Darwin, and young Indigenous males living in remote communities. Recently, there has been a relatively small, but worrying, increase in the number of suicides of young women from remote communities. We are also aware there has been an increased number of deaths over the past 18 months of young people where suicide is suspected.
Attempted suicide and deliberate self-harm are also serious problems for our young people. Whilst there are difficulties with recording and interpreting these type of incidents, it would appear from the available information that more of these incidents are being reported.
The Gone Too Soon report highlights the complex factors that precede suicide. These include mental health problems, drugs and alcohol misuse, sexual and physical abuse, problems with family and the law, inadequate education, lack of meaningful or any employment, cultural or sexual identity issues, and poverty. Factors such as the cumulative grief, loss, and trauma experienced by many Indigenous people in communities also have a significant impact on individual’s vulnerability and resilience.
The situation surrounding each suicide differs, and there is no single approach to prevention, or reduction of our suicide rate. In considering how to respond to this complex issues, the committee has identified four themes for action. These themes include:
1. building strong, healthy, and resilient communities by focusing on the development infrastructure, better service delivery, and more public awareness;
2. identifying and helping those at risk by providing increased counselling and mental health services across the Territory;
procedures and counselling available, providing bereavement training, ensuring capacity in hospitals and emergency departments to combat suicide
risk assessments, and establishing mandatory follow-up procedures; and
The breadth of these themes clearly illustrate the extensive nature of the challenges which lie ahead. In the context of the four themes for action, the report has developed 23 recommendations. The Northern Territory government has reviewed these recommendations, and all 23 recommendations are supported in principle. The recommendations reflect the direction of existing Northern Territory government policies, and confirm we are on the right track. However, we need to continue to build on this important work in collaboration with Northern Territory government agencies, the Commonwealth, and non-government organisations.
The Northern Territory government is committed to addressing the issue of youth suicide, in particular the recommendations set out in the Gone Too Soon report. As a first step, I am pleased to announced progress on four key commitments that respond to several of the recommendations.
In response to Recommendation 19, the Northern Territory government will establish an interagency working group, with the support of the Commonwealth, and carry out comprehensive mapping of all youth- and community-related services. This interagency working group will be headed by a very senior public servant who will be appointed to coordinate collaboration between the Northern Territory government agencies and the Commonwealth to provide a clear up-to-date picture of the youth- and community-related services provided in the Northern Territory, both in the government and the NGO sector.
The group will work to identify and strengthen services to ensure that all youth at risk of suicide can access the services required to build protective factors - resilience and a sense of self - to prevent the need to resort to actions that will have devastating consequences.
Given the wide-ranging nature of risk and protective factors associated with youth suicide, effective coordination of services requires a high level of intergovernmental and interdepartmental cooperation. The Northern Territory government will also seek Commonwealth support through the Department of FaHCSIA and Health and Ageing in response to Recommendations 1, 3, 11 and 14 to establish a coordinated approach to progressing the review of the provision of professional development and training of staff in regional, rural, and remote communities; the prioritisation of youth-specific infrastructure for greater accommodation options, and better health facilities for young people at risk; the status of the Youth in Communities funding and associated outcomes; and the provision of headspace outreach services in remote Northern Territory communities.
The Northern Territory government acknowledges that effective, adequate, and appropriate levels of infrastructure are required to support the provision of services to youth at risk of suicide. The committee identified, during the course of the inquiry, that access to youth-specific counselling, allied health and medical services, as a priority issue for residents in outlying rural areas of Darwin, Katherine, Tennant Creek, Nhulunbuy and, in particular, remote communities.
It is important in maintaining and attracting service providers that appropriate housing is available in these areas. As such, in support of Recommendation 2, the Northern Territory government will carry out a review of government employee housing and will establish a senior interagency housing management group to oversee planning, prioritisation, and the provision of strategic advice to the Northern Territory government.
Suicide prevention is not, in itself, a core function of any particular department or agency, but the responsibility of all levels of government and the non-government sector. In recognition of this, the Northern Territory government supports the establishment of the Northern Territory suicide prevention coordination committee, in line with Recommendation 23. It is clear, from the evidence received by the committee, that to address the complex and multidimensional nature of youth suicide, a strategic and coordinated approach to service delivery which actively encourages a high degree of collaboration between government agencies and programs and the non-government sector is required. The Northern Territory government supports the need for a coordinated approach to youth suicide prevention, and will review the current Northern Territory suicide coordination committee plans and governance structure.
Further priorities outlined in the report include the implementation of a series of recommendations which would enable greater assistance to be provided to youth in crisis, and to support them through their transition to adulthood, with a particular focus on meeting the needs of youth in rural areas, regional centres, and remote communities. These recommendations include:
training for local staff and improved access to primary and specialist mental health services, counselling services, respite services for youth not requiring acute
inpatient care, and short-term residential options in the regional centres;
expansion of headspace services to regional centres and remote communities and continue funding for the Youth in Communities program;
increased mental health staff based in emergency departments to better access and respond to young people at risk of suicide;
and drug problems, evidenced-based psychological therapies, and community education;
increased sport, arts, cultural and other recreational opportunities, including drop-in centres and positive youth development programs; and
abuse, and family violence in the past 12 months.
Recommendations relevant to the justice system include access to on-call specialist mental health staff in court and detention settings to provide assessment, acute intervention and coordination of community follow-up, and implementing an intensive family- and community-based program for repeat young offenders.
To implement recommendations above, the committee called for improved infrastructure in remote communities, including improved accommodation for visiting services and an audit process to determine the accommodation needs of locally-based staff in regional centres and Territory growth towns. An increase in accommodation and mental health facilities for youth at risk of suicide, with severe substance abuse problems and/or mental health problems was highlighted; as was infrastructure for drop-in centres and youth recreational facilities in regional centres.
The committee recommended that a report on the audit and review of infrastructure is tabled in the Legislative Assembly by 30 June 2013.
In recognition of the importance of addressing risk factors and building resilience amongst young people, the committee also made a series of recommendations in relation to services in school. They suggested the Department of Education and Training increase professional development and training for teachers; actively encourage schools to take up mental health promotion and resilience building programs; review anti-bullying policies to address cyber bullying and use of mobile phones; launch a new health and physical education curriculum; and establish an appropriate school council student ratio.
In recognition that it is, sadly, not possible to prevent all suicides, the committee emphasised the importance of bereavement counselling for individuals, families, and communities that may be affected, as well as support for frontline staff dealing with completed and attempted suicides.
It was also recommended that the Coroner’s Office maintain and provide access to a suicide register, and that the Department of Health investigate establishing a regulatory and administrative framework to enable the reporting of serious incidents of child self-harm and the initiation of appropriate responses. A report on the finding of this investigation should be tabled in the Legislative Assembly by 30 June 2013.
The committee acknowledges that a whole-of-government, whole-of-community approach is required. The 23 multifaceted recommendations apply to a range of Northern Territory government departments, including the Departments of Health; Chief Minister; Children and Families; Police; Education and Training; Housing, Local Government and Regional Services; Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport; and Justice.
The report also recommends the development of a Northern Territory suicide prevention action plan for 2013 to 2016, to be tabled in the Legislative Assembly before the 2013 budget sittings, which will build on work under way across government in the implementation of the three-year Suicide Prevention Action Plan 2009 to 2011, which was based on the Northern Territory Strategic Framework for Suicide Prevention.
Over the past three years, suicide prevention action included:
in addition to provision of acute and community mental health services, Department of Health-funded delivery of specific suicide prevention coordination and response
services in the Top End and Central Australia; a range of suicide prevention self-harm training programs; mental health promotion activities targeting groups more
vulnerable to suicide, including young people and men;
the Department of Health working in partnership with the Department of Children and Families for the development of a shared client case management framework
and practice guidelines for complex clients;
the Department of Children and Families funding of a variety of family focused support programs and services for vulnerable young people to assist families in crisis
and those in need of more intensive support;
the Department of Health and Northern Territory Police updating their protocols to ensure a coordinated system of care for people with mental illness and safe resolution
of mental health crises, including responses to people who are suicidal;
principles in the design of new Correctional facilities;
the Office of Youth Affairs supporting and developing a range of initiatives focusing on young people, including sponsoring mental health promotional activities in
National Youth Week;
the Department of Education and Training supporting implementation of wellbeing programs such as KidsMatter and MindMatters in Northern Territory schools; and working
hard to foster supportive school environments by encouraging meaningful partnerships between schools, family, and community;
the Department of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport developing sustainable sports and recreational programs in remote communities promoting healthy
lifestyle choices that will have long-term health and social benefits; and sport and recreational officers undertaking training in suicide prevention and mental health first aid to
assist them in this role.
The Northern Territory government committed an additional $600 000 in 2011-12, increasing to $800 000 in 2013, and $1m recurrent for 2013-14 for suicide prevention. The Department of Health’s mental health program has allocated resources to a number of important initiatives, including further development of the highly regarded Suicide Story, an Indigenous training tool produced by the Mental Health Association of Central Australia Life Promotion Program to assist people to create suicide-safer communities and families. There has been overwhelming demand for this program throughout Australia and, as a consequence, the Mental Health Association of Central Australia is developing a train the trainer package in 2012 which will be launched later this year in Alice Springs.
Further, the mental health program has implemented Counterpunch, an innovative program which utilises boxing and psychological strategies to increase resilience and encourage positive choices in youth aged 10 to 25. Already, 80 young people are participating in the program. Counterpunch has just moved to dedicated premises in Darwin with an official launch next month. There has been significant interest in Counterpunch from regional and remote communities, and the program will be expanded in 2013.
Funds have also been allocated to improve data collection and research, targeting of hot spots - communities and groups with the highest incidence of self-harm rates - and support for community action groups such as the Darwin Regional Indigenous Suicide Prevention Network and the Galupa Marngarr Suicide Prevention Group, which is holding a conference on suicide prevention in East Arnhem next month. Community action groups are considered to be a powerful weapon in the fight against Indigenous suicide and are expected to expand in the next few years.
In addition to a commitment to suicide prevention, the Northern Territory government also delivers funding to expand child and adolescent mental health services in the Northern Territory of $1m in 2011-12, and $2m recurrent from 2012-13 to expand the capacity of specialist child and adolescent mental health services to respond to increased demand for services by young people in both urban and remote areas. Included amongst these measures is specialist assessment and treatment for young people with severe mental illness and increased support to general practitioners, health centres, and schools to better support young people with mental health problems.
We are also working closely with our colleagues in the Australian government to ensure the suicide prevention strategies it funds are well-targeted and fit within local context. This collaboration continues through the Council of Australian Government Health Agreement and Mental Health Reform, and it is here we work hard to ensure the Northern Territory receives its fair share of Australian government funding in this area.
We, as a government, are committed to tackling this devastating issue which affects our community. We will be further increasing mental health services in our hospital and emergency departments and in our communities. We are expanding opportunities for young people to participate in sport, recreation and cultural activities, particularly in our regional centres and remote communities. We are increasing the support our children receive in school and better engaging young people who have left school. We will provide more support to those young people who use alcohol and other substances, or who have found themselves in detention centres or in trouble with the police. We will also provide better support to our vulnerable families, and implement strategies to build resilience and equip our young people to negotiate the, sometimes, difficult transition to adulthood. We want them to be able to realise their dreams, contribute to their community, form healthy relationships, and bring up healthy and well-adjusted children of their own.
This government is absolutely committed to reducing suicide wherever possible. I am sure members of parliament on both sides of the House will support all efforts we make to address this tragedy.
Again, I thank all members of the parliamentary select committee for their dedicated effort in producing such an important and detailed report. We now all need to play our part, work together, and share the responsibility for addressing this tragedy in our community.
In closing, I assure you we will do our utmost to implement strategies which will help to turn the tide of despair into a wave of hope for the future of all young Territorians. They are leaders of tomorrow and our most precious resource.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I ask the Assembly take note of the statement.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Deputy Speaker, I will not take long, but I will acknowledge all my fellow parliamentarians who have contributed to a fantastic debate in a bipartisan way to deal with and talk about what is probably the most harrowing of issues to conduct an inquiry into, and look at issues across all areas. There were young people from our urban, regional, and remote Aboriginal communities.
Fellow members on that committee found the increased rates of suicide, particularly amongst young women, quite confronting. We often hear the statistics in relation to young men, and the issue of completed suicide amongst our young men. What was also frightening was the increasing number of attempted suicides. We often do not hear about or focus enough on attempted suicides.
I am hoping, with this report and the recommendations we made - and I thank the minister for the government’s response. I was also hearted by the CLP’s response that they too - after 25 August, whatever happens, whoever is in government - will pick up those recommendations and support a way forward to assist not just communities, but families which are dealing with this issue.
I thank the members for Goyder and Sanderson, and my colleagues on this side of the House, the members for Nhulunbuy and Fannie Bay, for being part of the committee to look at that. I do not think there was any member on that committee who was not touched by the great evidence we received from those fantastic non-government organisations and our government agencies. I thank all of those government agencies and the public servants who participated and provided evidence to the committee and assisted us with information. I thank the Commissioner for Police who attended the hearing and gave us the statistics and talked through what issues are confronting our Northern Territory Police men and women. I place on record my thanks to the Coroner. In hindsight, when the Coroner came to talk to the committee, I wished we had talked to him at the start, and worked through with him those issues of his office, and some of the processes we need to look at. I thank Greg Cavanagh, the Northern Territory Coroner, for the part he played in the evidence he provided to the committee.
I thank those families - Julie Turner and the lady in Alice Springs; whose name I was trying to find - who gave evidence as families who had been affected by completed suicides where they had lost their children, or had children who had attempted suicide. I thank those families for sharing their stories with us because, without those stories from those individuals, we would not have been able to get an insight into those families.
I was not able to get to those communities, particularly in the electorate of Nhulunbuy, when those committee members went there, because I missed the plane that morning. However, I managed to hook in, and I thank Mr Russell Keith, and the secretary who had her phone and some speakers. I was able to hook into all of the sessions and listen and participate. However, some of my fellow committee members forgot I was on the other end of the phone. The session the committee had at Yirrkala, and the participation of all of the individuals there, was great. There were a number of people who spoke with great passion about what needed to happen. We found that everywhere we went.
The member for Fannie Bay talked about the Mount Theo program and that young man who came and talked to us in Alice Springs. The group we met in the member for Goyder’s electorate was at the Litchfield Council Chambers, I think. Often, we can become insulated and think this is just a remote area issue, but it is not. We have many kids in our urban centres and regions where this is a problem.
For me, it was a suicide - and I had talked about this at the committee - in my electorate of a very young person. As a member with a bush seat, a day does not go by where you do not receive a telephone call or you hear that someone has passed away in your electorate. However, this completed suicide of a young person confronted me like no other death. It made me question what I am doing, what my role is, where the policies are, and how they are helping and, why, in this day and age, given the intervention in 2007 and all the money which is flowing into many of these remote communities, this is not making a difference on the ground in these communities.
It was question upon question, and this inquiry allowed us to look at layers of mishmash that are often in these communities. Working through or peeling back those layers is an imperative of whichever government is going to be in place after 25 August, because the young people in those communities need government - whether it is an Australian Labor Party or a CLP government - to not play politics with this but to put in place a comprehensive strategy to assist communities and families to deal with this issue in a way which is going to assist those families through their grief. This is not about politics or either party’s ideology; this is about families - real live people who need to be assisted through their grief. I hope that, regardless of the outcome of the election on 25 August, we continue to implement those recommendations and pick up all of the issues that need to be looked at, particularly the issue of the audit and mapping recommendations in the report. People often say there is not enough money. If you have a look across the Northern Territory, there is a substantial amount of money going into these communities. The issue is where that money is going and how we target those areas to achieve the results we need.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I thank all members and the minister for their contribution. Final thanks to members of the committee, Russell Keith, Julia Knight, and the recording staff who assisted and travelled with the committee and recorded and took note of everyone’s comments. I thank the member for Fannie Bay who supplied the title of the report - aptly titled Gone too Soon - which all members of the committee agreed to.
Motion agreed to; paper noted.
TABLED PAPERS
Remuneration Tribunal Determination -Interstate Travel Report – Members for Braitling, Goyder and Port Darwin
Remuneration Tribunal Determination -Interstate Travel Report – Members for Braitling, Goyder and Port Darwin
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table the interstate travel reports, pursuant to Paragraph 3.14 of the Remuneration Tribunal Determination No 1 of 2011, for the members for Braitling, Goyder and Port Darwin.
TABLED PAPER
Power and Water Corporation Statement of Corporate Intent
Power and Water Corporation Statement of Corporate Intent
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, in accordance with section 39(7)(a) of the Government Owned Corporations Act, as shareholding minister for the corporation, I table the Power and Water Corporation 2012-13 Statement of Corporate Intent or SCI.
The SCI is the annual performance agreement between the corporation and the shareholding minister on behalf of Territorians as owners of the corporation. Consistent with previous years, information of a commercially sensitive nature has been removed from the SCI being tabled today on the basis that it would be unreasonable to disadvantage the corporation by disclosing commercially sensitive information that no private sector business would be expected to release.
The 2012-13 SCI continues the largest ever capital and maintenance investment program in the corporation’s history. $1.3bn of capital spending will be invested, and $452m is projected to be spent on repairs and maintenance over the SCI period.
The 2012-13 SCI includes key financial sustainability measures which continue to be below that recommended by the Reeves report. However, this is largely as a result of a continuing capital program to improve reliability and customer standards, and weather-related reductions in revenues. Despite this, the corporation remains in a small profitable position in 2012-13 through to 2014-15.
All utility tariffs in the Territory remain at previously announced levels which, for electricity and water, are the second-lowest in the country. This means that not only is the Henderson government, through the continued provision of debt for equity swaps announced in the 2010-11 budget, assisting the corporation in maintaining financial sustainability, but by keeping tariffs supported by generous subsidies among the lowest in the country, we are making the cost of utilities affordable for all Territorians.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, as the 2012-13 SCI will be considered by the Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee, I will not go into any more detail now.
MOTION
Power and Water Corporation Statement of Corporate Intent – Referral to Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I move that the statement be referred to the Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee for examination and report.
Motion agreed to.
APPROPRIATION (2012-2013) BILL
(Serial 208)
(Serial 208)
Continued from 2 May 2012.
Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I had nearly finished my remarks yesterday, but with the condolence motion coming on for Mr Murphy, I needed to stop where I was, so I will just be a couple of minutes. I think I had worked through in my budget reply to most areas of key service delivery.
The one that I had not got to was spending for transport infrastructure. I acknowledge the budget notes for the Central Arnhem Road - obviously a critical access road into my electorate - of some $10m in this current budget. This is part of a much bigger project, with $15m devoted to upgrading three key crossings on Central Arnhem Road. Central Arnhem Road runs about 400 km through to Bulman across Aboriginal land trusts, and then it is a further 300 km to the Stuart Highway.
Just the other side of Bulman, in the electorate of Arnhem, is the Mainoru Crossing. It is a really critical crossing, particularly for Bulman’s capacity to run cattle trucks in and out of the stations. The crossing for Mainoru is just about complete. There has been significant work happening there. There is significant work involved on Goyder Crossing, being on Aboriginal land trust land, which has reached the point where there is agreement from the traditional owners, which was, obviously, a highly consultative process over a period of time. I believe we have reached an agreement there. The process now is around scoping of the works to put a crossing in there. I believe there was geotechnical drilling that occurred just before Christmas.
Obviously, with Wet Season rains work comes to a close. However, definitely everybody in and around Nhulunbuy - and that includes homeland residents, as well as the fact there is a number of growth towns which feed off that road - look forward to these works occurring. It will provide safer access which will keep the road opened for much longer. Currently, the road is generally closed about five to six months in the year, obviously during Wet Season times. However, with the Goyder Crossing and, then, eventually the Donydji Crossing just the other side of Gapuwiyak fixed with bridges put in, that access will be extended to 10, maybe even 11 months in the year. That will be welcomed by everyone. It provides competitive freight and travel options. During the Wet Season the only option for freight is with barge services.
We welcome that, as well as additional funding announced, some $1.5m, to put in passing lanes on the Central Arnhem Road. I do not know how many passing lanes that will provide us with or exactly where they will be located. During the Dry Season, the Central Arnhem Road can be very busy and very dusty. Having those passing lanes where we have larger vehicles - we have trucks running freight during the Dry Season - with four-wheel drives will certainly make the road safer.
That was really all I wanted to specifically comment on regarding my electorate in the budget. I commend the Treasurer for her work. It is a tough but responsible budget and is delivering for families and Territorians, and gearing up for growth. The Treasurer has worked incredibly hard in the lead-up to the delivery of the budget, as have her staff and Treasury staff. This week has been an incredibly busy one with not only delivering the budget itself, but also all of the follow-up that goes in engaging with people and stakeholders about what the budget contains.
I look forward to the Treasurer coming to my electorate on 16 May. Those budget roadshow events, certainly in Nhulunbuy, are always really well attended. People are very interested to know what is happening, and also welcome the fact that the Treasurer takes the time to come out and talk with people and answer questions. That is a very valuable opportunity for people to have firsthand information. I am sure when she comes out we will organise a time for her to meet with the East Arnhem Chamber of Commerce and Industry, as she generally does.
On that note, because I know there are other people waiting to speak, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I will conclude my remarks and commend the bill to the House.
Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, the temptation with reading this budget is to get all shrill and bent out of shape over it because it really is a budget which causes me, as the potential Treasurer of the Northern Territory, subject to several things of course - whether I am re-elected in my seat, whether we form a government, and whether the Chief Minister would condescend to making me Treasurer. However, as the potential Treasurer of the Northern Territory, I have to say the sense of dread I am left with after reading this document gives me cause for great personal unease.
We always talk about budgets as if they exist in some form of perfect isolation from one year to the next. They do not; budgets are part of an organic, ongoing process. As the government in 2001 made great play of, it inherited something which was, in its description, very bad. I go far as to say I believe it was not particularly good; a debt to income ratio of 61% was unacceptable. I recall the then new member for Johnston screeching from the rafters with his own sense of dread, whether manufactured or real, that the great crocodile jaws being visited upon the people of the Northern Territory required all sorts of things, including a new tax, which was introduced. For essentially political reasons, they introduced the tax - and got rid of it very quickly too when they realised how unpopular it was.
However, they said at the time that $126m was this huge black hole. Without revisiting the fact that $126 was largely their decision, I point out that $126m looks nothing like the sea of red across the bottom line of the balance sheet now, and pushing out for the next few years to the year 2015-16.
If the minister was shrill about what they were handed in 2001, then he should be absolutely apoplectic about what he is seeing delivered into this House now. However, he is positively sanguine about it – relaxed - saying it is all appropriate spending. The borrowings do not even make sense in the sense that they are borrowing to build stuff that is going to create infrastructure that works. At least the excuse available to the Country Liberals at the time was they were borrowing and trying to raise capital to build a railway - which was built. Yes, that left a legacy debt, but at least there is infrastructure at the moment, and 10 years or 12 years later, that infrastructure is going to actually start paying for its self because of the amount of resources that are being developed up and down the track down to South Australia.
The vision of the railway will come to fruition, probably later than most of us would have liked, but it will come to fruition. I believe it will become a profitable exercise, particularly when things like Western Desert, Sherwin Iron – I have to declare an interest; my superannuation fund, I think, has a few shares in Sherwin. I will declare that just to be sure. I think Olympic Dam is now going to be the biggest hole in the world. Is it Olympic Dam or Roxbury?
Ms Purick: Olympic.
Mr ELFERINK: Okay, Olympic is going to be truly Olympic.
What concerns me about what happened afterwards is the GST started providing enormous income to the Northern Territory. The government then decided to start pouring that money into an already hot economy. Things were happening, the railway was being built. You only have to look outside this building to see how the taller buildings were starting to be built in the mid-2000s. Into that environment, the government started to complete directly with the private sector because they wanted to build the waterfront. So, rather than engaging in counter-cyclical spending, they engaged in amplifying the cyclical nature of the Northern Territory economy. Which means they grew the economy by pump priming it when it was already hot, so it grew even further. The risk with that approach is, as time passes, there is a very big chance the rivers of gold will start to dry up. The warnings, frustratingly, were there.
I return to Budget Paper No 2 of the Budget 2005-06, and quote the warning which, by the way, resonated in budgets before it and after it. It is repeated even in this budget; it is almost word for word because it gets rolled over from one budget to the next. The quote is:
- The Territory is heavily reliant on GST revenue funding from the Australian government to meets its budgetary and fiscal needs. The Territory is susceptible to even slight variances in the
GST revenue, which can have a substantial impact on the Territory’s fiscal position.
Which means, in short, you were warned! The Northern Territory government was told there was a strong vulnerability built into the GST. From that, only a prudent government would have realised you would not have used the extra GST income to amplify the growth in the Northern Territory economy when you did not need to. So, rather than build the waterfront when they did, they could have waited. However, of course, the political imperative for this government is to show they could do the big projects. The political imperative overtook the sensible fiscal and economic imperative, which was to ensure you had cash in the bank; that you paid off the credit card.
If you take into account the GST windfalls up to about 2007-08, and the savings that could have been made, plus added even a slither of increases from other sources of revenue, we could have paid off our debt, I argue, by the time the GFC was visited upon us. Therefore, there is no reason for this government to be able to blame the GFC.
You can read it in the budget papers of years gone by and the quote is almost exactly the same every time: we are susceptible to even slight variations in the GST for the Territory’s fiscal position. As a consequence, despite the fact the warning I sounded is in the budget papers, government chose to ignore those warnings and they set themselves up to amplify the problems.
When the GST was doing better than everyone expected, it provided us with hundreds of millions of extra dollars. What did we do? We spent it. We barely squirreled any away into savings and reducing our debt profile. Gallop, a Labor Premier, managed it in Western Australia. John Howard, the Prime Minister of Australia, managed it nationally. It could be done by both sides of government, but it was not done. It was not done because this government wanted to pursue its political imperatives and, in the process, went on to imperil the fiscal future of the Northern Territory. The consequence of that is they had some expenditure they did not want to bring onto the forward design list, but had to because of problems with infrastructure, particularly in the Power and Water area. As a consequence of that, they had to spend more than they wanted to, and had to do that on tick.
If you look at the budget papers of just two years ago, the prediction for the Northern Territory, for the financial year 2012-13, was $1.6bn. If you look at the set of budget papers which have been brought down now, the prediction is $3.1bn. In two years, the government borrowed in the order of $1.5bn, which they did not expect to be borrowing two years ago. That is poor fiscal management. The excuse has been that it is to avoid a contraction in the economy. However, it is the very economy you pump prime to reach such a big size that it became dependant on large amounts of government spending - so you set yourself up for the fall. The government should appreciate that in doing so, they were doing so against the warnings of many people and observers around the traps, not least of which was your own Treasury Department which said you had a real vulnerability in the area of the GST.
Was the great Roaring 20s, which was similar in the early 2000s internationally, going to end well? You do not have to be much of a student of history to realise that when you have the Roaring 20s something happens in the 30s, and that is exactly what the GFC was about. The only difference is when the GFC was visited upon us, governments decided to do the very opposite of what happened in the late 1920s and early 1930s; they decided to extend spending. However, if you follow that Keynesian model, you have to follow it completely. That model says that when you are in the good times you squirrel the money away. This government did not do that. The extra money from the good times was spent. Now, they say: ‘If we cut spending we will lose jobs’. Well, no ‘something’, Sherlock! Duh! We know that, we have known that for years!
Here is a thought: if you allowed the economy to grow under its own steam in the good times and restricted yourself to squirreling money away for a rainy day, you would have been in a much stronger position. You see how quickly these things manifest when you get a forward projection wrong by $1.2bn in the space of two years.
If you look at what is being proposed now for the Northern Territory, nett debt on the general government sector balance sheet - that is the section of the government which is, essentially, the public service; it does not refer to the Power and Water Corporation and those things - is currently $1.6bn. In four years time, that will become $3.6bn. The government is going to borrow $2bn over the next four years, and that was not in any of their forward projections. In fact, if you go back and see what was being said in 2010 by the Chief Minister, he said we would be returning to surplus budgets by now.
Let us examine the surplus the government promised to have delivered by now. The figure is a deficit of $491m - for the general government sector only. Let us add those publicly-owned corporations and government business divisions and examine their deficit for the year. Their deficit for the year will be $760m. That can only come from one place: borrowings; we have to borrow it. If you track that out, the deficits from the non-financial public sector, which is the government plus all its corporations, is $755m, $600m deficit, $500m deficit, and another $500m deficit. When do we start paying back this money? It makes me feel sick that this is actually occurring.
If you then track what that debt looks like, that debt in the non-financial sector of government-owned corporations plus government, goes from $2.8bn to a figure of nearly $5.6bn across government. Then, we have to add our superannuation liability of $2.8bn on top of that. So, as a jurisdiction of 220 000 people, the government now has financial liabilities and debt of over $8bn. In my family, that is the equivalent of $140 000-worth of debt added on the credit card at my home where there are four of us. $140 000 - that is just my home. The average Territorian has now a credit card bill of $35 000, the equivalent of a Holden Commodore for every Territorian …
A member: And they cannot drive it.
Mr ELFERINK: They are in debt for a car that they cannot drive; in fact, they cannot even see.
Then, this government will tell us they are good fiscal managers; that this is a responsible budget. It may be responsible in trying to avoid the loss of jobs, but at what point do you stop racking it up on the credit card? There is not a figure in this document in any of the forward projections which gives me any comfort that it is nothing but deficit, deficit, deficit spending from year in year out into the future. When do we pay the piper? When? What is the date that this is actually all paid back? If you follow the logic - and we heard it from the minister with the Greek accent, and also the very Greek approach to finances - it does not matter if it is $1m worth of deficit or $10m worth of deficit, it is about a health service. Well, I will tell you what happens at the other end of that. Sooner or later, the creditor knocks on the door and there ain’t no health service, because you are too busy paying the interest payment.
What do we get from our own source revenue, our own taxation revenue, in the Northern Territory? This is not from federal grants or GST money; this is the money we make for ourselves from our stamp duties, our fees we pay, the registration, all government fees. We will earn $450m worth of income from that taxation revenue in the year 2015-16. What will our interest bill be on that year? $404m. Nearly every cent – that is an exaggeration – nearly all the money we earn from our income, from our own taxation revenue in the Northern Territory, will go to pay the interest bill alone.
When I pay to register my car and pay the fee, when, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, you pay your licence fee, when the Leader for Government Business buys a house here and pays his stamp duty, do you know what we are going to be spending our money on? Paying the interest bill alone. Yet, we are told by the Treasurer this is a sensible and responsible government. It is not; it has shown no fiscal responsibility since the day it was formed. If it had it would have eliminated the debt it carried into government during the good times. If it had, it would not have competed directly with the private sector in overheating the economy by seeking to build its large infrastructure projects at the same time the economy was strong in the Northern Territory.
However, they chose to take political solutions. They needed the political ability to say: ‘Look, we built a waterfront, aren’t we good?’ It was all sweetness and light at the time because the economy was doing well, the punters were happy. However, underlying all of that, it was being racked up on the credit card.
If I, in my household, suddenly realise I have a loss of income - by the way, if I know that I have, potentially, a threat to the level of my income, I ensure I live within the means of that threat. This government chose not to. Moreover, they have then chosen to whip out the credit card and increase the quality of their lies even further. As income has gone up - in 2001 the annual income for the Northern Territory was $2.2bn, the income now in the general government sector for the Northern Territory will be $4.8bn, more than twice it was 10 years ago - you would expect the debt would start coming down, but that is not what is happening. It did for awhile, for a short period, not by much. However, the income is still going up and the debt is still going up.
I heard the Leader of Government Business in 2001-02 screeching from the rafters about using the word ‘unsustainable’. How is an increasing debt situation with an increasing income sustainable? When does it stop? That answer has been avoided assiduously by every member of parliament on the other side of this House who contributed to this debate because they do not have the answer. What is the wisdom of going down this path when you do not know where the path leads; when your headlights are so dim you cannot see past the bumper bar on your car? That is precisely what this government does and, what is worse, they put their foot on the accelerator in those circumstances and expect not to run into anything ...
Dr Burns: We do not have the handbrake on.
Mr ELFERINK: I will pick up on that interjection. That is precisely right; you never put the handbrake on. The foot was only ever on the accelerator even when it should not have been. There are times when you have to consider slowing the vehicle down. Unless you slow things down, particularly in the good times, you are going to drive straight into a brick wall. This government has driven into that brick wall and has no solutions. I would love to hear, by interjections or otherwise, from the good minister on what date we will be returned to surplus. Even if we achieve that, on what date will you have paid off the $8bn debt which is now outstanding in debt and financial liabilities?
The government said: ‘You cannot afford to talk about anything but the general government sector because that is how all governments talk’. The Territory is slightly different because we park huge slices of our debt in government-owned corporations. It does not always work for the other governments because they do not own huge government corporations - certainly not ones which carry 20% or 30% of the debt. That is a great place to park debt and say: ‘Just look at the general government sector balance sheet’. However, unless you are intending to sell the Power and Water Corporation along with its debt, you carry that exposure. It is a contingent liability. Does the government carry that exposure? Sure does. Debt for equity swaps which is - I love that expression, debt for equity swap. What it means is we bail them out.
The other thing we also do is we give them a holiday from their payments to the shareholder. We do not ask them for any money; in fact, we give them money. It is interesting when you read the Statement of Corporate Intent which was just tabled. Listen to this: the strategic direction of the Power and Water Corporation is:
Operate at least as efficiently as any comparable business.
The second one is:
Maximise the sustainable return to the Northern Territory (NT) on its investment in the Corporation.
So, we are not going to sell it. You cannot sell it; we could not sell it even if we wanted to. I love that allegation: ‘Oh, you are going to sell it’. We would not get 10 for that because, if it was a real business, operating in real terms, it would not survive under its current circumstances. It would be trading, if not trading insolvent, so close to flirting with the edges of it that any potential investor would say: ‘I will give you 10 for it’ - if you are lucky. You can get rid of that furphy, it is just not true. It cannot be done in the current structure - not that we intend to anyhow. The argument does not stack; it would not be worth anything.
The frustration I have with this government is they have been true to their Labor values. Their Labor values are simply that they want to be Santa Claus. They want joy. They really do want to be Santa Claus; they think they can go through life and just give things away. I listened to the minister over there - I am not announcing any budget changes, so do not get all excited - the Minister for Transport saying: ‘Oh, we gave this away, and we let that go for free, and that is for free, and we provide that for free’. No, you do not! You do not provide anything for free! It is all on the credit card, and somebody has to pay. You do not give away things. It is like Santa Claus is in town and we can just feel good about these things: ‘We do not want to hurt people, we do not want to place expectations on people’.
I listened to the Chief Minister saying today: ‘We are tough, we are tough, we are tough’. No, you are not! You have avoided the tough decisions since Day 1. If you had been prepared to just restrain a little expenditure when you were getting extra money, you would not be in this position. That is not tough; it is dumb, stupid, moronic. That is what has happened with this government’s fiscal management over the last 10 years. And who has to pay? Not these guys. After the next election, if they are still in power, then they have a problem. I almost get the sense they are almost prepared to lose this election so this becomes somebody else’s problem. Which is your typical Santa Claus approach: ‘Oh, I am not going to pay the piper, just pass the debt on to someone else’. That is what bankrupts do. Every time somebody declares themselves to be bankrupt, the people who are there creditors are the ones who actually pay the bills. Nothing happens for free. Yet, this government seems to think it is all for free, that it is all a gift. As a consequence, they led us to the brink of disaster.
I remember when the former Treasurer, Syd Stirling, and the current Treasurer, would screech from the rafters about the benchmark of poor fiscal planning was when your debt to revenue ratio reached 61%. This government is taking us to 74% and they are saying: ‘Oh, well, it is fiscally responsible’. No, it is not. By your own arguments in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005, and whenever else, it is not fiscally responsible; it is fiscally reckless.
I was concerned about 61%; to see 74% made me feel unwell. I do not like it when I look at my house loan as an asset in my home because I know I still have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars back to the bank from my own income. I want to take the same attitude to the Territory’s finances, but these people do not. They have no interest. They do not treat the Territory’s finances like their own finances ...
Dr Burns: No bankrupts on this side, mate.
Mr ELFERINK: They do not treat the Territory’s finances ...
Mrs Lambley: How would you know?
Mr Tollner: You do not treat the Territory’s finances like your own. You are sending us bankrupt.
Dr Burns: Careful what you talk about.
Mr Tollner: You are sending the Territory bankrupt.
Members interjecting.
Mr ELFERINK: The member for Fong Lim is exactly right: no bankrupts on your side, absolutely not. Do you know why? Because you would not want to be in a position where you have to claim bankruptcy.
But holy cow, come the public purse: ‘Here is the credit card. Would you take these, or how about Diners Club?’ That is your answer to everything: spend your way out of it, someone else will pay the bill. Ho, ho, ho, back to the North Pole we go. You have been so reckless it is scary. I can tell you I am terrified about what we will find should we win government.
Did you see the way you were squirming when we were asking about the financial exposures we carried in relation to the waterfront, Power and Water Corporation, and some of those other institutions? There was some very odd squirming on the other side of the House. I am terrified about what we will find when we open the books, should we win government, because I have the sneaking suspicion the exposures we have are a great deal more substantial.
This government is reckless; it has exposed us to an interest bill which will, in a few years time, be well over $1m every single day. They talk about Aboriginal housing; they will not be able to build a house at all because we will be paying $404m every year in interest alone. This government is a disgrace. They have taken us to a dreadful place and, then, they squeal when people start becoming critical in other jurisdictions as to how the finances of this jurisdiction are managed.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, they have only themselves to blame. They have been a wanton government. When compared to the spending habits of this government, drunken sailors look like sober souls when it comes to spending.
Mr TOLLNER (Fong Lim): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, first, I was appalled at the budget that was handed down this week. It is so typical of any Labor budget, no matter where you go. Whether you look federally, at Queensland Labor or New South Wales Labor, this was just a typical smoke-and-mirrors budget of a typical Labor Party. I say smoke-and-mirrors budget because when the Leader of the Opposition tabled his 27 questions to the Chief Minister and the Treasurer on Wednesday it highlighted there are so many things which are not accounted for in this budget. There is so much debt that is not accounted for in this budget. We still need answers to those questions, and very much look forward to receiving them. We are praying we receive them because it is my view this government has no intention of being open and transparent with the voters of the Northern Territory. However, we live in hope that at least they might try to respond to those questions.
The defining part of this budget was the level of debt we have been taken into. The member for Port Darwin summed it up very well when he was talking about our own source revenue in the Northern Territory. If you were operating a business and your outgoings were much greater than your income, you would be declared insolvent. That is exactly what is happening to the Northern Territory in 2015-16 as highlighted by the Treasurer in her own budget. Our own source revenue is almost the same as we are paying out on interest on the debt that has been shown in this budget.
As I said, if you were a company, you would be declared insolvent. However, of course, this is not a company we are talking about, this is a government. This particular government has revenue that comes not only from its own sources, but grants and gifts of GST and other monies from the Commonwealth. They breathe a sigh of relief and say: ‘We are all right. We do not raise that much money in the Territory, but look at all this largesse that other people are giving us from around Australia’.
It poses the question, though, that from 2015-16, every single cent that is raised in the Northern Territory is not going to building roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, or provide better sporting facilities, or any of that type of thing, it is going to pay off debt. In actual fact, it is not even going to pay off debt; it is going to meet the interest repayments on that debt. As a Territorian anyhow, I find that is a hard thing to stomach; that my Territory taxes and charges, the stamp duties, payroll tax that employers pay - every single cent that is raised in the Northern Territory - is simply being used to pay the interest of the debt this Labor government has created. It is a rather shameful situation to be in.
We all understand that the Northern Territory is a growing jurisdiction, that we do have bills; however, this government has taken it to a new level. As the member for Port Darwin rightly pointed out - and the analogy was very good - these guys think they are Santa Claus. They thought they were Santa Claus for the last 10 years, running around being merry men, preaching peace and joy to everyone in the Northern Territory, with a big sack of goodies, handing them out everywhere and, at no stage at all, considering somewhere down the track these things would have to be repaid.
You only have to look at their reaction to the way Kevin Rudd handled the global financial crisis. They seemed to think it was wonderful thing handing out cheques for $900 to every man and his dog. They were even handing out cheques to dead people, and people who had not lived in the country for decades. Cheques were going everywhere, and this government here was cheering them on as hard as they could, saying what a wonderful thing it was they were just throwing money around willy-nilly. Joe Hockey put it very well. He said: ‘We have spent $10bn. We have thrown $10bn into the electorate in order to see a $300m jump in retail sales - not very good value for money at all’.
That is not the Labor way; the Labor way is to get out there and throw money around everywhere, doing exactly what this government has been doing. Now, the rubber is hitting the road. I remember, in the few months that have gone by, the admonitions that have been coming from the Leader of Government Business and others in this place. When you stand up and say you are going to do something, the Leader of Government Business is very quick off the mark, saying: ‘Ooh, you have to be careful. Be very careful, member for such and such, you do not know what is going on, and do not spend money that you do not have’. That was a pretty good signal to the rest of us that the books were not in the shape they should be; that they actually saw the wall looming and knew we were about to hit a big wall. Indeed, that is what this budget has shown: that we have hit a big wall.
That is proven also by a range of other broken commitments of ministers, Chief Ministers, Treasurers and other people in this government. Things such as the Myilly Point development, the Katherine Prison Farm, the Bagot Police Beat are all broken election promises.
We heard today about the planned abattoir. The member for Casuarina, the Minister for Health and minister for Primary Industry, could not help himself a couple of weeks ago standing in front of 300-odd cattlemen. He had to show he was quite prepared to throw money around, and quite happily told everybody at that meeting he was going to rake up $9m to support that abattoir. We now find out that was all bunkum - absolute nonsense. He then went on to say: ‘Well, no, hang on. That was federal money I was committing. They have to deal with the federal government. We are making a case for them federally’. We then find out they cannot even word up their mate, Anthony Albanese in Canberra, the Infrastructure minister. He proved the member for Casuarina to be a complete fool and denied he had any contact at all with anyone from the Northern Territory government in relation to an abattoir.
Those are the depths these guys are plumbing. That is the wall they have hit. They now realise things are bad. We are not yet at the stage where they are crying and saying: ‘Gee whiz, haven’t we done a dodgy job over the last 10 years?’ However, the people in voter land are starting to work out this mob is a pack of charlatans and fakes when it comes to talking about their budget.
They seem to have a whole number of people hoodwinked. I have been very interested to read the editorials of the NT News in the last couple of days. The NT News on Tuesday or Wednesday ran an editorial saying it was a good, balanced budget. I almost fell off my chair when I read that. The people at the NT News, clearly operating out of the Treasurer’s office, seem to be hoodwinked by the Treasurer, and are simply mouthpieces for the Treasurer, which is rather sad. They have led with their chin. There would be a few people at the NT News now feeling a little embarrassed about the stance they have taken on the budget.
They are not alone. Other media outlets, such as Channel 9, I was quite surprised to see on Wednesday night, mentioned the budget. Admittedly, they made mention of the debt, but it seemed they were also very convinced this Territory Labor mob is doing a reasonable job.
We all know, what has come to light in the last couple of days is things are not good at all. The Territory is wallowing in debt. We cannot make commitments on the most basic things. Sitting here last night watching people ask the minister for Transport what road can be built, can we duplicate lanes on particular roads, and that type of thing, was a joke. This guy has reneged on a whole range of promises and commitments and, now, you are asking him to make another one. That is the victory of hope over reality: some bloke who cannot organise the Katherine Prison Farm after years and years of talk is now being asked to do things with roads. Goodness me, if anybody thinks that will occur they are sadly deluded.
The Bagot Police Beat is another area. We have heard over and over again that the government is going to do something in Bagot. Before the last election, of course, the Chief Minister said he was quite keen to get in there and turn Bagot into a normal suburb. He quickly ran away from that commitment and made another commitment that they put a police post in there because they understood the antisocial behaviour and the crime that was going on behind the fence at Bagot. They were going to step up and do their bit to reduce crime in that Ludmilla area, and give a bit of respite to the residents of Bagot from much of the antisocial behaviour by putting a Police Beat or a police post there.
Alas, of course, we learned this week that none of that is happening. The Chief Minister said police have been doing drive-throughs in Bagot. Goodness me! The Chief Minister should understand those things have been going on for years and years, and the situation is only getting worse. As I said, they have broken that commitment.
What is the government’s response to this dreadful situation? Well, they tried to hide. They tried to run and hide. They tried to hide this debt; they are not up-front in the budget about where the debt from the prison is, how we can get out of it, if we can get out of it, or what the terms of the debt are. They have been very reluctant to explain how the waterfront debt works, why we are paying $60m a year when the repayments are only $36m a year. They cannot explain where the extra $24m a year is going. It is a budget that is designed to hide things.
You saw the reactions of the government following that budget. The first thing they did was organise to have the shadow Treasurer removed from the Chamber in Question Time on Tuesday, which I thought was one of the most disgraceful things I had ever seen. I have never in my life seen a shadow Treasurer removed from the Chamber and not allowed to ask a question on budget day. However, there is no depth this government will not plumb, and they had the shadow Treasurer removed.
Then, they started concocting stories about Tony Abbott: ‘Let us blame Tony Abbott for all of this. Things are bad at the moment but, goodness gracious, imagine how bad it will be if Tony Abbott starts messing around with the GST’. Tony Abbott had said something along the lines that he would like to see a little more per capita funding. It is a curious thing, this discussion about the GST, because there is currently a review of the GST arrangements going on. It is actually not Tony Abbott who is conducting that review, or who has organised that review ...
Mr Chandler: Do not let the truth get in the way.
Mr TOLLNER: That is dead right. My friend, the member for Brennan, said: ‘Do not let the truth get in the way of a good story’. No, it is not Tony Abbott who is doing that review. As a matter of fact, it is Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan who are reviewing the GST arrangements. Interestingly enough, in Western Australia where Tony Abbott made those remarks, his biggest critic was, in actual fact, the Leader of the Opposition in Western Australia - the Labor opposition - who said Tony Abbott should be condemned for not guaranteeing Western Australia would get a greater share of the GST pie. He has been condemned by Labor in Western Australia for not going far enough, he is condemned up here in the Northern Territory by Labor for even suggesting it and, in the meantime the whole review is being taken place and run by Labor federally. What a scam!
Then, we pick up the newspaper today and read some bizarre story. I do not know how an editorial like that can end in what once was a reputable newspaper, saying we have to be very wary of Tony Abbott because he is a dangerous man and he is preaching dangerous views. Goodness me! How does a story like that come out of what should be an objective media organisation? The whole situation is laughable, but it shows me the NT News is probably a little too close to the Treasurer of the Northern Territory and the Labor government in the Northern Territory because, obviously, they have not done the most rudimentary checks of their stories. Had they done so, they would have found Labor in Western Australia is calling for even greater changes and commitments from Tony Abbott than he gave and, in fact, the review of the GST is being conducted by Labor federally. It is an interesting way of trying to distract attention from a very dodgy budget.
The other thing Labor is doing here - and I saw it done in Queensland by Anna Bligh and her government just before the election in Queensland - is distancing themselves from Labor. They do not want to be seen to be Labor. In the Northern Territory we now have a new entity called the Henderson team. They are trying to suggest they are not Labor because they know Labor is a toxic word across the country.
In Queensland, Anna Bligh tried to do the same thing: suggest she was not Labor. It was quite funny driving through the streets of Brisbane and looking at the signs. Normally, you would see LNP and Labor signs - or corflutes or posters or whatever you want to call them. However, not at that election - there was not a single Labor sign or logo to be seen anywhere. They were completely absent. What they were doing was painting words with pink paint on the back of their corflutes and sticking two of them together front to back so you could not see what the poster was supposed to be. They would say, ‘Keep Kate’ with a little love heart in the case of the Ashgrove MP at the time. Everything was ‘Keep Kate’ done in nice pink with a love heart, and there was not a Labor logo to be seen anywhere.
It is interesting when you access the website here because it lists the local party as the Australian Labor Party, Northern Territory Branch. The official register of political parties in the Northern Territory lists it as the Australian Labor Party NT (ALP). Further, their own membership application form defines it as the Australian Labor Party, Northern Territory Branch. There is no reference anywhere in any of these areas to the Henderson team, Hendo’s mob, or even Territory Labor. They identify themselves legally as the Australian Labor Party, but we have not seen that shown anywhere of late. They have tried to distance themselves from the Australian Labor Party because they understand the toxicity of Julia’s mob and they do not want to go anywhere there.
The only problem is these people here run their books in exactly the same way as Julia’s mob run its books federally. I find it curious these guys are trying to distance themselves from the Australian Labor Party. Imagine if that applied to sporting clubs! Can you ever imagine a situation where the St Mary’s Football Club or the Buffaloes Club try to change jumpers simply because they are on a losing streak? It defies logic. Because the Parramatta Eels team have hardly won a game this season, would they would run out and change their colours from blue and gold to pink and red and change their name to the Parramatta Bronco? You just would not imagine it happening.
However, this is exactly what Labor in the Northern Territory is trying to do. They are doing their best to distance themselves from this budget. They have rarely talked about it this week; they have said practically boo about the budget. On budget day, they threw the red herring about Tony Abbott out there. The reason being, of course, is they are embarrassed about their budget. They are embarrassed about the state of the Northern Territory’s finances. The worst part of it is they know more about what is going on behind the curtain than any of the rest of us do.
I suppose one thing about the Leader of the Opposition’s 27 questions is those questions go to what is actually behind the curtain. That must send the fear of God into members of the Henderson team because, of course, in the Northern Territory the Australian Labor Party NT Branch does not exist. There is no way known they want to be known as the Australian Labor Party anymore, because that has connotations of Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd, and that creepy little fellow, Wayne Swan ...
Dr Burns: Oh, I thought you were talking about Christopher Pyne for a minute.
Mr TOLLNER: Ha, ha, and a few of those other clandestine dodgy characters such as the Craig Thomson affair - all these things that are getting very murky down in Canberra.
Labor in the Northern Territory wants to distance themselves from that. They want to try to ignore that is happening. They conjure up evil things that Tony Abbott is supposed to be doing. You only have to listen to them at Question Time. We say the budget is in a terrible position, and the Treasurer jumps up and says, ‘Oh, so you are going to cut infrastructure spending’, as if the only way to balance the budget would be to cut infrastructure spending.
It is putting words in our mouths, suggesting we are going to turn the taps on as far as alcohol is concerned. The tap is already on. I do not know what planet this woman lives on. They have been running around saying they have turned the tap off on alcoholics. Goodness me! It is like they are living in a parallel universe where no one drinks anymore. You only have to step out the door of this place, walk anywhere around Darwin, Palmerston or Katherine. Heaven help us, if any of them went to Alice Springs. Let them suggest they have turned the tap off there; that no one can access alcohol. What a joke!
The reality just defies what this government continually tells us. They tell us crime is on the decrease, violent assaults are on the decrease, and drinking is on the decrease. Everything is getting better; people are getting richer, house prices are falling, there is plenty of land availability. That just defies logic. And here we are now, with a Treasurer who marched in here and told us this is a responsible budget.
Prior to political life, I was involved with a superannuation fund. I was North Australian Manager for the Australian Retirement Fund and had quite a bit to do with the way that fund operated and was run. I took a bit of interest in the way things operated. I understand a trustee of a super fund has a fiduciary obligation to the members or policy holders of that particular fund. A fiduciary obligation means a trustee should act as a prudent person would with someone else’s money; that is, you are not spending your own money where you can be reckless and do things with it. In actual fact, you have to be much more careful when you are using other people’s money. That is what a fiduciary obligation is all about. You have to be very careful.
It was an interesting interjection from the Leader of Government Business who said: ‘There are no bankrupts on our side of parliament’. I am unsure if there are any bankrupts on our side of parliament either. However, he seems to miss the point. The point is not whether individual members of this parliament are bankrupt or not; the point is the Northern Territory is heading for bankruptcy. That is not how a prudent person operates. It is not the fiduciary obligation that a trustee of a superannuation fund would be allowed to get away with. You have to be much more careful with other people’s money. You cannot run around throwing it here, there and everywhere. Labor, whether it is in the Northern Territory, federally, or otherwise, is not very prudent with other people’s money.
A few examples: the carbon tax. We are not going to fix a single thing in our environment or our air by imposing this carbon tax. However, who cares? It is only the citizens of Australia; they can afford to fork out more, let us hit them with another tax.
The minister loves to bang on about the Building the Education Revolution, the BER. He says it is a wonderful thing. We received a couple of school halls in the Northern Territory. He does not care about the cost to the rest of Australia. The fact that this is known as a fiasco around the rest of the country, for very good reason, does not bother him. He seems to think it is quite okay.
The home insulation plan was another one of Labor’s wonderful schemes. The pink batts scheme - where did that go? This is all just wasting other people’s money: cash for clunkers, the citizen’s assembly and the mining tax. We are bringing in a mining tax to penalise the one profitable sector in our economy. Detention centre riots, the break-out of refugees, the enormous number of boats that are now arriving in Australia - Labor does not care about the cost. It does not care about the billions that have to be thrown at these problems. The list just goes on and on and on.
It is really quite alarming. GP super clinics were promised. They say they are wonderful things up here. They promised 64, 11 have been delivered, one in the Northern Territory. They think they are going to get another one. Again, hope overrides reality. The national government is just as bankrupt as this government is.
The only concern I have is this government does not seem to recognise the situation. They are not going to turn anything around; they keep denying there is a problem. I put it to the voters in the Northern Territory that maybe the opposition has not fully discovered the extent of this problem, but at least we recognise there is a problem …
Mr CHANDLER: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker! I move an extension of time for the member to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr TOLLNER: Thank you, I will not take much longer.
This is one thing I will say to the voters of the Northern Territory: the Country Liberals might not know the extent of the problem. We do not know the level of debt this government has got us into; we do not know the financial arrangements around the prison, the waterfront, or a whole range of other things such as the Power and Water Corporation. We are keen to get to the bottom of that. However, we have recognised there is a problem and that is the first step. When we go to the polls in August, voters have a clear choice between the Country Liberals who recognise there is a problem and will act to fix that problem, or vote for the Henderson team which denies there is a problem, try to paper over the cracks, try to convince you white is black and black is white, and night is day and day is night. It does not matter what they do, they will try to convince you they are doing something else.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, to sum up, I was horrified with this budget that came down. Things are coming to light I did not think the Treasurer would let come to light. The fact is, in a couple of short years, if we were a company, we would be declared insolvent. In a couple of short years, every single cent Territorians pay to the Territory government will be expended on interest payments alone. There is no money for extra roads, for better schools, for better hospitals - for any of that. Why? Because this government, in 10 years, has sold the farm completely. More than $1bn in windfalls from the GST - $1bn they never knew they had coming - they managed to not only blow, but blow a whole range of other money they also picked up, in addition to borrowing money at goodness knows what rates or who from, to the point now we are in this almost untenable situation.
To top it all off, as I said in a presentation yesterday, we no longer have the safe and reliable pair of hands of Costello and Howard in Canberra and the surpluses they created. What we have now in Canberra is a terrible political joke of people who should not be in office and who are prepared to spend the legacy of governments before them, to the point now where there is really nothing the Northern Territory has as a backstop.
We need to change things quickly. This last budget highlights our urgent need for a major review of all Territory finances and the way we do things in the Northern Territory because, at the moment, things are not right. They have created so many problems for us here, it is time for a change. I hope, come 25 August, we will see a change of government in the Northern Territory.
Mrs LAMBLEY (Araluen): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I respond to the budget that was put to us on Tuesday by this Henderson Labor government - a deficit of $491m, a budget black hole, as my colleagues have been outlining tonight.
I listened with great intent to the Minister for Child Protection who spoke about this budget, this deficit, being just like a credit card bill. He likened it to a personal credit card bill. Of course, everyone has a credit card bill, and it is really nothing to worry about. Well, it is something to worry about, I can tell you. As someone who has been involved in business as a child with my family, and as an adult for at least the last decade, this level of debt is something you lose a great deal of sleep over. You worry about it when it is your personal debt, when you have put yourself on the line, and you have taken considerable risks to get yourself further in life. This is something you lose a great deal of sleep over.
I hope and pray the Treasurer, the Chief Minister, and other members of this government, are losing a whole deal of sleep, worrying themselves sick about the level of debt they have put each and every Territorian in. It concerns me; it really worries me. Anyone who has had anything to do with business and debt knows this level of debt is unsustainable. This government has put us in a position of great exposure and vulnerability, and I dread to think what the future holds if this Labor government retains power in August this year.
Tonight, I will talk about how this budget affects the business of child protection in the Northern Territory.
We have a government which equates spending with success in child protection. There is one thing we know for certain in the Northern Territory; the two do not correlate. Spending money and saying they are successfully providing child protection services in the Northern Territory is a misnomer; it does not equate.
Yes, this government has allocated an extra $7m towards child protection for the next financial year and they have their spending up to $177m. That alone is what we are expected to be very excited about when it comes to child protection. I, as the shadow minister for Child Protection, am not confident, pleased or excited about an additional spend, because this government, as we all know - as I have mentioned many times over the last 18 months - is extremely dismal when it comes to managing child protection in the Northern Territory.
There are a few areas I will point out which were of great interest to me when I read the budget papers. The area out of home care is a great concern to all stakeholders involved in child protection. We have had a shortfall of over 100 foster care placements in the Northern Territory for at least the last 12 months. This situation has not improved; it has remained much the same over the last 12 months. The foster care system is in disarray and dysfunction.
The government has handed over responsibility for recruiting foster carers to a non-government organisation called Life Without Barriers. This NGO is going about the business of trying to, once again, fix the system that is broken, make up for years of lost time, and drag people out of possible ignorance when it comes to foster care because it has been off the agenda for so long. It is trying to entice them into looking after our most vulnerable children in the Northern Territory. However, we have a shortfall 100 foster care placements.
I am told that, instead of foster care places, which we do not have, the government is spending a fortune on private residential care places, which cost up to 10 times as much as a foster care place. We are not receiving a very clear representation on this part of the budget. It is not being reported very clearly because it is an acute embarrassment to the government that they have failed when it comes to out-of-home care for children in the Northern Territory.
The other area I wish to raise tonight is the issue of caseloads. We read in the latest reform report that caseloads remain at a critically and seriously high, unsustainable level. For example, in the Barkly remote and rural, child protection workers are supposed to have less than 20 cases on their caseload and, in the Barkly, there are 112 cases per child protection worker. The situation is unsustainable. They have five times as many cases as they should have.
This is a very serious situation. It comes down to a very long-term and critical recruitment and retention problem the Department of Children and Families has been trying to bring under control for many years. They cannot do it; they are not equipped. The situation was left to slide for so many years they cannot get on top of it. This is an area we will respond to if we get to government. We will respond to it very quickly because, unlike the government, we have a greater understanding of why we have a critical and serious recruitment retention problems within the Department of Children and Families. These poor social workers are trying to do a good job with caseloads which are unrealistic. They are a burden which leads to burnout, stress, and dissatisfaction with their jobs which, ultimately, leads to them packing up and leaving town. We have seen that many times.
The other area of interest I will raise tonight is the issue of the time it takes for the department to process child protection notifications. When a notification is made to the department, they are classified into three areas: a child in danger, which is the most critical area or category; a child at risk; and a child of concern. We have a slight improvement in those figures over the last 12 months, thankfully. The Department of Children and Families has something to celebrate - not get overly excited about – as there has been a slight improvement there.
Only 45% of the cases categorised in the area of children of concern are meeting the timeliness requirements of being dealt with in five days. So, 45% for that category is still way beyond the standards required when it comes to the department responding to these children at risk of abuse and neglect.
This government has a long way to go when it comes to properly managing the business of child protection in the Northern Territory - managing in the way the Territory deserves and Territorians can feel proud their government is doing the best they can. Obviously, there has been about 10 years of taking their eye off the ball; 10 years of hoping these things will just manage themselves, rather than be managed; and 10 years of a series of ministers mismanaging and, then, passing the buck to the next minister who has mismanaged - and so on and so forth. It is a diabolical history of failure.
I will talk briefly about one of my favourite topics; that is, Alice Springs. I read in the Alice Springs News they did an analysis of this Northern Territory Budget 2012-13, and only 3% of the entire budget goes to Alice Springs, which is just staggering. It really demonstrates just how little this government is committed to Alice Springs and to the people of Alice Springs.
We have heard a too-little-too-late statement by the Chief Minister earlier today, given the atrocities that have occurred in Alice Springs over the last 24 hours of those two poor young women who were raped in Alice Springs by three men, and another poor gentleman who was assaulted by four youths last night, saying in response we now have a government that, after 11 years, decided: ‘Gee whiz, with 113 days to go to the next general election, let us implement a zero tolerance strategy to crime in Alice Springs’. It is something the local people of Alice Springs have been demanding for years. As long as I remember, people have been jumping up and down, particularly over the last 10 years, for a zero tolerance approach to crime in Alice Springs. So, 3% of the budget goes to Alice Springs - that says it all.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, tonight I put on the record that I am truly appalled by the gravity of debt this government has placed us in. It is so incredibly unimpressive. It should be of great and deep concern to each and every one of us. We are exposed. Our future is looking very grim if we are put in a position of insolvency, as my colleague, the member for Fong Lim has outlined. It is a distinct possibility. We cannot bury our heads in the sand when it comes to this budget and the possible critical situation we could find ourselves in. Look no further than Europe, at countries that have placed themselves in extreme debt - debt they are unable to pay - and you can see the road we are heading down with this terrible Budget 2012-13.
Mr CONLAN (Greatorex): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, there is so much here it is hard to know where to start. I will pick up on what the member for Fong Lim said about John Howard and Peter Costello - those two dynamos when it came to economic management. I thought it would have been good if we arranged a five-minute catch-up with Peter Costello and Delia Lawrie, the Treasurer? Even if we arranged a couple of minutes, a little fireside chat. I am sure we could have all chipped in, flown her down to Melbourne to meet with Peter, and he could run her through how to manage the books, how to balance the books, and how to run a responsible budget’.
Looking back, I wish we had done that because now, on the eve of an election, what do we have? There are 130-odd days to go. Potentially, a new government could come to power in the Northern Territory and, on Monday morning, the 27th, we will open the books and see the true state of what it is. It is going to be pretty ugly.
We are at $491m, and there are bets on that it is much more; that you are not quite telling us the truth. I wish we had arranged that meeting because no one has been in a better position than us to be able to do that. Peter Costello is a good friend of the Territory. He is a good friend of Terry Mills. He was a good mate of Jodeen Carney’s, so one of us would have been able to pull that together. Instead, no, she lacked the advice, the expertise, and she has her grubby little hands over the Territory coffers. What she has left us with is absolutely despicable.
I concur with everything that has been said in this House today about the state of the Territory finances. To hear, by 2015, the own source revenue of the Northern Territory will not be enough to cover the interest rates on that debt is extraordinary. That is an absolutely extraordinary place to be. That equals insolvency. Much has been said about that situation. It was articulated perfectly in the Leader of the Opposition’s budget reply yesterday. I could reread that. I could put it back on the record. This could be the member for Greatorex’s speech. Reiterate exactly what the member for Blain said yesterday, because he pretty well summed it all up. He said the most striking thing about the budget was the lack of imagination. It is a government lost for ideas. Well, hello! No doubt about it. Talk about lost for ideas!
This zero tolerance issue is unbelievable. It really is pathetic. I do not know how you can sleep. I do not know how you can look at yourself in the mirror in the wake of a disastrous law and order issue in Central Australia. It was always going to come to this; it was always going to happen. Imagine if you employed this zero tolerance strategy 12 months ago. The community was screaming out for it in January 18 months ago, one of the worst summers in the history in Central Australia - or two, three or five years ago. They have been screaming out for it for years. Imagine if you did that. Imagine if the Chief Minister, after the tsunami of crime as it was portrayed last year, said: ‘Right. I have had an absolute gutful’.
If he said what he said today, which was a result of a dorothy dixer from the government: ‘Okay, I have had a gutful. That is it. I will not tolerate it. It is now a zero tolerance regime in Central Australia’, those two young ladies might have had a nice evening camping out under the stars overlooking the beautiful, majestic MacDonnell Ranges without fear of being attacked, let alone raped at gunpoint for God’s sake. That is the headline.
You could imagine what happened this morning on ABC News 24. We all cringe a little, don’t we? We watch ABC News 24 and they run through the newspapers. They have heavy hitting journos covering pretty important stories across the country from The Age, The Australian to The Sydney Morning Herald. They get to the Territory and it is: ‘Hippo and Croc in G-string’ or something. Oh God! They all have a chuckle as the camera comes back on them. Not this morning. This morning it would have been: ‘Tourists raped at gunpoint’. That is what the country woke up to this morning - and it is not Darwin, it is Alice Springs. It is phenomenal.
You talk about your alcohol regime and your law and order regime. I cannot understand how you can actually think it is okay. I just do not understand how you can think that everything is okay as a result of that and numerous other incidents.
My place was broken into last night and the night before - twice in a row. Did you know that? The night before, on Tuesday night, they jumped the fence and pinched the stereo. My wife and two children were there alone, mind you. I cannot explain the anxiety that causes me. Nevertheless, my wife woke up this morning and said, ‘Strange they did not pinch any grog’, because two weeks ago they did. Two weeks ago, they jumped the fence and raided the fridge and stole all the booze. That is the third time they have done it in my place. Three weeks before that, they stole a car from my driveway. I do not know, maybe I am being targeted, but there is a bit of crime going on in that particular neighbourhood at the moment. She said: ‘It is strange they did not take the grog this time’. She opened the fridge after the stereo went missing and there were, I think, four beers and a couple of cans of Diet Coke sitting in there. That was all was left in the entertaining fridge outdoors. Anyway, this morning she woke up, walked out, opened the fridge - and guess what? The four beers were gone. They finally came back and got those four beers and the couple of cans of Diet Coke too which, I believe, were not much use, so they sprayed them around the back and left the empty cans lying around.
The most extraordinary thing about that is that I feel lucky. I look at this headline here and I took at those people, these two young women, these two backpackers, coming and investing their money, their time, and their holidays in the Territory, despite the bad publicity we have had. They said: ‘No, we are going to come anyway’. This happens and I feel lucky. I feel lucky that all they did was take a $100 CD player we could put a CD on and listen to while we are enjoying the outdoor Territory lifestyle, and a dozen beers. God, I got off pretty easily.
I cannot believe what is happening in my office at the moment. My electorate officer worked for Barry Coulter. She is very experienced, she has been around for a number of years - a couple of decades, in fact. She worked for Hon Barry Coulter, as his electorate officer, in the 1980s and 1990s. She said: ‘You know what is happening, I cannot believe. It is hard for me to explain to you, Matt, because you would not have known this. When I worked for Barry Coulter during the euthanasia debate, his office was just inundated with people coming in because it polarised, as everyone knows, the community’. It polarised and compelled the community in so many ways, and they felt a need to go to their MLA and tell their story and what they thought and felt about euthanasia, essentially - yes, or no, yea or nay. They just needed to tell their story about it, because people felt strongly one way or another about euthanasia. She said: ‘It is a bit like that in Alice Springs at the moment. People desperately want to come into the office’. I have never seen anything like that it, certainly not since I have been working with you for the last five years. There has been nothing quite like this. People are coming in. They just want to come and let their MLA, the local member for parliament, know how they feel about it, and what has happened - just to tell their story; to say they have been broken into, that their friend next door has been assaulted’.
This is real stuff. I am not just making it up to try to be colourful on the last day of parliament. I really wish I could talk about something else. You think we love talking it about it? We are sick and tired of talking about it. ‘All you do is talk down the town’. God, I would love to not talk it down; love to not do stuff like that. I would love to talk about other issues for a change; it would be really nice to talk about other things.
However, this is the issue; this is what is happening. My office is inundated with people, with families who have been here for 20 to 30 years, and those who have been here for five minutes. They just want to come in and tell their story. As I said, I feel lucky. The law and order issues, the lawlessness, assaults against the person, break-ins, property assaults and property thefts are now becoming almost a rule rather than the exception. It is a sad state of affairs not only when it is reflected in the statistics, but when people say it is a matter of not if, but when.
Instead of an assault or break-in being a one-off in a small country town - let us face it, it is Alice Springs, it is a small country town. It is a wonderful, iconic, cosmopolitan centre, but it still has that country charm. That is how people see it, locals and non-locals - wide open streets, quiet hour on a verandah on a lovely sunny afternoon with the breeze blowing across your face. This is how people see and feel about a town like Alice Springs. To have this happen constantly is remarkable. You could roll out your swag and camp underneath the Sydney Harbour Bridge and feel much safer than you would at the moment doing exactly the same thing in Alice Springs.
This is proof. All those two girls did was say: ‘We are backpackers, we want to save a little money. We might just park the car underneath the MacDonnell Ranges.’ They probably had a couple of glasses of wine, sat back and said, ‘This is great. Why don’t we just camp here?’, and pull the seat back. We have all done it. It is a great Australian way. It is something they do in Europe every day of the year. It is perfectly acceptable to do that. But, no, no way. Alice Springs - holy cow! To be faced with such extreme sexual assault - and these guys were armed with a firearm - is unbelievable. I am gobsmacked.
This happened about a kilometre from our place and there were a number of other places in our street and around that region that were hit. The whole town is being whacked every now and then. The place is being smashed, to be honest, with law and order business. There seems to be a theme around my area. I said to my wife: ‘Okay, lock the doors and make sure you sleep with a golf club’. What are you supposed to do? My wife and I are both from the city. She came over from Perth and I came to the Territory from Brisbane. We are very well aware of this stuff but you do not think about it in quiet, charming little communities such as Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Katherine, or even Darwin. Darwin is a big city now, isn’t it? However, in remote and regional parts of the Northern Territory, it is the last thing you would expect.
It has reached this point now and it was always going to. Do you feel embarrassed? The Chief Minister must feel something. It is almost like ‘told you so’. I wonder if he is sitting in the office thinking: ‘Those guys have been saying this for a long time. God, if only we had listened’. Yes, if only you had listened. How hard can it be, and what is wrong with that? What is wrong with getting a grip on it? What is wrong with listening to the people who live in that community? You talk about politics – well, if anyone was playing politics with these issues it was you guys because you did nothing and, now, two girls have been raped. That is it; you did nothing and that is what has happened. That is the end result.
It is a direct result of your lacklustre approach to law and order in Central Australia, and your arrogance towards this side of the House and the three, four, five members from Alice Springs - we have a fifth member over there on the other side. It is almost an indictment on him for not being able to stand up in Cabinet and be heard. Maybe he is just bullied in Cabinet. I am guessing that is probably what happens: ‘Oh, sit down, Karl, and shut up’.
As far as the rest of us go, we have been saying it for a long time, as members before me and all of us: the previous members for Braitling, Araluen, Greatorex, and Macdonnell have been saying it for a long time. It was always going to happen, and you guys, in your arrogance, failed to listen and, now, we are at this point. What next? That is the thing - what next? Holy cow! I could think of a couple of things worse than this. I will not articulate them, but I do not think it is as farfetched anymore. I would have thought this sort of thing only happened in New York, Los Angeles - those big, smoky populated towns - not a lovely, sunny little place like Alice Springs.
However, it does, and it happens regularly. This is not a one-off. Assaults are happening all the time. It ranges from a couple of beers being taken from the fridge to murders. What is happening in the place is why my office is being absolutely inundated. I say that with my hand on my heart, because it is what is happening. I am not saying it because I want to try to embellish the point by turning three people coming into the office into 300. That has happened before but, literally, there are dozens of people coming into my office. My office is pretty central and visible in Alice Springs. People go to the post office and, on their way back, or past or whatever, they are calling in and they are saying: ‘I cannot believe what is happening’. Now, we have a zero tolerance approach. A reaction to something - it is just reactive, not preventative. If you only listened.
I read from the budget paper today, and I learn from my colleague, the member for Araluen, that only 3% of the budget has gone to Central Australia. Well, that is extraordinary. Let us have a look how you sell Central Australia in the budget paper. The Central Australian region, which occupies 41% of the Territory’s land area. Huh, 41% - it is home to 18% of the Territory’s population. There are about 41 000 people living in the region, along with 27 600 in the Alice Springs region. Despite all that, and how you have built it up, and how important it is to the Northern Territory, you only allocate 3% of the budget towards it. It does not seem to make sense. It does not make sense. Where is the money? Where is all the money going?
Are you mentioning the Mereenie Loop? I cannot believe you actually had the audacity - well, I can believe it; I should not be surprised. I should not be surprised, but I still am a little that you actually had the gall and the guts to mention the Mereenie Loop. This takes the cake. It has been on and off. Clare Martin said she was going to do it all those years ago and, then somehow, it fell off the budget paper. I could be mistaken, but I thought the member for Karama, at one stage, said they were putting it on hold, it would not be done. They were going to do the inner loop or the outer loop or something. It has been a bit of a moving feast. The goal post has changed with the Mereenie Loop. However, here it is; it has appeared again:
- Connecting Territorians through our road network is a key commitment of this government …
What are they going to do? We are:
- … strengthening, widening and road safety improvements across the Territory including … the Arnhem Highway, the Port Keats Road, the Mereenie Loop …
So, it is back on. The Mereenie Loop is going to be, somehow, sealed again. I would like to see you do it. I wonder when it is going to happen. That has been an absolute disaster.
That is in the electorate of Macdonnell, or is it Stuart?
Ms Anderson: It is Macdonnell.
Mr CONLAN: It is Macdonnell. I am sure, member for Macdonnell, you know exactly what is going on out there, and why this is not happening. It is the failed negotiations, I believe, with some of the local people? From my understanding it has been stalled negotiations, almost non-existent. It has not happened. However, we see it again. Apparently, it is going to appear; it is back on the map.
The debt situation is really quite extraordinary. To get ourselves into a position where our own source revenue will not cover the interest payments on the debt by 2015 is despicable – it is really bad. Any business would have gone to the wall. We all fear, on this side, the Territory is going to the wall. What happened to the great Northern Territory and the dream that was the NT with self-government? What happened to it? Even when you were elected in 2001 there was a sign of democracy, wasn’t there? We did not want a dictatorship; we did not want regimes in forever and a day. I do not begrudge democracy. We have changed governments in this country without a single shot being fired. That is one of the great things about it.
There are good governments and bad governments of both persuasions. By 2001, the CLP had probably run its course. That was a time for change, and everyone looked towards you and gave you their endorsement. There were high hopes. So many people who lived in the Northern Territory had prayed, wished, and longed for the day a good Labor government would come to power. The expectation was enormous. For a couple of years, you did all right. Looking back in history, and my time in the Territory for those few years, you got on with a few good things. You were a new, excited, government, and there were many legislative changes you wanted to make. You had some things you wanted to do and, for all intents and purposes, you seemed to tick along okay.
However, then you, obviously, lost your way. The eyes widened when you saw the money rolling in through the GST: ‘This money - my God, look at this money. No one has ever seen this much money in their life. I cannot believe it’. Then, the wheels started to come off and they have been coming off for a long time. You guys are like the Flintstones - no wheels. You are running along, lifting it up, and losing momentum big time.
Today said it all. That announcement by the Chief Minister in Question Time was symbolic, if nothing else. It was many other things, but it was symbolic of how pathetic things have become, how the momentum has gone, and how desperate you are to react and say: ‘We are now employing a zero tolerance regime in Alice Springs and are going to fix it all now’. There are 100 examples out there of the sinking ship, and I cannot think of one off the top of my head. Like the Italian cruise liner. The captain jumped off the ship as it sank and had all these excuses and reasons why he did it. There are a million stories like this in history of really sad attempts to clutch and cling to a last remaining piece of credibility. It is a sign of such desperation, and everyone in this House can see through it.
Even the Chief Minister, as he made that announcement today, realised how ridiculous and sad it was. Is he sitting up there thinking: ‘God, how did I let it get to this point?’ It is him who has let it get to this point. Let us remember, he rolled your best chances of leaving a decent legacy. He gave Clare Martin the tap on the shoulder. If there was any chance of you guys walking away with your heads held high and leaving a reasonable legacy for the Territory, it was with her. Who was to know that at the time? We all knew it because none of us put much stock in the member for Wanguri. However, everyone was prepared to give him a crack, give him a go - and that is his legacy. Anything you had built up over the six years under the previous member for Fannie Bay has all gone and, basically today, what the Chief Minister said summed it up. It was like his epitaph. It was almost like his final words.
We look through history and think of turning points that changed the course of history, or what someone is defined by. That guy, he said that then. Or you look at sporting events. You can look at any time at a sporting event. Greg Norman picked up the soft 4 iron instead of a heavy 5 iron in the 1986 Masters, and sliced it off into the woods and blew the lead to Jack Nicklaus. You would say that was the defining moment of that particular tournament. Through history, it is littered with those defining points.
What happened here today was that moment when the member for Wanguri said: ‘We are going to now embark on a zero tolerance regime in Alice Springs in the wake of this headline: “Two tourists raped at gunpoint”’. God, I hate even saying that. That was the moment he will now be defined by. That is the legacy he will leave. Everyone will say: ‘Well it is too little, too late’ - absolutely too little and it is far too late. It is far, far too late for you, Chief Minister. It is over. No matter what the outcome of the election, no matter what it is, if the Labor Party in the Northern Territory is re-elected in 113 days, it is still over for you because that is your swansong. That will be your defining moment, and it is a sad state of affairs. That is the legacy the current Chief Minister has left all of you, government members: far too little, far too late.
It is just sad now. I have a Thesaurus here full of all these words ‘despicable’, ‘disgraceful’ - all that kind of stuff. It is now just sad. I actually feel sorry for him because he has lost it. He has lost the battle. The thing about politics and political parties is he is taking you with him. You are all going down with the ship. The people have lost faith. Can you imagine - members for Araluen, Braitling and Macdonnell - if we walk down the street tomorrow - which we will be; we will be in Alice Springs tomorrow - and we say: ‘Guess what? Hendo has just embarked on a zero tolerance policy. Wow! Guess what?’ Can you imagine the reactions? Can you imagine what people are going to say? There is no way I could even repeat some of the stuff that comes into my head about what people would think of that ...
Mrs Lambley: Too little too late.
Mr CONLAN: Yes. That is just such a polite way of putting it, and it does not even really actually do it much justice because it is so bad. The fact we have reached this point is so bad ...
Mr TOLLNER: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker! I move an extra 10 minutes for the member for Greatorex to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr CONLAN: Thanks, member for Fong Lim.
To draw all this back, obviously, we need to be relevant about the budget. To me, law and order is the most pressing issue in my life at the moment because our place has just been robbed – twice. In fact, three times in three weeks, so I am very close to it. If I have not been close to it before, which I have, I certainly am now. This is something we face every day, and I feel I am one of the lucky ones compared to some of these other people who have faced the wrath of the lawlessness in Central Australia.
To see these modest increases in policing and into Central Australia - 3% of the budget allocated to the region - really shows your lack of commitment and respect for the place. You say in here - and I think you gave up. I have heard the member for Stuart say on a number of occasions: ‘We are never going to win any seats. No one ever votes for us in Alice Springs’. Well, it is your own fault people are not voting for you. Some people do vote for you down there, but it is your own fault you do not have enough support ...
Mr Giles: They ticked the wrong box, actually.
Mr CONLAN: They ticked the wrong box, did they? Some people do. However, the fact that you are not receiving enough support to win a seat is not our fault; it is your fault. Alice Springs is not a Utopia for conservative ideologies. It is because you guys are hopeless, no one has any faith in you. I might as well say it one more time considering this will probably be my last speech in this parliament. You had a chance in 2005; you had every opportunity. You had a much better Chief Minister than you have now. You had your A Grade team; some of your best performers. You had Toyne, Syd Stirling, Clare Martin, and the member for Johnston, who was at his best.
You were at your best and you were not so bitter. You were not so angry and rotting from the inside with anger. Now, it is as if you are determined to leave this place without a single friend in the world: ‘I am going to take them all down with me. If I am going down I am taking them with me!’ You will not have a friend left, mate, if you keep this up. In those days you were much softer, much better; a much better member of parliament, a much better minister. You had your A Grade team and you had a chance to win the support and capture the hearts and minds of those in Central Australia, particularly in Alice Springs. You came within 100 votes of winning the seat of Greatorex in 2005 election with a big name. You failed to capitalise on the momentum you received. So, it is your own fault that Alice Springs does not seem to like you at the moment.
I guess that is why you have only allocated so much money to the place. It is one of those vicious cycles, isn’t it? ‘They do not like us, so we do not like them’. No one ever steps back and says: ‘Okay let us put a halt to this, draw a line in the sand. We do like you, we will show you. Now, let us start to try to win that respect back’. It is not happening. It is: ‘You do not like us, so I do not like you, and you can all go jump’.
There is so much here and I had not made too many notes; I had not prepared a structured argument. I knew exactly what I wanted to say, because we have been saying it for such a long time. The government has not listened to what we have been saying, and that is why we are in this social and terrible financial situation.
What scares me is, if the Country Liberals form a government in August, then we are not going to be left with much. In fact, we are going to be left with nothing. We are going to be left with paying off debt. So, the thing we have to be very careful of is these social problems do not continue to spiral out of control because of the unavailable resources to fix them. That is why we need some very sound financial management. We believe we have the team to do it. We certainly have the expertise. Look around, this is a good group of people sitting on this side of the parliament. Our candidates who have been preselected for other seats are first class. I believe if we were given an opportunity to form a government, then we will have no trouble. It will be hard, but we certainly have the capacity to rein in the spending, control the debt, and also address these enormous social problems which are affecting our great regional communities. In my view, there is none greater than Alice Springs.
We do not - and I certainly do not - support the budget. It is a blight on the Northern Territory government. Sometimes, it is hard to wrap up, isn’t it?
Members interjecting.
Mr CONLAN: That is right.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I have taken up a little more time than I wanted, because we only have about two-and-a-half hours to go before they shut us down. I know a number of other parliamentary colleagues would like to put their views on the public record in this, the last day of parliament.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I contribute to something I am very disappointed in, because there is nothing for my electorate, or nothing for the bush. I will just put a list of a couple of my communities on the record so, on Monday, I can show them they actually have nothing in this budget.
I will start off with nothing for Santa Teresa; nothing for Docker River; nothing for Imanpa; nothing for Ampilatwatja; nothing for Arlparra; nothing for Harts Range; nothing for Bonya; nothing for Finke; nothing for Titjikala – and I will come back to Titjikala, because I have something to say on Titjikala Police Station; nothing for Mutitjulu; nothing for Haasts Bluff; nothing for Alcoota; nothing for Areyonga; nothing for Mount Liebig; nothing for Kintore, except an admin centre at the school; nothing for Papunya, except renovating the clinic; and nothing for Hermannsburg, except a couple of extra bores that have to be put in because of SIHIP going in there in September to put in a couple of new houses.
It will not alleviate the overcrowding, because they will actually demolish the existing houses and build on the same service site, and only build a few houses at Hermannsburg. There are over 20 people living inside my brother’s house.
There will certainly be no men’s centre that has been promised. There has been a football oval promised at Kintore. There is nothing in the budget papers. I will certainly be taking all this around to Santa Teresa and Kintore where all the stuff has been promised, and talk to the people who will understand me.
To go back to Titjikala, I had a phone call last week, just before coming to this budget week. The phone call was from a constituent who said there is a police station at Titjikala, but it is empty. It has no computer there, and the police go there once a week from Santa Teresa. If you arrest a man or a woman, you have nowhere to lock them up at Titjikala. A big police station has been built there, but it is not manned. It is an hour-and-a-half to Alice Springs, and an hour-and-a-half to Santa Teresa because the police are stationed in Alice Springs and Santa Teresa. It is really appalling that this trickery has happened after promise made to remote Aboriginal communities. We have learned about the bag of tricks this government is good at, wrapping it and putting a beautiful bow on it, and taking it out to deliver to remote Aboriginal communities.
Titjikala is very upset because Titjikala is only 74 km from Alice Springs. There are people who come into Alice Springs, buy alcohol, and go back to Titjikala. An hour-and-a-half is a long time to wait for police to arrive from Alice Springs or Santa Teresa. Someone could be killed in that time. If there is a brawl you cannot lock the people up because there are no holding cells. That is a pretend gaol, a pretend police station which has been built on a remote Aboriginal community. That is just not on. That is a real gammon police station. It is not manned, not even a computer inside, and you have to wait an hour-and-a-half for police officers to come from Alice Springs and Santa Teresa. It is not fair for police from Santa Teresa, who are looking after a population of over 300 and might have disturbances there, to do an hour-and-a-half travel by road that is corrugated for them to come to Titjikala. That is not fair. It is just a pretend police station which has been put out there, manned once a week, with no computer, an hour-and-a-half either way from Santa Teresa or Alice Springs.
The other issue I want to raise is the Minister for Essential Services made a comment yesterday. I also note the Minister for Essential Services stated in his speech that, with respect to power, water and sewerage: ‘we have relieved the burden on Territory households’. I have to ask: do Territory households include the households at Ampilatwatja, because the sewerage system at Ampilatwatja has not functioned properly for years? It was documented that sewage was spilling out of a sink in one house, and was dumped locally in an effort to provide a quick fix for the problem. You would think this is old news; it has been discussed in parliament and in the media. However, in the Northern Territory under this government, desperate problems like these take years to fix. It is an environmental health disaster that would not be allowed anywhere but in a remote Aboriginal community.
In other areas there is little functionality to spending. A good example of this was people have gone out to Ampilatwatja to look. I certainly went out there and the sewerage system was still being ripped up. They had backhoes on the community. People are still living under the same conditions. People are living underneath trees, 25 to a house, 17 in some cases, eight in others, and sewerage is not functioning. This problem which has been reported over and over again – definitely on the ABC - should not be neglected or not heard by a government on the opposite side of this House, whose members continuously say it is the only government that looks after Aboriginal people.
Ask the Aboriginal people and see how good your report card is when you go out to remote Aboriginal communities. You certainly will not be getting an A. You will be getting D-minus or C. Everywhere across the Northern Territory, you would be a flat out getting a C in your report card. You will get D-minus.
I complement some of the things my two colleagues from Alice Springs, the members for Araluen and Greatorex, have said. I grew up in that town. I went to Alice Springs when I was eight years old. Alice Springs was such a beautiful town to walk around in. We used to walk from The Gap to the Walk In, watch the movies and go back. We had a relationship with everyone - the Greeks, Italians. We played softball with the Diano sisters, the Hatzimihails - and we were friends with everybody. It did not matter whether you lived at the golf course or the old Eastside or, as we did, The Gap. We were referred to as The Gap angels. We grew up with people like Jenny Lillas and were just kids from Alice Springs. We did not class ourselves as black kids, Greek kids, or white kids. We were kids who played around in Alice Springs, grew up together, and went to the same school at Traeger Park. It is really sad now to see this beautiful little town we grew up in, we had our children in, and our children also love, turn so drastically to something very horrible.
The problem we all must admit is we have been sweeping it too much underneath the carpet. We have been brushing it underneath the carpet. We have all stood back and said there is not a problem. If somebody raised an issue in Alice Springs: ‘Oh, you are racist’. It was not racist; people were all trying to deal with the issues.
Today in Question Time, we heard the Chief Minister coming up with a zero tolerance, giving all power to the commissioner to do what he can in Alice Springs. Well, one thing, it is good to have zero tolerance, but all the gaols are full. Where are we going to put all these people once we have picked them up in Alice Springs because we have zero tolerance? Where are we going to take them, because the gaols are overflowing? Where are we going to put these people? Are we just going to clean up the streets for a couple of weeks until it all goes silent again, until nothing happens? We must have a long-term strategic plan for all our regional towns - not just Alice Springs but Tennant Creek, Katherine, and Darwin.
There is this trend of people coming into town now, and we can no longer sit back and say: ‘Oh, we will take them home. We will do a country visit, put them on a bus, and take them back’” Do you know why? They would beat you back into town. The buses come after them; they have already got a lift and they are back in town. We have to cater for these people, but we have to ensure, with this social interaction, social engagement, there is also social mannerism. We talk about social mannerism when we talk about social engagement and interaction with people.
People who are born and bred in remote Aboriginal communities come into town and are living underneath the bridge. I went around to Hoppy’s the other day to see my brother and his family. I had a news journalist from The Centralian Advocate with me because I took her to introduce her to a few of the people. The house right next door to where my cousin and my brother lives was empty. I asked him: ‘What happened to all those people who were living there?’ ‘Oh, they got kicked out by Territory Housing, but do not worry, because they just got moved over to The Gap camps’. Out of mind, out of sight.
You just cannot do this kind of stuff. There are people living back up in the hills again, and underneath the bridge. My cousins are all living underneath the bridge. I still drive past, and go and sit at Kentucky Fried Chicken and 24 Hour. I have seen an increase, over the last month, of these kids. I have stood in this House and praised YSOS for the work they do, but it has become too complicated and too hard for them now, and they are struggling. They are struggling; I see it all the time. We were driving past a couple of weeks ago when YSOS was taking some kids home, and these other young girls on the other side near the taxi rank - and I would not repeat the language in this House that was used on the YSOS people. They just have no respect for them now.
If you talk to people in remote Aboriginal communities - and I sit down and talk to these people when I am inside their lounge room, when I am sleeping with them - the problem they see is you have built all these houses in town, so more and more people are coming into town. Those new existing, beautiful houses you have built there under the normalisation are now overcrowded and they are spilling. They have more and more people living in those new houses in the town camps than ever. When you keep building more there and fewer on the remote Aboriginal communities, of course, you have to expect an influx of people. They are coming in because you are building more and more houses for them.
If you want people to remain in the communities, then build the houses on the communities. I will go back because I briefly spoke to someone this morning about IHANT. The Minister for Public and Affordable Housing said in this House there are about 200 houses that have been built under SIHIP. Well, IHANT used to build 100 houses a year. If you go back and have a look, IHANT distributed 100 houses a year. It did not matter which community. Communities applied - two houses would go to Papunya one year, four to Hermannsburg, two to Santa Teresa, might be one to Titjikala. Everyone knew they would receive something every year.
You are 800 short of your target, even if you compare IHANT 13 years ago to what you are building today. You have not alleviated any overcrowding in remote Aboriginal communities; you have not built one extra bedroom. The houses you are soon to build at Hermannsburg will not alleviate any of the problems in Hermannsburg. You are taking my sister, and my aunty mother out of my brother’s houses. There are only two moving out. He will still have 21 people living in that house.
You are not alleviating any of the overcrowding, all you are doing is taking one house off that site, building one there while they live in a tent while they are waiting for their new house to go on to the same service site. It is untruthful to tell a community you are building 26 new houses when, in fact, you are building six or eight. You need to be truthful, you need to say to these people, you are not receiving 26, 28, 19, or 17, you are receiving five or six because you will build on your existing site. People can then say to you that you will not alleviate overcrowding because there are so many people living in these houses. If you are talking about good quality of education and health then you have to start addressing these problems: people having real employment, people living eight or nine to a house so the kids can get up and go to work.
Madam Deputy Speaker, this budget has given nothing to Central Australia and to remote Aboriginal communities. I will take the budget papers to my areas when I start my leave on Monday and will show them exactly what you have given them. I know there have been some promises made in these communities for football ovals and men’s centres, but I cannot see it in the budget paper. I will be telling people because I am the only one who speaks their language.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Deputy Speaker, it is an interesting debate so far. I hear things about the ALP. I refer to my colleague, the member for Fong Lim, when he was talking about the ALP here and Hendo’s team not wishing to be associated with ALP.
It seems as if the government is moving towards the CLP on a daily basis. It is very interesting, as a result of this headline in today’s paper, ‘Tourists raped at gunpoint’. Crime is out of control in Alice Springs and the Chief Minister’s answer to that is: ‘This is terrible. What are we going to do about it? Oh, let us have a zero tolerance policing system’.
I remember the mid-1990s when Shane Stone introduced the term ‘zero tolerance policing’. He went to New York City, which has a 40 square mile radius, where they have 42 000 police officers so there is nearly one on every corner. They introduced a zero tolerance policing system over there and it worked. It was working here. I go back to mandatory sentencing because that is where we seem to be going. With zero tolerance policing we may go to mandatory sentencing. I do not know what you will do with all these people when you charge them in courts. What will the courts do with them? How are we going to solve this? Where is the budget for the massive increase in the number of people you are going to arrest and put through courts? That is what I am assuming when you say we are going to have zero tolerance policing, because that is what it is about.
We heard the Minister for Alcohol Policy today say, no, they are not going to lock up drunks. In fact, if you are consuming alcohol - I do not know too many people who will open a can of beer or a drink and walk around for a day with it open. That is absurd. Why would they do that? Maybe I need to find all the people who are walking around with open alcohol containers but not consuming it. That seems a bit strange to me. Maybe that is the case or that is what the Minister for Alcohol Policy believes.
Here we have Hendo’s team. You do not want to be associated with the ALP. They are now starting to adopt CLP policies from the mid-1990s. I recall very well the mid-1990s when the then Leader of the Opposition, Brian Ede, followed by Maggie Hickey as leader, stood up and cried: ‘You cannot do this, this is terrible. What are you going to do?’ I cannot remember the exact rhetoric, nor have I had time to go back through the Parliamentary Record to dig up what they said, but I do know the ALP was against all this. They were against mandatory sentencing. It is all on the record; anyone can go and check that.
If we are moving towards zero tolerance policing - and I do not have a problem with that, I believe it is actually a good idea - we need to be fixing the problems. When you look at zero tolerance, though, we have an issue: the gaols are full, there are no deterrents; people are walking around the streets thinking they can do whatever they like. Eventually, someone has to actually say: ‘You cannot’. We have a massive problem with people in our community understanding what they can and cannot do.
In the budget, I do not see the ability for getting more school-based police officers actually in classrooms and teaching young people about what they can and cannot do, and what the community’s expectations are: they cannot just walk around and do these sorts of things. There are a few more things that I will deal with a bit further into my presentation tonight.
Regarding the zero tolerance policing in Alice Springs, let us have a look at the figures the Minister for Alcohol Policy gave us today. Overall in the Territory, assaults are up by 17%. If you go to Alice Springs, well, it gets worse: assaults in the last 12 months are up by 33%. I will just say that again for members opposite: assaults are up in Alice Springs by 33%. In March 2011, there were 433, we have gone to September – 348; December – 418 - this is the quarters - and now we are up to 464. When you look at Darwin, it is up 15%.
If we are going to take a zero tolerance attitude towards these sort of things in the community, where are we going to put all these people? What are we going to do? Put them in court and put them on bonds and say: ‘You have been a bad person, do not do that again’. Now, we are going to clog up the courts. We have nowhere to put them. The government wants to build this new, billion dollar Hilton - what do they call it? The Holtze Hilton in Howard Springs. We have this billion dollar gaol which is going to cost us about $60m. I saw some figures the other day where, if we had borrowed the money to build it, we would be about $40m a year …
Mr Giles: They have $24m left over every year - where does it go?
Mr STYLES: That is right. I do not know why the government just did not borrow the money. Mind you, that looks bad on the books, which brings me to another point. I was looking through the budget papers for 2012-13, and I got to page 145 under ‘Community Support Services for Frail Aged People and People with a Disability’, and I saw there is almost $15m-worth of services that have been transferred across to the Commonwealth government. It says under Footnote 2:
- The decrease in the measure reflects the transfer responsibility for some functions to the Commonwealth.
Well, that just saved the Northern Territory government $15m.
Mr Giles: What in?
Mr STYLES: Well, in Community Support Services for Frail Aged People and People with a Disability. Under ‘Clients accessing community support services’, it has the estimate for 2011-12 as $4.4m, which is going to drop down next year to $2.105m. Under the ‘Occasions clients access professional support services’, which also has a footnote, budgeted in 2011-12 for $77m, the estimate was $64m, and they have budgeted $63m in 2012-13. There is an actual drop from what they thought they were going to have to spend at $77m, down to $63m. That is because these things have been transferred across to the Commonwealth.
Had we actually had to provide those services, that is another $15m or thereabouts which goes on to the amount of money the government would have had to borrow which, if my memory serves me correct, would have tipped us over the $500m. That is $0.5bn extra the government spent last year. That is $0.5bn. These are extraordinary figures for a government that just keeps spending.
There was a classic recently. I heard about the air-conditioners at the new Nemarluk School. I do not know how the people designing this put an air-conditioning plant right opposite the very people who opposed the building. It is almost like rubbing salt into the wounds where the government cranked it up and, obviously, got its contractors to crank it up. The complaints came in thick and fast. What happened? Somebody in the government rang up and said: ‘Well, just pull it out and put in split units’. I heard a figure of $800 000 thrown around. That is another $800 000 of borrowed money. If you did not have to do that, you would not have to borrow that much money. It is absurd, when you are designing these things and you know you have a problem, that someone in the government does not say: ‘Put that out the back so we are not going to drive the people across the road nuts’. That is fairly basic planning. However, I am not surprised.
When you look at the issue of full gaols at the moment, I am aware the gaol rings the courts - I am assuming they do exactly the same in Alice Springs - in the morning and say: ‘Do you know there is no space here? You cannot put anyone in today so you might have to adjourn it until next week or when, perhaps, we do’.
I am also reliably informed there are people let out slightly early because they need to get rid of some of the prisoners. I sincerely hope that is not happening, but I am reliably informed it is. Maybe the government might tell us - and I am happy to be corrected by people on the other side - and categorically state that is not happening. If the gaol rings up each day and says to the people in the court house: ‘You can only lock up three people today’, it is a lottery. So, if you are a defendant and have been bad, it is like a lottery. ‘Will I be locked up? That depends on whether there is a bed there for me or not’. How are we going to cover all the issues revolving around zero tolerance policing?
I do not see in the budget an enormous amount of money for youth services. What are youth doing? The youth of today, if they are not corrected and given some guidance, are possibly going to be the offenders of tomorrow. We used to have a crime prevention unit in the police department, but that has gone. We do not need one of those; we do not need to worry about crime prevention. The Neighbourhood Watch system has been changed totally. When I talk to people they say: ‘We do not want to sit in our lounge room and operate on the net. We want to talk to real people. We want to have real barbecues. We want to get real action in our street, in our neighbourhoods, and in our parks’.
We need to invest money in schools. We need to get people back into classrooms, to teach them what the community expects; that there are ways of going about things. We need to deputise these young people in schools so we get the information. Police do not pluck all their information out of the sky; they rely on people and intelligence. Today’s paper! - they rely on people in the community who are confident they are going to be protected and covered if they give information to the police. However, they only get that confidence by dealing with police in times when they are not locking up mum and dad or somebody in the household. It comes from good crime prevention and community policing strategies. Here we have Wednesday’s paper, front page:
Innocent Live Behind Bars ...
It has a photo of Mr Vincent:
... while the guilty go free.
If you have no space in your prisons for these people, you cannot lock them up. You have to put them on good behaviour bonds and on home detention. There are issues going on every single day. If you pick up Tuesday’s paper, it is terrible. I get the paper delivered in the morning, and the first thing I do is open it up. I am looking for the bad news because I know it is going to be there. We seem to be getting worse. I listen to members of the government say: ‘Well, we are locking more people up than you ever did. We are spending more money on this than you ever did’.
The problem is we are not getting the results. People will say: ‘Here are the statistics, and this and this and this’. However, I did not hear the member for Karama say today: ‘Yes, total assaults in Alice Springs are up 30%, they are up in Darwin by 15%, and overall they are up 17%’. I did not hear those statistics. I heard that from others. I heard the member for Karama say: ‘You have to be a little careful about statistics because if you get a few, it changes things and it can skew the end result’. Well, vice versa. When you look at figures of 33%, 15% and 17% are not just 1% or 2%, they are real percentages. The people in Alice Springs are seriously suffering.
I congratulate the Chief Minister for finally recognising what the CLP brought in - 12, 15 years ago we were looking at that – when we said zero tolerance policing was the way to go. What we do not see in the budget is how is he going to back that up? How is he going to back that up in Katherine? How is he going to back that up in Darwin? How is he going to back it up in Alice Springs?
I wish the commissioner all the very best of luck. I sincerely hope he succeeds, but I do not see where the government is going to support him. Where are they going to pluck this money from? Borrow some more money? Well, they are going to cut some money somewhere, because this is going to be an expensive exercise. They will just borrow some more money and let someone else pay it off. It seems to be the way. When you go through history and have a look, Labor governments get in, they run the debt up and, then, the Conservatives and the Liberals have to get back in, sort out the shop, get the place back in order, pay off the debt. Then, when Labor gets back in, up goes the debt again. They just spend their way out of everything, waste money, and keep spending, spending, spending. It is really amazing.
It is only in very recent history, in 2007, when the federal government changed hands from the Coalition to Labor, we had zero debt, money in the bank, and Australia was looking really good. I remember going to a meeting where Peter Costello - this is 12 months, maybe 18 months, two years, after the election - addressed the people about the current state of the nation. He thought his legacy, his one good thing he could do for Australia, was pay off Labor’s $96bn of debt - back in those days; if you translate that through to current day values, it would be worth much more today. In those days, $96bn in Labor debt, he paid off, along with John Howard and their policies, and left money in the bank. Of course, Labor got in, and what did they do? They spent. We are up to a $156bn or something at the moment - and still going. It is unsustainable.
My mother always taught me, when I was growing up when I was a teenager, ‘You cannot live beyond your means’. The only time my mum said you could go beyond your means, is if you needed to borrow money to buy a house. There are certain things you can do. However, you do not load yourself up with debt to the point where all your income is simply going to pay the interest on your debt. That is an absurd position to be in: when all the income of the Northern Territory will only just cover the interest bill on the money we owe. That is in a couple of year’s time.
When I saw those figures and people were starting to digest this budget, I was appalled. When I moved here 31 years ago, I brought some tiny little kids up here for a better life. I thought: ‘Great. The Territory is a great place!’ Well, I tell you, I watched this place deteriorate over the last 10 years. I know the government will say: ‘The CLP had its issues’. Yes, we did. However, we were getting on top of some of those issues. If you look at youth issues, for instance, when the Country Liberals went out of government in 2001, there were six juveniles in the Don Dale Centre. How many are in there today? Overflowing! What is this government doing for youth? We talk about - somewhere in here, just a moment, I will have a look.
There are some figures here where we have increased some of the youth funding, but it is nowhere near enough. Why do youth get into trouble? Well, one reason is, quite often, they have not had any instruction. There are some parents out there who either cannot, will not - just cannot be bothered, or are either affected by alcohol or other drugs, who do not teach their kids what is expected. Who else is doing that? I ask you. Can anyone in this House tell me who else is actually doing that? Not many people at all, unfortunately.
The situation is, as a community, we need to provide far more activities for our youth. We talk about the lack of police facilities. When you get your young people - and today we tabled a report titled Gone Too Soon. Youth out there are struggling; there is no guidance, no leadership from many parents. Certain people in their community need to have that leadership, role models. We have good role models in schools. There are welfare teams in schools, although they are struggling to maintain their presence.
Why do kids go out and do that? If there is no leadership they cannot go home because of physical, emotional or sexual abuse. They just want to get out of the house and will not go home until the early hours of the morning when they know they can at least have a couple of hours sleep. They are supposed to wake up in the morning and comply with the government’s policy of Every Child, Every Day.
There are many kids who are struggling. They are struggling to get enough sleep, to find a place to sleep, and to find enough to eat. I recall very well, as a school-based police officer, dealing with young kids who had to steal food so they did not starve. This is a First World country but, only a few years ago, kids were struggling to get enough to eat so they committed crimes.
I will not mention the two kids who come to mind, but they are children who have been mentioned in this House before. I dealt with them. You report that they struggle. Why is it that these kids commit suicide? Why do they attempt to commit suicide? Because they are struggling. I believe the turnover of staff at Family and Children Services is horrific, although I hear from the Minister for Health they are trying. I do not know whether you are going to succeed. There is so much more we need to do before we reach that crisis point.
Look at the graffiti situation in the northern suburbs. Why is that happening? Because kids are bored. There needs to be many different structured things for kids to do and opportunities for them to do it. We used to have some user-pay events. We have to find people who are going to help these youths.
That reminds me of a place called Skateworld, which existed a couple of years ago. It was a great place. Kids went there in droves. When the building was sold, the operator approached the government and said he did not have that sort of capacity; there was not that much money in it. He did say on Friday nights 400 kids used to go there - 400 kids off the streets, in Skateworld where they were safe, where bullies were not allowed to run the place, there were no pass-outs and the parents would come and pick them up or they made their own way home. There was entertainment there for 400 kids at a really cheap rate. When the building was sold and the lease was up, the guy approached the government and said he needed a helping hand to get started. ‘No, sorry, cannot do that’. So where are those 400 kids now? I do not know. They are out there somewhere, struggling.
You need to have those types of things. I am a believer that to pass the message on to kids we have to educate them, especially if you are going to introduce zero tolerance policing. This is all the more reason to teach young people what is going to happen.
My colleague, the member for Macdonnell, raised an interesting situation. She said she grew up in Alice Springs. She went there when she was eight years old and it was a great place. I remember the movie A Town Like Alice. When I first came to the Territory my mother had some very good friends who lived there - one of her bridesmaids lived in Alice Springs so she used to travel there a great deal - the reports I received were that it was such a lovely place. I have been there many times in the early days when it was a lovely place to visit. It was very welcoming. I do not know whether I would want to walk down the mall on an evening on my own now. That is a problem. Why is it happening? Because these people believe they can do whatever they like. What is the government doing about that? They say they are going to do this, they are going to do that, we are going to have zero tolerance policing, but that is going to be expensive. I do not know where the extra money is in the budget. I would be happy for someone to tell me where to look because I have looked and I cannot find it.
When we look at alcohol policy – where do I start? The cost of the Banned Drinker Register – an enormous cost and what do we have? I talk to people. It is one of the questions I ask given I am the shadow minister for Alcohol Policy. Everywhere I go, when I doorknock, when I am at my shops on Saturday mornings, or at barbecues on Sunday mornings, I ask people about the Banned Drinker Register and what they think about it. What do they think about being targeted for the behaviour of a few? I run past our habitual drunk legislation which we will introduce. People love it. I have talked to off duty police officers and they love it. The government says the police said they have the best tool they have had. Well, it is the best tool the government can give them, but there is a better tool - and it is the one we will introduce should we win the 2012 election on 25 August. I will just repeat that: the people we talk to love what we are going to introduce, because we will get the drunks off the streets.
The interesting thing is the Minister for Alcohol Policy uses the term ‘turning people off tap’. I ask the minister to go back and have a look at what the legislation relates to. It relates to takeaway alcohol sales. I do not see any taps in takeaway bottle shops. I was in one just recently, and I have a look around and I could not find a tap. The only tap I could see was out on the lawn they used to water their garden with. However, there is no tap in takeaway. It is actually a little misleading when the government says: ‘We are turning people off tap’. They make a big song and dance about it: ‘We are going to turn people off tap’. In actual fact, all they are doing is preventing that person from buying takeaway alcohol, unless that person has a number of driver’s licences or a number of different forms of identification. There are people out there, I believe, who have multiple forms of identification in different names. They might be banned on this one, but they just produce another one. They get someone who is a non-drinker to buy it.
Then again, are we setting the police up? I mentioned this earlier in the debate on liquor. The police officers are stretched at the moment just trying to deal with criminals. There is so much going on - just look at the paper. Here we are: ‘Innocent Live Behind Bars’. There is a 72-year-old in the hospital who, at one stage, was fighting for his life, now in a serious but stable condition. All that guy did was go out and say, ‘Can you quieten down please, I am trying to get some sleep’, so he was attacked. These are the things that people should be thinking about if they are pretending they do not know about this or, if they are the offender, they should be thinking about the consequence of this. Sadly, there does not appear to be too many bad consequences.
These people can be on the Banned Drinker Register - and they may be. I am interested to know, when the police eventually catch those people who assaulted that man at Hudson Fysh the other day, whether or not they are on the Banned Drinker Register. Again, I have spoken to police officers and asked what the problem is with the secondary supply issue. They say: ‘Well, there is a whole lot of people sitting around in a big circle and there is a pile of alcohol in the middle; no one seems to know who bought what. People say if they wander off to relieve themselves, somebody steals their alcohol’. Do the police then take a report on the fact that some alcohol has been stolen? How far do you go with a group of people sitting around who are drunk?
What we would like to see the government do is to pick up on some of our ideas and actually put in some real mandatory rehabilitation, where these people who are beyond helping themselves are taken away and given some real rehabilitation, because if we do not, it is just going to get worse. The government will say: ‘Yes, well, we have more people reported for this and more reported for that’. We just here all this rhetoric that means nothing, because the situation is actually getting worse.
If we do not fix the problem - and in the northern suburbs people are now sitting around in parks. There are larger groups gathering and they are becoming more aggressive. They are becoming more aggressive to ordinary taxpaying citizens of the Northern Territory, towards kids, and they are humbugging people. I was at the shops in one of my suburbs - I will not mention the particular suburb – where a woman came up and said to me: ‘I am really sick of these people being around the place. My daughter went up to the shop the other day and got touched up by one of these people. They were sitting there in a large group. She walked past them and one of the males got up and walked over ...’ - and this is a 12-year-old girl, thanks very much - ‘... and she was touched up’. She said: ‘This is appalling’.
Three days before that, her son was driving in town, and a drunken person walked out in front of the car. He had to slam the brakes on, the car behind them nearly piled straight into them. Then, they copped this mouthful of abuse while this drunk person walked around the side of the car and, out of the blue, king hit the guy sitting in the passenger seat through an open window - king hits him, breaks his nose. This woman told me: ‘A few days later, my daughter went to the shops over here ...
Mr Giles: Police?
Mr STYLES: Sorry?
Mr Giles: Any police?
Mr STYLES: No, police. It was reported to the police.
Mr Giles: Yes, but no one turned up?
Mr STYLES: No, you have to go and report it. The poor police – I will pick up on that interjection by the member for Braitling. Police officers spend so much time being the highest paid data input people in the Northern Territory; the PROMIS system consumes so much of their time. The government needs to do something about it, along with the commissioner, and those in the police department who can come up, hopefully, with a plan. The problem is police have to input so much information - they get a job, they go out, they get what they can, they come back and they have to put all that information in. Police officers, when overtime is frozen, have to do that in their own time because they have so much to do. The police department and the police force, from what I have been told, are seriously stretched. It is because of the cumbersome PROMIS system which is not streamlined. I remember quite some years ago, an offer was made ...
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I request a 10 minute extension for my colleague.
Motion agreed to.
Mr STYLES: I think there were a few noes, Madam Deputy Speaker. I will try to be brief because there are others ...
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: We go on the voices, member for Sanderson, and it was definitely the ayes.
Mr STYLES: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I have used up my time so I am going to make a very quick summary.
I will make a couple of points. One of the things I note when we talk about seniors is on page 146 of Budget Paper No 3 for 2012-13 it lists Support for Senior Territorians and Pensioner Concessions. Under ‘Pensioner concessions recipients’, it has Footnote 1. I will read the first part of Footnote 1:
- Services or items for which the Department of Health provides concessions and rebates are electricity or alternative energy costs ...
That is not quite correct because, in Alice Springs where seniors use gas to heat their small units so they do not freeze in subzero temperatures, they are not reimbursed for those energy costs. I ask the government to consider that.
The other issue is the Council of the Ageing has had its budget cut and there is no increase in its budget in the foreseeable future. It is struggling to provide services to seniors, as the peak body to represent the views of seniors. Their roof was leaking prior the last Wet Season and government could not help to get a bit of tin on the roof. These are the things where they need extra support.
There is a slight increase in the amount available for the Pensioner and Carer Concession Scheme, and the seniors out there are grateful for small mercies.
On page 29 of the budget, in Multicultural Advancements there has been a reduction of $21 000. I do not know what we are going to do about all the refugees settling here.
The other issue which is going to arise is the incoming workers on 457 Visas for the INPEX plant. I do not know who is going to provide the pastoral care and support services these people might need within their community established in Darwin. How are we going to facilitate them? Is the government going to ask INPEX to pay for that as well, as it has had to pay for roads, roundabouts, and all those other things?
The value of grants is up $100 000; however, there are community groups who need capital works done so they can become self-sustaining. The idea is for multicultural groups who have facilities - if we get them up to the standard where people can utilise them by hiring the facilities out when they are not being used by that multicultural group – can then have an income. They can do their repairs and maintenance and will not be coming to government. That is not going to happen if the government does not do that.
Moving on, I have spoken about youth. In Racing, Gaming and Licensing there is the necessity for fabric building. There are many people out there who are employed in the racing industry. I looked at some figures in New South Wales recently where it was about one in four. I actually thought that was quite remarkable. The person who told me that figure, I think is now the chair of the New South Wales racing industry. He is a gentleman I spent some time with a couple of years ago being briefed on a number of issues.
One of the issues I want to talk about is law and order, particularly in the northern suburbs. The cute thing is the government tries to rewrite history. Today, the Deputy Chief Minister and, I think, the Chief Minister also, were talking about the fact that the CLP froze police numbers: ‘You did not do anything in the early 1990s; you froze police numbers’. Well, I direct those people to go back and look at history, as to why that happened. I will enlighten the members for Karama and Wanguri.
The reason there was a freeze was because the then ALP government sent in the razor gang and slashed an enormous amount of our budget. I stand to be corrected; however, given the Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister have access to far greater resources than I, they might like to check that figure. It was around 20% of our budget that was slashed overnight. If I recall, in those days the budget was only about one-point-something billion dollars. There was over $200m slashed from our budget. I recall that, as public servants - I was a police officer then - we were actually struggling to be paid. The government had to manage that, and build all the facilities they built in the Territory. All the while, we were suffering. The reason we could not employ anyone is because we did not have any money, courtesy of the Australian Labor Party government in Canberra. So, do not try to rewrite history, please, those members, because you just have to go back and look at the facts.
The sad thing is, particularly in the northern suburbs, we have issues such as - I know the Chief Minister likes to think the shopfront is great but, across the road, you have a police station. The actual shopfront is consuming enormous an amount of resources. If we look at those issues, we get increasing people in the parks.
I have people from other electorates coming into my office and giving information about what is going on. I try to pass that on. I was at one of my shopping centres last Saturday - lo and behold – a huge group of people was sitting out the front. Some of them had alcohol, some of them did not. I am assuming that Coca-Cola is not a yellow coloured liquid, Coca-Cola is still a black coloured liquid. They had Coca-Cola bottles with a yellow liquid in them, sadly. I mentioned this to someone in charge at the police station and there was a police vehicle that came through, drove around three times, and continued to drive off. A different police car came back some time later. Actually, it might have done something and moved these people on. However, that is the problem I am hearing of more and more. As people gather and become, I suppose, gamer at what they want to do out there, it is an issue. I accept the government is trying to do things, but I just do not think they seem to have the right ideas about what is going on.
Madam Speaker, I have taken up, probably, more than my share of time. I still have about four pages I would like to get through but, in the interest of giving other members in this House a fair go, I will conclude my remarks on Budget 2012-13.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I will try to fit within the 20 minutes because there are many people still wanting to speak. Tonight is a special night; it is the last real night of sittings ...
Madam SPEAKER: You actually have 30 minutes, member for Nelson. .
Mr WOOD: Thirty minutes? Well, I will try to fit it well within 30 minutes.
Mr Vatskalis: Take 20.
Mr WOOD: Yes, okay. Put a bet on that. I had better not, knowing me.
Just a couple of things. I will make one note at the beginning. The member for Sanderson spoke about mandatory sentencing. I will put on record I do not agree with mandatory sentencing.
I agree with mandatory punishment - and I believe there is a vast difference to mandatory sentencing. Mandatory sentencing is a very unjust form of punishment, which I have said all along. If people do something wrong they should be punished; that is different to sentencing people because there are different forms of punishment besides putting people in gaol. It should be horses for courses, not just – I will probably criticise today - a 3% efficiency dividend over the lot. One should look at these issues on their merit. However, I digress.
I will say a few words about some of the things happening in the budget in relation to my local area, then some broader discussion on the budget as a whole. I never intended to go through this budget bit by bit. I always find budget papers difficult. I find estimates much better. I find looking at what departments said they were going to do through annual reports a much better way to see whether the government is on track. I will talk first of all about what is in the budget in relation to the rural area. To be fair, there is not much. I say that because I can read out what is for the rural area of Litchfield.
Howard Springs Road - great, $8.5m. That is well and truly needed. The traffic that builds up waiting to get through the lights on Howard Springs Road in the morning is sometimes 2 km long. Howard Springs Road has had no major changes for the last 20 to 30 years. It is the road that goes to the Howard Springs Nature Park. The amount of growth in that area has been enormous and the $8.5m is welcome and timely.
Of the $4m for the Arnhem Highway only a small amount is for our rural area; the Arnhem Highway goes all the way to Jabiru. However, I recognise there is some new money for the Arnhem Highway. In some places – not all - the Arnhem Highway desperately needs an upgrade. With the amount of traffic which will come from Mt Bundy of trucks with rocks for the INPEX project, it is going to need upgrades and repairs.
The rock pool, the waterfall, and the pump house at the Howard Springs Nature Park is happening, but it is happening slowly. I have been there several times. I try to put a good spin on it. At times, the park is still lovely, but people do not visit. Hopefully, that can get a go on; however, that is in last year’s budget. There is $0.4m for improvements in walking trails and an adventure playground which I thought was going to be part of the whole package originally. However, someone has decided to split the budget into two. Again, that is money which was set aside last year and has now been revoted to this year, so it is not new money.
Regarding the swimming pool - well I am not blaming the government exactly because there was a great deal of argy-bargy between the Freds Pass Management Board and the Litchfield Council, which delayed the introduction of a swimming pool to the rural area. However, we do have $1m down. It is revoted money because it was in last year’s budget for infrastructure. There is $11.5m for a new rural swimming pool. It is not clear exactly, because in the budget it talks about the following years, although I understand it will start in 2013-14. It would be good to have clarification.
There is also some money for Taminmin College, $2.7m, which is revoted money. And that is it.
Where have we missed out? We were hoping the extension to the bicycle path would reach Coolalinga this year. There has been no industrial land opened up in the rural area at Humpty Doo and we have people screaming for industrial land in Humpty Doo. There is a $64.9m referral in the budget to developing industrial land, but my understanding is that is not necessarily for the rural area. We have no retirement village in the rural area, which is very disappointing. Parts of the rural area are quite old now. People moved there in the 1960s and 70s and want to stay there and retire. However, the government has not made any land available or put up any options for private development of retirement villages in the area. I am disappointed that has not happened. I will be pushing again, in next year’s budget, that land is set aside and developed for retirement villages, and that we get industrial land as well.
Talking in general about the budget, it is good to see money being set aside for barge landings and airstrip upgrades. However, how come we are spending money on airstrips and barge landings if we do not know who owns them? If their five-year leases are running out, who is going to own those barge landings? That has not been sorted out. If we are putting public money into a barge landing that will not be owned by the government, I just simply ask the question: what is going on?
There is $1.5m for the Central Arnhem Road. It is still not a public road, so how is it we are spending public money on a private road? Sure, people use it to get to Gove. I do not have a problem with that, I have been on the road myself. It requires a permit for most of that road, therefore, it is not a public road. Why has that not been sorted out? Then, you can legitimately spend that money on a public road. If people want private roads, then they spend money from their own budgets.
It is good to see there is money for the Marine Supply Base. It will certainly be a great facility. Funnily, it is put under Palmerston and Litchfield. I know it is technically in the Litchfield Shire, but you would have to be pushing uphill to tell people that the Marine Supply Base - it is actually not in Litchfield, I beg your pardon, it is in East Arm. So, I am not sure how it fitted under the Palmerston and Litchfield category in the budget.
It is good to see there will be some funding for special education upgrades of $9.45m. I went out to the Nemarluk School the other day. I know there has been criticism about the air-conditioning, but that notwithstanding, the school is a fantastic school.
There is money being spent on trade training centres at Ngukurr, Groote Eylandt and West Arnhem Land - quite a considerable amount of money: $3.5m, $5.2m and $2.8m. I am not against training and getting people into different trades. The question I am asking is: what jobs are they going to have at the end? Are we building people up for failure, or have we a plan that says we are putting all this money into training centres and we are training these people. Well, I have seen this before where you train 20 welders and there is only a job for one. What happens to the other 19 welders? What is the plan? Do we fly people out to places such as INPEX and the abattoirs? Do we give these people a goal in being educated, or do we just educate them and they become a statistic which looks good on paper but, in reality, has not achieved anything in the long run?
Government employee houses has revoted money of $31.127m. I am hoping that will go towards, as the CTC said, the inequity between Aboriginal government workers who are sometimes not entitled to employee housing.
For the Palmerston Hospital there is $10m. I believe it should be called the Palmerston and Rural, or Palmerston and District Hospital. The whole idea is this hospital is supposed to serve the area, and it should be given a broader name. I still think it is actually in the wrong spot. It should have been on the corner of Howard Springs Road and the Stuart Highway, which would have given access to all rural people. It is going to have a problem with car parking, the same as RDH has. I looked the other day, and unless we are going to have some multistorey car parking there - we are? Very good. I do not want a repeat of RDH where you nearly have to go to hospital after walking from the car park to the hospital to get treatment, it is that far.
There is some money for the rural arterial road network. I am not sure what that road money is for, but it is revoted money.
Youth justice - I am interested to see whether there is money for diversions there. I cannot see any.
Regarding climate change, it just says there is $7.79m for research into the benefits against the cost of a solar array. I would love to get into the questions of whether solar electricity is worth the effort. That is something we might ask of the Estimates Committee, and see whether the value of some of these green policies the government puts forward are real.
I believe the government does not have any other option but to go into deficit. I was talking to Daryl Manzie on Top FM this morning. He and I were reminiscing about the times when the CLP government went into deficit to fund what is the Crowne Plaza down the road here, and the hotels at Yulara. It also went into deficit to build this building and State Square. Why did they do it? To keep the economy going. They came under criticism for it; they went into a public private partnership with this building. The government is being criticised for going into a public private partnership with the prison. That is exactly what the CLP did with this building and Multiplex. I believe Mr Anderson had a say in this building. Other governments in other times did exactly what this government is being criticised for.
Whilst I do not believe we should be heading further into deficits, if possible, we are a growing, young economy and we have issues other places do not. We have one-fifth of the area of Australia with 220 000 people. That is about 1% of the total population - might be a little more. We have a small population, large area, remote communities - a difficult area to fund.
How many people in the rural or remote areas want their road fixed, at an enormous cost, to go to 50 people at an outstation? How many roads out there - I have travelled some of these roads - need upgrading? We do not get much money for roads from the Commonwealth, especially in local government.
If people understand local government funding they realise money comes in on a population basis, not on horizontal equalisation. If you want an example of what would happen if Mr Abbott decided to get his way and fund the Territory on population, look at the existing example of what happens with local government funding. Local government is the section of the Commonwealth funding pie that is not distributed on horizontal equalisation; it is distributed on population. That is why local government receives such a small amount of money in the Northern Territory. It is then distributed on horizontal equalisation. That is why some of the communities near Darwin and other centres do not get as much money as they would like, because that money goes out to the remote councils.
I hope Mr Abbott does not get his way. It would be an absolute disaster. If we had a deficit and then were told we only had half the GST, we would be in big trouble.
There is nothing necessarily bad by being in deficit, but the government needs a clear plan to pull itself out of that deficit. It needs a strategy it promotes. The opposition is saying our prisons are full. You either have more money put into building more prisons, or that could be going into further deficit. How do you balance the two? I am not sure.
The member for Macdonnell said there is nothing for this place, nothing for that place, nothing for that place, nothing for that place. The government could put something in that place, something in that place, something in that place, something in that place, and the deficit gets higher.
I asked the Minister for Correctional Services about the prison. I am disappointed the prison farm is not in Katherine. I am also realistic that would add further to the deficit. I am disappointed the bicycle path is not going down to Coolalinga, but I am also realistic that, sometimes, you have to say: ‘Hang on, for the benefit of the Territory we cannot afford that at this time’. There has to be some realism that not all promises will be kept at this stage. It would be nice if a minister said: ‘We have not taken that off the agenda; we have just moved it a bit further up the budget’.
That was the same with the Bellamack special school. I sat at a meeting recently where the government had spent more money on Nemarluk than probably was originally budgeted for. The original budget was not quite as much as …
Dr Burns: None of it came out of the 30, mate.
Mr WOOD: Okay. However, it is a tight budget, and not everything could be achieved. I would have liked the government to say: ‘Okay, we are in deficit. Let us find out where the inefficiencies are’. The classic one is the air-conditioning at Nemarluk. I asked before: where is the good planning? Are we wasting money by not doing things right the first time? If we waste money to replace the air-conditioning because it was too noisy, who is at fault for doing that? Was there a sound engineer to check whether this was the right equipment for that school …
Dr Burns: I will speak to it if I get an opportunity.
Mr WOOD: Okay, that is good. However, I am using it as an example; I am not picking on the school. Minister, I visited the school the other day. It is a wonderful facility. I went out there today and gave them a couple of books, by the way, minister. One of them is called The Woman who Changes Her Brain and the other one is The Brain That Changes Itself. These are really good books about the elasticity of the brain ...
Dr Burns: I need one of those.
Mr WOOD: Yes, I know. I gave them because I was so grateful for the work they are doing there, and the tour they gave me of that school. More people should go out there and see the good work they are doing and the happy faces on the kids who have a school with space.
What I am saying is get the planning right the first time. I asked before how much it costs to move one department from Palmerston to Casuarina, or Casuarina to Darwin. I hear stories: ‘We have moved to a new place, I need a new desk. We need some new petitions, we need new carpet’. The whole building has to be rewired because the computer is going to go here instead of there, because there have to be new points. The telephones have to go here. What is the cost of that? Was it necessary? Did they have to move in the first place?
I am saying if the government really believes it is a tight budget, then it needs to be saying they are going to tighten up and become more efficient. I do not like the 3% efficiency dividend. It has been happening since the ALP came into power. How many times can you cut a department? If you have a department such as the Sacred Sites Authority, which - I do not know - might have 10 people, they have a job to do. They look at applications for mining or subdivision. So, you cut them. Now, the mining company has to wait three or four months before the applications are approved instead of two months, because there is not enough staff. Then, you create inefficiencies and the public gets annoyed because they are not being served properly.
You might even get places where you have to cut the vehicles back. Instead of three vehicles, there are two vehicles. This means some people cannot go out and do their jobs. They have to wait until there another vehicle returns.
If you want to cut departments, then you need to ensure it is targeted at the right places that will not affect services to the community. I know many departments will go: ‘Ooh, we will hide our inefficiencies’. At the same time, I do not think just having a bland efficiency dividend requirement across the board is the right way to go. It is an easy way to go about cutting costs. Whether it is an efficient and a fair way to go, I do not believe that is the case.
Regarding consultancies, I remember when the first Chief Minister came in, the great promise by the ALP was they would cut the number of consultancies. Well, I have a question - and it is still on notice. I would love to see how much consultancies are costing. I see small jobs, sometimes. Take the bicycle path. It went from Palmerston to Howard Springs. It will be done by a consultant engineer. Why can we not do that in-house? Have we got rid of all our skilled engineers and designing people? Have we not been able to keep up with private industry by employing the skilled people we need? We do not employ the skilled people but, then, we go and spend all the money on consultancies. Sometimes, those consultancies would be down south. Why are we not using more in-house ability to do some of these - especially the smaller jobs? Maybe the Tiger Brennan Drive is a fairly complicated engineering program; you might need a fairly big company to design that. However, if we can do more in-house, then we need fewer consultancies.
I have asked how many airfares are used by every department, whether they are international, interstate, and intrastate, and whether they are business or economy. I know some of our higher echelons in the government departments have within their contracts that they are allowed to have business class airfares. We have problems attracting people here, so you are caught between the devil and the deep blue sea. You either attract people here with things such as business class airfares, a nice house, and high wage, or we do not get them at all.
I was asked recently if I think politicians should fly economy. I think they should. I do not think the minister and Chief Minister should; they have plenty of work to do on a plane. However, some of our public servants can occasionally fly economy if they flying interstate. We all have to pull our weight in making sure costs do not blow out, and we are showing that, although we are in deficit, we are going to do our best to ensure the deficit does not increase.
In things such as safety, how many cords in the entire public service does the government own and require to be tagged? If you have a television on the wall, why does it have to be tagged? I do not know what is going to happen to it - it is sitting there. I can imagine power tools and, maybe, extension cords need to be tested every now and then, but every school, and my building at Howard Springs has tags all over it. There are tags for the toaster, the battery charger, and the television. Someone is making a fortune. If it is about $1 or 50 - I do not know what it costs per tag - someone is making a great deal of money. I am not against safety requirements, but where does common sense come into it? Has someone evaluated how many people have died from faulty cords on televisions? Or did we just decide to make it mandatory across the board and we will live with the cost to government of a couple of million dollars to get tags?
Road safety is the same. Nowadays, you can hardly do work within a certain distance of the road and you have to use witches hats, a flashing arrow, and lollipop girls. I am only painting a bus stop, for Heaven’s sake! So, the bus stop contract is double the price; it is $10 for the paint and $10 for the safety. You only need a couple of reflective signs to show there are people working there.
I might have mentioned a case before, where a surveyor in Alice Springs had a contract worth $50 000 and he had to have safety people which cost him another $50 000. So, the contract is worth twice as much. One bloke probably has a laser up the road there, is doing it himself. Common sense! We made this bland rule that anything within 5 m of a road will need 300 witches hats, two lollipop girls, blinking arrows everywhere, 40 km/h signs, 60 km/h signs, 80 km/h signs,. Sometimes, they have gone home, which is worse, especially on the Stuart Highway. There is nothing worse than going down the track and everyone has gone home but there is still a 40 km/h sign standing.
I do not begrudge it on major roads, especially when people are working on the roads. There should be adequate safety signs, but there are times when it is a little over-the-top and I wonder how much it costs. How much has that added on the contracts? I tried to ask about it during last year’s budget but the time ran out before the answer came. I will try to ask it earlier this year.
I accept this government had to go into deficit; these are difficult times. The GST has not gone up as much as people expected, but the government should show it is going to tighten its belt as much as it is saying we should go into deficit to keep jobs and economy going. That is what they have not told people: ‘We are going into deficit. We did not want to go this far into deficit, so we are also going to do our best to save were we can’ - and that will be sensible savings. The opposition should be reminded that, in the history of the Northern Territory, governments have gone into deficit to keep the economy going. I remember Yulara, the Crown Plaza – I forget what it was called then …
Ms Purick: The Sheraton.
Mr WOOD: Oh, the Sheraton, that is right. I remember this building and State Square. They were built to keep the economy going and the government would have gone into debt. As I said before, this was a public private partnership.
I will say one other thing today. It is in reflection of what the Leader of the Opposition said about the prison. I understand the prison is a very costly facility. I am not the sort of person who can argue about public private partnerships. People with greater skills in economies can tell you whether they are better or worse than going into debt yourselves, if the economic experts in this area want to debate it.
What I am a little concerned about is I was not sure whether the opposition was saying they would stop the prison. I am pleading with the opposition, if they got into power, not to do that. I will explain the reason I am doing that. I spent much time in this parliament arguing the prison should stay where it is. I believe we need a new prison, and anyone with any humanity in them who goes to that prison and sees the maximum, minimum, and medium security prisons says it is a dump. It is an antiquated dump! It is not suitable for looking after prisoners in this day and age. It is out-of-date and inefficient. I would not want to see that kind of prison used again. We have overcrowded prisons - you have heard it from people today. We need a new prison and a new way of doing things.
I need to give a little history. I was involved in discussions about the siting of the new prison. As anyone knows, I argued strongly for it to be built on the existing site at the Berrimah Farm. I attended a number of meetings with engineers, architects, Correctional Services people, planners, and other people who said the prison could not be built on the existing site and not on the farm. I also visited nine prisons interstate to see how they were done elsewhere, and I have also visited two prisons in America.
A member interjecting.
Mr WOOD: That is right. These are the reasons why the prison could not be built. The existing site for the prison is too small, and there needs to be at least a 400 m buffer all the way around. Half the land is flooded or waterlogged during the Wet Season. I went past that prison during Cyclone Carlos and half of that land was a sheet of water. It comes down off Berrimah Farm and off Tivendale Road. The cost to fill the land would be just as expensive as building a prison.
The existing building would not come up to OH&S standards, and the place would have to be rewired and all other services newly installed. The existing facility is overcrowded and poorly designed, making it difficult to properly monitor without using many staff. It is an inefficient facility for monitoring. The increased cost of building a new prison while prisoners are still there would be very costly. You cannot just go in and start building, you have to either move prisoners out, or check that the contractors have no things on them they should not have, and ensure tools are all packed away. It is very expensive to build a prison on top of a prison.
The prison had the highest number of lightning strikes in the Darwin area. When they showed me the plans, there is a square in the middle of the prison. It has the highest number of lightning strikes in the middle of the prison. So, if you are going to build a prison based on IT security, cameras, computers, and all that sort of thing to make it efficient, you are not going to want to put it where the most lightning strikes in Darwin land - and they land right on Berrimah.
If the prison could be built on the existing site and used as part of the neighbouring Berrimah Farm, I thought that might be something we could do. The high voltage line coming from Channel Island to Knuckey Lagoon would split the prison in half, and Correctional Services said no way would they want the prison to be cut in half.
I looked at Berrimah Farm. It still contains contamination and is still used for laboratories. The land is flat near the highway, but then just drops off, which makes visibility difficult.
Could the land be used for something more valuable, such as residential or industrial land? When we are looking at the cost of the prison, the sale of this land can offset that. We are just looking at the cost. The prison will move - there is valuable land there to be sold - and the farm could be sold. There are assets that can offset some of the costs, and that has not been brought up in any of this discussion. I looked at every way possible to keep …
Mr CHANDLER: Madam Speaker, I move an extension of time for the member for Nelson, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Mr WOOD: I just lost my bet, Madam Speaker.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WOOD: Thank you, member for Brennan.
I have looked at every possible way to keep the prison in that area. I have walked over the land, visited the prison, and viewed maps. We put prison designs all over the land, and it was not going to work. It was not for want of trying but, in the end, I would have been a fool if, after being given all the advice from the experts, I threw their advice out the window and persisted with my original belief that the prison should stay where it is.
One thing that does disappoint me in this process is that governments never invite the opposition to meetings. I know everything is about political point scoring these days - do not tell the enemy what you are doing - but I wonder, if a member of the opposition had attended these meetings, would the CLP have a different view today? That is what disappoints me. I know I am in a special situation, and I get asked to attend meetings but, sometimes, if we were a bit more inclusive in some of the decision-making there may not be as much opposition to things. People do not know and come from a position of what they think; it may not be correct. The reason they do not know is they did not have a chance to get the information to make an intelligent decision about anything government does.
If the opposition believes there should not be a new prison - I am totally against that. We need a new prison. I have visited the prison several times. It is not a good place if we are going to turn people’s lives around. Prisons are about paying back to the community - for sure, there is a certain element of punishment. You see prisoners on the road cleaning up Tiger Brennan Drive. That is what they should be doing. However, we should also be trying to ensure they do not come back to prison, so there has to be some rehabilitation. The existing prison is not capable of doing that. It has some good areas there. It has the working area where they made the rails for the bicycle paths. They have been building some of the low security prison units that will eventually end up in the Katherine Prison Farm. There are some good things there; there is no doubt. However, there should be work for everyone. I hope, with the new prison, there will be work for everyone - no one should be sitting down.
I visited prisons in Victoria, New South Wales, Western Australia and Ohio, and our prison is well below par. People think American prisons are all about breaking rocks. The prisoners I met in Ohio do not do that. With good education facilities in the prisons, they are very smart prisoners. They work on, in some cases, therapeutic communities. They are pretty smart places. They put many people in prison; however, they try to do much work to ensure they do not come back.
I hope if the Country Liberals are the next government they will not take the popular view. It is easy to say: ‘Throw people in prison and chuck the keys away’. We do not need that approach today. We have to be intelligent enough to say that might sound good, but if people come back into prison time and time again you know it is not working ...
Mr Giles: It is not working now.
Mr WOOD: It will not work with the prison we have, that is for sure.
There are many other reasons people return to prison. This is not the fix; it is part of the fix. There should be more money put into early intervention. Do you find money in the budget for early intervention? I do not think so.
There needs to be more money put into when people come out of prison so they can get a job. People need to follow-up those people to ensure they are not getting into trouble anymore. They need to go back to a community where there is a job, they are not overcrowded, and have a place they are proud of. If it is nicer to come to town they will be back in town.
The funny thing is, several people write to me from prison. I visit a prisoner who is a non-Aboriginal person who comes from Darwin. He has come from Darwin society and has found going into prison has been extremely traumatic. He has found it extremely difficult to cope with going into prison. Yet, an Aboriginal person thinks it is all right. On one hand, you have someone coming from middle-class society who, all of a sudden, is hit by what prison is really like: concrete, steel, plain meals, not much to do, your liberty taken away. You might get an Aboriginal person from a poor place which is overcrowded, with people humbugging them. When they get to prison no one is humbugging them, they get three meals a day, a bed, and they think that is pretty good. So, you see the different effects prison has on people.
The way to even it up is to ensure anyone going into a prison has to work - that is part of their punishment. If they do not work they do not get things such as television, pool tables and those things.
It is mentioned in the budget, so I am not 100% sure whether there was reference by the Leader of the Opposition to stop building the prison. The Country Liberals may have an issue about the cost of the prison. Maybe they can work out another arrangement; I am not the expert on that. However, we need that new prison. If it can have a good vegetable garden and an industrial kitchen, some of those people who have cognitive problems can be held there - which is a problem at the moment. If we can train people and get them back out into society and become productive human beings, then we should continue down this path. It is a very difficult area; a very expensive area. It is not just about a prison, it is about all those areas around the prison.
As I said, I do not see large amounts of money going into early intervention. That is fault in this budget. We need to stop people going to prison and, then, we will not have the 1000 people in prison. I actually do not like the new prison; that is why I pushed for the prison farm and the work camps. However, the reality is in a graph, it will show that, by human nature, we are going to fill that prison. Yet, I believe we should be spending more of our money to ensure people do not go to prison – in early intervention.
Madam Speaker, I have mixed feelings about this budget. I sometimes call it the good, the bad, and the ugly - and there is certainly a bit of that. That is all I want to say.
Mr CHANDLER (Brennan): Madam Speaker, I am not going to start tonight by ranting and raving as one could do, looking through some of these budget papers. Seriously, I do not think the budget reply speech is the time to do that. The time to do that is, perhaps, when you get the chance to digest and dissect the information through the Estimates Committee. That is, in reality, where you get to understand far more about the budget, the state of the economy, and what our government is up to.
I am going to start by something a little different tonight. I am going to congratulate the government for putting together a budget and the papers, just as they do, as any other government would do in the position they are in. What I find, looking through the budget, is there is nothing but advertising. There are probably three or four of these books we could just toss aside, because they are just advertising how the money is going to be spent in different areas. However, it does not really tell you how the money is going to be spent. It is full of headlines, particularly the highlights paper. It is like reading a number of media releases.
The Estimates Committee, for me, is where you get the chance to really dissect the budget and get a better picture and understanding of what government is doing today, and how it is actually spending the money. In essence, congratulations, because this is what any government would do in your situation.
It is also a little difficult to respond, particularly as the shadow minister for Education, when you have to take so much in. I listen to what other ministers were saying, and I have listened to different ministers respond. I know if he gets the chance tonight, the Education minister will respond. However, I am responding before the Education minister has spoken. It would have been nice to have him respond first so I could hear what he has had to say. Again, it is a difficult situation.
I will pick up on a point the member for Nelson raised earlier about opening up a government to the point where they are sharing information with the opposition. As the member for Nelson said, this is all about politics; it is all about them and us and so forth. I actually agree with him on this point; that if more information was shared with the opposition, perhaps we would come up with better ideas, better policies and even, in some cases, support the government because it turns out it is a very good idea. I can recall, late last year or early this year, being able to take up the opportunity provided by the Education minister to travel around to a few of our schools in more remote locations.
I had, essentially, put together a remote education policy prior to going out on some of those trips. I can tell you – and I think I have said it here before - when I got back I tore that policy apart, threw it in the bin. It was through the experience that was offered to me by the government that, essentially, enabled me to put together what I believe is a far better remote education policy than I had before. Who is going to benefit from that? Well, if the Country Liberals take government, the people of the Northern Territory will benefit from that better policy. Had we taken government with, perhaps, our old policy, maybe we would not be in a better position. Maybe education in the bush would not improve. However, I guarantee you the policy we have today is in a far better position than it was prior to going on that tour, and I thank the minister for Education. Whether it is the Labor government that is in office after 25 August or the Country Liberals, the fact that our policy is a better policy today because of the exposure to what I saw firsthand at the coalface in the bush, means Territorians will be better off. Education in the bush will be improved and the standards will rise. Through sharing that information there will be better outcomes for Territorians, whether we have a Labor or a Country Liberal government.
I am all for what the member for Nelson said: there should be more information sharing between government and the opposition. I know we can request briefings and, sometimes, you receive briefings. However, I often come out of them with less information and more confused than when I went in. If they were to provide those briefings - particularly with industry, if it was the case of a prison where you have experts in town talking about the prison - and the opposition was afforded the opportunity to be involved then, perhaps, you would see more support from opposition. Whoever the opposition is in the future, you would see more support, and better policies would come out of it. The member for Nelson is on to something there.
I will cover a few areas. I will cover some local issues, a little under Parks and Wildlife and, of course, Education. What worries me about this budget more than anything is we know, before too long, we will be spending more than $1m a day to pay back the interest on the debt this government has put us in. Can you imagine if there was no debt, and we had ministers with $1m in their pocket every single day? We could go to a different school every day and say: ‘Here is $1m’. We could go to another school, go to another organisation, go to some NGOs, with money you have because you are not spending it to cover off on debt. That is a sad thing because debt is something that, structured in the right way, would be like buying a house.
It is true to say it is far wiser to buy a house than it is to buy a car, for instance. I bought a few cars in my life, and I have seen them depreciate over the years. The opposite happens with housing. If government spends money on infrastructure, there are reasons to go into debt. However, if government is going into debt to cover recurrent costs, we have real issues.
In the areas of Brennan, and Palmerston in particular, most people I have spoken to in recent days are really suffering with the cost of living. There are many things people speak about, but I will talk first about the boat ramp. This government promised the boat ramp in Palmerston and, after quite a few years, most of the boat ramp was delivered. We are still waiting on the caretaker quarters there. It is taking a long time for the government to sort that out, to go to tender, to have it completed so people can lock their cars and have proper facilities there so people can come back and find their vehicles are in one piece and not damaged.
The other thing people speak to me about all the time - and I have written to minister McCarthy about it a few times - is the Roystonea Avenue/Temple Terrace intersection. That intersection desperately needs to be upgraded when the new extension, which has been completed since about December last year, finally opens up to Lambrick Avenue. The top intersection of Roystonea Avenue/Temple Terrace is already struggling, particularly in the morning when all the Army chaps are heading out to Robertson. There is absolute gridlock. That is the place you people want to build this new hospital and it is only going to become worse. That intersection desperately needs to be upgraded.
The cost of living would have to be the highest area of concern people speak to me about. It comes down to what it costs people to buy land here in the Territory. This is not just exclusive to Darwin and the Palmerston area, we know it is the same in Alice Springs and across the Northern Territory. It comes down to the lack of land release in the last few years and not keeping up with demand which, obviously, in a market driven economy, causes the prices to go up.
I have heard the Treasurer say, time and time again in here, that the government has no say in what the cost of land is; it is purely market driven. I looked closely at the Johnston development - and I will read off here. The cost of the initial land the government owns - it is Crown land which has not cost them anything, to which they then apply a cost. I know they are trying to do the best thing by the taxpayers by raising some money but, essentially, everything they do from that point on is going to add to the cost of land. For the developers who tender for the land, there is a cost. The land is then developed at cost. Then, in the case of Johnston, I believe there was about a 17% dividend paid by all new owners of the land. Then, there is the profit the developers have to put on, which is fair enough. Then, of course, there is stamp duty on top of that, particularly for investors and people who are not entering the market for the first time.
So, one, two, three, four, five steps in that process, of which three of those steps the government has an involvement in. One is the cost of land; two is the 17% dividend; and the third is the stamp duty. So there are three steps in that five-step program where the government absolutely does influence the cost of land.
I have spoken to quite a few people about ways we could, perhaps, reduce it. I have spoken to previous ministers of this House of both persuasions, and have talked about ways you could actually reduce the overall cost at the end of the day. One ex-minister of this House said one way was you could basically go out to tender, the same as you do now to developers, but provide the land up-front at no cost to the developer on the basis they provide infrastructure for the Territory. It might be a new school. I believe the original suburb of Durack had a similar program where not the total cost, but much of the cost of the Durack Primary School was borne by the developer.
If you were to give a block of land – be it 10 km by 10 km - and told the developer it was going to cost $100m for the land which they then develop, and then have to divide it to make the most out of it they possibly can, at the end of the day, it is the people buying the land who are going to pay that huge amount.
Turn that around, and provide the land at either no cost or at a reduced cost on the basis that the developer then provides infrastructure which would have to be paid for by the government at some stage - whether it is a school, roads, parks and gardens, a golf course, or even lakes. Have the developer provide that essential infrastructure, which makes for a better community. However, at the end of the day, they have not paid huge amounts of money for the land in the first place. Who is going to benefit in the end? It will be the people buying the land, the people investing in the Northern Territory, because they are not forced to pay as much as they once did, or do today. So, there are better ways to do it.
I will move on to Parks and Wildlife. I really worry about our Parks and Wildlife not providing the experience they once did. I have heard a few times that there are no new rides in our parks. Theme parks, even on the Gold Coast, reinvest every single year in new rides, because they understand the market they are catering for is, of course, limited. You might say people travel from all over the country to go to the theme parks on the Gold Coast – they do. Essentially, it is this same market they are drawing on each and every year. So, unless they invest in new rides, they are not going to get people back into those parks. Because they do, they have people coming back time and time again.
That is what we want with our beautiful parks in the Northern Territory. I do not think we, as a government, over the years have invested anywhere near enough in reinventing some of these parks and providing new rides, basically, to attract those people back.
I heard the member for Macdonnell, Alison Anderson, say we put all our focus into just one side of our culture; that is, Indigenous culture. If you go to parks like Nitmiluk, you will read signs - in all our parks across the Northern Territory - which focus on one thing: Indigenous culture, and talk about the Dreaming. It is so important, and we should still focus on that. However, at the same time, what about the geology? What about the science behind the ground we are walking on? What about having signs on not only the Indigenous Dreaming and how that is so important to them but, at the same time, the science of how the waterways were created over the years, the Wet Seasons, the waterfalls, the rock formations, and what minerals are found in the ground here. We could capture a whole new market of people wanting to come to our parks …
A member: The bird life.
Mr CHANDLER: The bird life, and flora and fauna. I was astounded at how many people travel around the world to study birds - amazing! It blew me away. I thought everyone was just interested in dogs but, apparently, there are people interested in so much of our diverse wildlife, our birds! To be able to attract those people - we have some of the very best people in the Northern Territory. In fact, in my own electorate, I have a lady who would be one of the foremost people with knowledge of birds in the world, who travels the world. To have that at our doorstep - that opportunity, that corporate knowledge - and not take every advantage of it is just damn right silly.
If we could tap into that market where people from all over the world could come to the Northern Territory to see our beautiful wildlife, our beautiful birds, and to have interactive tours with those people - not 10 minute start-up jobs I have seen in the past. I hate it when a tourist comes all the way to the Northern Territory and they talk afterwards of being so disappointed because it was a $10 tour with a $10 tourist guide. We need to focus on lifting those experiences and providing the very best.
I can remember years ago going on a cruise on the West Alligator - might have been the East Alligator - where there was an Indigenous chap who was the funniest man I have ever come across. He had the billy spinning in his arms and so forth. However, the experience they provided for the people - and that boat was full of people from all around the country; in fact, there were Italians and people from around the world - was first class – absolutely first class. We have many first-class tour operators today. However, we need people to leave the Territory having such an experience they do not talk to one person, they talk to many people, and those people want to come to the Territory. Sometimes, it is not all about advertising on the big screen - and I use movies as an example.
I am more focused to see a movie someone has told me about than because I have seen the ad in the paper or on TV. If someone said to me, ‘Oh, you have to see this movie’, you can hear the enthusiasm in their voice. That is what we have to tap into and ensure when people leave the Northern Territory, they take the enthusiasm with them and it drags other people here.
Yet, we see declining numbers in people visiting our two iconic parks - the Territory Wildlife Park and the Alice Springs Desert Park – year after year. We have had a GFC and this has put pressure on states across Australia in bringing tourists into Australia and getting tourists from within Australia. However, we have seen it year after year, but we have not seen a government coming up with a strategy which can meet the challenge. That is what is missing.
I see, in 2008-09, the Territory Wildlife Park had 77 000 visitors and Alice Springs Desert Park had 91 000 visitors. The following year it dropped down at the Territory Wildlife Park to 72 500, in 2010-11 65 000, in 2011-12, 54 000, and is estimated this year at 55 000. Alice Springs Desert Park, in 2008-09 had 91 000 visitors; 2009-10, 74 500; year 2010-11, 67 500; 2011–12, down to 53 000 people; and the 2012–13 estimate is only 53 000 people again. You are not even expecting there is going to be a huge increase. I want to know what the strategies are to get it back to where there are 100 000 or more going through these parks. If you took the numbers of children coming just from our schools, out of those numbers, you would find it horrific.
It is fantastic - do not get me wrong - the children should have access to our parks and so forth. However, if you want to really create a sad picture, take away those people who are not paying to get in, such as our schoolchildren, and start to have a look at how much money is actually made from a full-paying adult, for instance - a visitor to the Northern Territory. It is quite sickening. It is really sickening, yet, the impost to run these parks is getting bigger and bigger every year, and the numbers are falling. I do not see a strategy from this government - certainly no investment in the budget papers - in how we are reinvigorating our parks and getting them back to where we are attracting more than 100 000 visitors through each of our iconic parks.
I was disappointed in various comments from the government that the Leader of the Opposition’s budget reply did not cover off on any plan, any vision. Yet, I have read through it, and re-read it, and I can see page after page of where our vision is of what we would do to change things. It is quite wrong to say there is not a vision from this side. The policies we are developing at the moment have developed, have been completed. Many of them have already been released and more will come in the next few weeks. This budget reply is full of areas we will focus on, because we have listened to the community.
That is something I do not think is really evident within the 2012–13 Budget Papers from the Northern Territory government. One telling story, though, of course, is the shortfall for this financial year of $491m. That is what Labor has spent over and above what they have received. It is true we are to the stage where the taxes we pay - the income the government earns locally - is being completely monopolised just to service the debt. If it was not for the GST revenue coming into the Territory, we would be insolvent - the Territory would be insolvent. There are probably bigger companies around the world employing more people which have gone broke because of bad management because they have become insolvent. It has to be acknowledged that $491m is $100m more than this government said this time last year. You wonder why we question what has happened in the last 12 months!
Of course, one of the biggest concerns is the off-budget funding: the Darwin Waterfront Corporation, the Northern Territory Major Events Company, Indigenous Essential Services, the Power and Water Corporation, and the Territory Insurance Office. The fact is we have heard the shadow Treasurer talk about how this government is parking major debt into these organisations which, basically, makes these budget papers - the budget papers I have in my hands - sound that bit better. If you were to pile all that debt into here as well, it would be a very sad turn of events. It is sad, because it is my children and, perhaps, my children’s children, who are going to be paying off this debt into the future. Sadly, that is wrong - absolutely wrong. It has been said time and time again here we have to learn to live within our means.
From a personal experience, I know what it was like, many years ago, getting into debt myself - struggling with a mortgage, having a child with a disability, where my wife had to give up work to care for him. We did go into debt - serious debt - and are still working hard to pay much of that debt off. And this is years later. Every single time I make that payment on the credit card, for instance, I get angry because I think: ‘If I had not spent it’. People say you make mistakes in life. You know what? I made thousands of mistakes, because every time you put something on a credit card, you know it has to be paid back. Every one of those cards has been paid back. It is hard - it is damn hard - because you are struggling to meet some other arrangement, to put food on the table in a household, for instance, and every time you have made a huge payment on a credit card because of previous spending, it hurts because you go without so much into the future because of many decisions you made over the years. That is why so many people fall into credit card traps today. Now, we have a government falling into the same trap.
A Country Liberals government will not ignore the real costs of living pressures facing Territory families. You cannot ignore the stress young families are going through today. The speech from the Leader of the Opposition touched on some of the things we have to prioritise as a government. Come 25 August, if the Country Liberals take government, we will start to implement the policies. It will not be an easy road. In all the discussions we have been having as a shadow Cabinet, it nearly brings you to tears when you have all this vision and all you want to do for the Northern Territory, and you have that bugger of a shadow Treasurer sitting in the corner saying: ‘We cannot afford that’.
Why can we not afford it? Because of bad financial management, because we overspent in times when this government was reaping the benefits of GST windfalls. It was like winning lotto every year, year after year, and that was spent, and we have gone further and further into debt. Had it been saved for a rainy day, or put into the debt that already existed, perhaps we would not be in this situation today.
We talk about this government and the federal government; how the Labor side will try to tell you how well the GFC was managed in Australia because of all the money they spent to keep the economy turning over. That may be true, but do you know what? You come off a base where the Prime Minister at the time, Kevin Rudd, took over a country in perhaps the best financial position it has been in possibly ever. Yet, time and again, we see conservative governments taking over from Labor governments and they are never left with a great financial position. Usually, there is major debt. Because of that situation, you find conservative governments are often left hung out to dry by the electorates because they know they have to do what is financially sensible, which is to bring the budget back into a managed budget. Deficits are fantastic, but if you bring it back to where you had a zero at the end of the financial year, where you have expended what you have spent, you are far better off than if you have gone into debt.
You can do Google searches and look at graphs where Labor governments have spent and have gone into debt, conservative governments have been elected and, because the budgets have gone out of control, they have had to bring it back in. Then, they get back on their feet, the country or the state is turning around and, then, a Labor administration comes back in. The strange thing, though, is there are 25 members within this House in the Northern Territory. If we each had to write 10 things we wanted to see for the Northern Territory on a piece of paper, I guarantee you at least eight of those things would be the same. I do not think there are many different views in this House about what is good for the Northern Territory, what we would like to see happen in the Northern Territory, how the Northern Territory will prosper, and how we could do it.
It so happens the Labor way and the conservative way of going about things are completely different. The outcomes are probably similar with what you want to achieve. However, it is the method you use to reach them I struggle to understand - how Labor governments get it wrong so often and conservative governments have to bring the books back in order, which history proves. It is an extremely tough gig.
Madam Speaker, I have two speeches here that I would like to go through rebutting some of the things said by a couple of ministers in here, but we do not have much time. I will go straight to the budget papers. I go to Education. The reason I want to go here for the moment is the reason I get frustrated with these books we have placed in front of us is because, in three different areas - and the same thing happened last year and I think the year before - where you are trying to go through and find out figures, in different budget books you will see different figures for what, essentially, looks like the same thing. I could be wrong; I hope I am wrong.
Take the Palmerston Senior College Special Education Upgrade Stage 2. In three separate places within these books - in this, it is page 103 of Budget Paper No 3, it has $0.8m, so $800 000; in one of the other budget papers, it talks about $2m; and in another budget paper it talks about $750 000. I would really like to know from the minister what is going to be spent on the Palmerston Senior College Special Education Upgrade Stage 2. Is it $750 000; is it $800 000; or is it $2m?
It could be there are different programs in there. We may be able to get to the bottom of it at Estimates. However, I have run out of time and we are nowhere near it, thank you, Madam Speaker.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Speaker, I was expecting another colleague to speak before me, but that is okay; I will be very brief.
In regard to the budget, there is much comment about the provision of funding for the exploration programs within the Geoscience Division of the Resources Department, and that is welcome news. It is a very important initiative and it should be continued out of this budget cycle, and well into the future.
It was under a Country Liberal government that the exploration program was first established. We have to remain minerals competitive, not only against the other states of Australia, but also with the minerals competitive countries overseas such as Canada and the countries in South America. So, that is welcome news.
It is also welcome news that there is still funding and support being given to the various research institutions in primary industry and horticulture which, again, is important. We must undertake ongoing research in regard to existing crops and pastures where we have issues; for example, with Panama disease in the banana industry. We have to get on top of that, or stay ahead of it as best we can. Work is under way to try to find banana species which are Panama disease-resistant. Hopefully, one day very soon, the scientists will work it out, because bananas and mangoes are the two main crops that are our future for the primary industries. With every Australian man, woman and child, consuming 15 kg of bananas per year - and that is just fresh fruit - that is definitely where the future of the horticulture/agriculture industry is in the Northern Territory, along with the mango industry in the Top End, and other vegetables and melons in Central Australia. So, it is important we continue to research programs and to support that industry.
Perhaps there should have been something in there about new crops and new pastures we could have been researching to further expand the industry. There was no reference anywhere in the budget papers I could find in regard to any new agricultural precincts being investigated in the Top End or elsewhere. Sometime in the very near future we are going to have to look at where we are going to expand our industry; where the next Lambells Lagoon, Acacia Hills, or Centrefarm is, for example, because we have an abundance of good land and water in various areas of the Northern Territory. It was disappointing I did not see anything in the budget papers or in the explanatory notes where government was considering looking at new agricultural precincts.
There was not much comment in regard to the commercial seafood industry, which I thought was a little disappointing. Perhaps of all the resource industries in the Territory, they need the attention of the minister more than they are getting at the moment. They have challenges with the Commonwealth government trying to come in over the top and put marine parks all around our waterways with very little consultation. Just because the general population does not see the commercial seafood industry because they are not close to our coastlines does not mean it is not out there. When people go to a restaurant - from the research I have been told the industry does - they generally want fresh seafood caught in the Northern Territory. The good scheme we have is the Buy Local scheme - identification of fish products which have been harvested or caught in the Northern Territory. That scheme should be commended, if not expanded in some shape or form.
One question I have is in regard to the minerals area and the $1.95m that has been allocated under community - or something of that nature - to ensure active mining operations operate in a manner which supports sustainable development of the environment. I am unsure what that is about, or how far $1.95m goes. I am interested to hear from the minister exactly what that is all about, given it was not in an area associated with the resources, the mining, and the areas outside.
There was no comment at all in regard to the extractive industries and any support the government may be providing towards that industry, other than upgrading parts of the Arnhem Highway. Of course, the extractive industry is the main user of that highway, and will be more so a user as material is sourced from the Mt Bundy quarries.
It is interesting that much money has been spent on the intersection of the Howard Springs Road where there is going to be much traffic from the new gaol, the workers camp, and the schools in that area, but not much money has been allocated to some other main roads in the rural area that will be used quite extensively to service and provide materials for the proposed gas plant.
I heard the member for Nelson’s comments in regard to money allocated for two main roads, the Arnhem Highway and the Howard Springs intersection, but there was little mention of monies, programs or specific projects for the greater rural area, as I call it. Yes, there has been money allocated to Taminmin College. However, I did not see anything specifically referencing a positive learning centre for the rural area. There is more money going to the Palmerston High School in regard to its positive learning centre, and rural students use that centre. Sadly, we have the centres and they are needed. I have written to the minister requesting government give serious consideration to establishing a positive learning centre in the rural area for the need, sadly, that is growing in that area. It is disappointing it was not referenced here.
Also, as government and community, there is a great need to start working on developing a separate library from the Taminmin College library. It is a shared facility with the community. It is a large school and it is about time the government took the initiative and started to work with the Litchfield Council, the community, and other stakeholders in regard to separating the facilities. They are short staffed. They provide great services given the facilities they have at the moment and the staff they are allocated. However, we need to start seriously thinking about how we can service the rural area better when it comes to educational institutions and activities.
There really was not any other reference to activities which involve the greater rural area. That is disappointing. The main ones are, of course, roads and educational facilities. Several of the schools out there are old. Humpty Doo Primary School is an old school and has been in operation for 30 years. Perhaps they did not specifically ask for anything in particular, but they need some assistance, like anything that gets a little old needs a bit more maintenance and assistance than when it was a bit younger. I will be writing to the minister asking him to visit Humpty Doo Primary School so he can see firsthand how they need a little more attention than they are getting at the moment.
The school does a fabulous job. The council is good, the teachers, the staff, the families are all very supportive and work hard; however, it needs a little more attention from government given it services a large part of the rural area. It has about 25 different ethnic groups. It has a large Vietnamese population, a large Asian population as they are from the Lambells Lagoon area - the farming area. That school, in particular, does need a little more attention than it has been getting in the past.
Generally, I will leave comments in regard to other parts of the budget to my colleagues. I would have liked to see a little more attention to the greater rural area. I have always maintained the most pressure, the most challenges, will be in the greater rural area. It provides the water supply for Darwin; the extractive materials for Darwin, Palmerston and the rural areas. It is the fruit bowl of Darwin, and people continually want to come and live in the rural area. It is under much pressure, and I would like to have seen a little more attention from government across the ministerial portfolios in regard to these very salient facts.
I will leave it at that, Madam Speaker. I will be taking up various issues contained in the budget with the various ministers on behalf of my constituents, in regard to my shadow portfolio areas. However, it is a bit disappointing in how they have gone about it and how they have put in priority lists where a large percentage of the population are living; that is, in the greater rural area of Darwin.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, the member for Goyder, for her very speedy response. I know we are pushed for time, and I will follow the same approach.
I start by congratulating the Country Liberals team for providing a very coordinated effort in supporting the Leader of the Opposition, Terry Mills, in his fantastic budget response. He really pulled the budget apart and uncovered the deficit, debt, deceit, and hidden agendas that are littered throughout the current budget which has just been tabled. Many of my colleagues have spoken in the Chamber about the high levels of debt the government has placed the Northern Territory in. Terry Mills gave a fantastic overview in providing the 27 questions the government must answer within two weeks, about where the money is being hidden.
Two speakers ago, the member for Brennan, Peter Chandler, gave a good synopsis about the issues surrounding the debt, and the member for Fong Lim, who I heard speak, also raised the issue that, in a few years time based on the figures, our own source revenue will be outstripped by interest repayments at $1m a day. Any normal company in those circumstances would be trading insolvent. There are serious questions in those 27 questions the Leader of the Opposition has tabled, that the government must answer.
We know the government is in serious trouble. All you have to do is look through the infrastructure budget and see what is actually listed. Look through Budget Paper No 3 at the expenditure which has been occurring through programs. I sat down with Terry Mills, the Leader of the Opposition, at the start of the week when the budget was tabled. As soon as it was presented, I asked where their money has gone. Where is their money gone? It has all gone on borrowings and interest. It is a government that is now riddled with debt - absolutely riddled with debt. It put every Territorians in a perilous position where they have to have a government that lives way beyond its means - much worse than any other Territory household.
It is very interesting when you go through, in my portfolio responsibility of shadow minister for Infrastructure, and look at the capital works and estimated capital expenditure for 2012-13 as detailed on page 11 of Budget Paper No 4. Once again, this is a government that is all smoke and mirrors, talking up its capital expenditure when, in fact, it is actually not doing that. I have raised the issue on several occasions over the last few budgets, about how the government commits to some enormous figure but, in fact, it actually does not do it.
This year, we see on page 11 the government is saying it has an infrastructure budget of $1.0384bn but, in fact, if you look at the numbers more carefully, they have a revote of $454.7m. That is money not spent in the current financial year they are actually rolling over. Then, look at how much they are planning on rolling over next year, and it is $431.2m. They are actually bringing in 43% of the budget they are planning on spending and they are talking about from last year, then they want to rollover another 41.5% into next year. In actual fact, it is only $152.5m new money that they are actually spending in infrastructure. $152.5m is what they are really putting into this budget because so much is carried over from last year - $454.7m - and they are actually going to carry over another $431.2m into next year. It is not about what they have to say; it is about what they do.
In Question Time today, the member for Katherine raised some very important questions after we had already exposed election promises that were not going to be delivered, and lies and cover-ups within this budget and previous budgets. He raised a question about the Katherine bypass which had a substantial amount of money offered towards it in the 2007 federal election campaign. I have in front of me Budget Paper No 4 for 2009-10. In that budget it said:
- National Network - New Works
Stuart Highway - heavy vehicle diversion around Katherine CBD $10m
That $10m is included in one of the record infrastructure spends they like to talk up as part of the infrastructure budget every single year. Was that done in that financial year? No.
Go to the 2010-11 financial year and look for exactly the same thing. In Budget Paper No 4, page 40, it said for Katherine minor new revoted works, which is carry over again just to fill the numbers of the budget to make it look like they have plenty of money in infrastructure:
- Stuart Highway - heavy vehicle diversion around Katherine CBD $9.990m.
They must have spent $10 000 somewhere but they did not do the work then.
In last year’s budget, 2011-12, on page 37:
- National Network - Revoted Works
Katherine
Stuart Highway - heavy vehicle diversion around Katherine CBD $9.973m
So, now they have spent $270 000 on the Katherine proposed heavy vehicle diversion.
We know the work has not been done, but they are including this money in their infrastructure budget. It raises the question: did they ever receive the money and, if they did not receive it, why did they include it in their budget? If they did receive the money, where did it go, or did you have to give it back to the Commonwealth? They are very important questions because you can make any announcement and put any money to it and include it in your capital works budget but, when you continue to roll it over or you never do it, it has never had any meaning in your infrastructure budget, so it is all smoke and mirrors.
I go back to the point that they are only proposing to spend $152.5m of new money in this infrastructure budget because $454.7m comes over from last year. However, enough on the infrastructure side of things and the debt and deficit.
It would be remiss of me not to talk about the situation in Alice Springs and the comment made by the Chief Minister in response to Question No 1 during Question Time today. He knew Alice Springs was coming up as a topic. He already had an MPI on his table which was later withdrawn. He had to be prepared for the onslaught and vitriol that would have come from our side about their reluctance to do anything. He said, ‘I am going to take a zero tolerance approach’ like it was something new.
He has always had zero tolerance for Alice Springs. He has always been intolerant of Alice Springs. He has no tolerance level. If he did have some tolerance, he would have put some commitment in the budget two days before. This did not happen overnight; this has been brewing for years because of their inaction.
He comes in here, zero tolerance, Hendo is toughening up. What a load of rubbish! Too little, too late. ‘I put the Police Commissioner in charge’. What a load of rubbish! Was the Police Commissioner not in charge last week? Was he not in charge yesterday or the day before? Every time I ask for the police van to go to the Northside shops - please Police Commissioner, please, please, please. However, we are coming into an election now; it has been turning up. It has only been three-and-three-quarter years while we have been waiting for something to be done. However, it is starting to come up now it is election time. Now, the Chief Minister is taking a zero tolerance approach. He is putting the Police Commissioner in charge. What about the Housing Department? Get Territory Housing off their backsides and get them doing something.
Start showing leadership! I called for leadership last week from the Minister for Central Australia, the member for Lingiari, and the town council. They are the three decision-makers. Start doing something! What did we see two nights ago? Two women raped by three men, allegedly with a rifle involved. Absolutely deplorable! That fellow last night who was also assaulted - this is a regular occurrence.
Figures were released about the assaults today. Those assaults are appalling. There is a 33% increase on the quarter from when the Banned Drinker Register was first introduced - a 33% increase in a three-month period on the quarter from when the BDR was first introduced. You are trying to say it is working. The BDR is a load of rubbish. That is why the Country Liberals are going to scrap it. If it was working, we would tolerate it, put up with it, mea culpa, and admit that it is not working. Every Territorian is inconvenienced. There have been nearly four million transactions with people having to show their ID, and nothing is getting any better.
The crime in Alice Springs is worse than Darwin. A population of 28 000 versus the population of Darwin, of which I have an estimation of around 110 000. How can the crime be so bad down there, and the Chief Minister walked in here today and said: ‘I am toughening it up’. Zero tolerance! He has a zero tolerance for Alice Springs, otherwise he would have put investment into the community, built infrastructure in this budget, supported our economy, and backed tourism. Instead, through his complacency and his lack of action and attitude, we have now seen our tourism industry suffer yet again.
We will get that incompetent Minister for Central Australia - the bloke who should be run out of our town - saying we are talking the town down. It is not talking the town down when two women are raped, with an allegation of a gun - that is not talking the town down. If I do not stand up here and advocate for the people of Alice Springs, I am doing something wrong. I am talking leadership; that is what it is about. The Chief Minister is not a leader in this debate, or in Central Australia. Do not walk in here at 11.50 pm and tell us you are going to toughen up. Do not walk in here and tell us you are going to try to toughen up. Now, the Police Commissioner is going to have all charge.
What is Territory Housing doing? What is it doing to evict bad tenants? What have you done, minister, to fix the Housing Act; to make rules that say tenants cannot have visitors for six weeks, 12 weeks, three months, or six months? Wauchope Street flats are a disgrace. They are getting calls all afternoon about Wauchope Street flats. A bus pulled up there with 20 people in it yesterday, who caused trouble in the flats, went and camped next door illegally - no rangers to move them on, no response from police. I am not sure they received a call, but there was no response from police. They were drinking all night, fighting, and partying. I have had to try to fix that tonight while I have been sitting here, because you will not do anything. That used to be a pensioner complex. I will tell you what leadership is; it is about making decisions. If the Country Liberals come to power, those Wauchope Street flats will be for over 65s. No more mucking around, we will bring it back the way it used to be; Wauchope Street flats will be for over 65s only. Make some decisions.
I am sitting here tonight receiving e-mails from Elliott Street flats. I will read them out to you; I will not tell you who they are from. I got one at 5.57 pm, which went straight to one of the officers at Territory Housing who I will not name. It says:
- Unit 27 and 28 at the flats are drinking and have started to fight early in the evening today. They just never cease with their antisocial behaviour.
- The police are called as the fighting has escalated.
The Corrections system in Alice Springs - here we are spending $10m building a new gaol to teach people how to drive. You have a growth town policy, which has failed, where you said you were going to put MVRs in every growth town and start giving people licences. Think about some alternative ideas. The $10m could have gone into a whole lot of different work. It could have gone into infrastructure to support the economy. You could have spent $5m building a temporary training centre, taking everyone who has a licence or a minor drink-driving problem, and trained them in a centre for a week’s intensive training and put them back out into the community.
You could have fixed their cars, you could have involved CDU and CAT, and a whole lot of training providers, and fixed their cars so they are roadworthy. Give them licences, intensive training, and drum it into people's heads about drink-driving. Teach people what a standard drink is, because people do not know. Half the people are not literate, and do not understand numbers. They do not even understand what 60 km/h on their car is. They do not even understand the numbers on the speedo. They think E is ‘enough’ when it should be E for ‘empty’ on the fuel gauge.
Start teaching people. You could have done that for $5m, or whatever it cost, and put the rest of the money into supporting our tourism industry. You could have put the 20 extra police on the street the Country Liberals have committed to. You could have funded the Assistant Commissioner of Police we have committed to putting in Alice Springs to take charge. These are things you should have done.
This budget is a deplorable budget. I hear stories from the prison officers about what is going on at the gaol. ‘Why are you back here?’ ‘Well, I came back because I needed a new hearing aid’. ‘How did you get back?’ ‘I committed a crime so I have come back to gaol. Can you get me a new hearing aid and can I get my teeth fixed while I am here?’ That is not what gaol is about. We all want rehabilitation in gaol. The member for Barkly, the Corrections Minister said: ‘All you wanted to do was build a big hole’. We are sick and tired - that is frustration; do you understand it? Gaol is about punitive measures. Sure, rehabilitate people, but no one is being rehabilitated in that place; no one is participating. They sit around, play pool, eat out of a vending machine all day, get paid, and are allowed to smoke.
In how many government buildings in the country are you allowed to smoke? But you can smoke in gaol. What about the health risks on the prison officers? It is a punitive place, toughen up! The prison, public housing, police - get something happening, some action. It is not just about a Police Commissioner at 11.50 pm - that is not zero tolerance. It is about taking back control of our streets.
This is an emergency. I have people up hill and down dale asking me to call for the Army to come in. I am not going to be sensationalist or populist, but that is what people want. They want the Army to come in because you have failed. They want the Army on the streets, on every corner, ensuring not just tourists, but residents are safe.
Our economy is in the doldrums because you are not acting. It is not just about the financial investment, it is about the peace and safety people have when they walk down the street. The women are sleeping with handbags under their pillows in case they are stolen, and the blokes have baseball bats.
There have been some tragic events in Alice Springs over the years with deaths, murders, and interracial crimes - they have been tragic. I am as fearful as you could be that there will be a major riot in Alice Springs. It concerns me; it really worries me. It could never happen, we could go through like this forever and a day, or we could have that one match that slipped and started a bushfire. All it takes is that one match in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong fuel. That is all it takes.
Madam Speaker, I am sorry I get a little emotional about this; it really gets to me. At the Northside shops - the bottle shop - something needs to happen. I support free enterprise and private business. People should be allowed to come and go. I do not like restrictions, I do not like prohibition, but something needs to change. Everyone has had enough; I have had enough.
I put out a newsletter about four weeks ago asking people in my electorate what they thought about the bottle shop at Northside. Did people want it open, did they do not want it shut, or did they want something in between. I have had a stack of responses right across. The people who do not like alcohol are, naturally, going to ask for it to be shut. There are people who are so concerned they want it shut because they do not feel safe. There are people who are on the other spectrum saying: ‘How dare we sacrifice our principles as individuals who do the right thing for the people who do the bad thing? That is not right’. I agree with that; I do not agree with sacrificing and I support business. I fully support business. There are people in the middle asking: ‘What about this, what about that?’
I have come up with a proposal for my electorate: if the CLP gains government - even if we do not I will advocate for it - as soon as we can, we will work with licensing and shop owners and change the times that shop operates. Currently, on Monday to Friday, it opens at 2 pm and shuts at 9 pm. On Saturday, it opens at 10 am and shuts at 9 am, and Sunday it does not open at all. On Sunday there is not much trouble, and the police will tell you the same thing. It is during the week there is big trouble, particularly on Tuesday. On Saturday, there is nowhere near as much trouble as during the week when it operates from 10 am to 9 pm.
I am going to go back to the electorate, around Braitling - I will be doorknocking there all next week and the week after - all those places in the near vicinity and expounding it. I will be standing at the shops at Northside next week in the evenings waiting to talk to people who want to have a chat. I will propose a potential solution. It is not a definitive solution, it is a potential solution. That is, the bottle shop to open at 10 am and shut at 7 pm. It will be opening earlier, which I know the government will come out and play politics about opening up the rivers of grog, all those sort of things. However, I propose it opens at 10 am in the morning and shuts at 7 pm at night, two hours earlier, which allows people to purchase less alcohol at night in that area. It also allows two hours of shopping for people without being in that influx of drunks, which tends to be more so at night. We will trial that for six months.
We will also ensure that police van is at the Northside shops every day in the afternoon until closing time, from 1 pm until 7.30 pm, to ensure they have the operational requirements to be able to clean up that shopping centre. We will trial this for six months to see if it can work. This is a proposal I am putting to the electorate. The police van will be there every afternoon until the bottle shop shuts. The bottle shop will be opened at 10 am in the morning and shut at 7 pm at night, Monday to Friday. Saturday trading will continue the way it currently is, and Sunday it will remain closed. We will trial that for six months and see if it works. If it needs a slight variance, we may retrial it. If it is not working, I propose it is shut completely.
That is the question I will put to the electorate. I will see what they think. I know these things are risky in a political sense, but people want something to change, and the only thing I can offer is a potential solution to try to make a change in that area. It is not about me trying to put more grog down people’s throats. I am extremely sad to be at the point where I am now trying to change, or propose to change, alcohol times to manage a social issue that is out of control, when I would rather be fixing the back-of-the-room stuff, getting people working and off welfare and changing the whole psyche about people being alcohol-dependent.
However, that is the proposal I will put to the electorate. I put it sternly because that is the best proposal I can come up with as a happy medium for all. If it is not working, it will shut, and if it is working, we will look at how we can continue that as a trial basis into the future to try to make improvements around Alice Springs.
On Indigenous affairs - and I am sorry, minister, I did say I would be quick on this ...
Dr Burns: You have had eight minutes.
Mr GILES: I am sorry. If you would like me to sit down, I will sit down ...
Dr Burns: No, no.
Mr GILES: I do not mean to hold you up. I have said before, you are one of the main castigators, minister for Education and Housing, of the Country Liberals and our policy base.
Well, we have a stack of policies. We have released quite a few already on Indigenous affairs. One of them was around our first circles concept with traditional owners - one group in the Top End and one in the bottom end of the Territory - meeting with the full Cabinet twice a year to talk about policies, issues, implementation - not to guide how we form our policies, but to provide advice and direction. It is a very important idea, and it would be a first in Australia’s history, with a representative group such as that meeting the full Cabinet. It is not designed to take anything away from any other representative bodies, whether they be land councils, health organisations, local government, or anything like that. It is designed to be another layer to provide support to people and try to re-engage people where they have become disengaged under Labor.
We have also proposed reform in the local government area. In that reform, we have said not every shire is doing a bad job. In fact, we do not believe anyone in shires is doing a bad job in the work ethic department. We think the model was a problem from the start. It has disenfranchised people; it has taken away people’s power and voices. It is a very bad model to not have your head office within your shire boundaries. It does not even support you economically. To me, that is just ludicrous. I have used the word ‘toxic’ before, because it does not matter where you go, shires are the topic of conversation - they are toxic. Regarding how shires manage, I know they have engaged a consultant now to remarket themselves and probably come out and fight the Country Liberals as part of the election campaign. I am sure Labor will get some of the shires on board to start their fight. That is how Labor plays the game. However, that is one of our other policies.
We have also committed $50m over four years - $12.5m a year - to support outstations and homelands, recognising there is a very strong connection to country. People have had properties under-invested, and we know much of that under-investment in outstations and homelands, combined with the shires and with a many policy failures, is driving people into town. So, we are starting to reverse that trend and take a different focus in the Northern Territory: we are about decentralising and supporting the regions, not just urbanising everyone which is creating many problems in the Northern Territory.
Yesterday, I spoke about welfare, the Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP), the perils of welfare without mutual obligation in the form of sit-down money with remote area exemptions being applied, and the reluctance of Centrelink to adhere to its guidelines on participation reports on people.
People in this Chamber, and many throughout the Territory, would know I am a firm advocate of economic development and employment. My biggest criticism of the intervention is there has never been an economic component to the framework of it. The intervention has done many good things and many bad things too, but there has never been an economic development arm. In Indigenous affairs there are many agencies, including Indigenous Business Australia, Indigenous Land Corporation, Aboriginal Benefits Account and many other funding bodies. There is a very uncoordinated approach in the way this is delivered by the federal government. There are better ways we can do that such as combine that with reforms in CDEP to remove the Newstart and quarantining component to encourage people to participate in CDEP, streamlining the way ABA, IBA, ILC and the other bodies come together to deliver services, particularly around the provision of infrastructure development for economic development. For example, in a hypothetical sense, strip shopping centre complexes in places like Wadeye or Yuendumu, some of the government current growth towns, would be a fantastic thing so people could start businesses in these communities.
There are better ways to streamline that and, for that reason, one of the Country Liberals’ policies proposes a national partnership agreement with the federal government on economic participation and economic development. Within that proposal to the federal government we will be asking for a reformist approach around CDEP and Newstart, and the removal of quarantining from CDEP. We will be asking for a greater say in how economic programs at a federal level are delivered in the Northern Territory. We are not putting our hand out as mendicants saying, ‘Give us all the money’, but we are trying to provide leadership through a recognised framework - that being a proposed national partnership agreement - to try to deliver better outcomes on the ground. We think we can work together rather than apart. I have not spoken to the leader of the Coalition or federal government. This is a proposal from our end trying to take the initiative to show the leadership to achieve reforms in this area. It is an important initiative. I am not sure whether Labor or the Coalition will be receptive, but it is an important proposal to try to achieve change.
While I agonise over a very weak Chief Minister around his comment of crime in Alice Springs and other areas of the Territory is a direct component of urban drift, I recognise we cannot just criticise those who are drifting into urban areas. We must recognise the government’s failures and why those people are drifting into our urban centres as economic or social refugees and the concerns around that. Those people are also marginalised. While we criticise, on one hand, because we want action and a tough law and order approach, on the reverse side we are trying to decentralise and develop in regional areas so people are happy to go back to their country.
One thing that is not talked about – minister, I am moving away from the budget for a minute. One thing people do not realise is that before settlement, Australia was made up of many countries. In the Territory, there were many countries - different people from different areas. As people were mixed together troubles came - the mission movement and so forth. The member for Stuart will acknowledge what I am saying. Many people moved on to different country, different areas. Mixing together caused problems. If you tried to close down two countries in some parts of Europe now and move people together, there will be certain trouble. What is occurring, more so now, is where that conglomeration happened many years ago, now there is urbanisation, or the urban drift, that is having another direct impact. It is affecting everyone and everyone is a loser ...
____________________
Motion
Adjournment Debate
Motion
Adjournment Debate
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, I will just advise you that it is 9 pm and the House does now adjourn.
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I think the House is of the view that we would like to continue, so I move that the motion be put.
Madam SPEAKER: The question is the House do now adjourn?
Motion negatived.
____________________
Ms PURICK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move that the member’s time be extended.
Motion agreed to.
Mr GILES: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I heard that enthusiasm coming from the member for Arafura. I am just about to congratulate her in an adjournment speech and she does not even have the respect to give an ‘aye’. I might have to rethink that ...
Ms Scrymgour: Come on, Adam, come on.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Mr GILES: It is all just frivolous. I am about to finish up shortly.
I was commenting about the different countries, or the different nations in the Territory, coming together at one point in time. They are now coming together in urban centres, and that is causing a whole lot more trouble. That is one of the components that has underpinned the Country Liberals’ policy of decentralising and trying to support the bush and grow the Territory in that area.
Madam Speaker, let me finish up by talking, once again, about Alice Springs. The Chief Minister’s zero tolerance tough-boy approach today fell on deaf ears. If there was any sincerity, it is too little, too late. His idea that the Police Commissioner should now take charge of police in Alice Springs - it really puzzles me that he was not in charge yesterday. I have said the prison needs to toughen up, the police need to be given that extra 20 police the Country Liberals will provide them with, and Territory Housing needs to toughen up.
In all of this, one question comes back to me regarding what is happening with the crime in Katherine, Palmerston, Tennant Creek, and Alice Springs. I was thinking about it the other day. We have these really expensive Chief Minister’s Offices in all these areas, and you have to wonder what has been going on. These Chief Minister’s Offices are wholly politicised. I am not attacking the individual - maybe in a minute, but not now - but they are highly politicised. Ex-government advisors from here, Labor Party members from there, are filling up the Chief Minister’s Offices, particularly in Alice Springs. Maybe it is not particularly in Alice Springs, but across the board. However, in Alice Springs you have a number of staff working there. The member for Stuart, the Minister for Central Australia, who should be run out of town for his failures, knows these people.
The future candidate for Namatjira is working in the Chief Minister’s Office. This is the candidate who used to work for the shires and got the shires so wrong. Now, he is working for the Office of the Chief Minister, with the member for Stuart as the minister, running all out over Namatjira, telling everybody he is going to build men’s centres here, ovals there. There is nothing in the budget. Alice Springs is burning while he is out there playing political games.
We want people in that office who do the job. All the other staff in there who are political appointees are incompetent. No wonder Labor is so hopeless in Alice Springs - look at the gumbies you have running the show! They cannot get anything together in the office. If they cannot get anything running in the office, how are they going to run a political campaign? How?
You have the future candidate - who is telling everyone he is the endorsed candidate, but he has not been publicly announced yet - running around everywhere: ‘I am the man, I am the man’. Let me remind people, he is the man who was in charge of the shire who caused all the problems in the first place. Then, we see the lovely lady who was temporarily in charge of the Chief Minister’s Office, is now moving to Darwin for a promotion - and good luck to her. She is a lovely lady.
We have a replacement coming in. The replacement is a lovely lady too, but you have to ask about your selection. When I used to apply for jobs, even for this job, I put my credentials on the table: ‘This is what I have done before. I think I have done a good job here, there, and everywhere’. I am not attacking this lady personally; I know it will come across that way. The head of Territory Housing in Alice Springs, which is one of the three pillars of failure, is moving over to head up the Chief Minister’s Office. I hope she does a good job. I hope things work. However, you have to ask: when that ain’t working there, how is that going to work? That is not a hard question.
You have an office full of political operatives running political games and you have Des Rogers running for Namatjira against the member for Macdonnell. He should be in town fixing the problems, not playing political games. There is no way he should be out there. You wonder why you have problems. You have all these political games going on.
If I try to have a meeting to help someone: ‘You have to go through the Chief Minister’s Office’. You get in there and they talk their political jargon. I understand part of it, but when you have someone who is really trying to help, you do not play games.
You will not fix Alice. I hope you do. I hope the person in charge of Housing who is going to the Chief Minister’s Office does a good job. I hope she is part of the solution, but what has come out of there so far has been absolutely nothing.
I have just jogged my memory on a very important point before I sit down. I wish the member for Brennan could remind me of the name of the policy - I am pretty sure it is Every Child, Every Day. I want to quickly touch on that. How much money does Every Child, Every Day receive? We will find that out in Estimates. Every Child, Every Day in Budget 2011-12: Middle Years Education, under Key Deliverables, for students attending over 80%: budget for non-Indigenous, 99%, estimate 93%; budget for next year, 94%; actual 81%. What have they done this year? They have gone from 99% to 93% to 94% to 81% of an outcome. They have decided not to target 99% as an 80% school attendance: ‘We will lower it to 83% and we might be able to meet our targets then’.
Indigenous, Middle Years Education, Every Child, Every Day - and this includes all Indigenous Territorians, urban and remote; and we know urban has a much higher school attendance and participation rate - 80% of the time is only four days out of five a week. The estimate is 25%. You can only get 25% of Indigenous kids to school 80% of the time. Of those 25% who attend and are in Year 9, only 22% of the 25% who attend 80% of the time actually meet Year 9 writing standards. Does that make sense in an Every Child, Every Day, every school scenario? They are supposed to go five days a week, but let us say it is only four. Only 25% of kids are turning up four days a week and, of those 25% turning up only four days a week minimum, only 22% are meeting the Year 9 benchmark. Every Child, Every Day. Something does not seem to be working.
Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I am sorry I took more than eight-and-a-half minutes.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Speaker, I was going to let my colleague, the member for Fannie Bay speak. I will not take long to speak on Budget 2012-13. It has been interesting listening to the member for Braitling, and other members of the CLP, in their contribution to the budget, but particularly the member for Braitling. He said there are many criticisms in regard to the intervention. This was the man who championed the architect of the intervention, Mal Brough. If we look at some of the issues in Alice Springs, particularly the urban drift we see in many our regional towns, much of this can be attributed to the intervention and people moving from their remote communities into Alice Springs.
The member for Braitling likes to have his cake and eat it at the same time. On one hand, he champions the cause of Mal Brough and the intervention and, when it suits him, says there are many things to be criticised. I am glad he has had an epiphany and has suddenly changed his mind. He has gone around the communities, which I reckon is all part of his charge for the seat of Lingiari at the next federal election. I believe whilst the member for Braitling will run for the seat of Braitling, let us watch this space and watch the member for Braitling go for the federal seat. I actually think he finds this parliament is a small pond, and he feels he is a big fish in a small pond. Going federally will see him go into the big pond, which is where his heart really lies.
If you believed members opposite regarding the negativity and the dire circumstances of the Northern Territory, you would think that nothing was happening. It could not be further from the truth. There are many things happening – and certainly many positive things. As I reflect on probably the last budget of my parliamentary career, we have been through many since 2001. I remember when we came to government in 2001, and the appalling state the CLP left us in. I have heard these members opposite saying conservatives are the money managers; they are the ones who can manage the budget and bring it back to surplus. I remember what had happened when we inherited government in 2001, so it could not be further from the truth.
We have people on the others side who have selective, short memories, particularly in relation to the bush. There are members opposite who often say: ‘Oh, it is always negative. They are always looking back at the past regarding the bush’. I suppose that is true; we often do go back in history. It is always important to look back in history at the consecutive budgets and money this government has injected into the bush. This budget is no different. Since 2001, it has been this Labor government which has built on infrastructure and programs that have been vitally important in the social fabric of those remote Aboriginal communities. I think of all the schools and health centres which are vital infrastructures in our communities, where we did not have appropriate clinics, where nurses working in many of those communities did not have decent accommodation to live in.
Madam Speaker, I remember when you were Health minister, and we visited Maningrida and nurses were just about falling through the floors in their accommodation. This was what was acceptable to the CLP. They were in government for 26 years. My other colleague, the member for Johnston, would remember Maningrida School. In the second biggest community in the Northern Territory, where there was a community population of over 2500 people, the school had not had infrastructure funding for many years. It was because they were political pariahs; the CLP had felt they were too close to, and voted, Labor so they were penalised. It was hypocrisy for members of the CLP, one after another, to come trotting in here all day sprouting their negativity and saying nothing ever happened. Well, there was a great deal that happened, and there have been some fantastic initiatives built in, particularly in my electorate of Arafura.
I ask the member for Braitling to have a look at the Alice Springs News, particularly the 13 September 2000 issue. Erwin Chlanda ran a series of stories in the Alice Springs News about the stabbings. I am not saying that what is happening today is okay; I am saying these are complex social problems. He hit at the heart of it, and it is something we recognise: alcohol is a major factor. The Minister for Alcohol Policy has constantly talked about the initiatives of Enough is Enough and what we need to do in clamping down on alcohol-fuelled violence in Alice Springs. It needs to happen throughout the Northern Territory, and that is happening. Everyone needs to be supportive of making sure we can deal with the issue of alcohol.
Turning to my electorate of Arafura, the new training facility for Gunbalanya and Jabiru for the VET programs will be welcome. That builds on the fantastic West Arnhem College which has been established. It is welcome. The mining sector, the tourism sector - all of the sectors in that region - will welcome that training facility to be able to provide VET programs in Jabiru.
I was recently at Wurrumiyanga formerly called Nguiu, and the barge was in. Receiving that $2m for the barge facility and having that barge landing completed will be welcome. I am happy to see that $2m in the budget.
Regarding the $4m for the Arnhem Highway, recently I drove on that highway over the Easter period and after the Easter weekend. There has been some work done since the Wet Season, so the $4m will be welcome. I know the minister for roads will continue to talk to the federal minister because, with the growth in Jabiru, the expansion with ERA and INPEX, there has to be some working together between us and the federal government to look at some major roadwork funding to build, widen, and strengthen the Arnhem Highway.
The family centres in Gunbalanya and Maningrida will be welcome. In Maningrida there were plans to attach it to the school. In Gunbalanya, the family centre - built on West Arnhem College, with Gunbalanya School - has taken over the running of the childcare facility and have integrated that closer into the school. That money in the budget is also welcome. It was great to see that.
The upgrade for the health centre at Pirlangimpi is a long time in coming. I thank the government because there have been some OH&S issues, and that funding to upgrade the health centre is welcome.
The upgrade to the water supply for Maningrida is also welcome – part of the $7m which will also upgrade facilities in Lajamanu and Ntaria. In Maningrida with the new subdivision, the upgrade of the water supply is welcome.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I welcome Budget 2012-13. It is responsible. I know members opposite have harped on the deficit. The Treasurer has explained why we have had to maintain that. It can be maintained. For Territorians, particularly for Aboriginal people living in remote communities, there is continued spending on essential infrastructure.
In stark contrast to the Leader of the Opposition and his budget speech, it is amazing how the member for Macdonnell - I was listening to her and I think that was the first speech she has made in recent times. This is a member - hypocrisy with a capital ‘H’ - puts out all doom and gloom for Macdonnell which has always been there. She has been quite inactive as the local member. It was interesting, she did not say anything about the lack of policy and direction the Leader of the Opposition had in his speech.
The member for Macdonnell, the candidates for Stuart and Arnhem - I have heard members of the CLP in the past say: ‘The Aboriginal members of the ALP should stand up and speak their mind and say things’. Well, I ask the Aboriginal members of the CLP, the member for Macdonnell, and the candidates for Stuart and Arnhem: where do you stand? Where do you stand on your leader who cannot be bothered to even put out his policy? He has put out a political policy on outstations. When you read the detail of the outstation policy, it is a farce, and is actually quite insulting to Aboriginal people that they have tried to sell this policy.
I talked to my constituents in Maningrida after they went there. We have talked in detail, and drilled down to the detail of the CLP policy. The smoke and mirrors of the CLP need to be seen through. For the smoke-and-mirrors member for Macdonnell, who comes in here and paints the doom and gloom and says nothing has happened – well, what has she been doing as the local member for the last six years? She has failed as a local member. She has failed her electorate. She has failed to advocate and to try to get things happening.
It is the same with the candidate for Stuart. What does she think? These are women who are quite vocal, have been quite vocal, and have strongly advocated people should be taken off welfare and we need more jobs in communities.
I challenge the candidates for Stuart and Arnhem, and the member for Macdonnell. Come on, you guys have always stood in here - well, the member for Macdonnell has stood up here. The candidate for Stuart was quite vocal in the media, and, suddenly, silence. I believe the Aboriginal members of the CLP have been silenced. All of the Aboriginal members of the CLP have been told they cannot shame the CLP: ‘We do not want the focus to be on blackfellas in the bush. We do not want you to talk, because this is all about moving. Let us just trick Aboriginal people, let us talk the rhetoric, but very little in action’. I find that totally offensive. Aboriginal people are not stupid ...
Mr Westra van Holthe: What have you mob done for them?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: More than you have. And the member for ...
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms SCRYMGOUR: I pick up the interjection from the member for Katherine. You are a disgrace. You have not even been preselected, member for Katherine. You have not even been preselected and you sit here …
A member interjecting.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: And you - your treachery on stamp duty and what you did in Lajamanu, you ought to be ashamed of yourself! You sit there and ask what we have done ...
Mr Westra van Holthe: Yes, what have you done?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Well, there are many things we have done. I tell you, I can depart this parliament very proud of my 11 years in this parliament and what I have done for my electorate. I can walk out of here, I can sleep at night, and know I have had an electorate that this Labor government has actually invested in, in infrastructure and programs. This is a government that has not turned its back, unlike you guys who turned your back for 26 years. So, do not sit there and tell me that nothing ever happened.
You are a disgrace, and you have not even been preselected. For goodness sake! You are sticking up for a leader who is spineless, absolutely gutless, and is knifing you in the back, and has also knifed the poor member for Drysdale. This leader has a track record of saying: ‘Not my problem; it is the party’s problem’. This bloke is absolutely spineless, has no substance, and manages to duck and weave all the time. His sidekick, the member for Port Darwin …
Ms Lawrie: The wannabe?
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Yes, the wannabe Chief Minister ...
Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! I remind the member we are talking about the budget. Relevance. She seems to have strayed from the topic.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Braitling. There has been considerable latitude in the debate this evening. I recall the member for Greatorex’s contribution. Thank you for the point of order. Member for Arafura, you have the call.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. They have glass jaws on the other side; I have always said that. They can get extensions of time and talk. They stand here, exhaust themselves and literally knock themselves out, they spin so much. They talk about the Labor spin! The spin from the Liberals is just amazing. They spin and just about knock themselves unconscious. Their spin amazes me.
Member for Braitling, I was complimenting you. It made my heart sing a little when you said there are criticisms in relation to the intervention. You have seen the light and that is fantastic. I hope you mean it and it is not just political spin. You have genuinely - particularly communities like Maningrida. I have been standing in this House for 11 years talking about places like Maningrida. There are many examples in Maningrida - models that can be adopted or looked at, particularly with jobs.
The Labor government has always had a Jobs Plan. Going from 2001 with Syd Stirling right through to our government, the Jobs Plan we have has to marry with the federal government’s roll-out of its jobs plan. You talked about the revamped CDEP. I would like to look at places like Maningrida having the flexibility of topping up the salary and giving people a full-time wage because it made people feel part of - we all want a job, we all want to work.
When you talk to Aboriginal men, particularly in the Maningrida region, who have been working for a long time - my colleague, the member for Johnston, would remember old Mr Don Wilton who worked with Bawinanga Aboriginal Corporation for nearly 40 years – 40 years that man worked for and not one day off! He worked on CDEP top-up up until Mal Brough brought in the intervention and removed CDEP. To see that man who had worked for 40 years, not a day off, absolutely gutted because he lost his job was a disgrace. When I look at the intervention I see the injustice that happened to people like Don Wilton and those decent men at Maningrida, who worked every single day for their families, and who lost their jobs because a federal government felt CDEP was sit-down money and it was not an employment program. It is an absolute disgrace.
It had worked, and you have seen it, member for Braitling. You have seen places in Maningrida where we have 23 enterprises built from CDEP, and Aboriginal people driving that process of that economy. That is what we have to get back to. That is certainly something I have been very passionate about for 11 years, and proud to be part of this government because there has been a great deal of infrastructure money that has come from this government to assist communities such as Maningrida to move forward.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the Treasurer, and I support Budget 2012-13.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Katherine, before I call you, I point out to members that, almost simultaneously, the Deputy Clerk and the Speaker have advised me regarding Standing Order 67, Digression from Subject. Under (c), it does not apply to the particular debates of second reading of an Appropriation Bill, or supply bill.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Katherine): Madam Deputy Speaker, I find it quite incredulous tonight to hear part of the contribution from the member for Arafura - incredulous that she should come in here and sprout the word ‘hypocrisy’, as she used in reference to the member for the Macdonnell. I remind the member for Arafura and the House, regarding hypocrisy. Let us cast our minds back some time ago - well, we are talking 18 months I guess - when the member for Arafura bailed on this government. The member for Arafura bailed on the Labor Party. Looking back at the reason for that, I seem to recall it had something to do with the failure of this government in Aboriginal affairs policy. So, for the member for Arafura to come in here and start bandying around the word ‘hypocrisy’ is just unbelievable. How can she stand there with a straight face, with any credibility at all, when she has none? She proved that tonight. She has none and, to bandy around the word ‘hypocrisy’ in reference to the member for Macdonnell - well, we all will draw our own judgments. I am sure the people of the Northern Territory will judge that as well. Although, I guess they will not get to judge the member for Arafura at the next election because of, course, she is bailing once again. I guess for a different reason. It will be the rat deserting the sinking ship.
Anyway, that is not how I wanted to start the contribution to the budget debate tonight. Tonight I respond to what is, in my view, a pretty darn ugly budget for the Northern Territory in 2012-13. It is ugly in many ways, and I will spell out those ways as I go through some portfolio responsibilities, but also as the budget relates to the Katherine electorate. I have four portfolio responsibilities. I am going to focus on one particularly tonight, and that is tourism.
I find myself drawn to tourism - notwithstanding I have spoken about it many times in this House before during all sorts of debates on MPIs and other debates - because it is an extremely important part of the Northern Territory’s economy. In fact, tourism is one of the key economic drivers in the Northern Territory. It employs more than 10 400 people directly, and almost another 10 000 indirectly. That is around 20 000, or 9% of the Territory’s total employment. Tourism contributes around $710m in direct gross state product, and another $853m additional indirect gross state product. That brings tourism’s total contribution to the Territory to around $1.6bn - not small fry by any standards.
Yet, it could be so much better, if only this government would accord this vital part of our economy the importance that it deserves. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Tourism has had a number of ministers in the 11 years of the Henderson Labor government, and has been relegated to junior ministry status by having it vested with the current minister who is, at best, lacklustre. I hope the minister does not take that personally because it is not about her personal attributes; it is about her capacity to drive tourism to where it should be, as it was under the previous CLP governments, as one of the most important areas of policy and focus which delivered key economic outcomes to the Northern Territory.
What have we seen happening in tourism in the past 11 years? What have they done? What has this government done to tourism since coming to power in 2001? What they have done would make you cry. A little melodramatic perhaps. However, without the melodrama, they have forced tourism businesses to close their doors, and that is a fact. Let us examine why.
For one thing, visitors to the Northern Territory have been on the decline since this government came to power. I wonder if that is a coincidence. In 2000, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, there was a total of over 1.5 million overnight visitors to the Northern Territory. This was comprised of intra-Territory, interstate and international visitors. In the years between 2000 and 2005, those total visitor numbers dropped from 1.54 million to 1.38 million. When you break that down, total domestic visitors dropped by 7%, and international visitors declined by 18%. That was in the first five years of this government: visitors to the Northern Territory down by 7% and 18% respectively for an average fall weighted at 10%.
I could rattle off all of those figures but, instead, Madam Deputy Speaker, I seek leave to table some statistics from the Australian Bureau of Statistics which show tourist numbers in the Northern Territory from 2000 to 2005.
Leave granted.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Let us remember, 1 540 000 overnight visitors to the Northern Territory sank slowly to 1 380 000 in 2005 – a decline of 10%. Funnily enough, I do not think there was a global financial crisis going on during those years, so we cannot blame that. The Northern Territory government cannot blame it.
Let us now warp forward to 2011 and go to Tourism NT’s website and look at the statistics on visitor numbers. The number of domestic visitors in calendar year 2011 to the Northern Territory was 891 000. That is a decline of a further 141 000 visitors to the Northern Territory, which equates to a fall of almost 14% from 2005 until now. Turning to international visitors, from an 18% decline from 2000 to 2005, international visitors have continued to decline by a further 59 000 people or 17%. That is quite consistent, though, is it not? Under the administration of this government, with its several ministers, and its current minister, a fall in the first five or six years of this government of 18% and, for the same amount of time from 2005 to present, 17%. Well done, Labor.
This is not a joke. I did not come in here to make light. This is deadly serious because this government has allowed one of the key economic drivers in the Northern Territory to go from swinging in the trees to dragging itself through the mud, which has visited upon tourism-related businesses in the Northern Territory the worst possible outcomes: closed doors, falling revenues and profits, and job losses. To the minister, congratulations, well done. I hope you can hold your head high when you go to Alice Springs and talk to tourism operators there.
Since this government came to power in 2001, total tourist numbers have declined from 1 540 000 to 1 180 000, or more than 23%. Do you know what effects that 23% has on the bottom line of business? Well, I suspect no one on that side of the House knows what effect that would have, because I do not think any of them have ever run a business. I could stand corrected. Unless you have someone on your side of the House that has, perhaps, run a business, been involved at that level, I do not know you would really understand how these types of statistics actually play out on the ground. Since this government came to power, almost a quarter of visitor numbers, almost 25%, have declined. That is hardly a very good record. What has this government’s response to the decline been? Absolutely nothing.
Budget allocations for Tourism for the last six years or so were: in 2005-06, $37m; in 2006-07, $38m; in 2008-09, $42m; in 2009-10, $42m; 2011-12, $41m; and in 2012-13, again, $41m. I have not done the figures and broken it down so far as to figure this out exactly, but I do not even think those budget allocations for tourism have kept pace with CPI. They have, in fact, declined in real terms.
Also, let us have a look at what Tourism gets in the percentage of the total budget for those years. I am not going to do all the years, but let us just have a look at a couple of them. In 2005-06, the total budget for the Northern Territory was $2.523bn. The percentage of that figure allocated to Tourism was 1.5% - 1.5% of that budget went to Tourism. Now, in 2012-13, the paltry $41m that has been allocated to Tourism is just 0.9% of the total amount of money the Central Holding Authority has authorised for budget expenditure - 0.9%, a drop, a fall from 1.5% of the budget to 0.9%. No wonder tourism is in the doldrums.
Let us face it, this government loves to tout the spending of money as an outcome. We hear it constantly in this House. We do not see any results on the street. We do not see any real results, but what we have is a government that constantly says: ‘But we have spent this much money. But we have spent more than you ever spent’. I remind the government that spending money is not an outcome. Money is an input. If you do not get any value for money, you do not have any outcomes, and vice versa. They can hardly crow this time that they are spending more money on tourism.
This minister and her predecessors have allowed tourism to decline in every respect. It even commands a smaller and smaller slice of the budget pie. Not only is the current minister lacklustre, but she and her predecessors have failed to command enough respect with their own Cabinet colleagues to secure a budget allocation that gives tourism any chance of growth in the Northern Territory. That is, of course, another hallmark of this government.
Here you had an opportunity to invest in tourism, a sector within the Northern Territory that contributes so much to the economy of the Territory, driven by private enterprise and risk, and you have ignored the principles of good government and continued to invest in non-productive assets with policies. Remember, tourism is one of the three economic drivers in the Territory, along with mining and cattle, yet it is in the doldrums for a whole raft of reasons.
Are there any excuses? I have heard the Tourism minister, the Treasurer, and the Chief Minister blaming everything on the global financial crisis and, of course, they like to throw the strong Aussie dollar into the mix as well. Sure, that is the problem.
Did this situation take the government by surprise? Sure, the global financial crisis was a tough time, but what about the Aussie dollar? Did that sneak up on you? The Aussie dollar has been climbing since this government came to power in 2001. When I look at the graph I might not have brought down with me - no, there it is. I have drawn some rough lines where the government came into power in 2001, where we are now, and it has been rising ever since.
I seek leave to table this document also, Madam Deputy Speaker, because the minister might like to look at it so she can understand what I am talking about.
Leave granted.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: It started at around 55 when you first came into power and has jumped up to about $1.03. The question I have now is: what has this government done to mitigate the effects of the rising Australian dollar? What did your economist - you must have economists who advise you - tell you what the trends are, what they are likely to be, and what the impact will be? Surely to God, you have an economist or somebody with some expertise you can tap into to give you advice on how to mitigate the effects of things such as the rising dollar.
Did you employ any of these strategies, if you were advised of them, to mitigate these effects? I would really like to know what has been done to mitigate the effects of the rise in the Australian dollar in tourism. From where I sit, all I see is a decline in the Tourism budget year after year after year. Remember, we went from 1.5% to 0.9% of the total allocation for the Northern Territory.
Tourism is in decline so I guess this government is thinking: ‘Let us spend less’. I do not know what this is all about. What is more, they spend less on the real, productive, and private-sector focus part of the Territory’s economy. I do not understand that thinking. They had an opportunity, over the past 10 years, to heavily invest in tourism - whether that be destination development, marketing overseas or whatever - to try to boost tourism in the Northern Territory to keep the economy afloat, to keep the businesses afloat, to keep people employed in that sector. Yet, they have, over the last 11 years, squandered that opportunity because they keep going back to spending their money on non-productive items. The shadow Treasurer and the Leader of the Opposition have canvassed that issue time and time again.
There is much to say but so little time. I am not going to talk too much about essential services or local government; I am going to save that for the Estimates process. However, I will say one thing about local government; that is, I am waiting with bated breath to read the financial sustainability reports on the shires. All of us in this House recall the minister hid the last financial sustainability reports done on East and West Arnhem Shire Councils. I understand the latest reports are due to be handed to the minister some time this month. The minister has already spoken in this particular budget debate.
I throw out the challenge to any journalists listening this evening. Why do you not see if the minister will commit to making those reports available publicly before the August election? More importantly, for the sake of the shires, will she provide a copy of those sustainability reports to the shires prior to the next election? Maybe if the minister has the opportunity, she might like to get up in adjournment and give that commitment. Given the culture of cover-up that is also a hallmark of this government, I somehow doubt it.
As my colleagues have already spoken about in this place, I also have very significant concerns about our levels of debt. By 2015-16, we will be almost in a position where our own source revenue will not be able to meet the interest payments on our debt. If I was in that position personally I would be very afraid. I would be afraid of how I was going to meet those responsibilities and repayments from my budget. Perhaps we will have to start digging into the GST revenue to top up those interest payments. I imagine the expectation out there is GST revenue will actually be used to improve the lives of the people who live in the Northern Territory, as opposed to paying off Delia’s credit card.
What all this really means, to use an analogy, is when Mr Trucking Company Owner goes into the MVR and pays thousands of dollars in registrations, he might ordinarily expect that rego payment would be put into the roads his trucks drive on. Mr Trucking Company Owner expects the government might apply his registration money to those roads that shake the life out of, and rip the guts out of, his trucks. That is a pretty reasonable expectation. That will not happen if this government continues down the current slippery path it is on. Mr Trucking Company Owner’s registration money will go into paying off the interest - just the interest - on this government’s mounting debt.
Then, there is the cost of the prison - the $300m prison that went to $495m. We now discover by the time it is paid off, it will have cost Territorians - in the total amount of money that will have been paid out - $1.8bn. The Treasurer likes to get a little cute around that figure: ‘Yes, that is not $1.8bn in today’s dollars and that will be reduced over time as the CPI takes effect’. Nonetheless, it is still a figure people in the Northern Territory should be worried about.
I will move on to talk about a few local issues in Katherine. I note the budget is not all bad for Katherine. It is not good; it is not all bad. We have an amount of $7.7m, I believe, allocated for patient accommodation at the hospital. That, in itself, is a nice initiative. I certainly welcome that money being spent in Katherine. However, it highlights the lack of strategic planning and the shallowness of the government when it comes to thinking about the future of a place like Katherine - and the hospital, of course. The hospital is in a flood zone. I have said this before in this House and I will say it again: every time there is a Level 2 flood warning, patients need to be evacuated. Those patients are either taken to Tindal or flown to Darwin.
In a cracker of a Wet Season, we can have two or three Level 2 flood warnings. I will not belabour the point, but someone needs to start thinking strategically about major and critical infrastructure such as hospitals when they are situated in the flood zone. Parts of the Katherine hospital are now 75 years old - it celebrated its 75th birthday last year or the year before. I remember saying then that I hope by the time it is 100 it will not be there anymore; it will be somewhere high and dry.
I move on to the renal unit. There has been a fair bit of hoo-ha in Katherine about the location of the renal unit. Last year, it was spoken about in the media. Since then, it has gone through two stages of development consent; the subdivision being the first of those stages which was approved. Then, in March this year, the Development Consent Authority approved the building of the facility. I do not think I need to table it, but these are the minutes from that meeting. I listened to a fair amount of what the Health Minister had to say in the last couple of days about the budget, and health and renal facilities. He has spoken about - and I imagine they are all federally funded - renal facilities that are going to be built out bush. Yet, there is no mention that I can find in this budget paper - unless someone can point it out to me - that talks about the renal unit in Katherine.
If this government was so hell-bent on getting this done - let us go back to the process. The process started without any consultation about the location of the facility. Departmental personnel within Lands and Planning, as I understand it, were simply asked to find a block of land. They found the cheapest and most easily accessed block of land that already had power, sewerage and water connected. I guess they closed their eyes with a pin in their hands on a map, in went the pin, and that is where they decided to put it. That is about as far as the strategic planning went for the renal unit which, in my view, should be a part of a new health precinct in Katherine. Why not put it in the location where the future hospital might be? That is a tough one, isn’t it? But, no, because there has been no strategic planning, this government does not have a clue where it is even likely to put a hospital. Moving right along - no renal unit.
In the last couple of days, we have had some debate in this House during Question Time about another couple of issues; one being the cultural precinct and the other the bypass. I will talk about the bypass. It was the subject of a question today in Question Time. The member for Braitling spoke about this in his budget reply this evening. An amount of $10m was allocated a number of years ago - and it has been in three previous budget papers - for the bypass in Katherine, for the road train diversion. The minister was quite right in what he said: there were a number of designs. I seem to remember that four options were put to the people of Katherine. One was no change, and the other three options were different routes for the heavy vehicle bypass. All of those options were knocked back by public comment and opinion. It was felt so strongly by a number of people in Katherine that none of those options were suitable. I distinctly remember the minister saying words to the effect of: ‘We will have to go back to the drawing board and come up with a new plan or a new design’ …
Ms PURICK: Madam Deputy Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move an extension of time for the member.
Motion agreed to.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Thank you, honourable members.
We had a situation where the ball was back in the minister’s court. He made a commitment that he was going to go back to the drawing board for a new design. I have not heard any utterances from the minister or this government with respect to the road train diversion around Katherine.
Consequently, it is a fairly safe assumption to draw, because of the minister’s - well, I will say - laziness, lack of urgency he has applied to this project, that $10m has gone. I am yet to discover - and I guess Estimates will probably clear this up, because the minister’s answer today was not all that clear whether the $10m promised by the federal government through Anthony Albanese, and in which Warren Snowdon had a big hand - whether that money actually came into Northern Territory government coffers, or it was just sitting there on an accrual basis ready to be handed over when the project began.
I do not know that is the case, because I notice in the budget papers that original $10m amount actually started diminishing after the first year. I guess $20 000 or so came out after the first year, which I assume was spent on consultancy and design work. There was some more money taken out of the $10m in the second year, presumably for more design work and consultancy. I am assuming the $10m was actually in the hot little hands of the minister, so to speak, because he was able to access it and spend some of it. If that is the case, where on earth is that money now? Where has it been pushed off to? What sort of arrangements has he made with the federal government to spend it elsewhere? A couple of questions there to prepare yourself for in Estimates, minister.
The cultural precinct in Katherine - again the subject of a question in Question Time, and the minister not really giving any clear answers to the questions that were asked of him. We are in a position where $6.5m, or thereabouts, has been spent thus far getting the Godinymayin Yijard Rivers Arts and Cultural Centre up to where it is now. It is almost complete; there is internal fit-out work yet to be done.
We had an interim board which oversaw the initial stages of this project. We now have a permanent board which is, in fact, set up as a company. On the expectation that reasonable and substantial ongoing funding for recurrent costs would be provided by the Northern Territory government, the board has engaged an executive officer. That executive officer has resigned from her job down south and has moved to Katherine. She has, as I understand it, bought a house. Her partner has also resigned from his work. He is on his way here now, if he is not here already. So, we have a couple who have completely uprooted their whole lives to move to Katherine to take on a significant role in what will be a very significant asset for the Katherine community. Yet, we now discover there is no line item in the budget, and no specific mention of recurrent funding for the cultural precinct.
I was intrigued to hear the minister’s answer in Question Time yesterday about this. He referred to two budgets. He said they were working on two budgets, or something like that. I wonder whether this government is running two sets of books …
Dr Burns: Oh, come on!
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: I pick up on the interjection from the minister.
Dr Burns: I think he is talking about a couple of budget proposals. That is what I heard.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: I will check the Hansard.
Mr McCarthy: We are going to have an opening, but you are not invited!
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: I pick up on the interjection from the minister. This is the type of bloody-mindedness we have come to expect from the member for Barkly. This man has some history. He has opened the door; I am going to walk through it now ...
Dr Burns: Let us not talk about history.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: It is recent history, Burnsie, not 10 years old.
We have the history of this minister who sat in a meeting with the previous Mayor of Katherine and was asked by the previous mayor: ‘Why do you not do anything for Katherine?’ His bloody-minded answer was: ‘Well, what do you do for us?’
Mr McCarthy: That is a lie! That is a used car salesman by the sound of it.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: That is what I was informed, minister.
Mr McCarthy: You were told wrong.
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, order!
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: We do not have to degenerate into a slanging match …
Dr Burns: Let us get it over and done with.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Yes, let us get it over and done with.
The other part of this is, if I go back to 2005 - and I have a copy of a letter the previous Chief Minister, Clare Martin, sent to Mr Bill Daw, Chairman of the Katherine Regional Cultural Precinct. I seek leave to table this document also.
Leave granted.
Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: I am going to read a little from it. It says:
Dear Bill
- Thank you for your letter of 3 June regarding the Katherine Cultural Precinct.
I am happy to provide a clear commitment from my Government to this project …
- I am happy to provide a clear commitment from my Government to this project.
To date we have committed $500 000 to the headworks. In addition to that, Government will commit $6.5m to the project, including $200 000 to replace the baseball diamond.
The way my mathematics works is that is $7m minus the $200 000 to replace the baseball diamond, because that did not need to happen. That is $6.8m. What I do not see in the budget papers is the remainder of the Northern Territory government’s contribution to this commitment by Clare Martin. We know the Northern Territory government has committed – is it $3m or $3.5m? - so far to this project. The remainder came from the federal government. So, there is still a big invoice coming your way, minister. I let you know that in advance because the problem we have with the cultural centre - it is a bit of a Catch 22 you could almost say. This cultural centre can become commercially viable, but only once Stage 2 is built and you have sufficient recurring funding to employ the people needed to run it to make it commercial. Once it gets going and starts to become commercially viable, the imposition on government should reduce because it will be able to generate some of its own revenue.
What we need – and I put the challenge out to the minister - is a commitment to Stage 2 to get this thing up and running, and a solid commitment to the recurrent funding required to get the staff in place and have the operational expenses taken care of. Unfortunately, the minister did not commit, despite him saying on 8 KTR a couple of weeks ago there would be recurrent funding. Then, of course, he obfuscated around that and started talking about private sector investment, philanthropists, and all that sort of thing. He realised he had put himself in a difficult spot and had to use weasel words to get out of it.
Madam Deputy Speaker, my time is at an end. This budget is really quite ordinary for Katherine, and I can only hope a CLP government will commit some more to the Katherine region ...
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Katherine, your time has expired. Please resume your seat.
Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Madam Deputy Speaker, I speak in support of the budget, the Treasurer’s fifth. I do not think any budget is an easy budget, but I do not think the Treasurer has ever had an easy budget. This one was particularly difficult in circumstances where post-GFC, private sector investment has not returned to those levels, the federal stimulus funding has been withdrawn and, in some respects, the Territory government is left as the last person standing to ensure the economy functions until that private sector investment kicks back in. There were some very difficult, deliberate decisions made by the Treasurer and this government to ensure we kept putting that funding in, particularly in infrastructure, to ensure the economy functioned well and we kept people in jobs. Very important, difficult decisions have seen a very tight budget.
A few people have commented it is not an election budget. It is really important that you frame your budgets according to the economic circumstances you are in, not the electoral circumstances. Obviously, that is what we have done, because this is a very tight, difficult budget, and has confounded some public expectations about what you do in the last budget of your electoral cycle. It is important to always budget for the economic circumstances you are in.
We have made some important decisions in our budgets over a period of time now about how we support Territory families and people living in the Northern Territory. They are things that people can take for granted. At Parap Primary School and Stuart Park Primary School at the start of the school term at the start of this year, talking to parents about the Back to School Bonus, they really appreciated that money was coming in, and the time at which it came in, to help them get back into school, particularly post-Christmas with those first credit card bills coming due. It is a really important budget item we have and is there again in this budget, the same as our childcare subsidy. We are the only jurisdiction that provides a childcare subsidy to offset childcare. They are critical things we do to support Territory families.
The Minister for Transport spoke about the bus services we provide for students and seniors. There are things we do in our budgets to provide services for Territorians, recognising where we live and some of the challenges we face. It is important, as a government, to ensure we have those things we do to help Territorians out.
In this budget we have invested money into the Royal Darwin Hospital, with $22m to continue upgrades to increase the number of beds in the emergency department and short stay unit, and provide two additional operating theatres at Royal Darwin Hospital. In some respects, the best health news in this budget for people living in my local area is the money we are putting into Palmerston Hospital. Investing into the Palmerston Hospital over time, while it is good for Palmerston, also provides relief for the Darwin hospital which is the hospital most of the people living in my area use. The Palmerston Hospital is a very important initiative, not just for the people of Palmerston. There is $10.3m for an early works package in this budget to commence construction of the $110m Palmerston Hospital. The effects of that are going to be well received in my electorate. I commend the start of that. It is very important for people living in Palmerston, and it is going to have a very important effect on people living in Fannie Bay, Parap, Stuart Park, and The Gardens.
Another initiative we have in our budget which has been popular over time is the concession of $8500 to assist senior Territorians and Pensioner and Carer Concession Card holders downsize or buy a home. That is of immense interest to people living in my area. They are going to be making decisions, over future years, about where they choose to retire. We want them to choose to retire in the Northern Territory. That is the kind of initiative that will help people make those decisions. It is critical it is in the budget, and it provides support for people making those life choices. We want them to stay in the Territory. That is a very important budget initiative.
Something the minister for Housing might discuss - which we have discussed in this Chamber before - are the four housing initiatives we have in place to try to make it easier for people to get a home, and when they are in a home, to be able to afford it. One of the things we want to try in the Territory is the affordable housing scheme where you pay rent of 80% or below the market rate.
The first stock is going to be in my electorate, in the village at Parap. This is our first major redevelopment of a public housing site, which is another added bonus. It will be opening later this year; it is nearly finished. We were touring it the other day. It looks fantastic; it really is a schmick set-up.
These are critical decisions we are making to build stock into an affordable housing company that will have long-term impacts on where we live. It will start from a small base, but it will grow and make a very large difference to many Territorians’ lives over the future years. The establishment of the Venture Housing company is critical. I commend the minister for Housing and the Treasurer. I have toured that new development with the Treasurer a couple of times and she has taken a keen interest in what we are doing, making sure we are providing affordable housing to Territorians.
We have to be careful in how we frame this budget to ensure we are doing what we need to do to prepare for INPEX. The minister for Infrastructure spoke a great deal about some of the works. We had to frame a very careful budget, bearing in mind the need to keep people working and living in the Territory before the INPEX project really gears up.
Madam Deputy Speaker, this is an excellent budget, very well framed and thought through. I am happy to commend it to the House.
Dr BURNS (Education and Training): Madam Deputy Speaker, I have listened carefully to the debate; I have been present for most of it. Essentially, this debate on this budget comes down to two different views. One view is from government, that we believe it was necessary to go into deficit to support jobs, families, and the Territory gearing up for major developments. There has been an opposing view put by the opposition, which really says it is very undesirable to go into deficit, the budget is unsustainable, and the debt is unsustainable. That was clearly articulated by the opposition.
In the end, the people will make the decision on the budget. That will be part of their consideration. The Leader of the Opposition, in his budget reply, said:
- … people will forgive you for spending beyond your means if they can see a clear link between that spending and a meaningful purpose or benefit to them.
It comes down to the people, whether they believe government’s position will benefit them in the longer term or they believe the opposition. It really did not take the Opposition Leader long to backtrack on important elements of his budget speech. In his budget speech he said:
- We will target a return to surplus by the end of our first term in government.
Within an hour he said no, in the first term they would identify when they could return to surplus.
So, already, we have seen the Leader of the Opposition backtrack. We saw the weakness of his position. We saw him uncertain about his plans for the Territory.
We put a budget of certainty here, and you only have to look interstate to see what has happened. I will quote directly from an answer given by the Treasurer to a question earlier this week about the Victorian budget:
- … the Victorian budget sacked 4200 public servants. It cancelled the first home buyer building scheme. It put up all government fees, charges and fines by 15%. It cancelled
its version of a back to school payment. It slashed its jobs training budget and delayed the building of the hospital it had promised - and all this from a government that was
elected on a promise to cut the cost of living.
I suggest to Territorians, despite all the promises about costs of living and undertakings by the Leader of the Opposition, he will head in exactly the same direction as Ted Baillieu.
It has been very interesting for me to hear the aspirations. Along with the criticism, there have been many budget bids come from each member opposite. I will not detail them, but I am sure they have been noted on both sides. He is going to have this inordinate problem where he wants to return the budget to surplus. Then, he is also going to have this problem of putting down all these budget bids that have come out tonight during the course of this debate.
I will spend some time on the Leader of the Opposition’s speech, because it needs to be critiqued. There needs to be criticism of this speech. A few perspectives need to be brought forward for the public, the media, and for the future, because this is my last budget speech. I have been around long enough to recognise a few things.
I was absolutely amazed, dumbfounded, and gobsmacked when the Leader of the Opposition started talking about a black hole. It took me right back to 2001-02. It is all here in this letter of demand, if you like, that he has given - all these 47 questions, and right up the top is the budget black hole. It was the opposition that went back to 2001-02 in this Territory parliament because, when we came to power, we discovered a black hole in their budget of about $130m. It has been obvious from the member for Port Darwin that he has never accepted that. He has never accepted they had a black hole, and this is somehow some sort of payback:. ‘You said we had a black hole, but you have a black hole in your budget now and we are going to prove it. We are going to ask all these questions. We are going to amass all these bits of information, and we are going to vindicate ourselves for what happened in 2001, when the Labor Party came to power’.
I have a quote from Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass:
- ‘The horror of that moment’, the King went on, ‘I shall never, never forget’. ‘You will, though’, the Queen said, ‘if you don’t make a memorandum of it’.
Well, I have a memorandum - in fact, I have about 150 pages of memorandum here. It is a report of the Public Accounts Committee into the budget shenanigans of the CLP when we came to power – their last budget. The budget shenanigans around the budget estimates and the black hole were exposed. The memo I am going to read from - and this is a pivotal memo in the history of the Northern Territory’s political and budgetary history - comes from the then Chief Executive of Territory Health Services, Mr Paul Bartholomew. I will be tabling this after. It is accessible on the Internet, but I will table the whole report for those who are interested. I am sure there are many new members on the other side who are not aware of this history. The memo said:
- Attached as requested is an explanation of THS’ budget situation for 2001-02 as compared to that presented in the last budget papers.
In summary, there was an artificial reduction of $8m in THS’ 2000-01 budget, in order that the 2001-02 budget figure could be presented falsely as a 2.5% increase.
In reality, the THS 2001-02 budget represents a reduction on the final 2000-01 approved budget.
There was a dissenting report. I could go on for hours about this, but they brought it up, they are the ones who talked about the black hole. It needs to be spoken about. What happened out of that is the government got an independent person to come in - Professor Percy Allan - to look at the black hole. Not only was this budget fiddle about the estimates, we found a $137m black hole. Professor Allan said in his report of the findings:
The last four budgets incorporated unrealistically low growth forecasts for government final consumption expenditure.
It was a political decision for them to create this black hole. His major recommendation was that we should:
- Adopt a Fiscal Integrity and Transparency Act to ensure that the budget:
We have done all those things, and it is absolutely futile and deceptive for the shadow Treasurer and the Leader of the Opposition to suggest there is some game going on off-line, off-budget with things such as the waterfront, and there is a lack of transparency in our budget. We accepted the recommendations; we implemented a Fiscal Integrity and Transparency Act. It is all in our budget books. This is just smoke and mirrors on the part of the CLP, just like the smoke and mirrors which was revealed when they lost government.
How many other budgets had they done the same? We will never really know. However, we did get to the bottom of it as a Public Accounts Committee. I am proud to say I chaired that Public Accounts Committee. For the members who were not present at that time, never forget their deception around budgets, and never forgive it because they have never said sorry. They have never confessed. They have never said: ‘We were wrong’. They still maintain there was never a black hole in 2000–01. I say shame on them.
That is what this exercise is all about - these silly 47 questions from the Leader of the Opposition. Leader of the Opposition, I have more questions on what you said in your budget speech, and I will go on. You attacked the convention centre; you have always hated that. That has always been something you have tried to downgrade.
You mentioned the surplus then you backtracked on it. That was absolutely reprehensible.
I will digress a little because there was a bit in your budget speech where you said:
- We believe ministers should be held accountable for wasting money, implementing failed policy, or making poor decisions. Have it out in the open.
You then went on to talk about:
- Brand new air-conditioners had to be ripped out of Nemarluk School and replaced at a cost of $800 000 because they were too noisy. That is just another example of taxpayers’ money being wasted.
I do not know where you got the figure of $800 000. I place on the record that I will take responsibility for what happened. Yes, air-conditioners were installed and were within Australian Guidelines in their noise levels. We had a complaint from a particular person who lives along Stedcombe Street who has been extremely antagonistic, and remains antagonistic, about this whole project. Rather than have the school move in there and have this person complaining in the media, etcetera, I said to the department: ‘I know the air-conditioners conform to standards, but is it possible to have something quieter on Stedcombe Street?’ They said: ‘Yes, we can put split system air-conditioners in. Bakewell school needs a new air-conditioner. The air-conditioner that was installed facing Stedcombe Street could be installed in Bakewell school’.
The all-up cost, I am advised, of removing the air-conditioning plant that had been installed, and reinstalling it at Bakewell, plus the cost of the split levels, was $57 000. The cost, I am advised, of Bakewell acquiring a new air-conditioner – essentially, it is a new air-conditioner - was $20 000 and $10 000 to have it installed and commissioned. If you take $30 000 away from $57 000, $27 000 was still within the envelope of the project, and still within the contingency fund. I was trying to do the right thing by the school and also the person who complained. I will take it on the chin.
I do not want to see an engineer in Construction and Infrastructure blamed - some members opposite are throwing stones at the design people and the engineers - I will take responsibility. I do not have any problem with that. It was $27 000. I have given the reasons why, sometimes, ministers have to intervene. Sometimes, there are other considerations which are political considerations, and considerations to those kids and their parents. Who wants a serial complainer writing to the paper continuing to complain about the noise from the air-conditioner, ruining those kids entrance and settling-in period into that school? I will take responsibility for that. You were completely wrong in $800 000, Leader of the Opposition, and that brings into question just about every other figure in your speech, as far as I am concerned.
He went on, as I mentioned today, to talk about government employees. We have given an undertaking. We have staff caps in place, but we have said there will be no sackings within the public service. You said in your budget speech:
- I will personally ensure no pay or conditions will be eroded, or any compulsory redundancy visited upon any public servant earning $110 000 or less.
He went on to say:
- However, I am not able to give a single guarantee to the highly-rewarded senior executives within this sector. That is not to say there are no senior executives well and truly worth their salt - indeed, there are, and they know who they are.
Then he went on to say:
- They have absolutely nothing to fear. In fact, I am aware of senior managers who are well and truly ready to accept greater responsibility in the Northern Territory.
This is the Leader of the Opposition who talked disparagingly at one stage about senior public servants. He defines that as anyone who earns more than $110 000 a year, the AO8s or SAO1s come August. There are quite a few of them. He called them backroom boys, carpet strollers and those characters who walk around with clipboard folders and do not provide service to Territorians.
This is what this man who would be Chief Minister thinks about public servants. He obviously has a hit list of senior public servants. There will be an absolute blood bath should he get into power.
I will always remember when Clare Martin came to power, she told us, as a very new Caucus, that there was going to be no sacking, no blood bath, and no massacre after 27 years. She believed the public service was a professional body and would work with the incoming government. That was what she wanted, and was the message she gave to all the senior executives.
There is quite the opposite message being given by the Leader of the Opposition. He has a hit list. He also has a list of people who know who they are, who are not on the list. He has, obviously, been having conversations. That is the inference I get from what he said: ‘They know who they are. You will be right, mate, but that bloke over there he has the crosshairs on his head’.
Most of these senior public servants are on contracts. You are going to have to pay them out. Is that factored into your budget calculations? The loss of knowledge through vindictiveness is a bit like Pol Pot coming into power, or Joe Stalin having a purge. This is all about personalities and vindictive behaviour. I am really concerned about what he said at the end:
- In fact, I am aware of senior managers who are well and truly ready to accept greater responsibility in the Northern Territory.
I take from that he has had conversations with individuals saying: ‘If we get into power you are getting a promotion’. I say to all the public servants who might be listening to this, who might be interested, and to the media, I think the whole issue of merit and promotion based on hard work and study will fly out the window. What will happen if promotion is based on cronyism? Promotion will be based on political affiliation and that is a very dangerous thing.
However, I believe this is the man to do it. After all, this is the man who offered Leo Abbott a job all those years ago, in return for him standing aside as a candidate. He said Tony Abbott was part of it. He was offering him a job. He denied it, but he was. He said:
- Tony Abbott says he can’t be part of this, he can’t condone it in any way. So you got an issue there. However, I have it. I have his word that if he be the Prime Minister, we will be in a strong position to look after you.
Tony Abbott has said that in the event that he is Prime Minister there is a very good position to bring strength and support around you for 2012. That is the only way out.
He did not keep that promise anyway. Here is the bloke who is offering all sorts of inducements and favours to people such as Leo Abbott. It does not surprise me in the least that he is offering inducements and favours to people in the public service who are ambitious, who will throw their lot in with someone like the Leader of the Opposition. It is despicable. If it has occurred, if it could be proved, it would be against the law. It would be against PSEMA. It comes very close to what many people would call corrupt behaviour. I am not accusing him of that. I am saying there is a big question in my mind about what is going on here.
I know it is late, but I also want to talk about his statements in terms of the …
Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. If he is not going to accuse members then he does not use the terminology. I ask that he withdraw it.
Dr BURNS: I withdraw Madam Speaker. If it has occurred, it is very questionable behaviour.
Mr Elferink: Fine, we can live with it.
Dr BURNS: Okay. Let me turn to his statements about the private sector and its relationship with any government he might lead. He said:
- Let us grow the private sector. This will not mean a wholesale sell-off of government assets …
So he does not completely dismiss the sale of government assets. We know the Government Printing Office and NT Fleet are part of that, as happened elsewhere.
- It does mean we will focus on private sector growth and diversification through wise investment, creativity, innovation and strategic planning.
Fair enough. Then, the next part:
- This will certainly include partnerships with my government, if elected, on a win/win basis.
This is code for privatising services within the Northern Territory government. There is nothing more certain than that. I say to people such as the good people who work at the laundry at the hospital, and the range of service providers within the Northern Territory government: look out, because privatisation is on their agenda. They want to reduce staff numbers, that is part of their political platform. They are going to go down the privatisation agenda. That is all code for privatisation.
I will finish because I know it is late. One thing that really caught my eye, as a former Planning minister, is where he said:
- My government will also have a major focus on planning and development. This will not be done by sacrificing our pristine natural environment or adversely affecting our unique lifestyle.
We will create an independent planning commission comprised of the highest calibre and breadth of relevant industry experience we can gather. The commission will have the responsibility
for the development and custodianship of town plans across the Territory, including the essential role of earmarking land for future infrastructure development and transport corridors. The
commission will also be the authority charged with the responsibility for assessing complex and sensitive development proposals.
That is not to say we do not value the work of the Development Consent Authority. In fact, that body does an excellent job under difficult policy and political constraints.
Here is the one buried in there. It really jumped out at me. He said:
- There needs to be increased flexibility to raise building height levels.
What does that mean? That means blocks of units in the suburbs. That means blocks of units in Johnston. That means blocks of units in Sanderson. That means Jingili people having to put up with blocks of units that have been put there by this special planning body authorised by the Leader of the Opposition. I can see the white shoes walking all over this. I say to Territorians: be very wary of these planning proposals. It needs to be scrutinised. What are your plans? Who is going to be on this authority? What sort of building heights and where? Where? Where is it? I will just wind up now. I talked about the memo. It said:
- ‘The horror of that moment’, the King went on, ‘I shall never, never forget’. ‘You will though’, the Queen said, ‘if you don’t make a memorandum of it’.
Well, I have made a memorandum of it here today in my predictions, my analysis, of what the possible future Chief Minister of the Northern Territory might do. It is all hidden in there and we should all be very concerned.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend this budget to Territorians. It is a responsible budget. It does go into deficit. It is subject, as with all of these things, to laws and rules we brought in following the CLP fiddles, games, and shenanigans that went on in 2001 around the budget estimates - the way they wound them back so they could look as though they were having an increase in funding for the 2001 election. Also, the very real black hole that existed then ...
Mr Elferink: No.
Dr BURNS: Well, here we go, he is saying no. So, there is no repentance there at all - no remorse whatsoever of what they did in 2001. They cannot be trusted in 2012 either.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Deputy Speaker, it is great to have an academic on the team in Cabinet.
Minister Burns scrutinised in great detail the proposals put forward by the opposition - the would-be if they could-be. The very worst ever budget reply from the Leader of the Opposition was a case in point, where the man went out and led with his chin, and backflipped within an hour on one of his core commitments within his speech. Minister Burns tonight has just taken us forensically through quite a few proposals that were put forward, and thought bubbles from the Leader of the Opposition - no policy behind it, just thought bubbles. Reading through the messages those thought bubbles are sending - well, the messages were pretty clear: if you are not on his favourite list, you are getting the chop if you earn more than $110000. If you have not already had the call, ‘You are okay, son’, watch out. There is no security or job tenure for anyone earning over $110 000.
That is quite extraordinary for someone whose party aspires to be a government in any jurisdiction in this nation to come out and say. I actually do not think - in this modern day and age where we apply acts regarding the independence of the public service such as the PSEMA - anyone in opposition around our great nation would propose that. However, we saw that unedifying moment here on Wednesday during the Leader of the Opposition’s budget response.
It was always, I thought, quite useful for minister Burns, the member for Johnston, to remind the party of just why the Territory Labor government brought in the Fiscal Integrity and Transparency Act. Why now, when you have budget books and papers published, which are scrutinised through an Estimates Committee, they are audited by the Auditor-General? You do not get a greater level of transparency than is required to be met under our Fiscal Integrity and Transparency Act.
I will just go there as well. Also required is the pre-election fiscal outlook which is handed down when government is in caretaker mode in August by the Under Treasurer. I challenge the opposition to put forward their costed policies so they can be tested through the prism of whether or not they come within the budget parameters over the forward estimates. Quite frankly, the budget contributions from the members opposite - as the minister for Education quite rightly pointed out - were a mixture of the normal doom and gloom we are used to, and how terrible the Territory is because Labor happens to be the government - we have heard that. They are a bit of a broken record on that subject, and it is absolutely predictable; we have heard all their speeches and scripts before.
However, there was a tinge of aspiration in their contributions; their little personal shopping lists of what they would like to do and see implemented. They all have to be costed. Put them into your election commitments and cost them, if you have any credibility. So far, you have no credibility. So far, no one believes you because the beauty of the Territory is it is small enough for people to have a chat to each other about what someone said to someone, and what someone was promising someone, and who said what. People compare the stories; they can compare what they are hearing.
The thing about government is there is a rigour applied to what you say when you are a minister. There is a rigour applied to what you say when you are a member of the Caucus of the government. If you say you are going to do something, you have to deliver it. You actually have to have costings against it and to have a plan about where it sits within the forward estimates of any budget, at any given time. In government there is a rigour; in opposition there is this - as I am fond of quoting the Chief Minister - scattering of fairy dust that occurs. They wander around promising to the person they are having the conversation with: ‘Yes, yes, we can do that’.
Quite astutely, the Leader of Government Business took us through the messages the Leader of the Opposition was sending through his budget response; the message to the white shoe brigade of: ‘Do not worry, stick with us, we will have our own special planning powers and, if there is a particular project you want to get up, we will be taking care of that. Come back, Arafura Harbour; we will have canals there. We will chop through East Point. The mangroves around Bayview can be chopped up as we want and put in the canal estates’. It was a quite interesting series of messages the minister for Education was able to scrutinise in the Leader of the Opposition’s budget response.
I am still completely flabbergasted at the paucity of the response, but also the scary level of going back to the old days of the CLP arrogance and the silver circle – the ‘we will take care of our mates; we will take care of those who helped take care of us’ messages that were interwoven throughout the entire budget response. There were no plans, no costed policies. There was a real opportunity this week to apply some credibility to the would-be if they could-be opposition which wants to be the government - the Leader of the Opposition who aspires to be the next Chief Minister.
It is an election year; there was an opportunity for him to step up to the plate and say: ‘Here are the things we are going to do, here are the costings to it, here is where we are going to apply the savings, and this is how it all adds up’. None of that - not a shred of credibility in anything he had to say; no costings, no definition. Within an hour, at a media conference, there was an unedifying backflip on the one thing he hung his hat on: returning to a surplus. Totally embarrassing! No wonder he spends most of his time looking over his shoulder at big Dave wondering: ‘Is the knife is coming in today? Is there another challenge on for the leadership?’ It is quite extraordinary.
Territory families have benefited from the fact we stuck true to them through the tough times, through Budget 2012-13. We have stuck true to them with the concessions and subsidy schemes which are the best in the nation in supporting Territorians, and the families and the seniors, with the cost of living.
Victorian Libs have slashed it. We know that is on Terry’s quiet list he will pull out of the bottom drawer if he ever gets a chance to pull out the bottom drawer.
We will continue to provide quality health and education; to invest in our law and order and our policing; to build our housing stock across the Territory, remote and urban; and help Territory businesses to gear up for growth, to ensure we are keeping their businesses strong, their doors open, the staff opportunities there because of the contracts they are getting through that all-important capital spend.
We look forward to scrutiny in Estimates with the 27 Dresses list. I do not know if anyone has seen 27 Dresses, but it is about a hapless bridesmaid. We have the 27 questions from the Leader of the Opposition, and not one policy - not one policy. It reminded me of that movie, 27 Dresses, the hapless bridesmaid. I look forward to the scrutiny. All those 27 questions are very easy to answer. It just goes to show how lazy the opposition is, because the answers are there in the budget papers. But, no, they are not going to read those budget papers, or get someone to help them read them - one of their staff. They have been adding staff so, surely, there is someone who can step them through it, give them a little hint about which page to look at to check out the Department of the Chief Minister; the waterfront figures are there.
It is always good being the Treasurer of the Territory when you are up against the member for Port Darwin. I give you the tip: the only one worse than that was the member for Katherine. Member for Brennan, you should have had a tip at shadow Treasurer, it would have been a little more challenging than dealing with ‘Uh oh, the member for Port Darwin puts his foot in his mouth again’. I am looking forward to Estimates.
Madam Speaker, I thank members who contributed to the Appropriation debate. After the Clerk reads the title of the bill, I will be moving that the committee stage be later taken.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Ms LAWRIE (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I move that the committee stage be later taken.
Motion agreed to.
ADJOURNMENT
Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I put on the public record the great news about the Golden Heart Awards 2012 for Tennant Creek and the Barkly. I outline the award categories. For Best Business/Industry - Small (1 to 10 employees), the winner was Laurie Fuchs, for 30 years of service to Elliott as a mechanic. Laurie is an outstanding citizen of Elliott in many ways, and a brilliant mechanic who works on cars, windmills, and bores. He is honest, has integrity, and has often quietly helped people with mechanical repairs for no payment.
Best Business/Industry - Large winner was Anyinginyi Health Aboriginal Cooperation for being a provider of primary healthcare for people in Tennant Creek and north Barkly communities. Anyinginyi has been running for nearly 30 years and offers many primary health services. Anyinginyi is committed to improving the health of all people of the Barkly.
Customer Service Award (Individual) was won by Roddy Calvert for her outstanding contribution to customer service since 1988, and her passion for Tennant Creek in the delivery of this service. Roddy has worked at Battery Hill since 1988. She treats visitors with respect, honesty, and a cheerful persona. Roddy has produced on her own two booklets What to Do and See and What’s for Dinner, Breakfast, Lunch and Tea for the visitors to the Barkly.
Rising Star (25 years and under) winner was Karina Files for her energetic, willing, and capable service to many areas of Tennant Creek. Karina has also received this award for promoting a range of events, as well as encouraging and fostering the development of Tennant Creek as a tourism destination in her capacity as Industry Officer for Tourism NT.
Best Team Juniors winner was Desert Storm Track and Field Barkly participants for their performances at the NT Championships in Darwin where they won seven gold medals, seven silver medals, and eight bronze medals. For most of the group, it was the first time they have ever participated on an international-class track, and they performed extremely well.
Best Team Seniors winner was Tennant Creek Tigers, AFL Barkly, for their enthusiasm and passion for the game since 1989 that recently resulted in winning the 2011 representative game against Mount Isa. Players for this successful team are selected from teams throughout the Barkly.
Best Coach winner was Wayne Green. As the main organiser and coach of Little Athletics, Wayne takes the time with every child to ensure he or she gets the most out of the experience. Wayne not only has outstanding coaching skills but works tirelessly to raise funds to go toward more opportunities for the children.
Best and Fairest Competitor winner was Matthew Green. In 2011, Matthew broke the Northern Territory record and won the gold medal for discus as part of the Desert Storm Cluster. He led the Desert Storm Barkly Under 12 side in Katherine, and was selected for the NT squad. Matthew was named the Senior Boys Highest Achiever at Tennant Creek Little Athletics presentation night.
Best Referee winner was Alison Haines for her work as a volunteer parent official at the Tennant Creek Little Athletics. Alison takes a lead role as an age group chaperone, and is always willing to officiate, with a tape measure or a recording sheet in her hand.
Rising Star (25 years and under) winner was Nicholas Corbett for representing the Clontarf team at many levels. Nicholas represented the NT Under 15 side at the national championships in Canberra, the NT Under 15 side at the Indigenous National Championships, is team captain for Junior and Senior Clontarf and made the All Stars Clontarf team.
Best Visual Artists (Individual or Group) winner was Delvina Beasley for being a prolific painter who works to preserve her culture through her art.
Best Performing Artist/s (Individual or Group under 25 years) was Kirsty Eberl from Kirsty’s Ballet School. Kirsty is passionate about dance and runs her ballet school each Saturday so children of all ages can learn to express themselves through a variety of dance genres, including ballet and tap. The school is a fantastic outlet for children, and Kirsty is a wonderful teacher.
Best Performing Artist/s, (Individual or Group under 25 years) winner was High School/Anyinginyi Singers for their positive work in writing and performing a rap song aimed at raising awareness about foetal alcohol spectrum disorder. Called Strong Baby Strong Life, the song confronts a major problem in our community and urges pregnant mothers not to drink alcohol because of the harm it can do to their unborn babies. This group wrote the song and created the clip in two days. The song has been uploaded to YouTube where it has received about 1500 hits in just a couple of months.
Rising Star - Arts (25 years and under) winner was Luke Evans. Luke is a focused and quietly keen young man who is a naturally talented artist. He was very impressed by visiting graffiti artist, Narisha Cash, and incorporated the skills he learned into his own style. Luke is also a very talented guitarist whose passion for the arts is truly inspirational.
Best Volunteer winner was Helen Kempe, for her role as volunteer within the town and the wider Barkly region where she is well-known throughout the pastoral industry as a tireless organiser and worker. Helen has one of the biggest and best photographic histories of the Barkly, having documented its social history over several decades. Helen is passionate about the Barkly’s history and, to this end, has assisted many groups and organisations with historical matters. Her dedication to the Country Women’s Association is, literally, icing on the cake.
Best Volunteer Group winner was Rotary Club of Tennant Creek for 30 years of volunteer charity work within the community. Rotary has not only remained an enthusiastic fixture at many Barkly events and assisted many individuals as well as community groups, but has extended its generosity for international projects such as Interplast, Polio Plus and Volunteer Services Abroad.
Best Community Event winner was Tennant Creek Christmas Tree. This is the longest-standing community event in Tennant Creek which has become a well-established local tradition. In the true spirit of Christmas, a free-for-all town party is held for families with each and every child receiving a gift. Funds for the event are raised throughout the year by the committee. The Tennant Creek Christmas Tree epitomises the generosity, friendliness, and spirit of our community.
Special Achievement Award for Long-standing Committee Membership winner was Marlene Hicks. Marlene’s name is synonymous with voluntary community work. She has served the Lions Club for 35 years, as well as many other committees such as the Barkly Australia Football League and Tennant Creek Women’s Refuge. Marlene started in 1976 at Barooga Lions Club and, 10 years later, moved to Tennant Creek. Her 35 years with the Lions and being a voluntary committee member with so many organisations makes her a deserving winner of the award.
Outstanding Community Contributor (under 25 years) winner was Rowan Salerman for his involvement with youth as an outstanding community police officer. Rowan engages youth on a personal level and generally cares for them. He is earnest and determined about wanting the town to be a safe place for everyone.
Community Care Award winner was Emmerson Resources for its support of the Clontarf Foundation and dedicated involvement in other areas of the community. Emmerson Resources has proved itself as a company which is proud to be a part of the Tennant Creek community.
Hero Award - Youth (25 years and under) winner was Grant Hanson for the example he sets as a fine role model for youth. Grant is our youth hero because he has demonstrated commitment to school, work, and the community. He is a responsible, community-minded young man who has made many people proud of his journey in life so far.
Hero Award - Open (over 25) winner was Stewart Whilley for his unwavering dedication to youth in the community. Stewart’s work with youth goes beyond guiding and mentoring. He truly cares about them, listens to them, fosters their self-development, and offers genuine support not available from anyone or anywhere else. Stewart has helped dozens and dozens of young people to re-engage with the community, and has gained their respect en masse.
Outstanding Cattle Station winner was Brunchilly Station for leading the way in cattle production and encouraging their hard-working staff in many ways. Everyone at Brunchilly is part of a family atmosphere, and the managers are keen to help develop career opportunities for their workers. Brunchilly supports local businesses, encourages visitors to enjoy station attractions, and is also involved in research and development.
Outstanding Clinician (doctor, nurse, health worker) winner was Celina Bond for the confidentiality, discretion, compassion, and kindness she offers to patients which has earned her the admiration of many. Celina is dedicated to her job and provides a continuity of care and trust as a nurse.
Outstanding Education Achievement winner was Grant Hanson, a Year 12 student at the Tennant Creek High School who has completed all his schooling locally. Grant is a role model for other students. He is currently undertaking a school-based apprenticeship with the Barkly Shire Council.
Community Pride Award winner was Barkly Shire Council, Service Centre, Elliott. Under the management of Brian Phillips, the Barkly Shire Council Service Centre in Elliott has flourished. The service centre’s CDEP workers keep the township clean, tidy, and welcoming, and everyone involved is proud of their achievements.
Outstanding Non-Clinician (administration, maintenance, drivers) winner was Bevan Stokes. Bevan is known widely as the man who picks up people to take them to their appointments at Anyinginyi. More than just a bus driver, Bevan plays a vital role in encouraging people to attend clinics.
The 2012 Great Big Golden Heart Award is the biggest golden heart of them all and is awarded to someone whose community spirit, care, and dedication to task is admired by all. The award goes to someone who has worked quietly and tirelessly over many decades to make Tennant Creek and the Barkly a better place ...
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Barkly, your time has expired.
Ms PURICK (Goyder): Madam Speaker, tonight I commend a talented and dedicated person in the sport of equestrian events, and will talk a little about what it takes to become an equestrian coach, and how we need to support this sport more, as it is a good sport and provides so much for young people.
Most people dream of owning their own home, but I know many a young person who dreams of owning their own horse. Over the last few years, I have come to know the horse people - as I call them - and they are an amazing group of people; whether they are a senior person involved in dressage events, or a family involved with pony club events.
When events are on at Freds Pass Reserve, an array of well-groomed horses and well-presented riders is a sight to be seen, and both rider and horse are immaculately presented. Countless hours go into preparing the horse for pony club or dressage events. I know many a mother who has risen at 5 am to plait tails and manes, and put pretty things on a rump and shiny stuff on the hooves. Clothes are ironed to within an inch of their clothing life, and riding gear polished and buffed so well you can use them as a mirror.
Many people get a bit mixed up over horse events. I can fully understand this situation as it has taken me the best part of three years to come to grips with the styles and events of dressage and all that surrounds equestrian events. Plus there are funny little things; for example, there is no such thing as a white horse in equestrian, it is a grey horse even if it is white. Then, there are the horses. I still do not know the difference between a warm blood versus a thoroughbred versus a quarter horse versus an Arab horse, but I do know the colours of appaloosa, palomino and pinto. Then, there are the ponies that come in different shapes, sizes, and colours. A pony is not just a pony as many of us would think. It could be a Shetland pony, a Welsh pony, or an Australian pony. Whatever the type of horse or its size or colour, they are all well-groomed, well-presented, well-cared-for, well-mannered, and provide great entertainment for many people. We only have to look at Freds Pass and Darwin shows and the number of people who sit patiently for a long time watching the horse events, especially children. They all enjoy the horse events.
The history of equestrian sport dates back more than 2000 years. The classical art of dressage is not new. What we see today as a highly technical and exacting discipline had its origins in the cavalries of ancient Greece when the Greeks introduced dressage training to prepare their horses for war. It continued to develop as a military exercise through the Middle Ages with a three-day event including dressage, cross country, and jumping tests designed to reflect the range of challenges horses faced in the Army. The word ‘dressage’ is a French word which roughly translates as training, and is considered the classical foundation for all equestrian training. Dressage tests the ability of horse and rider to display both athletic prowess and supreme elegance. Dressage requires precision, technical excellence, and harmony between horse and rider.
The classical method of training the horse for dressage goes back many centuries. The very spectacular jumps and gymnastics of the Haute cole ‘high school’ which entertained thousands of visitors to the Spanish Riding School had far more practical applications. Horses were trained to leap and kick out to free themselves from the melee of the surrounding foot soldiers. These horses responded to weight and leg signals from the rider, leaving both hands free to wield weapons, hence the more highly trained the horse, the better chance of survival for its rider. It went from the cavalry parade ground with its display of military horsemanship to the art of dressage as we know it today.
A second form of horsemanship is jumping, which requires horse and rider to navigate a course of jumps that fall if slightly knocked. The highest level is 5-star grand prix. At this level, the maximum height of a vertical jump is 1.6 m. The maximum width of a spread triple bar can be 2.2 m. Obstacles on a jumping course may include parallel rails, triple bars, water jumps, and simulated stone walls. Jumping was the first equestrian discipline included at an Olympic Games. Also known as show jumping, jumping as we know it today developed out of necessity.
Until the 18th century, hunters were able to gallop across open fields in pursuit of foxes but, when fences were built in the English countryside during the process of enclosure, riders and horses needed to adapt, and jumping was born.
Australia’s Edwina Tops-Alexander is the leading female rider in the world, and currently ranks seventh overall. Her best horse, Cevo Itt du Chateau, stands at just 15.2 hands high, a small horse comparatively, but a big jump is an amazing feat and accomplishment.
A third event is called eventing and is considered the triathlon of the equestrian. It has three phases, being dressage, cross country, and jumping. This is the event that attracts the most interest in the Olympics and that Australia has done exceptionally well in, in the past.
How do people get to be riders at Olympic level? They have to be coached. In the equestrian world, coaching is an art and a special skill in itself, as the person must be a proficient rider as well as be able to coach. In many other sports, a coach may not necessarily need to be a first-class participant in the sport to be a good coach, but in equestrian coaching the person must be very proficient in riding, care and knowledge of the horse, and have capacity and ability to be a good coach.
Under the rules of Equestrian Australia, the first level is introductory coach. I am pleased to say we have one person at this level and it is Vanessa Lines in the Top End. There is no one else in the Territory who has any level of coaching, and that is sad. I will come back to that point later.
To achieve this level, one must undertake studies and various riding activities. They must demonstrate they have strong knowledge of horse care and management including grooming, care, feed, when to undertake vet visits, and maintenance such as dentistry and foot repairs. In the riding area, they must be able to walk, trot, and canter up to preliminary dressage level. Then, they have to undertake coaching tasks, which is only flat work and involves no jumping. Before they get to be a proper coach, they have to undergo assessment from an accredited coach educator who has to come from down south to the Territory.
The next level is Level 1, which involves similar horsemanship and care and management. However, the riding component requires riding skills and knowledge up to novice dressage and jumping to 90 cm. I understand Vanessa is keen to pursue coaching qualifications, and this would be a welcome move as we need qualified coaches in the Territory to help with training and improving our riders.
We have excellent riders at senior levels, some of whom have competed interstate, and we have an abundance of junior riders, many of them showing great promise. However, to assist them in their sport, we need more coaches and people to help with training. I ask the government to take greater interest in this sport as many people who go on to Level 2 and 3 are usually nationally acclaimed; Level 3 being the people who coach our Olympians. Wouldn’t it be great if we could get people through from introductory to Level 2, then Level 3, and really bring the spotlight on to the Territory? Wouldn’t it be good if we could have homegrown coach educators, which would mean people would travel to the Territory to become accredited?
While many people enjoy watching dressage, not many people really know what the sport puts back into the Territory. The sport brings great pleasure to many people, provides a good learning opportunity, provides the basis for future careers involving horses such as cattle work, racing, horse care, and management and, of course, polocrosse, and is a great contributor to the economy.
Equestrian is part of the picture, with the other part being pony clubs. In the greater Darwin area we have many pony clubs, with my club being the Noonamah Horse and Pony Club – having, of course, the most handsome horses, superb and good-looking riders, and wonderful families. I enjoy their events, watching the riders and talking with the families. Pony clubs teach children from an early age how to care for animals, responsibilities, fairness, being a good competitor, and enjoyment of an outdoor sport. Perhaps getting up at 5 am in the morning is not so good, but the end result can be worth the hard and early work.
Back to Vanessa Lines who is why I started this speech in the first place. Congratulations on achieving introductory coach level, which has been a long and difficult road. I wish her the very best in her future coaching studies and activities, and hope one day to see her go all the way up to Level 3.
I say to the government, give more attention to this wonderful sport and support the clubs in any way possible, because it is a good sport for all ages. Congratulations, again, to Vanessa Lines.
Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, the member for Goyder. I learned a little about horses I never knew. I have a share in a racehorse. I hope it is a thoroughbred, but it is out being spelled at the moment, and it might come back as a pony. Who knows?
I just quickly say thanks to four members of parliament who are leaving very soon. I will start with my colleague, the member for Drysdale. It was very interesting listening to the condolence motion yesterday. The member for Fong Lim spoke about the people who were in the galleries. He reflected on how it is almost like a past era; and those people are gone who had connections with the current party. I was sitting here during his speech thinking about how there is a new era coming in, and those connections are linking up.
Ross came in here as part of a new wave of people - the 12 members of this side of the Chamber. He was, and continues to be, an integral part of our team. Just as the team is moving forward on to the next level, it is very disappointing to see him go. He has provided a fantastic contribution to our team. He will move on and continue in his passions in life, which still is being a bit supporter of Palmerston, and a motor sports fanatic. He wants to go into the mining sector or similar, so I wish Ross all the best. It has been good working with Ross for the last four years.
I also acknowledge you, Madam Speaker. It is always difficult - this is my first term, as you know, Madam Speaker - being in the role you are in, trying to be somewhat of a referee, and copping it from our side and so forth. You and I have shared a wink, a laugh, or different things from time to time - although you should not have kicked me out yesterday. But that aside ...
Madam SPEAKER: I hope you are not reflecting on the Chair, member for Braitling, because I will have to throw you out now.
Mr GILES: I am not reflecting on the Chair. It is late, it is late.
Madam SPEAKER: It is not that late!
Mr GILES: I know you have had some health issues, and I hope that you, when you leave, spend a great deal of time with your family, and look after yourself. I hope you have enjoyed your time here. I think it has been 11 years you have been in the Chamber and held ministerial positions and the Speaker’s role. I wish you all the best, and thanks very much for a warm welcome when I first came in here. I hope I have not been too much of a rowdy customer for you, Madam Speaker, but it has been fun.
The member for Johnston, the Leader of Government Business and the minister for Affordable Housing - I quite often agitate the minister for a whole range of issues, including SIHIP and public housing. I have to say minister Burns has always been very responsive when I have asked him for assistance. He has always been a very polite gentleman in conversation, and it is always good to have a conversation with him. He adds a great deal of value and character to the parliament. We do not see eye to eye on policy and politics but, in moving towards the end stage of his career, he appears to have taken on a more personal role recognising some of the failures, some of the positive things, and how to improve areas. He has moved more to the middle ground. I recognise that and believe it is a good thing. Personally, in my job, when I needed to call and get something done - although the list seems to be endless - on a number of occasions he was very responsive. He will spend a great deal of time with his family. I thank him for that role in the Chamber and his responsiveness to me on some things.
The member for Arafura also came to the Chamber in 2001. That must have been a big year when everyone walked in. She reached the height of the Deputy Chief Minister and held some very senior portfolios. She was the first Indigenous woman to be elected into the Northern Territory parliament and the most senior Aboriginal person Australia-wide. I know from my travels before I came to the Territory, many people spoke of Marion. Whether it was in New South Wales, Victoria or Canberra, many people looked at you as a - I do not know if shining light is the right expression, but someone who is a lighthouse to show - I do not say that in a negative way - there is opportunity and a pathway for people. That is fantastic. I have enjoyed talking to you and working with you.
I sincerely hope the Country Liberals are elected into government at the end of August. I am not taking anything for granted. It is a very hard thing, but I like to think we could. There are many things we could do in government, particularly in the areas where you work, Marion. If you take the role that you said you are going to take, I welcome the opportunity to work with you in the future. That will be fantastic because you are committed.
We do not see eye to eye, and you are very fiery and feisty, but it is good to see that people have front. That is fantastic. I really mean that; I think you are fantastic. Thanks very much for all your efforts in the Northern Territory. You probably believe you have done a fantastic job in areas. Some things you can improve, some things you have done a fantastic job. You will walk away with your head held high knowing you have provided a shining light for many people around Australia, not just in Arafura or the Northern Territory. Well done, and congratulations.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Braitling for his kind words.
I am going to quickly contribute to the adjournment. Every day in this position I have felt honoured to have been elected for 11-odd years as the member for Arafura, a position some may think is not much. There are members opposite who have ridiculed me and thrown disparaging comments about past glories, yesterday’s hero, etcetera, across the Chamber. It is with amusement that I often look at them with pity, and hope they can, at some stage in their life, find some peace and harmony within themselves to come to terms with the most honoured role one can have, which is to be a duly elected member representing a diverse number of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people in our electorates.
Some of my experiences, both as an Aboriginal woman and a member of parliament representing the electorate of Arafura, have often been a roller coaster - up, down, and around - sometimes exhilarating, sometimes lonely and very depressing. It is important to acknowledge we are all here today because we have been elected by people who have faith and trust that we will do whatever it takes to represent them in an honest and fearless way.
My journey into this parliament recognised and highlighted that struggle by Aboriginal women for humane conditions and the right to be safe, and to be recognised politically. More recently, I have reflected upon that progress and the choices our women have made to assert women’s rights in political, social, and economical arenas. We have seen substantial progress.
With specific regard to the Northern Territory and this place, Darwin, that I love - my home - the vibrancy and optimism is, to a large extent, a product of the rich and cosmopolitan blend of races, ethnic groups, and cultures that are reflected in our population. When I was elected to parliament, I paid testament to both my parents to acknowledge the part they played in my personal journey. Up until her tragically premature death in 1992, my mother was the constant source of wisdom about life, human values, and my strong Tiwi culture. More than anyone else in my life she has been my guiding light. I use, and have always used, my parents as an example of the many older Territorians, of whom many have been women, who have committed their lives to this place, and who I consider to be amongst the most important stakeholders in the ongoing enterprise that is our future.
I have made many friends in my journey, and many of those wonderful, strong, proud women I am going to miss - those women who have taken me under their wings, who have guided me in the path going forward. Along with those women, many men - strong, proud, traditional, cultural men - have been so privileged to have had their respect and support for over 11 years. Tragically, when I have looked back over the last couple of weeks, in many of our bush electorates, many of those men and women who have been my mentors have all passed away.
I reflect on this position, and all of the members for Arafura. They were strong men - whether it was Hyacinth Tungutalum, who was the first Country Liberal member to this parliament, the man who I was proud to call father, followed by my uncle Stanley Tipiloura and, then, Maurice Rioli - who have all, tragically, passed away.
Given the 11 years I have been privileged to be in this position, it was time to evaluate and to go forward. I just want to say to many of those women - and I will take the opportunity over the next couple of months to see them and hug them one more time; and, hopefully, it is not the last time I am going to hug them – and thank them. All of us know just how lonely it can be. I think of the members for Nhulunbuy, Arnhem, and Stuart.
As women, the task is of representing diverse bush electorates, and having not just the women, but also the men and those cultural barriers. Just because I am an Aboriginal woman does not mean I can just step over those barriers. The barriers I have are probably the same barriers the member for Nhulunbuy faces. I will get around to those women, particularly my friend, Esther Djayhgurrnga. We have been very good friends for 11 years and I still find it hard it to pronounce her surname, so I always call her Esther D. I will get to see her.
I pay special tribute to Esther as she is someone I have admired for many years, because she has stood in the face of many struggles to be where she is as the principal of that school. To see Gunbalanya School turnaround, particularly over the last 12 months, is testament to her, but also to Sue Trimble, a non-Indigenous woman who is co-principal. Both those women show black and white can work together, can get the outcomes, can work and walk in harmony with each other and, for the sake of our kids, get those outcomes. I am looking forward to seeing them.
I recognise and put on record that Sue Trimble is currently undergoing chemotherapy for liver cancer. She has been a stalwart in the community of Gunbalanya. She has assisted Esther whilst going through her own battle with cancer. Those two women have held each other and walked through this battle. I recognise both women, and all the women in that electorate. I will get around to talk to them.
Jo Vandermark a non-Indigenous woman who was an old educator, very early in my career walked me through the whole issue of language and using language as a tool for English, and was a fantastic source of pride. There have been so many of them: Helen Bonsharp in Maningrida, Helen Williams, and Casmira Munkurra, Eunice Alsto, those strong Tiwi women who have been the backbone of the health system and are currently fighting their own battles with cancer and undergoing treatment. I am looking forward to getting out of parliament and back out into the electorate, saying thank you to those women - Aunty Mary and Aunty Daisy in Minjilang. I will not stop the connection or the relationship I have with those women; that will continue post-politics.
I am looking forward to 25 August, to the outcome of the election. Hopefully, the Australian Labor Party will be returned to government, but I will have that conversation with the member for Braitling after 25 August.
Madam Speaker, I am certainly not retreating from the political world. A new door opens, and a new chapter in my life will begin.
Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Speaker, tonight I also speak on some departing members, come 25 August.
The first person I would like to farewell is my colleague, the member for Drysdale, Ross Bohlin. Ross and I worked in the police department together in crime prevention. We shared some time and space together and Ross spoke to me on a number of occasions about his interest in politics to the point where he joined the Country Liberal Party and was, subsequently, preselected.
Ross has chosen not to participate in the next election. Ross, obviously, has a huge interest in motor sport, in the mining industry, and things mechanical. I suspect Ross, when he leaves this House, will go on to bigger and better things in either of those areas. Ross is a competent person in relation to motor sport. He is an accomplished racing driver and mechanic, and very knowledgeable about all things mechanical. If he gets into the mining industry in relation to training or participation in a managerial role, I am sure he will do very well. I will look forward to having conversations with him in the future about how he may be doing far better than us financially in roles he may choose.
The next person I farewell is the member for Arafura, Marion Scrymgour. If you will excuse me for referring to her by name, it would be nice on the record to say goodbye to Ms Scrymgour, a great adversary.
It is interesting in politics. One thinks one understands what it is like in this House, then when one gets here one finds it is quite different. Without good adversaries, you will end up with mediocrity. Without the two sides of politics - or three but, generally speaking in Australia, it is two sides of politics - without the ying and the yang, you do not have accountable government. The toing and froing in this Chamber is tempered with some of the discussions you have with members opposite in committee stages, in committees themselves and, of course more recently, where I spent some time with the member for Arafura on the youth suicide committee. It demonstrated to me, if we all cooperate in some areas where we can, then we can achieve results, hopefully.
There are, of course, philosophical and political differences that divide us from time to time, and encourage some fairly vigorous and feisty debate. I must say the member for Arafura is good at giving it, and she also is fairly good at taking it, from time to time. Although none of us like to take some of the criticism we get in this House, it actually makes us better and stronger people. Some of the comments and constructive criticism I have received from the member for Arafura has sharpened my political skills, and probably made me a better person and, hopefully, a better representative for the people in my electorate.
The next person I farewell is the member for Nightcliff, Madam Speaker, a former neighbour before both of us were in politics. It was interesting days. It is interesting when you are the umpire. As we know, in any sport, event, or anywhere there is an umpire, not all sides agree with the umpire’s decision. You have put the Speaker’s position in a very high position in the minds of most people in this House. I certainly have admired the way you have made the calls. It is a very difficult position. I have not always agreed with those calls, but the thing is you have generally been consistent. Whether we have agreed with them or not, you have been consistent over the years, and you have done a fairly good job, if one takes the philosophical beliefs and the politics out of it. It is always a difficult job. I wish you well in the future. I hope you are able to enjoy a long and fruitful life, and a well-deserved break from a lifetime of very dedicated work. Madam Speaker, you leave this House with my best wishes, and good luck to you and your family.
I saved the other one for last; that is, the member for Johnston. The member for Johnston and I have crossed swords on occasions before getting into politics, and we have crossed swords in this House. It is very interesting when you get to know people from the other side. I have - I do not know what words I could use - perhaps a reluctant admiration for the member for Johnston. I do not agree with him on most occasions, but there are times when his wit and his humour have brought a good laugh to this Chamber. As I said, I have a reluctant, or begrudging, admiration for his tenacity and his intellect. He has been a very good member for Johnston.
We share a school which is in his electorate and my electorate, and I am about to inherit many of his constituents in Wagaman as a result of a redistribution. The member for Johnston has a reputation of being a good local member. I am sure he has served those people well and, perhaps, some of them will be sorry to see him go. It is inevitable that all who come into this Chamber will, at some stage, have to leave, and he has chosen this time to leave. He will not be forgotten, and the people on the other side of the Chamber will find it hard to fill his shoes, given his commitment to the Labor Party.
It is always admirable when people commit to things. Although you do not believe philosophically what they believe in, you have to admire the dedication the member for Johnston has given to his side of politics. One has to give credit where credit is due.
To the four members who are leaving, I wish them the very best. It is an interesting and challenging job. I believe many people in the community do not fully understand the commitment required from all members of this House - the 25 members who are here who believe in what they do. Whether we believe in the same philosophies is, obviously, a point of difference we have in this House. I believe most people in this House work very hard for what they believe in, even if I believe those on the other side of the House may be misguided.
Madam Deputy Speaker, that is what we are here for: to discuss the points where we believe we can help improve the situation. It is our job, and the four members departing made their contribution. I congratulate them for having the tenacity and the intestinal fortitude to put their hand up to come into this House and fight for what they believe in.
Mr HAMPTON (Stuart): Madam Deputy Speaker, I also acknowledge the four members who are coming towards the end of their political career. It is really important, as other members have done tonight, to acknowledge the contributions they have made - some shorter than others but no less significant.
First, I acknowledge the member for Drysdale, Ross Bohlin, who has been my opposition spokesperson over the last three-and-a-half years on different portfolios. As some members have said tonight, you do not quite understand what this job is all about until you are into it and, sometimes, thrown in at the deep end. Over the last three-and-a-half years, Ross has done his best in his portfolio and as a local member. I sincerely wish him all the best in the future and with whatever endeavours he takes on. I know he has a passion for motor sports, particularly mud racing, so I am sure he will be able to become involved in that area of his passion.
To my colleagues on this side of the House who are leaving, I feel I have grown up with them. My political career and experience began 11 years ago when many of their elected membership and political careers began in 2001. I gained a job as an advisor in 2001 and I feel like I have grown up with them over the past 11 years. In the early years, I looked up to many of them and studied what they did and said in parliament. I listened to it all the time on the Internet, so I feel a really close affiliation to the three members on this side who are retiring.
I thank Madam Speaker for her support and advice. I do not know how she does it sometimes in that chair, particularly during Question Time. She has done a fantastic job. We all know about the personal challenges she has had to deal with in regard to her health. She has done a fantastic job in dealing with those issues as well as sitting in the Chair and dealing with us mob in the Chamber during Question Time. To the member for Nightcliff, thank you for your friendship and your advice.
To the member for Johnston, I enjoy, and have learnt a great deal from, his performances in the House. The most I have taken from the member for Johnston is just how hard he works as a local member, and someone who knows the workings and the standing orders of this parliament. It has been a really invaluable thing for me to be able to watch him over the past 11 years.
My colleague, the member for Arafura, has been a great friend and a great mentor for me over the last 11 years, particularly the last six years I have been a member. I have not forgotten the time she gave me a poem, which I keep in my top drawer here on the left hand side, all about the job and about battling demons and some of the critics out there. I shall keep that poem in my top drawer until my last day in this Chamber, member for Arafura. I respect your courage, and what you have achieved. You have not lost that fire in the belly and that is very important and something I will try to aspire to.
To all those members who are retiring, I wish you and your families all the best into the future.
I will finish by acknowledging a gentleman I have known for 25 years. Many times in this House over the last six years I have been a member, I have made my condolences in my adjournments, remembering those who have passed on. This one is particularly difficult. I have known this gentleman for 25 years of my life. He was a hard stockman. He was very close to my children. He is their grandfather, my father-in-law, who passed away on 14 April this year. I will talk a little about his life.
We had a wonderful service at the Alice Springs Basketball Stadium on 23 April – just a week ago. He has been a part of my life for 25 years. As a father-in-law, he was everything you would expect. He was a hard man, an ex-stockman from Camooweal and Mount Isa. I learnt much from him regarding the values of life and family. I certainly will not forget our bush trips. I remember one trip where I was bogged and he taught me how to get out of a bog in a sandy creek, and told me a few things that I should have known, for sure. He was a great man.
I place on the public record the eulogy read out at the service by his niece, Hayley Iles from Mount Isa:
- Fred Trindle was born at Louie Creek, Queensland in 1934. He was one of 16 children. His parents were Ernest Francis Trindle and Bessie Ning, both deceased. Although he did not
have much schooling, he spent most of his early life being a ringer on Barkly Station and Rocklands Station.
He first met the love of his life, Maureen Stokes, in 1952 whilst on holidays. In 1954, he arrived back in Alice Springs from Avon Downs working on the sealing unit. On 22 December 1955,
they were married in Alice Springs. The following year, their first child, Steven, was born followed by Faye, Beverley, Vicki and Rebecca. His family was always his first priority and he worked
tirelessly to protect and provide for them.
- During his 45 years with the Commonwealth Department of Works, he worked in various sections such as the sealing unit, the plant pool, beef roads, bore maintenance, the ESU, the NTEC
and the Power and Water Authority.
In 1997, he retired. This gave him and his wife the opportunity to travel and catch up with their family and their trusty companion, their dog, Mitzi. In his later years, he enjoyed travelling back to
Camooweal for the Drovers Reunion where he would compete and catch up and share stories with his family and ringer mates. He loved having a punt on the horses and won more often than
he lost. We always looked to him for the Melbourne Cup winner.
His house at Poeppel Gardens was his pride and joy and he had the best organised tool shed in town. He enjoyed pottering around the yard. Dad was the best cook ever. He made the best corn
beef fritters, fried rice, and cabbage stews. It was a popular request from many people in Alice Springs and the family and friends will certainly miss those dishes. In his spare time he loved singing
and playing his guitar. His idol was Slim Dusty, who we all grew up listening to as we had no choice. Now he is with Slim Dusty, they can have their sing-songs together.
A big part of his life was spent supporting his wife, children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren in their sporting achievements. He always had an opinion on how it should have been done better.
He loved his grandchildren and great-grandchildren unconditionally, and he mellowed as they grew up and they got away with more than his children ever did.
He is survived by his wife, Maureen; five children, Steven, Faye, Beverley, Vicki and Rebecca; his 12 grandchildren, Timothy, Shaun, Dylan, Brett, Staci, Josh, Junior, Sissy, Curtly, Danielle, Jamie and
Lara. He is also survived by his four great-grandchildren Shaun, Ezra, Budi and Brodie, and there are also two more on the way.
The funeral was held in Alice Spring at the basketball stadium. There was a huge turnout from the community. Many of the old friends and members of his family from Mount Isa came. His brother, Johnny Turner, a very talented man, sang many of Slim Dusty’s songs at his service, and his niece, Hayley Iles, read the eulogy. Heather Laughton, a local lady, was the MC for the service.
I thank Allan Rowe and the people at the Gillen Club for allowing the wake to be held at the Gillen Club after the service in recognition of this old man. He was a fantastic man, a hard man, but a great family man.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016