Department of the Legislative Assembly, Northern Territory Government

2011-10-20

Madam Speaker Aagaard took the Chair at 10 am.
STATEMENT BY SPEAKER
Fire Incident at Parliament House

Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, as you would be aware, at the conclusion of sittings last night smoke was detected in the main electrical switch room adjacent to the members’ car park. Police, Fire and Emergency Services attended to contain a small fire, the cause of which is still being investigated. Staff of the Assembly were in attendance overnight and again this morning, and we anticipate receiving a number of reports during the day.

At this stage, I can advise the air-conditioning should be working as normal - it certainly is in here. We have some reduced capacity with water being pumped to the top floors of the building but this is being monitored and should be working as usual.

I also understand the sound and vision system is working, as is Hansard. If there are any problems during the day, we will have a recording machine at the Serjeant-at-Arms desk.

I will keep members advised during the course of the day if there are any changes.
ELECTORAL AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 179)

Bill presented and read a first time.

Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.

The primary purpose of the Electoral and Other Legislation Amendment Bill is to amend the Electoral Act, the Local Government Act and the Local Government (Electoral) Regulations to implement a number of reforms to the Northern Territory’s electoral legislation and processes as recommended by the Northern Territory Electoral Commissioner. The majority of the amendments proposed by the bill are technical and harmonising in nature, the adoption of which will improve and update the Territory’s electoral procedures, processes, and legislation, and align it with contemporary electoral practices and legislation in other Australia jurisdictions.

The bill also makes a number of more substantial amendments to the Territory’s electoral legislation including:

a limitation on party nominations per Legislative Assembly division to address the potential for voter confusion associated with excessive numbers of candidates at Legislative Assembly elections;
    authorisation of how to vote and campaign material to ensure the source of materials containing electoral matter is clear and unambiguous;
      incorporation of modern technological processes in service delivery, including electronic voting in strict circumstances to assist certain classes of voters at the discretion of the Electoral Commissioner;
        the relaxation of formality provisions in the voting system for Legislative Assembly and local government elections;
          a requirement for a registered political party to provide, as part of their annual return to the Electoral Commissioner, a current constitution and statement for the purpose of monitoring a party’ s continued eligibility for registration;

          the removal of the $100 candidate nomination deposit for local government elections;

          the establishment of the Electoral Commissioner as the sole provider for all local government elections; and

          the removal of the ability for an employee of a council to be able to simultaneously hold office as an elected member of the council they are employed by.

          I turn now to specific elements of the bill. Part 1 of the bill deals with preliminary matters and contains a commencement provision. It is intended that all provisions in the bill, with the exception of those contained in Parts 4, 6 and 7, will commence upon assent. The provisions in Parts 4, 6 and 7 are primarily related to the establishment of the Electoral Commissioner as the sole provider for all local government elections, and will commence on 1 May 2012. This is necessary to ensure the establishment of the Electoral Commissioner in that role does not conflict with the current timetable and processes for the local government general elections on 24 March 2012.

          Part 2 of the bill amends the Electoral Act. It defines concepts such as campaign material, electoral advertisement, how-to-vote card, and mobile polling place to aid an understanding of the act. Part 2 also includes numerous amendments of a technical nature to clarify and improve the operations and processes of the Electoral Commission. These include:

          discretion for the Electoral Commissioner to set the locations of mobile polling places at locations to service a specific class or classes of voters;
            clarification of rules associated with the assessment and processing of votes by unenrolled voters;
              the extension of postal and early voting services to disabled voters or voters who fear for their safety;
                clarification of the process for the return of the candidate nomination deposit;
                  the ability for the Electoral Commissioner to approve the use of electronic or automated systems for the purpose of electoral processing, including voting in strict circumstances and the use of electronic and certified lists in polling places to accelerate processing times; and
                    clarification that Electoral Roll information is not for sale, and the right to inspect the roll does not include the right to copy or record the roll to prevent inappropriate and commercial use of enrolment records.

                    Members may be aware that the Commonwealth government has passed amendments to the Commonwealth Electoral Act to restrict the number of candidates that can be nominated by a political party in an election for each division. This was in response to matters occurring at the by-election for the division of Bradfield in December 2009 where the excessive number of candidates on the ballot paper - nine of whom were nominated by a single political party - was considered as the primary reason the informal vote at the by-election rose to 9%, the highest ever recorded informal vote for the division of Bradfield.

                    The Electoral Commissioner has recommended that, to avoid potential voter confusion associated with excessive numbers of candidates at Legislative Assembly elections, and for consistency purposes with the Commonwealth, only one person may be nominated as a candidate by a registered political party to contest the Legislative Assembly division at an election. Accordingly, Part 2 of the bill contains a provision to give effect to that recommendation.

                    In general, the Electoral Act requires all materials containing electoral matter to be authorised; where the source of that material is unclear it has the potential to confuse electors. The Electoral Commission considers it prudent for electoral campaign material to be clear and unambiguous, properly authorised, and that these requirements extend to capture electronic and other forms of transmissions and modern technology that are now more commonly used for publishing and distributing electoral material; for example, via the Internet, electronic billboards, automated telephone calls, and push polling activities.

                    The bill inserts new sections into the Electoral Act to define the meaning of campaign material and makes it an offence for a person to publish or distribute campaign material that is not properly authorised, or contains misleading or deceptive information, or to conduct push polling activities without first stating the name and address of the person authorising the activity. In these instances, a penalty of 100 penalty units will apply for the offence committed.

                    To assist the Electoral Commission in monitoring the registration of political parties, Part 2 of the bill also contains a provision that will require the registered officer of a political party to provide the Electoral Commission with an annual return that includes a copy of the party’s constitution within 16 weeks of the end of the financial year for the purpose of determining the party’s continued eligibility for registration. A maximum of 20 penalty units will apply for failure to comply with this requirement.

                    My government believes all Territorians should contribute and actively participate in our political system. To achieve this aim, we want to ensure every vote cast is counted. That is why we are introducing a provision that will reduce the number of informal votes at Legislative Assembly elections.

                    The comparison of Australian jurisdictions’ electoral legislation indicates that the Northern Territory’s electoral legislation declares one type of vote cast informal that states such as New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria, South Australia allow to be counted; specifically, votes where a voter has used a tick or a cross instead of a ‘1’ to mark first preference for a candidate. Part 2 contains a provision that will make it acceptable for a tick or a cross to indicate a first preference to allow a ballot paper to be treated as formal, where all other candidate squares have been numbered on the ballot paper with consecutively increasing numbers. Members should note the bill does not remove an existing provision that permits one candidate square to be left blank to indicate a voter’s last preference.
                    Part 2 also contains a number of minor and consequential amendments of statute law revision nature applicable to the Electoral Act.

                    Part 3 amends the Local Government Act and includes provisions to harmonise the electoral provisions in the Local Government Act with the Electoral Act, requiring all materials containing electoral matters to be properly authorised to ensure campaign material used in local government elections is clear and unambiguous, and that these requirements extend to capture electronic, other forms of transmissions and modern technology that are now more commonly used for publishing and distributing electoral material.

                    Part 3 also includes a provision that, commencing from the local government elections in 2012, no member of a council can also be an employee of a council. The provision which allowed council members to also be employees of council was originally designed to allow flexibility during the establishment stages of new councils. Since the reform of local government, concerns have been raised by a number of councils about governance implications such as conflict of interest and staff management issues. The Local Government Association of the Northern Territory, the Local Government Administration and Legislation Advisory Committee, and the Local Government Accounting Advisory Committee support an amendment to the Local Government Act to remove the ability of council members to simultaneously be employees of the same council.

                    It is similar in this Legislative Assembly. A member of the Legislative Assembly cannot be simultaneously employed as a Northern Territory government public servant or hold public office.

                    It should be noted that the amendment does not preclude a council employee from holding a position on a local board under the amended legislation, or a council member from holding a job within an organisation, such as a resource centre which is contracted by the council, as working for a council contractor and working for the council are not the same.

                    Part 3 also contains a transitional provision to enable current members of a council who are also council employees to see out their term without being disqualified. These people will have time to decide whether they wish to stand for council at the next election, or whether they prefer to be a council employee rather than a council member. If an employee wishes to stand for council, there is provision in the Local Government Act for the employee to temporarily resign for the election period and to be reinstated if not elected.

                    Part 3 also contains a number of minor and consequential amendments of a statute law revision nature applicable to the Local Government Act.

                    Turning to Part 4 of the bill, at present the Electoral Commissioner is the returning officer for most local government elections and, although councils have the capacity to appoint an alternative returning officer, an alternative returning officer is very rarely used. The Electoral Commissioner has recommended he become the sole provider for all local government elections, consistent with his role under the Electoral Act. My government supports this recommendation. It is sensible and logical and will provide certainty that an independent authority will conduct elections to a consistent and professional standard across the Territory. In addition, the establishment of the Electoral Commissioner as sole provider will facilitate Territory-wide absent voting and advertising which will deliver the benefits of economies of scale and planning at general elections. Accordingly, Part 4 omits the definition of ‘returning officer’ as it is no longer required.

                    To assist the Electoral Commissioner in this role, the bill also amends the Local Government Act to provide the Electoral Commissioner with the discretion to set an election timetable for by-elections to allow some flexibility in customising a by-election timetable that better suits the needs of wards and council elections, if necessary.

                    Part 4 of the bill also contains a savings provision so that, in the event of a failed election at the local government general election in 2012, a fresh election is held as if provisions amending the Local Government Act had not commenced.

                    Part 5 of the bill amends the Local Government (Electoral) Regulations. Members would be aware it would not be usual practice to include amendments to regulations as part of a bill. Because provisions in the local government legislation are being harmonised with the Electoral Act to spread across the Local Government Act and Local Government (Electoral) Regulations, it was considered appropriate to include these amendments in this bill.

                    The amendments in Part 5 are primarily technical and harmonising in nature, and will commence upon assent to provide operational and procedural efficiencies to the Electoral Commission in conducting the local government general elections in 2012. These amendments include:

                    providing guiding criteria for application of the discretion for the Electoral Commissioner to set the locations of mobile polling places at locations to service a specific class or classes of voters;

                    the capacity for the Electoral Commissioner to approve the use of automated or electronic systems to facilitate election processing, voting and vote counting;

                    absent voting procedures and ordinary voting outside wards;

                    resolution of ties in counts and election results; and

                    lodgement of nominations and nomination checks for candidates.

                    Part 5 also includes a provision to remove the requirement for $100 candidate nomination deposit for local government elections. Consultation with local government councils and peak bodies regarding the removal of the candidate nomination deposit for local government elections highlighted the requirements to pay a nomination deposit presented a challenge to individuals on low disposable incomes to raise the deposit without financial support of other family or community members; presented barriers for Indigenous candidates in those places where there was no Electoral Commission presence to pay and formally lodge the deposit; presented difficulties for council staff and caused potential conflict of interest, particularly in communities where the council office is generally the sole support for community residents; and resulted in confusion with many candidates not understanding the process of obtaining a refund for their deposit. My government considers the removal of the $100 candidate nomination deposit is justified, as it will increase the participation of Territorians in local governments, and nominations from candidates at future local government elections.

                    Part 5 also contains a transitional provision which provides that the amendments relating to the removal of the $100 candidate nomination deposit at local government elections does not apply to the nomination of candidates for the local government elections to be held on 24 March 2012.

                    I previously referred to the inclusion of a provision in the Electoral Act to make it acceptable for a tick or a cross to be marked on a ballot paper which will allow the ballot paper to be treated as formal, where all other candidate squares have been marked on the ballot paper with consequentially increasing numbers. Given the high number of informal votes at the local government level, my government considers this provision has equal application in the local government context. Accordingly, a similar provision has been inserted into the Local Government (Electoral) Regulations to reduce the number of informal votes at local government elections, and will be operational at the local government general election in 2012.

                    Part 6 deals with a number of miscellaneous matters and removes references to ‘returning officer’ and replaces these with references to ‘Electoral Commissioner’, or removes obsolete provisions due to the establishment of the Electoral Commissioner as the sole provider for local government elections. These include: issuing of general directions to a returning officer; nomination of candidates to a returning officer; and closing of the roll. It also contains a provision that will allow the Electoral Commissioner, as the sole provider for local government elections, to approve the use of automated or electronic systems for the purpose of election processing, voting, vote counting, and certifying lists and polling places to accelerate processing times.

                    Last, Part 7 of the bill deals with minor consequential amendments to the Local Government Act and Local Government (Electoral) Regulations, and Part 8 contains a standard expiration clause.

                    In conclusion, I believe this bill will improve and update the Territory’s electoral procedures and processes, provide internal consistency within the Northern Territory electoral legislation, and align the Northern Territory’s electoral legislation with contemporary electoral practices adopted in other Australian jurisdictions. The technical provisions included in the bill will assist the Electoral Commissioner conducting elections, and will improve their operation processes and procedures. The bill will also ensure that all Territorians actively participate in our political system by reducing the number of informal votes at local and Territory elections, and by making sure every vote cast by Territorians is counted.

                    Madam Speaker, I commend this bill to honourable members, and table the explanatory statement to accompany the bill.

                    Debate adjourned.
                    MEDICINES, POISONS AND THERAPEUTIC GOODS BILL
                    (Serial 180)

                    Bill presented and read a first time.
                    Mr VATSKALIS (Health): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read for a second time.

                    The Territory Labor government has demonstrated its ongoing commitment to ensuring public safety in reducing the harm that drugs cause in the Territory community, including that caused by the misuse of medicines and poisons. We continue that commitment with this bill which we propose to replace the existing Poisons and Dangerous Drugs Act and the Therapeutic Goods and Cosmetics Act. Its purpose is to provide contemporary, harmonised medicines, poisons, and therapeutic goods legislation to protect and promote the health and wellbeing of the community by setting the framework for control measures to ensure public safety by minimising poisoning, medicinal misadventure, and diversion of substances to the illegal drug market. The new legislation will provide a comprehensive framework for the control of regulated substances in the Territory.

                    A review of drugs, poisons and controlled substances legislation was commissioned by the Council of Australian Governments in the context of the National Competition Policy with Rhonda Galbally being appointed to head the review. The final report, commonly referred to as the Galbally review, was released in 2001, recommending changes to legislation at all levels. In 2005, COAG unanimously accepted the amended recommendations. Since this time, many of the recommendations have been introduced. The outstanding Galbally recommendations are included in this bill.

                    In July 2007, consultation was approved by my predecessor to review the current legislation. Initial, extensive consultation was held throughout the Territory in workshops, individual face-to-face meetings, by phone, and written submissions with representatives of the Commonwealth, state health departments, Northern Territory government departments, health practitioner groups, veterinarians, industry, non-government organisations, and interested general public. During the drafting of the bill, targeted consultation for specific issues was carried out. Further consultation was conducted in April 2011 when an exposure draft was released for comment. Issues with the current act were highlighted during consultation and have been addressed in the bill.

                    The Commonwealth Therapeutic Goods Act, the TGA, provides for the establishment and maintenance of a national system of controls of therapeutic goods, both within Australia or exported from Australia, and operates in harmony with state and territory legislation in providing a uniform approach to controlling the availability, accessibility, and safe handling of medicines, poisons, and therapeutic goods throughout the country. As with all Commonwealth acts, the TGA overrides the Territory’s Therapeutic Goods and Cosmetics Act 1986. This bill includes the adoption by reference of the TGA into our legislation, plus sections of the Northern Territory Therapeutic Goods and Cosmetics Act not covered by the TGA, thus allowing for the repeal of the Northern Territory Therapeutic Goods and Cosmetics Act.

                    The health arena is dynamic and constantly influenced by new technologies, advances in transport, communication, and social change. The roles of health practitioners are changing and, in some areas, there has been a significant expansion in their scope of professional practice. This was highlighted when national registration for health practitioners commenced on 1 July 2010. Northern Territory nurse practitioners, eligible midwives, or podiatrists cannot prescribe scheduled medicines although they can in other jurisdictions.

                    The 2009 Commonwealth budget included the ability for nurse practitioners and eligible midwives who are approved to prescribe by the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia to access the Pharmaceutical Benefit Scheme (PBS) in 2010. There has been much discussion around midwives prescribing following this announcement, resulting in national agreement by AHMAC, the Australian Health Ministers Advisory Council, to provide supportive legislation for this initiative which commenced on 1 November 2010. The bill includes prescribing for eligible midwives in accordance with this national agreement, as well as for nurse practitioners and podiatrists. This change will also improve the Northern Territory’s ability to compete in the workforce market and implement more flexible services.

                    The legislation includes a framework for future recognition of other health practitioners’ additional qualifications and endorsements under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law by the Northern Territory. This will ensure the Northern Territory can respond in a timely way to changes in health practitioners’ scope of practice.

                    The bill provides increased transparency, not only for those who make and sell scheduled substances, but also for users of these substances, by making it clear who may supply what substances to whom and in what situations. For example, a wholesaler may supply scheduled substances to someone who has an authorisation under the act, and then may supply only what the authorisation allows. For example, a medical kit authorisation may authorise the holder to have only Schedule 4 medicines; and a Schedule 7 authorisation may allow the holder to have a specified Schedule 7 substance.

                    A new provision authorising delivery people to possess prescription medicines and prohibited substances for delivery purposes establishes the boundaries as to who may possess these substances, ensuring protection for this group of people for having these substances in their possession.

                    The bill provides flexibility in the period of manufacturing, wholesale, and retail licences by allowing up to three years registration, harmonising the Northern Territory with other jurisdictions.

                    Technology has brought many changes in recent years, including business practice. Modern legislation needs to ensure it reflects these changes. This bill includes the ability for industry, health services, and health practitioners to maintain electronic systems of record keeping compatible with modern business practices.

                    The Poisons and Dangerous Drugs Act and the Misuse of Drugs Act are the main Territory legislation relating to scheduled substances. Provisions making possession and supply of certain substances illegal were transferred to the Misuse of Drugs Act 1990 and corresponding provisions removed from the Poisons and Dangerous Drugs Act. Hansard records from 1989-90 show that the intent was to place control of illegal substances and legitimate substances diverted to the illicit market under the Misuse of Drugs Act rather than the Poisons and Dangerous Drugs Act. This is has created a legislative gap for substances which are misused or sold on the illicit market, but have not been included in the Misuse of Drugs Act schedules. This issue was highlighted recently when the Misuse of Drugs Act Schedule 2 was required to be amended to include 18 synthetic cannabinoid substances. A number of other gaps were identified during consultation.

                    The bill introduces offences for the possession of Schedule 4 and 8 prescription only substances and Schedule 9 prohibited substances without an appropriate authorisation under the act. People who are in the supply chain, such as manufacturers, health practitioners or veterinarians, are authorised under the act. Exemption is provided for people who have substances prescribed for them, or a person they care for such as a child or a dependant adult, or for an animal they own or care for through their work. These provisions will address the identified gap between the Misuse of Drugs Act schedules and the poisons schedules.

                    During consultation, it was identified that the current range of authorisations for various groups which require access to scheduled substances for their work needed to be expanded. The bill introduces two new authorisations; namely, a research authorisation and a Schedule 9 authorisation. Schedule 9 prohibited substances have use in a range of areas, including the use of etorphine in the control of large animals such as crocodiles when they are being moved, and educational purposes such as the training of sniffer dogs, and forensic purposes. These authorisations will support the pharmacy and medical academic programs at Charles Darwin University, research, teaching and analytical laboratories that need to use scheduled substances.

                    New provisions provide criteria to assess the suitability of an authority holder, both individuals and bodies corporate, and the activities that are allowed under the various authorities such as a manufacturer’s certificate of registration; a pest management technician’s licence; a research authorisation; or a medical kit authorisation. These new provisions provide transparency of the assessment process.

                    Natural justice is served with the introduction of an appeals mechanism. People have the ability to appeal to the Chief Health Officer regarding licences and authorities’ decisions. If the person is aggrieved by the decision, they are able to appeal to the local court to hear the matter.

                    Changes to Schedule 8 substance controls that will benefit people on long-term pain management therapy - for example, chronic severe back pain or cancer patients receiving palliative care - have been included in the bill. A new provision will allow one week’s supply of a Schedule 8 substance without a prescription in emergency circumstances, provided the prescriber has contacted the pharmacist to do so, and the period of expiry for Schedule 8 prescription has been extended from two months to three months.

                    The supply of Schedule 8 substances by pharmacists on the prescription of an interstate prescriber has been a long-standing issue for Alice Springs, and has become a greater issue since the commencement of the National Registration and Accreditation Scheme for health professions on 1 July 2010. Many health practitioners and the general public are now under the impression that Schedule 8 prescriptions can be dispensed anywhere in Australia. Tasmania, Western Australia, and the Northern Territory retain impediments to the dispensing of interstate Schedule 8 prescriptions. A mechanism to allow the supply of Schedule 8 substances by Northern Territory pharmacists on the prescription of an interstate prescriber is included in the bill.

                    The Territory stands out as having the highest rates of sexually transmitted infections in the country, both in our remote communities and urban areas. The bill provides a framework that will assist in addressing the high rate of sexually transmitted infections in the Northern Territory. It allows for the issuing of a prescription to a person for a prescribed medical condition in specified circumstances, and permits the issuing of a prescription to the partner of a person, even though the prescriber has not examined the partner. The prescribed condition proposed is Chlamydia. This change will benefit our younger population, both urban and remote, by reducing the incidence of this infection and its potentially devastating effects.

                    Not all hospitals in the Northern Territory have a pharmacist, thus the requirement under the current legislation that the pharmacist is responsible for the storage of regulated substances in the hospital creates an issue. Not all regulated substances are medicines. Regulated substances include chemicals used in products such as industrial cleaners, pest control agents, and products to control weeds. To ensure that senior hospital personnel take responsibility for the storage of regulated substances, the bill stipulates that the hospital manager takes responsibility for their storage.

                    Under current legislation, it is an offence if a health practitioner administers a Schedule 8 medicine without the administration being witnessed by a second person. In practical terms, this is not always possible, particularly in remote areas. The bill provides exceptions for nurses, midwives and Aboriginal Health Workers who work in remote areas when they are unable to have a witness. However, they will be required to record the administration in the patient’s clinical record and the reason there was no witness available.

                    The powers of authorised officers are necessarily wide in the interests of public safety. Several new powers are introduced to assist authorised officers to administer the legislation in a more effective way; namely, the ability to enter Aboriginal land without being required to hold a permit, and the right to enter an aircraft, vehicle or boat.

                    The bill provides a staged approach to dealing with breaches of the legislation. The introduction of compliance notices will ensure that a person who is in contravention of the act - for example, a wholesaler not storing a poison appropriately or a health practitioner not keeping records - will address the problem. The notice will include the problem and how long the person has to rectify it. It will be an offence not to comply with the notice.

                    A range of penalties apply for those who commit an offence by not being licensed or authorised under the act to possess, supply, or use a regulated substance. The Department of Justice will review the offences, assessing the severity of the offence then applying appropriate penalties. The penalties range from $2740 to $88 500, and imprisonment terms range from 12 months to five years.

                    The Chief Health Officer’s powers have been broadened to ensure that public safety is maintained. The introduction of a prohibition on dealing with a substance included in the Poisons Standard will provide the Territory with the ability and flexibility to address local issues. For example, in 2010 the ‘Drug Bomb’ was given to people in the Tennant Creek area putting those with severe kidney disease at risk of renal failure because their kidneys could not adequately remove phosphate, an ingredient of the ‘Drug Bomb’; or in 2011 the product known as ‘Kronic’ has been sold containing synthetic cannabinoids.

                    The Chief Health Officer is able to place a prohibition on a doctor under the Poisons and Dangerous Drugs Act to possess, prescribe, or deal in any way with a Schedule 8 substance. This power has been extended to include any health practitioner or veterinarian who handles Schedule 8 substances.

                    A new provision allowing the Chief Health Officer to declare that a specific medical condition may be treated with amphetamines, such as palliative care, will ensure the outcomes of new research into the use of amphetamines and may benefit Territory patients whilst maintaining control over this substance which has a high illicit value.

                    You are all well aware of the many disasters that have occurred, both nationally and internationally. The ability of health professionals to respond to an increase in diseases following such disasters is frequently compromised. The bill empowers the Chief Health Officer to provide emergency authorisation for the possession, supply, and administration of scheduled medicines by other appropriately trained people such as first aiders, during or following disasters such as a pandemics, cyclones, and floods, ensuring Territorians will have prompt access to appropriate medicines in such situations.

                    I believe this bill introduces greater flexibility in the application of medicines and poison controls by introducing more adaptable processes, and that the provision of the bill will have the effect of promoting national consistency of control for medicines and poisons. It will be effective in protecting public health in the Territory by ensuring the system of controls over regulated substances covers all aspects of the supply chain from the manufacturer to the consumer. It protects people who legitimately handle these substances, promoting a system that is open to public scrutiny. It demonstrates the government’s ongoing commitment to doing all it can to ensure the safety of Territorians.

                    In conclusion, I thank the officers of my department who have done an enormous amount of work on this legislation. It has been a large project, and my sincere thanks to all who contributed.

                    Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members, and table the explanatory statement.

                    Debate adjourned.
                    MOTION
                    Select Committee on Youth Suicide in the Northern Territory – Change of Membership

                    Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): After negotiation with government I move – That -

                    (a) the member for Macdonnell, Ms Anderson be discharged from service on the Select Committee on Youth Suicide; and
                      (b) that the terms of reference of the Select Committee on Youth Suicide in the Northern Territory be amended by omitting paragraph 4.
                        Paragraph 4 reads: ‘The Independent member of the committee shall be the member for Macdonnell’.
                          The reason for this procedural motion is to remove the member for Macdonnell from the committee as she is no longer an Independent member in this House. By way of explanation, the intention was to have her removed from the committee. However, the original motion requires a minor amendment which is the deletion of paragraph 4 because it would not be possible to remove the member for Macdonnell simply by removing her from the committee. We have to amend the original motion, hence the omission and deletion of paragraph 4 of the original motion to deal with that technical hurdle.

                          I have spoken to the Leader of Government Business and the Government Whip about the matter. They understand and acknowledge the circumstances and causes behind this. I anticipate no problem to this procedural motion.

                          Ms LAWRIE (Deputy Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, the government supports the motion.

                          Motion agreed to.
                          BUSINESS NAMES (NATIONAL UNIFORM LEGISLATION) REQUEST BILL
                          (Serial 170)

                          Continued from 11 August 2011.

                          Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, today I talk about the Business Names (National Uniform Legislation) Request Bill. The thrust of this particular amendment is part of a national agreement. We in this House are becoming used to the passage of legislation dealing with national agreements. I do not have a major problem with this particular amendment; however, I cannot forebear but to make certain comments in relation to national agreements more generally - but more on that later.

                          The principle in this bill is one directed towards issues of commerce and, generally in this country, there are two ways to register your company or business name and, depending on whether you are running a company or business, has a different effect on what the registering authority is for those business names.

                          It is fairly clear why we have this legislation in place. It is pretty much universal throughout the western world, and even many places beyond the western world; that is, to protect the goodwill associated with trademarks - Nike with its slash, the golden arches with the name McDonalds, etcetera. They want to protect those names so when someone else tries to set up a business called McDonalds Hamburgers, then McDonalds has recourse to the law to protect its business name. It makes sense, because it is a product provider. It provides a certain product and, if anyone else wanted to trade off the back of its name, it could simply call itself McDonalds if we did not place an impediment in their way. And so it should be, because that is just good commercial practice.

                          The process in this country, of course, deals with business names. If you have a business name which is registered as a company - at this stage, one that is dealt with by federal legislation - that company name – it could be the Happy Bean Coffee Company Pty Ltd – is registered through Australian Securities and Investments Commission, or has oversight by ASIC of the registration of that company name. This means if I was attempting to register a business in the Northern Territory of the same name, I would stub my toe very quickly up against a search of the company’s register which says the business could not register the same name because a national company had that name already.

                          That has a lot to do with the nature of companies, because companies tend to operate in multi-jurisdictional environments. They are, by their very nature, a different legal entity to a simple business. As a consequence, they have a ‘right of way’ - for lack of a better expression - over registering business names in state jurisdictions.

                          Businesses, by their very nature, are smaller entities than companies as a general rule - that is not always the truth – and, when that occurs, businesses may be registered for local purposes. This is why the states maintain control of the register of business names, so that if a business wanted to - by way of illustration - call itself the Happy Bean Coffee Shop and they happen to be located in Darwin and there was already a Happy Bean Coffee Shop in Sydney, there is a low chance there would be a direct conflict in the protection of the goodwill of that business because, by the nature of these businesses as a general rule, they are not multi-jurisdictional. So it would be unlikely that someone who went to the Happy Bean Coffee Shop in Darwin would think they were going to any organisation associated with the company or business of a similar name in Sydney - or wherever else that may be located.

                          Like all things in the real word, there are overlaps between companies and businesses in their size and their multi-jurisdictional nature. In the modern world, these overlaps can be amplified by the existence of the electronic means of communication which are manifest in current times. That being the case, the governments of Australia have turned their mind to this issue, and this bill is a result of the arrangement being struck by the governments across this country.

                          I thank the Attorney-General for the briefing provided, and the staff from the Attorney-General’s department who were kind enough to provide me with that briefing.

                          I have some observations about how this will operate. The concern I express at the outset is that the vast majority of businesses are of the nature which I described earlier; that is, small businesses which operate in small shops and have one, maybe two, retail outlets in a specific jurisdiction. They certainly do not have to go through the difficulties of company registration and management. How much is a business registration worth, $15, still? Someone? Perhaps the Attorney-General can enlighten me in her summing up. However, the business registration is a small fee, whereas to register a company nowadays, you are looking at at least $1200 just to kick off the shelf company status of a company.

                          That being the case, I want to ensure this arrangement does not have a negative effect on Territory businesses. My concern is simply that there are many businesses that rely merely on the cleverness of their name to give them a capacity to operate. A business which really exists in the Northern Territory - a business such as the Duck’s Nuts - is a catchy business name; people know where that particular restaurant is. Many people will say: ‘I will see you down at the Duck’s Nuts in 10 minutes’. Everyone knows what is going on. Catchy business names in the Territory jurisdiction only have to compete with companies or other local business names.

                          One of the concerns I flagged during the briefing process is that Northern Territory businesses would then have to compete on a national register of business names, and so catchy names would probably be immediately consumed by the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of registered businesses across this country. That would be an unfortunate outcome because all those catchy names would very quickly be lost down south, and you would have no capacity in the Northern Territory to brand your business with a catchy name. While that was not so important in the past, the very name of the business nowadays is a fundamental part of its marketing strategy.

                          I expressed this concern during the briefing and, subsequently, received a reply from the department - and I am grateful to the department for providing that reply. I am, at this point, reassured by the reply I have received. However, I will pause on it to mention it in some detail. In essence, ASIC will, ultimately, run the business register, or have final oversight of the business names register. Where, for example, the name Central Caf exists in other jurisdictions, a business would then be required to become the Central Caf Alice Springs. That is not to say it would immediately follow that business would be required to place Central Caf Alice Springs on their signage. It is merely the way you would differentiate one business from another business in different parts of the nation.

                          If there were in other jurisdictions an attempt to register Duck’s Nuts, for argument’s sake, in Sydney, and the Duck’s Nuts name is registered as a business in the Northern Territory, Duck’s Nuts in Sydney would not be prevented, as I understand it, from registering. It is just that on its business certificate, it would become Duck’s Nuts Sydney and could operate as Duck’s Nuts as a restaurant in Sydney. Any logos or other paraphernalia associated with the restaurants would then become a matter of trademark and copyright, and that operates in different legislation.

                          I do not see an enormous advantage for business in the Northern Territory and I do see potential disadvantage if this legislation does not operate in the fashion that I have just described. This, then, leads me to my original observations about the nature of national agreements.

                          National agreements should be good for the operation of whatever the national agreement attempts to oversight. National agreements should not just be signed up to for the sake of having an agreement; it should have a rationale that is tested on each occasion by some pretty simple tests. One of those tests should necessarily be: is that good for the Northern Territory? If it is not good for the Northern Territory, the Northern Territory should proudly stand up and say: ‘Sorry, this is not good for our people, we are not going to go down this path’. The Country Liberals, when presented with a situation where there is an insufficient advantage test applied to the application of a national agreement, will not sign up to them willy nilly or impulsively unless a good case can be made as to why it is to the advantage of the Northern Territory.

                          This particular national agreement reaches the bottom end of our threshold in relation to whether this is good for the Northern Territory. There is not a remarkable amount of improvement for Territory opportunity as a result of the passage of this legislation.

                          The Country Liberals place on the record now that if this legislation is overseen in a fashion contrary to the good outcomes of the Northern Territory, then we will amend or change this legislation, or pull out of the agreement if that is possible for the sake of looking after Territory interests and businesses.

                          Madam Speaker, beyond that point, at this stage, we tentatively support - with reservation - the passage of this legislation.

                          Mr KNIGHT (Business and Employment): Madam Speaker, I support the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General, and the Business Names (National Uniform Legislation) Request Bill 2011.

                          On 2 July 2009, members of the Council of Australian Governments, including the Northern Territory, signed the Intergovernmental Agreement for Business Names. Each government agreed the Commonwealth would enact a national law for the registration and use of business names. The Business Names Registration Bill 2011 forms part of the national business names registration package. This includes the Business Names Registration (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Bill 2011 and the Business Names Registration (Fees) Bill 2011. The package also incorporates other legislative instruments, including the Business Names Registration (Availability of Names) Determination 2011.

                          The national scheme will create a single register that will be effective throughout Australia and administered by the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC). The Business Names Registration Reform project also includes a non-legislative component known as the Business Online Services (BOS) project. The BOS initiative is aimed at providing a single national business portal for access to business licensing and advisory information for all Australian jurisdictions. It will provide a link to the Business Names Registration Scheme, the Australia Business Register, the Australian Taxation Office’s Australian Business Number System, Intellectual Property Australia, the trademark indicative advice, and other reforms projects such as the Standard Business Reporting Initiative.

                          The BOS project builds on my Department of Business and Employment’s business licence information system and related information resources. The Northern Territory component of the project is being managed by the Department of Business’s Territory Business Centres. They are really great centres scattered throughout the Territory, and have great staff within them. I congratulate all those staff for the hard work they do.

                          I am pleased to advise that the Northern Territory government representatives have been involved in the business names and Business Online Services development from the beginning, helping ensure the Northern Territory’s interests are considered. The national business names legislation is dependent on the Australian states referring the necessary constitutional powers to the Australian government. Because of our current constitutional position as a Territory, that is, there is presently no requirement for the Northern Territory to formally refer powers to the Australian government in order to allow it to enact these new laws or for them to operate in the Northern Territory. In most cases, the Northern Territory is treated reasonably equally with the Australian states. In this case, we are not. The bill introduced by the Attorney-General provides an important opportunity for this House to signify concurrence for a sensible national reform in which the Northern Territory is an equal and active partner with the other states and territories, as well as the Australian government.

                          The bill, as a request bill, also provides a valuable opportunity for honourable members to reinforce the Northern Territory government’s desire and objective to be treated fully as an equal with the current states of the Australian federation.

                          I congratulate the Attorney-General for taking this step. I urge honourable members to support this action and reinforce the Northern Territory’s desire for constitutional equality. I understand the introduction of this bill has been noted and welcomed by the Australian government officials involved, both as support for the national agreed business reform and as a statement of the Northern Territory government’s desire to be treated equally with the other states.

                          Through this bill, the Northern Territory formally requests the Commonwealth to enact national legislation relating to the registration use of business names based on the text of the legislation recently tabled in the parliament of Tasmania. The bill emphasised the Northern Territory, along with the Commonwealth and the states, has an important role in the implementation of national reform. The scheme requires effort from the Commonwealth, states, and territories in order to be implemented as a national scheme, and for the orderly transition and transfer of business names records from all states and territories to ASIC.

                          Honourable members will, no doubt, recall the process of enacting such a request bill was one this parliament has followed through the 1990s into the 2000s, with legislation that either helped Commonwealth law or requested the Commonwealth to make a law. Examples include the Mutual Recognition (Northern Territory) Act 1992, the Corporations (Northern Territory Request) Act and the Terrorism (Northern Territory) Request Act to name a few.

                          It is appropriate, as far as possible, that the Northern Territory’s legislative structure regarding national schemes mirror those in place between the Commonwealth and the Australian states. The national scheme aims to provide a real time online process for registering both an Australian business name and a business number. It will contribute to the seamless national economy reforms, and in easing the regulatory burdens on business, especially those trading across states and territory borders.

                          Madam Speaker, I am pleased to support the Attorney-General on this bill. I commend the bill to honourable members.

                          Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank the opposition for its support, and my colleague, the minister for Business, for his support. As he mentioned, this came out of an identified regulatory hot spot. It followed the report of the task force on reducing regulatory burden in 2006, driven out of a COAG reform process pursued at the time by the then Prime Minister, John Howard, under the Liberal Coalition government in Canberra. It was very much a driving force in removing regulatory burdens on business, and the genesis of why we have reached the point today where we are looking at passage of this legislation in relation to business names registration.

                          It is useful to point out, to allay the concerns of the shadow Attorney-General, this government just does not sign up willy-nilly to national reform or national legislation. We generally look at the genesis of it, what the concerns are, and what the advantages are for Territory businesses, in this instance. It is not a case of just going along for the ride; we have been active participants in this reform process through the Department of Business and Employment. As the Attorney-General, I am very supportive of any reforms that reduce and cut the red tape confronting business across our nation, because we are proud supporters of small business in the Territory.

                          I know you have your concerns around the catchy names and how that will work, and you provided a fair amount of time in your contribution around your concerns. I note, though, you recognised the advice from the Department of Justice in that, basically, your concerns are not justified at all. I will go to that in more detail in my response.

                          Basically, business is as usual for Territory businesses, but now they know there is a national reform they are participants in, in the registration of business names, and they have protection from someone elsewhere in Australia trying to raid their good work and their good business name. We have some tremendous business people in the Northern Territory who, I believe, are world’s best in their practices and what they are doing in innovation in their particular spheres. I am not going to name individuals, but I have the absolute joy and pleasure, as Treasurer, of meeting these inspiring Territory business people who carve out global recognition in their niche fields of innovation and business.

                          They are very protective of their name. They do not want someone down south doing a raid on their name, quite frankly, so this is a good thing for Territory business. This is the right thing to sign up to. This is what business wants us to do: get out of the way, cut some of the red tape, but also protect the innovation and strength of Territory businesses which are national leaders in niche areas, and global leaders as well. It is a very good thing to do.

                          I point out, as I did at the outset, that it was a Liberal government that started this. Okay? A Liberal government started it, picked up by Labor governments, pursued and signed off by Labor governments. So we were able to do a significant tranche of very useful reforms through this process. I know you have concerns, but I also recognise in your contribution that you recognised, based on the advice by our Department of Justice, your concerns had been allayed.

                          Regarding the fee for business names registration in the Northern Territory, it is $66 for three years - a very modest fee. That answers the query you had. Regarding the issue of how you can ensure that people cannot be disadvantaged in the Territory because someone else down south already has that business name - and you gave, obviously, the example of the Central Caf. There could be a registered name of Central Caf Alice Springs; equally there could be a Central Caf Fitzroy. That does not prevent the Central Caf, which is a catchy name if you are sitting in the Todd Street Mall, from trading as a Central Caf. It does not have to trade as Central Caf (Alice Springs), nor does it have to be on its logo. All of your concerns in that regard - which were very thoroughly and adequately addressed by the Department of the Justice officials in both the briefing and in follow-up - are concerns, but they are not actual barriers at all. They will trade with that catchy name but, on the business names register there will be an identifying element to that. That is probably a useful thing also.

                          I do not believe I know anyone who locates businesses on the business names register. In the great age of Google, most people will Google and it will come up and away you go. Caf 21, pretty popular here, is trading well in the Smith Street Mall - nothing preventing a Caf 21 elsewhere, but it will have an identifying element which distinguishes it in the business names register. I understand your concerns.

                          I understand you are saying that, if ever given the opportunity in government, and you think this is not the right thing to do, you would amend it, change it and back out of it, if you could. Well, so be it; that is your choice. However, one of the things about being in government is you actually understand the genesis of where things come from and why you are doing them. I will go back to the outset.

                          This came out of a task force to reduce regulatory burden on small business and on businesses. It has been worked through since 2006 across the business fraternity; they are supportive and they want it. It has been driven in the Territory jurisdiction by the Department of Business and Employment. I would not be standing here today as Attorney-General if I was not genuinely satisfied all of the advantages for Territory businesses are captured in here, and any concerns they may have regarding barriers have been adequately dealt with as well. I am absolutely satisfied about that.

                          I take my role very seriously. I do not sign up to national reform unless it holds an advantage for the Territory. I will just go back to that point I made. We have very good, strong, innovative, local business people operating in the Territory and, if this protects their name on the national stage, then it is a great thing.

                          Madam Speaker, I commend the legislation to the House and thank the opposition for indicating its support. I thank my colleague, the minister for Business, for his strong support as well.

                          Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.

                          Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General) (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 Statement – Greenest Territory Government

                          Continued from 19 October 2011.

                          Mr VATSKALIS (Health): Madam Speaker, I will continue my support of the Chief Minister’s statement.

                          I now turn to the Minerals and Energy Division and, in particular, this government’s efforts to develop the Territory sustainably.

                          The first area in supporting industry to recover resources responsibly remains challenging, but the Territory’s mining security bond does just that. I should point out that it took a Labor government to implement a 100% security bond for the rehabilitation of mine sites to ensure the legacy of the CLP’s approach to the environment, the Mt Todd mine site, will never occur again. I call on the CLP to offer its support for environmental security bonds. In 27 years of government, it was unable to bring itself to implement security bonds to fund rehabilitation should the company go bust. I cannot recall the CLP offering support for security bonds nor, for that matter, ever taking action against a mining company about an environmental issue in the 27 years of their government.

                          The second area is the proposed changes in the Mining Management Act brought before the House to deliver greater transparency and reporting on environmental performance of operating mines.

                          The third area is my department’s compliance team which monitors all goings on within the industry.

                          The fourth area is the work accomplished around solar energy.

                          The mining security bond means all mining operators are required to submit a rehabilitation bond for proposed environmental disturbances. The amount of the bond or level of security takes into account the risk detailed in the mine’s management plans and a post-closure component of the security bond is retained until the company can demonstrate the criteria detailed in their plan has been met.

                          The Security Assessment Board oversees the establishment of security associated with environmental rehabilitation of mining and petroleum sites. It is chartered with developing consistent and transparent policies and processes. The security policy endorsed by this government requires operators to submit security for 100% of non-rehabilitational liability. This is the strongest environmental security bond arrangements across any jurisdiction in Australia. A security assessment calculation tool was developed in 2009 to assist miners in estimating their rehabilitation liability and is updated every two years to ensure currency. The total rehabilitation bonds currently held by our government are over $607m.

                          The second area of the division’s continued efforts is the proposed changes to the Mining Management Act, or the MMA. This legislative mechanism is used to regulate mining exploration activity. It covers any mining-related activity that constitutes substantial disturbance of the environment. In practice, this means activity as little as the clearing of a small drill site during exploration, right up to full-scale mining. Under the act, the minister for Resources must have regard to the outcomes of any environmental assessment undertaken under the Environmental Assessment Act, or EAA. This provides a direct linkage between the environmental assessment processes undertaken by NRETAS and my department’s regulation of mining activities. If my department believes any proposed activity would trigger the EAA, it is referred for environmental assessment. Recommendations received are then required to be addressed by the operator as part of its mining plan.

                          The proposed changes range from compulsory reporting of environmental incidents and the ability to investigate incidents at any level, to introducing a provision allowing the company to require a community benefit plan as part of the approval of the project. Overall, these anticipated changes will enhance protection of our natural environment with respect to mining activities which continue to form the cornerstone of the Territory’s economy.

                          The CLP seems to be trying to walk on both sides of the street on this issue. The opposition spokesperson on the environment wants prescriptive regulations. The mining spokesperson has publicly said that increased environmental reporting and transparency is simply more red tape for business.

                          A third important element of protecting our environment’s sustainable development is my department’s compliance staff. In the 2010-11 financial year, 289 site visits were undertaken, including seven formal audits consisting of six major mine sites, and at least three more audits are planned before the end of this year. The department currently employs 32 mining officers, with three more about to be recruited. Mining officers have the powers of inspectors. They have the right to enter mining sites, inspect and audit operations, and direct actions to be taken. In Alice Springs, a mining committee has been appointed and the department also now benefits from an assistant director chief mining engineer.

                          The fourth aspect of this division ever to support this greenest government is our involvement in the Remote Renewable Power Generation Program. It has funded over 616 renewable energy systems in the Territory, with over $31.3m paid out in rebates. This includes projects such as a wind generating system at a remote Indigenous boarding school community, to rebates for 285 small outstations.

                          Alice Springs Solar City has seen a contribution of $2.3m from the government and $8.3m from the NT allocation of funds, as well as further funding from the Australian government. The Alice Springs project involves residential homes, with the installation of 340 solar hot water systems. Commercial buildings have also received benefits, such as the Crowne Plaza $3.3m installation. This will reduce the hotel’s carbon dioxide emissions by 420 tonnes per year, and will supply up to 80% of the instantaneous power demand during the day.

                          The solar farm: members may have noticed the facility near the Alice Springs Airport is generating enough power to supply 70 homes a year. It is estimated this project will save at least 12 943 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year, the equivalent of taking around 20% of Alice Spring’s cars off the road every year.

                          The Mines and Energy Division contributes to the long history of this government’s credentials.

                          My story does not end here. I said at the outset that the government has been making great efforts to achieve, and even surpass, best practice in energy management across all of its operations. In 2005, a working group was established to identify and drive the efforts to meet energy efficient targets set out in this government’s energy management Smart Building policy and a targeted reduction of 10%. The department responded with a number of initiatives; for example, a major project at Katherine Research Station: upgraded office security lighting, mounted timers on photo electric cells, as well as installing ceiling insulation, applied window tinting, and established smart metering. An old diesel pump was replaced with a solar system at the Douglas Daly Research Farm which provides continuous water supply, up to 44 000 L per day, and does it without creating any emission or bills.

                          My department has also continued its success in reducing fuel consumption invariably helping our cause in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Strategies such as acquiring the greenest and technologically advanced fit–for-purpose vehicles, whenever possible, have brought down emission levels. Introducing smarter business practices such as a more robust system of evaluating replacement has seen an increase of four-cylinder and diesel vehicles without adversely impacting on service level. In fact, the ongoing achievements continue and are recognised by the NT Fleet operating as the model agency in the government’s Greening the Fleet strategy.

                          The Department of Health is the largest energy consuming agency in the Northern Territory government and offers the greatest opportunities to reduce the Northern Territory government’s carbon footprint. Hospitals are, by their very nature, energy intensive, and ours account for 90% of the department’s energy use. Twenty-four hours a day air-conditioning and lighting, hot water for showers and heating in Central Australia, and steam for sterilisation and laundries all takes energy. Hospitals cannot just switch off equipment overnight to save energy and greenhouse gas emissions. Instead, the government is investing over $10m in major equipment upgrades that have great financial returns, as well as being great for the environment. We should start seeing the impact of those projects on our energy use over the next couple of years.

                          At Alice Springs Hospital, we are installing the first Building Code generation system in the Northern Territory. We will generate over 60% of the hospital’s electricity ourselves and use the exhaust gas waste heat to make carbon-free steam. This will save over 20% of the hospital’s energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, through the government’s support for the Alice Solar City project, Alice Springs Hospital is completing a range of other projects. One such project is the new natural cooling approach, which allows the hospital to turn off its chiller water system when the weather is comfortable. Instead, at this time, the hospital would be evaporatively cooled.

                          At Royal Darwin Hospital, by the end of 2012, we will have replaced five air-conditioning chillers, which use about 30% of RDH energy use, with some of the most efficient units in the world; will replace a 1970s inefficient hot water heating system with state-of-the-art equipment; retrofit over 3500 light fittings, demonstrating to industry how light fitting energy use can be halved whilst conserving the embodied energy in the old fittings; and switch from burning diesel in the boilers to LPG. We are also working hard to ensure new buildings such as the Alice Springs Hospital emergency department and Royal Darwin Hospital accommodation buildings demonstrate best practice energy and water efficiency.

                          Other Department of Health co-initiatives include trialling different ways to save computer and printer energy and paper use, and installing water efficient shower heads at Alice Springs and Royal Darwin Hospitals, an initiative predicted to save over 10 million litres of water a year. This green project demonstrates the essence of ecological sustainability. They are win/win all around. Over the next decade, the Department of Health energy management projects are predicted to save over 60 000 tonnes of carbon dioxide and $25m. This saving will help global efforts to stabilise the climate, lead by example, and reduce the financial impact on our health system of the increasing demand for services and increasing energy costs.

                          The department has had the Climate Change Committee in place since March 2009 to develop corporate strategies and coordinate efforts across the department to reduce emissions and focus on adaptation and mitigation responses with health cost benefits.

                          The Department of Children and Families also actively promotes a green culture with its officers by providing green tips in the Chief Executive’s weekly newsletter, encouraging staff to adopt green practices ranging from unplugging mobile phone chargers to using reusable water bottles, displaying signage encouraging DCF staff to change settings to two-sided printing and reduce paper wastage, and erecting signs in DCF offices reminding staff to power off the computers and switch off the lights at the end of the day.

                          All departments within my portfolio are contributing to whole-of-government climate change and adaption action plan by implementing the vehicle management policies that promote the choice of vehicles with low carbon dioxide emissions in line with Greening the Fleet strategy, and utilising the Northern Territory Fleet vehicle booking system to assist in better utilisation and management of its fleet.

                          There can be no doubt there continues to be growing recognition across government that we can make a difference. I am proud of the work my department continues to undertake to protect and enhance the Territory’s environment, and its willingness to partner with other agencies to optimise the environment outcomes we are achieving in development opportunities across our economy.

                          Madam Speaker, it is an important part of ensuring the Territory remains not only a great place to work, but that we have an environment and lifestyle that makes it a great place to live, not only for us now, but for those generations to follow.

                          Dr BURNS (Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on this very important topic of having a green Northern Territory we can hand to future generations. There is no doubt the government has very strong policies in regard to greening the Territory, and the Chief Minister listed those. We have some achievements, some of which I have been proud to be involved in such as the moratorium on land clearing in the Daly, and having a good look at water resources in the Daly. That happened while I was Environment minister. I stand by those policies and the steps government took amidst much criticism from the opposition.

                          We have policies. We are coming into an election cycle, and the opposition also has policies in relation to climate change, sustainability, and growth. The policy was released by the Leader of the Opposition in 2009. The first headline is:
                            The Country Liberals want to lead Australia in the push to cut pollution from our environment. This includes reducing climate affecting carbon emissions. While our carbon footprint is having an impact, change must occur through a coordinated global effort.

                          That is the CLP policy - very plain - released by the Opposition Leader in December 2009. It also went on to say they want a 60% reduction in carbon emissions by 2050. They talked about core philosophies, green energy, energy efficiency, government introducing practical measures and benchmarks, etcetera.

                          The Leader of the Opposition is clearly on the record in this parliament of not being a climate change denier. In fact, he was quite offended in this parliament when the Chief Minister accused him - that is the Leader of the Opposition - and members opposite of being climate change deniers. The Leader of the Opposition came into the parliament on Wednesday, 21 October 2009, and gave a very short personal explanation in relation to this very crucial matter. He said:
                            Madam Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation. During Question Time today, the Chief Minister said …

                          And here is the quote:
                            The CLP and the Leader of the Opposition are climate change deniers.

                          Then he went on to say:
                            This statement is blatantly false. On 21 February 2008, in response to a ministerial statement on climate change, I said climate change is ‘clearly measurable’ - hardly the comments of a climate change denier.

                            In addition, during the 2008 election campaign, I released a Country Liberals’ environment policy Meeting the Challenge of Climate Change, a comprehensive statement committing the Country Liberals to introduce a number of measures to address the impact of climate change in the Territory. Robust debate in this Chamber is, indeed, welcome; blatantly false statements are not.

                          That is the personal explanation. It is one of the few personal explanations made by the Leader of the Opposition. He was very sensitive about this one - not so sensitive about making a personal explanation about Leo Abbott’s job offer, Alison Anderson’s job offer, or even his outrage at the assertion made by the Chief Minister that he was upset at not being invited to be on Q&A and making telephone calls to Q&A asking why he could not be on it, and why Dave was on it. No personal explanation about those things, but a personal explanation about climate change. There is the record of the CLP and what they are saying about their policies in relation to climate change.

                          I was absolutely gobsmacked the other night in relation to a MPI brought on by the member for Fong Lim - not so much by what the member for Fong Lim said but by what the member for Brennan said. He said this - I am reading from the Daily Hansard:
                            So, there goes global warming. Where carbon dioxide has shown to increase in the atmosphere, the global temperature has actually fallen and that is scientifically proven.

                          This is the member for Brennan:
                            Then we have anyone who dares to question the science. Even scientists who question anything are simply labelled as sceptics by the these people.

                          Then he went on to say that there is a great deal of pressure for people not to question the science of climate change. Then he said:
                            I have found it interesting that there are certain scientists out there who are pushing human-made climate change, and there is another group of scientists who are saying the science does not actually tell us that.

                          What the member for Brennan was actually saying, in direct contradiction to CLP policy and the statements by his leader - and I will repeat the statements by the leader which are contained in his statement. He said:
                            The Country Liberals want to lead Australia in the push to cut pollution in our environment. This includes reducing climate affecting carbon omissions.

                          That is what he said. He also said that climate change is clearly measureable. Here we have the member for Brennan, the spokesman on the Environment, saying something that is diametrically opposed to his leader. Why is that? Because it has been driven by Canberra, by Tony Abbott. I believe this whole debate on climate change and how to address pollution and carbon omissions has got out of control …

                          Members interjecting.

                          Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!

                          Dr BURNS: It has got out of control of the Leader of the Opposition. It now rests with the member for Fong Lim and Tony Abbott. It enables and frees up members such as the member for Brennan to come in here and say just about anything he wants to in opposition to the science of climate change. In fact, I am quite sceptical about the member for Brennan’s credentials to come in here and argue about science and critically review science. After all, in 2010 we had Mr Terry Lynn Wright, who had this wonderful cure for cancer which consisted of a blue dye and a white light, operating out of a unit in the Darwin CBD and, I reckon, fraudulently taking money from cancer victims and their families under false pretences. You were prepared to promote this man. It is here in the article written by Alyssa Betts:
                            Mr Chandler met the man early last year and even offered to set up a media event so Mr Wright - who claims to cure untreatable cancers with a laser and a blue liquid out of a block of flats in Darwin’s CBD - could spruik his cure.

                            Mr Wright’s outlandish claims are now being investigated by the Therapeutic Goods Administration.

                          That is not the only trouble that Mr Wright is in; he got in deeper trouble than that, even past this cancer cure stuff:
                            Mr Chandler said yesterday his job as local member was to listen to people who come to him. He said the contact did not last long.

                          That is your excuse. However, you contacted Nick Calacouras to try to set up a meeting. You said:
                            We’ve all lost dear friends and family to cancer. I suppose you think initially wouldn’t it be fantastic if there was the cure we were looking for.

                          He then suggested an approach to the paper’s political reporter, Nick Calacouras:
                            It’s probably a good way of testing the media waters so to speak and as far as reporters go, Nick appears pretty reasonable … What do you think? We could certainly …
                          Arrange a
                            … meeting (sic) in my office and you could bring some equipment.
                          ‘You could bring some equipment’. I really think, member for Brennan, you should have been bitten a little by that ...

                          Members interjecting

                          Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!

                          Dr BURNS: The same man came to see me, and I just called him for what he was - to his face - a fraud and a charlatan. Anyone with any nous and any antenna would have seen exactly the same with this fellow. He was taking money from cancer victims, and you promoted it. You believed his Internet science, and so it is with what you have said about climate change.

                          You have taken all this stuff that is on the Internet and you have come up with your theory that the climate change scientists - those who are actually publishing the stuff about anthropogenic climate change through carbon emissions - are somehow on the take from governments. That is disgraceful and you ought to offer some apology to some of those eminent scientists who are publishing this stuff.

                          Your leader believes in climate change, he believes it is measurable but you, obviously, do not. I was very interested to hear you the other night talking about incandescent lights. You said they glow and, when you look inside them, what is in there? You said a vacuum. I compare you to an incandescent light - you certainly glow brightly, on deeper currents, very powerful currents, and those currents are coming from Canberra. However, when you examine it, it is a vacuum. There is nothing to back up what you are saying. You are in complete contradiction to your leader, and you are starting to line up with the member for Fong Lim who comes from the planet Triton. So, enough said about that ...

                          Mr TOLLNER: A point of order, Madam Speaker! He is pretty loose with the truth, but I do not think there are too many people here who would actually agree that I come from the planet Triton. That is an unparliamentary comment; he should withdraw it.

                          Madam SPEAKER: Minister, would you please withdraw the comment about the planet Triton?

                          Dr BURNS: Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to withdraw the comment; it is a slur on the people of Triton.

                          Mr TOLLNER: Madam Speaker, is the minister demonstrating his knowledge now of astronomical matters?

                          Madam SPEAKER: Member for Fong Lim, I do not believe that is a point of order - interesting comment, but not a point of order. Minister, you have the call.

                          Dr BURNS: Anyway, I …

                          Mr CONLAN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I ask that the minister withdraw the previous comment. He has not yet withdrawn it.

                          Madam SPEAKER: He has withdrawn.

                          Dr BURNS: I withdraw, member for Greatorex, and thank you for keeping me to withdraw ...

                          Mr Conlan: Very good, very good. Dot those i’s and cross those t’s.

                          Madam SPEAKER: Member for Greatorex, please cease interjecting.

                          Dr BURNS: Madam Speaker, as I said, I am very pleased to support the Chief Minister’s statement on this very important issue. In 30 years in the Territory, I have been privileged to have the opportunity to travel to many of our centres and remote communities and see the diverse natural wonders and wildlife we have. It is great.

                          Fishing is another fantastic pastime. I have shared the concern of many anglers around Darwin with proposals by the Coalition nationally, and previously by the CLP, to dam the Elizabeth River and the threat to our waterways. We know what Bill Heffernan is up to. He is circling around wanting to dam our major rivers; he has made no secret of that in the past. It is a real threat and a challenge to the Northern Territory if Bill Heffernan gets his way. But Bill is Bill, I suppose; he has a very strong view on this. As the member for Karama said, we do not want to repeat the mistakes that have been made in the Murray-Darling system. We do not want a wreck of a river or a desert out there in our river systems.

                          We have great attractions in the electorate of Johnston. We have the Water Gardens at Rapid Creek, a very important corridor within the electorate. Unfortunately, through many reasons – namely, drinkers in that corridor - there is often quite a lot of debris associated with that, such as drink containers and bottles, etcetera. That is why I welcome the Cash for Containers. It is not going to be the magic solution to all of these problems, but it will go a long way to alleviating some of those litter problems along Rapid Creek. One hundred million beverage products are consumed each year and it is an opportunity to ensure people responsibly dispose of these containers.

                          In my portfolio areas, the Department of Education and Training is working with the next generation. As I go through and visit schools, more often than not kids have environment projects. They are very proud and pleased to show me those projects. We have a younger generation which is vitally interested in preserving our environment.

                          The department has a sustainable asset strategy and also an ongoing commitment to promote energy management in schools, and energy efficient improvements to the department’s infrastructure. We want to have ecologically sustainable design principles and innovation.

                          I am very proud of the Millner school and what they did with their BER funding. They put up a solar array that provides a third of the school’s electricity …

                          Mr Chandler: How much?

                          Dr BURNS: … and excess to that requirement ...

                          Mr Chandler: A third of their school’s electricity? A third!

                          Dr BURNS: A third of that school’s electricity. I can get you a briefing if you want …

                          Mr Chandler: No, no that is fine. I heard it.

                          Dr BURNS: I hope you incorporate it in your policy …

                          Madam SPEAKER: Minister, please direct your comments through the Chair.

                          Dr BURNS: All right. It is a third of the electricity for the school and, obviously, two-thirds from the grid. Over the weekend and particularly in the peak of the Dry Season, the school actually feeds back into the electricity grid, and they receive a payment from Power and Water on the electricity that is fed into the grid. I know there are a number of other schools in Darwin, and in our remote regions, looking at this particular model.

                          I have been in conversation with the department - you can put this in your policy if you like, member for Brennan - about what incentives we might offer for schools to go down this path. Also, with the savings they make on their electricity, some of those savings might be further invested in insulation of the classrooms, making those classrooms more energy efficient. Millner school wants to lead the charge on that, and I commend the school council, which is quite visionary in that regard. The kids are very proud of that particular development.

                          I commend the Australian government for the BER funds they invested. I saw Kevin Rudd yesterday but I did not have a chance to speak to him. I would have liked to, and I would have commended him on two things: the investment, along with Julia Gillard as Education minister, in the BER of over $200m in the Northern Territory, and the substantial investment in housing and social housing he made. Many people are very appreciative of that. In relation to the BER, here is one example in the Territory, and there are many projects looking to the environment and sustainability. I commend schools for that.

                          In regard to school curriculum, students are always learning about the environment and different ways to protect the environment. It is part of the curriculum from Transition to Year 10. For example, there is specific content in studies of society and environment, science, and processes within the design and technology area that relate to sustainability. NT schools are currently planning for the implementation of the Australian curriculum from 2012. Sustainability is embedded in the three cross-curriculum priorities in all learning areas.

                          I am also glad to inform the House of the inaugural and successful Student Sustainability Summit held in 2010 at Millner Primary School, and at Girraween Primary School in June 2011. It brought together our best resources to progress green direction, which is really for our Territory children. This year’s summit brought together 14 schools and over 150 students, as well as singer and actress, Jessica Mauboy. We wish Jessica and her family all the best, and her father a speedy recovery. Jessica put in a surprise attendance and the kids really loved it. It reinforced the value of the efforts of these students.

                          This year, the summit was hosted by Girraween Primary School, one of a growing number of exemplary energy smart schools with a diverse range of students attending from as far away as the remote Arnhem community of Gapuwiyak. The summit was part of the NT Sustainability Week, with nine events and dozens of organisations involved.

                          I am also pleased to inform the House that from 2012, Centralian Senior College will become an environmental and sustainable centre for excellence in Alice Springs ...

                          Mr McCARTHY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move that the minister be granted an extension of time.

                          Motion agreed to.

                          Dr BURNS: Centralian Senior College is one of the two new school sites which next year will offer a centre for excellence program for high ability students who are passionate about their learning. Students aspiring to be scientists, social scientists, architects, engineers, economists, business entrepreneurs, or other relevant professionals will engage in an individualised curriculum with the opportunity to focus on issues and solutions for sustainable futures. Students will engage in programs with a research focus, working with Charles Darwin University, Desert Knowledge and the Desert Peoples Centre and the Education for Sustainability Central Australia Network. Students will study subjects with pathways to university to undertake a research project, and have the possibility of studying a CDU course during Year 12.

                          I have already mentioned the Energy Smart Schools Program. It was introduced in 2009 as a successful key initiative to meet the Northern Territory government’s energy smart buildings policy of a 10% reduction in energy intensity by all agencies by 2010-11. Reporting for the 2010-11 period is due to be completed in January 2012. In the 2009-10 period, a 9% reduction in energy intensity was achieved across the target schools, suggesting these schools will achieve a 10% reduction in the 2010-11 reporting period.

                          Sixty government schools responsible for over 80% of DET’s total energy use were targeted under the Energy Smart Schools Program. The schools were located throughout the Territory. This program provided a targeted approach to auditing and supporting the identified schools with technical, educational, and motivational advice to help develop and implement the energy plans. As a result of the Energy Smart Schools audit, a number of common themes and initiatives were identified across schools and this resulted in a successful submission for funding from the Australian government’s Energy Efficiency Opportunities program for lighting upgrades. DET secured $1.8m of funding from the program which is currently being invested across 44 Northern Territory schools in 2011-12.

                          We also have the National Solar Schools Program, and $2m will be invested in 2011-12 as part of the program. To date, 36 schools are approved for up to $50 000 in funding for solar photovoltaic cells and energy water efficient tanks. A second round of applications and funding for 11 more schools is currently being approved. DET has also invested $3.7m of BER school project funding in photovoltaic installation in 2011 in 15 schools.

                          I have already talked about Millner school. The advice I did not give is their project will reduce the school’s greenhouse gas emissions by 100 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent annually. I am going to have to break the news to the kids that, by reducing those emissions, probably - I am not sure whether the temperature is going to go up now; that is the converse of the argument of the member for Brennan. I will be interested to hear more of what he has to say about that.

                          I will go to Public and Affordable Housing in the time I have left. Our Housing department is also mindful of the impact it has on the environment and has targets to reduce its footprint. With over 5000 Territory Housing properties, and more being built, we need to ensure we minimise the carbon footprint of our housing stock. We know most of our tenants are very disadvantaged, and struggle to pay utility bills and payments, and this government gives many concessions to seniors, pensioners, and others. We are mindful of that, but we also understand that people have to stretch things to make ends meet.

                          As we design and deliver new public housing in the Northern Territory, we will be taking into account a wide range of temperature considerations. In the tropics of the north where orientation is the key, in Bellamack Seniors Village we are using insulation, whirly birds, louvres, airflow and ventilation. In Central Australia, with a full range of temperatures there - freezing conditions in the winter and very hot in the summer time - the houses need to be built to reduce the impact of these weather extremes. We are taking this into account in designing public housing dwellings for the climate. For instance, at the Larapinta Seniors Village, we are trialling grey water reuse and return-to-grid solar power. We will be having a close look to see how that goes, and want to explore that further in future.

                          Water saving measures are crucially important in Central Australia and also across the Territory, so we need to look at ways we can improve our water efficiency. We need tap fittings that meet at least 3-star ratings and higher wherever possible, and landscape works that take into account maximum retention of existing vegetation to minimise soil erosion and retain biodiversity.

                          With SIHIP, full steam ahead. It was interesting to see the locals at Maningrida, through the Bawinanga Aboriginal Corporation, doing all the landscaping, planting grass, planting trees - local people - and local vegetation in many cases. It was great to see, and I am sure people will really look after their gardens. Also, with SIHIP, low energy hot water systems, solar units, and heat pumps are being installed, and design and construction measures are being used to achieve 6.5-star and better energy ratings in all zones in the new housing. There has been much work and comparison between pure solar power and solar hot water systems with the solar units and heat pumps - a great deal of comparison and thought to energy efficiency.

                          Existing public housing dwellings are being upgraded also. Hazell Court in Coconut Grove has recently had extensive upgrades including roof replacements, ceiling insulation improvements, installation of whirly birds and a whole range of other things. That is very important. We can always do more, and that is why, under our Climate Change Policy, Territory Housing has committed to upgrade all public housing, where technically possible and within budget, to solar hot water by 2020.

                          It not only helps the planet but will also help our tenants reduce their power bill. Many of our public housing tenants are very proud of their house and their gardens. We currently have a competition, and there are always great entries. I believe I am presenting some of the prizes in the near future, and it will be a real pleasure to do so. One category is environmentally friendly gardens, and I will be very interested to look at those gardens.

                          The department is also moving to ensure more of its vehicle fleet have minimum greenhouse ratings. It is currently in the second year of the whole-of-government five-year program to reduce emissions by 20%. I congratulate the department, which exceeded the targets each year. In the first year, it set a 10% target and achieved a 12% reduction. In the second year, it set a 7% target and achieved a 13% reduction. So, good on the department of Housing. Staff are also looking at their office space and various aspects such as printer cartridges - any way they can get energy efficiency. I commend all the public servants. I know many of them are very energy conscious in using energy and greenhouse gas emissions. The Department of Chief Minister, with the OCPE, has established a sustainability committee and I am very heartened by that.

                          Madam Speaker, in closing, we are a government with policy. We are taking steps; we are moving along the path towards the targets we have set. The opposition does have a policy in this regard - one of the few policies it has. However, as I outlined earlier, they are in disarray over this policy. A senior member, who is the environment spokesman, is actually contradicting his leader’s own policy - actually contradicting it. It is unacceptable; the leader cannot accept it and he needs to discipline the member for Brennan. The member for Brennan needs to make a personal explanation about it and recant; I know there are many scientists who are very upset with what you have said …

                          Members interjecting.

                          Dr BURNS: You seem to have a penchant for upsetting people. I counsel you to think before you make some of these very outlandish statements, before you accept Internet science over hard science. Please, please, member for Brennan, reconsider.

                          Mr McCARTHY (Lands and Planning): Madam Speaker, it is with pleasure that I support this incredible team effort to outline the Henderson Labor government’s green credentials. It is a storybook I have really taken interest in - member after member telling the good news stories to the Northern Territory. However, there is a bit of a vacuum on the other side. I took advice from my colleagues, from team players, and I went to look at a website ...

                          Members interjecting.

                          Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!

                          Mr McCARTHY: I am pleased to say that the CLP does have a policy and it is on a website. There is not much happening on the floor in parliament showing Territorians what you believe in and what you fight for. It is important to let Territorians know the CLP policy. I quote from the website is:
                            ... preserving the Territory’s environment and tackling climate change are very high policy priorities for the Country Liberals.
                          That is good to see, and congratulations to the Country Liberals. I am not quite sure what they are going to do about that, but I am interested in hearing in the debate how they plan to address climate change. Maybe they will take advice from other global economies that have gone down the road of pricing pollution; maybe they will not. Maybe they have something special up their sleeve; it would be good to hear about it. I am sure they will have many opportunities to talk about that in this House at some stage. When you have a vacuum, when you do not hear anything, it leads to questions.

                          I am glad to say that a Labor government is able to outline clear Labor policies and is able to tell the story of what this government is doing. It has outlined green credentials, and I am very pleased to be part of that. There are more speakers to come from our government who will outline more green credentials.

                          I commend the Chief Minister for leading from the front in promoting these opportunities of greening the Territory, but also for development. It is about getting that balance right. What a challenge we have in the Northern Territory, because the place is going at a rate of knots. It is going into a whole new century of development, and the Chief Minister is very much leading that. With the green policies of this government, we are outlining to Territorians getting that balance right. This government understands that being pro-development is being open for business, but it must not be done at the expense of the Territory’s environment; it is a balance. We are certainly on the cusp of the next stage of the Territory’s development, and this government is getting that balance right.

                          As Territorians know, we are connected to our environment. Our policy and our articulation of our green credentials demonstrate that. It shapes our way of life and our thinking. Whether you are in the Top End, the Katherine/Victoria River, the Arnhem area, the Barkly, or Central Australia, it is certainly a unique part of our country and a unique part of the world. That is why we continue to strengthen the economy and create more jobs. However, we are committed to sustainability and sustainable development. As the Chief Minister noted in the statement, it is about preserving our way of life for the benefit of our children and grandchildren.

                          I am pleased to see, in the CLP’s policy on the website, they are tackling climate change for our children and our grandchildren. I am very interested to hear how they plan to do that, because they are a creative bunch over there and they have something up their sleeve, but they are not giving it away. They are going to step outside what the rest of the world is doing, what the global economies of the western world are doing. I am sure they will enlighten Territorians, sooner than later. It will come out in a media release, I am sure, produced by the spin machine of the CLP, and I look forward to it.

                          As the Minister for Lands and Planning, I regularly see the balance between development and sustainable growth. I believe our planning processes are good planning processes. They allow debate and a balance to be achieved. I take great delight in working in the planning processes. They are complex, involved, and challenging for government, but it is what we do. We do it every day; we take on the challenges.

                          With public exhibition period of development applications, interest groups and individuals are able to have their say and have their views heard in the Northern Territory under this government, and we are proud of that. The planning and development approval process for large-scale projects require an assessment by the experts in the department of Natural Resources and the Environment on key issues such as soil suitability and pressure on water tables.

                          An independent Development Consent Authority plays an integral role in assessing both the experts’ reports and submissions from the community on the impact proposed development will have on the environment and the surrounding community. It is certainly exciting, working with the Development Consent Authority. Their process ensures the broad spectrum of issues are taken into account in determining whether to approve planning amendments and development for the greater benefit of Territorians.

                          When you have a vacuum, it is pretty hard to gauge policy from the Country Liberal Party. However, you can look at history and form. I was not in the parliament but, as a Territorian, I took great interest in that space in time when our Labor government made the decision to place a moratorium on land clearing in the Daly. As a Territorian passionate about the future, I welcomed this bold move. I saw it as good policy. I saw it as a good and a challenging move. No doubt, there was pressure from the community to allow broad-scale clearing and development, but the government took a good position in waiting and looking at the science in the decision.

                          I know the Country Liberal Party was in favour of not wanting to wait for the science, but time has shown how valuable that bold decision from a Labor government was: taking time to get the science right, good planning, good governance, and good policy. Since then, government has been able to set clear guidelines on land clearing, providing certainty to industry and protecting not only the iconic Daly River for future generations to enjoy, but also policy for other very important parts of the Northern Territory. It is a fact - if you want to examine policy - that had the CLP been in power then, broad-scale clearing would have gone ahead and that would have had major impacts on that ecosystem, if we stick to the Daly example. I commend the Chief Minister for taking that decision; a decision that balances development with protection of the environment.

                          We are a government that is delivering now, but planning for the future. The Greater Darwin Region Land Use Plan Towards 2030 is a central piece of that plan for the future, identifying residential and industrial land for development to meet demand as our population and economy grows - and it is certainly growing. As the land use plan notes, it:
                            … focuses on economic and social development, balanced with protecting the Territory’s natural resources in a sustainable way.

                          It promotes residential growth through development of a balance of infill and greenfield sites. Through infill developments, we can offer Territorians the option of living in higher density areas. It not only removes the need to clear new sites for everyone, but densifying a population that brings in services from around existing areas - better use of services. That means, when you are looking at densifying: walking distances to shops and services, easy access to public transport routes, lesser reliance on cars, and less impact on the environment through connected, walkable communities. Of course, not everyone wants to live in higher density areas, so government is also indentifying greenfield sites which, through planning, we can develop in the most sustainable ways.

                          An example of the development of greenfield sites is unfolding in Palmerston East. The government, historically, is turning off land five times faster than ever seen before in the Northern Territory. Territorians are now calling places like Bellamack home. The suburb will deliver almost 670 lots on completion. If you go there - and I know the members from Palmerston city will, no doubt, celebrate this - you see roofs going on and a hive of construction activity. Not only in Bellamack, but also in Johnston, titles for Stages 1A and 1B have been issued, and development of Stage 2 will start next Dry Season. Budget 2011-12 delivers $20m to continue the headworks into Zuccoli, Johnston, and Bellamack, ensuring land is turning off to meet demand for our growing population.

                          Importantly, as Minister for Lands and Planning, I have been pleased to place on exhibition the proposal to rezone the area around the top of Mitchell Creek to Conservation and Public Space. That is a great example of government getting the balance right. It is an intensive development, a hive of construction activity. However, we are looking at very special aspects of that community and preserving them for the future - preserving them for conservation and public space.

                          Arguably, one of the most exciting greenfield sites identified is the new city of Weddell. There will be up to 50 000 people calling the city home in the future. The government’s planning is focused on it being a tropical, sustainable, and liveable city. The participation of hundreds of Territorians in last year’s Inquiry by Design forums continues to inform the planning for the city. What a wonderful way to engage Territorians with government and in a government process. I do not think there was too much negativity in that process. I was lucky to be part of not only the Top End one, but also the one in Alice Springs and Central Australia. It is nice to work with Territorians who have a positive outlook. Members on the other side could probably pick up from some of that positive outlook of their constituents and take it on board.

                          The first stages of Weddell will be developed around the Jenkins and Finn Roads intersection, with Bennetts Creek as an important feature. The government has launched two competitions for the first stages – the Weddell New Town Urban Design Competition and New Town Tropical Housing Competition. The competitions give local and national architects the opportunity to design the start of a city. We are challenging them to be creative in their vision, including a focus on environmentally sustainable buildings. I am really looking forward to the results of those competitions.

                          In challenge in policy, once again, Weddell is bordered by the Elizabeth River, an iconic river of the Top End of the Northern Territory. The Territorians and planners who participated in the Inquiry by Design forum for Weddell saw the value of the river and the potential for it to be an important part of a new sustainable city of Weddell.

                          This Labor government also recognises the value of Elizabeth River. That is why this government will not dam the Elizabeth River – in policy gap, unlike the Country Liberal Party. The Country Liberal Party remains committed to its plan to dam the Elizabeth River - simple as that. They have been pushing this plan since the 1990s, dusting it off from time to time, and recently putting it back out there as their land use plan. This is the same CLP that would develop Glyde Point for industry, directly destroying its biodiversity. The Labor government has made its position clear: industrial development will take place in appropriate areas. There will be no dirty industries around our harbour, and no heavy industry at Glyde Point.

                          This government understands and values Darwin Harbour and its importance as a heart of our natural environment and focus of our great lifestyle. This government’s commitment to protecting the Territory’s environment and delivering sustainable development extends not only from the Top End, but throughout the Territory.

                          Earlier this week, I was pleased to, once again, witness the progress of the new community suburb of Kilgariff in Alice Springs. As well as Weddell, government’s planning for Kilgariff has benefited from the direct input of Territorians, through the Inquiry by Design process. We listened to feedback from the community, and are responding with a focus on sustainable development that maximises that natural landscape in Central Australia. It is a challenging landscape, and it has been interesting to work with the planners and with the challenge, because Kilgariff is very flat land that is allowing our planners not only to be creative, but also challenging them in the innovative areas such as storm water drainage and irrigation. It is nice to also inform the House we are working closely with the Alice Springs Town Council on this new subdivision area, this new part of their community.

                          Alice Springs company, Sitzler Bros, is delivering a $4.3m contract to provide sewer and power reticulation, including a pump station. I have been witnessing much work going on in Alice Springs. It is great to see this project, the employment it creates, and the economy boost for Alice Springs.

                          Additional to that, a tender has been called this week for construction of water reticulation to the new suburb. We are out to tender to construct a new intersection at Norris Bell Avenue and the Stuart Highway for the first stages of Kilgariff, representing new road transport infrastructure, economy, and jobs. I am looking forward to seeing the growth at Kilgariff, including continuing the work with the community and the Alice Springs Town Council. It is by working together, as a government in a positive frame, that we see great gains.

                          The Greening our Streets program is another way this government is working with Territorians to enhance our environment, in a $1m initiative which partners government with Greening Australia and the community to beautify streets in Darwin and Palmerston. I also acknowledge the Darwin and Palmerston councils for their support of this program, and in working together in a positive sense. It is a grassroots approach, where Territorians were asked to nominate streets in their community which they thought could do with a makeover. More than 150 nominations were received for 66 streets, and careful assessment is now under way on which streets will be planted, and announcements will be made soon. I am sure the community planting days with Greening Australia will be great events and those members opposite, as local members, will be out there celebrating a Northern Territory Labor government initiative in partnership with Greening Australia and putting trees into suburbs that will be the focal and talking point for generations to come.

                          As the Chief Minister noted, it is important to get the balance right in delivering a sustainable future. Members will be aware that this government, through the National Partnerships Agreement on Energy Efficiency, has introduced a 5-star energy rating for residential homes and 3.5-star for units. As Territorians, we know life in the tropics is different to life in Victoria, and building styles that are ideal for the Top End would be completely out of place down south. The units in the government’s Bellamack Gardens development are a great example of building for the tropics – 6-star energy efficiency rating with louvres to channel the breeze and no air-conditioning - built by a Labor government.

                          The current computer modelling for energy ratings favour building styles from down south. They do not recognise the natural cooling elements of some of our tropical designs, and may only award two or three stars. This is appropriate; that while other states move to mandate 6-star rating, we are establishing an industry reference group to establish the performance of the current 5-star efficiency measures and assessment tools suitable for the Territory. It is about taking the time, working with the people, and getting the balance right. Where it is appropriate to act, this government will.

                          I am also pleased to advise the Department of Lands and Planning has begun its preparations to move staff from Energy House on Cavenagh Street to the new Arnhemica House building in Parap. Energy House has served the Department of Lands and Planning well for a number of years, but the department is seeking a new workplace that better meets its future needs. In taking up a workplace to meet future needs, it is appropriate the Department of Lands and Planning is moving into a workplace for the future. This is a 6-star energy rated commercial building …

                          Ms SCRYMGOUR: Madam Speaker, I move to suspend standing orders to allow the Minister for Lands and Planning an extension of time.

                          Madam SPEAKER: We do not use suspension of standing orders for this.

                          Ms SCRYMGOUR: Well, move that the minister be given an extension of time.

                          Madam SPEAKER: I note it is after 12 noon. The question is that the member’s time be extended by 10 minutes.

                          Motion agreed to.

                          Madam SPEAKER: However, minister, it is already after 12 noon. We will ask you to continue your remarks after Question Time.

                          Debate suspended.

                          MOTION
                          Note Statement – Greenest Territory Government

                          Continued from earlier this day.

                          Madam SPEAKER: The Minister for Lands and Planning is in continuation with 10 minutes.

                          Mr McCARTHY (Lands and Planning): Madam Speaker, in providing my contribution to this wonderful debate from this side of the House about greening the Territory and the real green credentials of our government, I was talking about the move of the Department of Lands and Planning to Parap. In taking up a workplace in Parap to meet future needs, it is appropriate DLP is moving into a workplace for the future in a 6-star energy-rated commercial building a short walking distance to one of our main bus routes. That will help ease the congestion on our roads heading into the CBD. It will also be a welcome boost for the traders of Parap, with 100 additional workers picking up a newspaper, morning coffee, or their lunch.

                          This is an important point, an important move, which relates to being close to public transport. Government has done much with public transport and is committed to taking more cars off the road under the Territory 2030 strategy. We were the first jurisdiction to make travel on public bus networks free for seniors, pensioners, students, and carers. Thirteen of our Buslink buses on the school routes and 11 on the urban network are low-emission vehicles, making it even greener to catch the bus to work or school. We have delivered on our election commitment to roll out orbital bus routes in peak periods, connecting Palmerston, Casuarina, and the CBD, with a semi-express route in peak periods, which means you will only have to wait 20 minutes for that connection.

                          Last month, I was pleased to join the member for Daly and officially open the new $1.8m Coolalinga park and ride facility. The new environmentally-friendly facility is a Territory first, and gives commuters the option of leaving the car or bike behind and taking advantage of public transport into Palmerston and the Darwin CBD from the rural area. I looked at it just over a week ago on a Wednesday, and am very pleased to report there were 12 vehicles parked there. Go the rural area! Go green! Not only is it a move to take cars off the road, it gives rural residents a less expensive option to get to and from work, saving money on petrol and parking. The new facility has capacity to accommodate 60 cars, four motorbikes and 20 bicycles, and can be expanded in the future. I feel confident we will see a growth in rural residents using our public transport network to reduce their costs, to make it safer and greener.

                          This government has a vision for the future, unlike those on the other side who have refused to participate in the debate. There are not many carbon emissions coming from the other side on the green debate. However, I must say I am very pleased to be part of this team and the Henderson Labor government, witnessing all the great initiatives coming out of all government portfolio areas.

                          Another park and ride is on the way for Humpty Doo, and the Territory’s public transport options continue to expand. We are also investing in a network of cycle ways across Darwin and Palmerston and the rural areas to take more cars off the road and reduce greenhouse emissions. We are responding to what Territorians want and what Territorians do; that is, a love of cycling. A recently released national participation survey showed the Territory has the highest cycling participation for any state or territory in Australia - approximately 11% of Territorians ride bicycles as a means of transport, and 26% ride a bicycle in a typical week.

                          I update the House and those opposite that since the last sittings, I am pleased to say we opened the Territory’s newest bike path from Howard Springs to Palmerston. It was a delight to hear the member for Nelson speak about that in an adjournment – a great advocate for the rural area and a great adjournment. It is a $2m, 5.4 km sealed path complete with bubblers, shelters, solar lighting in parts, and interpretive signage at key sites along the North Australian Railway corridor. I agree with the member for Nelson about it being a major preservation of heritage.

                          There is now 35 km of continuous cycle path from Howard Springs into the Darwin CBD, providing a clean, green, healthy way to get about the Top End and the rural area. We are committed to improving our network of cycle ways across the Territory, including a 2.5 km cycle path along Roystonea Avenue from University Avenue to Buscall Avenue, linking Palmerston centre to Farrar, Bakewell, Gunn, and the new suburb of Johnston; a 2.8 km Vanderlin Drive cycle path from the Stuart Highway to McMillans Road; a 1.2 km cycle path along Berrimah Road; 850 m Frances Bay Drive bike path linking Tiger Brennan Drive to Bennett Street in the CBD; and a new 5.2 km cycle path expansion in Katherine, the birthplace of Cadel Evans.

                          From bike paths to ports: as members will be aware, last month the Darwin Port Corporation was fined $19 000 for causing an environmental nuisance. I am pleased to report that the Port Corporation is formalising a performance agreement with the Department of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport. The agreement means the port will work with the regulator on long-term storm water improvement. I welcome this move, because while Darwin Harbour is a working harbour, it is also the focal point of this great city.

                          Unfortunately, under the Country Liberal Party, the wharf was built specifically to discharge untreated storm water directly into the harbour. This government is taking action to address the mistakes of the past, including blocking storm water outlets to the harbour and redirecting it to discharge into Pond F. There is much work to be done, but we are heading in the right direction.

                          As the member for Barkly, I have great pleasure travelling through some of the most beautiful landscape in the Territory and, indeed, the country. I am continually reminded of our insignificance in this great country as it shows us its power. Last week, the week before, and for a number of weeks, we have seen bushfires after record rain seasons and, at the same time, we are starting to witness the build-up and the Wet Season in the Gulf Country rolling in - the power of Mother Nature, the power of the Territory. That is why it is so important to protect our environment for the future with a focus on sustainable development. I commend the minister for the Environment for his commitment to declaring Limmen, in the electorate of Barkly, a national park and the important work the minister for Environment is doing with the constituents of Barkly - the traditional owners and other Territorians.

                          There is more to do to achieve a target, there is more to do in many things. However, we are proud to be part of a team that respects the importance of the Territory’s biodiversity.

                          In closing, there is a personal issue to talk about. I was not aware the wonderful staff I work with had noticed my use of green bags. I took to them like a duck to water. I carry much paperwork - having the engine room of portfolios - and they, apparently, take great delight in my use of green bags. Well, this Henderson government has gone even further; it is not just about the minister and his green bag. Our minister for the Environment and the Henderson government have gone much further in relation to the government ban on the use of light-weight single-use plastic bags in the Territory. What a great outcome. What a great green initiative by this government. It takes some readjusting to remember those recycled bags when you get your groceries. However, I notice everyone is adjusting. It is a regular topic of conversation, both in the supermarket at home in Tennant Creek, and also wherever else I pick up the rations on my extensive travels around the Territory.

                          I congratulate the Chief Minister and the minister for the Environment for driving the implementation of this important initiative, and also the other important initiatives that have been outlined in the House through this debate. Cash for Containers is a great retrofit of a great idea for Territory kids and Territory non-profit organisations, not only for the fundraising opportunities, but in cleaning up the environment.

                          Madam Speaker, it has become quite clear in this debate that our Labor government has real credentials with this, and a real commitment to protecting our great environment and the Territory’s sustainable future. I am honoured to commend this statement to the House.

                          Mr GUNNER (Fannie Bay): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister in his comprehensive statement for a cleaner, greener Northern Territory. I do not necessarily support his love of the scrub fowl. It is great we have a healthy environment, a thriving biodiversity that sees bush hens scrubbing their way through Parap, Fannie Bay and Stuart Park. However, I do not really like the fact they dig up my yard. I welcome what he was saying about the need and the importance of having a balanced, healthy environment. He is right in saying the fact we have so many bush hens strolling through our backyards is a great sign of the health of the place in which we live.

                          That is what we need to keep in mind as we move forward: that we maintain the great balance we have between lifestyle and environment, industry, and sustainable development. We are pro-development; we want things to happen. It is important we have those systems in place which allow investment to happen with certainty and protection for the environment. That has seen us successfully manage the development of an LNG industry in our harbour. The certainty of being able to balance the needs of a healthy and working harbour was a factor in INPEX choosing Darwin. Certainty matters.

                          Our harbour is one of our great assets. Looking locally, East Point is a special place. Every city should have something that makes it exceptional. East Point is one of our places - a rare collusion of heritage and history, cliffs, beaches and wallabies, active community groups and an active lifestyle. Fannie Bay Beach at East Point is a great spot.

                          We said no to the Arafura Harbour development which would have cut East Point in half, right through Fannie Bay Beach. The CLP supported that project. On our side we know we need to be certain our decisions and the systems we have ensure the harbour and East Point and Fannie Bay Beach stay as healthy, active spaces - as great spots.

                          These are our legacy decisions and why I am a big supporter of our decision to direct the Larrakia macerator to Ludmilla, upgrade the Ludmilla Sewerage Treatment Plant, and extend East Point outfall 1 km. That puts the East Point outfall in deeper water beyond the shallow tidal zone.

                          During the Estimates Committee, we heard from the Power and Water CEO, who provided the best explanation I have heard to date about what is currently happening in the harbour and why onshore sources flowing into the harbour are causing many concerns. There is no doubt we can do better in how we treat our sewage. The macerater should be shut down and we should treat our sewage better at Ludmilla, and we should get our East Point outfall beyond that tidal zone. These are sensible legacy decisions that will lead to a better harbour.

                          If you are interested in the weekly health of our harbour, there are several tests that occur and the results are available publicly. Power and Water test the outflow from its treatment plants on a weekly basis. Beach monitoring is undertaken by the Department of Health and Families. Harbour testing is undertaken by NRETAS. The results of all testing are available on the NT government website. That site also includes maps of sampling locations.

                          We need to ensure East Point stays special. It is close to the heart of many people, from the casual walker to the stroller, to the jogger, and for sunset barbecues - the place is packed during Greek Easter - to the Friends of East Point and the Landcare Group that works mainly through that breezeway area near Colivas Road. They are very passionate about East Point and do a great job. They have an event there in November, around the heritage listed saltpans. I am really looking forward to going out there with them. I think Madam Speaker might have also received that invitation.

                          Recently, we saw an organised campaign of Corrections, Police, Justice and council clean up the breezeway area. It finished with a team of low-security prisoners getting in there and doing a massive cleanup of rubbish. There is no doubt one of the great frustrations of people who use East Point is the littering that can occur, and why I welcome the decision to bring in Cash for Containers.

                          Litter is one of the driving reasons behind the introduction of Cash for Containers. A 10 incentive for a bottle or can to be returned and recycled works. We have seen it work for decades in South Australia. Cash for Containers reduces litter, reduces landfill, increases recycling, and creates green jobs. We also know it can be a great source of revenue for community groups. I expect kids to get heavily involved. Parap Primary School has an amazing opportunity next to the Parap Shopping Village, particularly on market mornings, to collect bottles and cans. It is something I am discussing with the school community, the principal, and the chair of the school council.

                          This is a grassroots decision by this government. It is a grassroots, practical program that will see people use it every day. Sometimes, our environmental decisions or programs happen at a level where people do not see the day-to-day outcome. That is not the case for Cash for Containers, and it will not be the case either with the ban on plastic bags. Many of our traders in Parap and Fannie Bay had moved to banning plastic bags before the government went down this path. We have many forward thinking businesses in our local area – the butcher, the corner shop, even some of the petrol stations had decided to move from ordinary plastic bags people were quite familiar with using, to the biodegradable plastic bags.

                          Perhaps the most active and environmentally conscious traders are Jo and Selvam at Saffrron. As well as making delicious food – and I am addicted to their Keema Mutter – Saffrron takes an environmental first approach to business. Perhaps the thing most diners notice is the unusual tableware and takeaway containers they use made of bamboo and sugarcane. They are disposable and biodegradable. It means less use of water and electricity, and dining out at Saffrron stands out as an unusual experience. Saffrron has a great website, and they have just started an active Facebook presence too. I encourage members to check out Saffrron’s website. The menu is listed and it is guaranteed to make you hungry.

                          On a side note, on Monday night they were highly commended at the Gold Plate Awards. That is a rare commendation. Only once in the last five years has it been awarded. They were highly commended. So, as well as making you hungry, the website, if you check it out, will show you some of the things they have done in their business to be environmentally friendly. This is the level where environmental decisions need to be made - at that individual, business level.

                          Saffrron has a ‘source locally first’ policy. They recycle, they compost, and they use appropriate stock management techniques to reduce food waste and excess packaging. They have installed energy efficient lighting throughout the restaurant. They have installed aerated taps and dual flush toilets. They use eatware, tableware and takeaway packaging that I just mentioned – the bamboo and sugarcane products - biodegradable bags, straws, and cutlery, as well as discounts for customers who bring in their own container and bag. They use Eucalyptus oil and bicarbonate soda for cleaning purposes. They send waste cooking oil to Fryer Fuels which recycles the oil for biodiesel. They stock Cascade Green, 100% carbon offset beer. If you ever need an excuse to drink beer, drink Cascade Green. They use green office products such as recycled paper and so on, and have their menu printed on soy-based inks on paper - so that is going beyond just recycled paper, the actual ink cartridges are recycled - and they also support community organisations and events.

                          That is just one example of one business in the electorate doing a very good job. They are, obviously, successful in what they do. They make great food, and are also environmentally friendly. That is triple bottom-line stuff that people look at.

                          I want to touch on that they source locally. That is a little topical at the moment with some of the fishing issues that happened yesterday and today. We have a well-managed fishing stock in the Territory. We do not need to lock away, at random, on a whim, large areas to fishing.

                          Territory fisheries have sought export accreditation, which means they are independently audited and assessed, and have been found ecologically sustainable. Many of our fisheries have been afforded the highest level of accreditation possible. When the minister said the science is in, he is referring to an independent review from earlier this year by Professor Carl Walters, an eminent, world-renowned scientist, a fisheries expert who showed that our fisheries are well managed and sustainable.

                          We heard the minister speak in Question Time earlier about the fact that we only use 8% of our biomass where, in other places in Australia, three or four times that amount is considered acceptable. When fisheries are in trouble elsewhere a common response is to close areas and allow them to replenish. To apply that logic to the Territory is to respond to a problem that is occurring somewhere else, not here. One reason we can have confidence in our environment and the balance we have in the Territory - and this goes beyond fishing – that goes to a clean, green Territory, is the creation of an Environmental Protection Agency.

                          It was a Labor government that finally saw the Territory have a mature mechanism for the protection of our environment. We have a strong, independent environment watchdog. The EPA is effective in the work it does, how it works with business, agencies, and the public, and how it adheres to its principles because it is independent.

                          We are, as members are aware, on the cusp of a major industrial expansion. The EPA ensures, as we move into exciting times, the environment is not forgotten and we have the necessary oversight for the overall environment protection we need to move forward.

                          We created the Territory’s first EPA. We took the Territory into the 21st century by having an independent environment watchdog. That is a top-level approach to the environment. However, as most of us know, it is as important to think local as it is to think Territory. One of the most active environmentally conscious, energy conscious groups we have in our electorates are our schools. I want to use one example.

                          At Stuart Park Primary School, all classroom air-conditioners are used with the on-off button, and timers are turned off. This means rooms not always in use, and which used to be always air-conditioned, are only chilled when needed. That is most important during Terms 2 and 3, during the Dry Season. With such beautiful weather, many classes do not turn on their air-conditioners at all or, if they do, it is only for the middle part of the day. That saves many hours. They have timers on all their water chillers and hot water systems so they are not working when the school is not open. From talking to the principal, when they first set out to make that decision, they were stunned at the number of hot water systems in the school. They populated over a number of years and would be running in certain classrooms 24 hours a day, with no one using the hot water produced. It was one of those legacies that can happen with decisions to put something in without realising what the consequences are going to be long term. They made some very big savings there.

                          Other small things are rationalising the size and number of fridges and when they are on, and turning off lights when rooms are not in use. They have experimented with skylights in one room so that lights are hardly ever used in that classroom. Obviously, you can only do that in some classrooms. The class control over air-conditioning has not only saved power, but it has also been very much appreciated by the classes that can do it. Not all classes get good airflow, so it is one of those ones where, as in every circumstance, you have to make decisions that are appropriate to the context you are in.

                          Stuart Park Primary School has beautiful grounds. If you have not been there, it has beautiful tropical grounds, and an environmentally conscious group of students, staff, and teachers. It is a beautiful school and is reflective in many ways of the fact that Darwin is a beautiful, tropical, green city - and we can be even greener.

                          Touching on something the last minister, Mr Gerry McCarthy, was speaking about, one of the best things we are doing soon is another local on-the-ground initiative aimed at greening our streets in a partnership with Greening Australia. Many people in my electorate have nominated their streets for a landscape plan from Greening Australia, and a community planting day where all the neighbours get out. I know many people are excited about what streets are going to get the nod. The minister said we are going to find out very soon which streets will be greened under this project. I am looking forward to getting out with local residents and Greening Australia to dig holes and plant trees. I am sure there will also be mulching and weeding. This is an excellent community building initiative. It is not just going to green our streets to make them look better, it is also going to get many neighbours working together on the streets with the Greening Australia landscape plan. It is an excellent program, and I look forward to getting out there on the end of a shovel.

                          This government recognises the importance of giving attention to the environment on all levels, from the EPA to the health of our harbour, through to Cash for Containers, to greening our streets, with a healthy balance in the Territory that allows for industry and lifestyle and a clean, green Territory.

                          Madam Speaker, I commend the statement to the House.

                          Ms WALKER (Nhulunbuy): Madam Speaker, I also speak in support of the Chief Minister’s statement, and I thank him for bringing this important and very topical subject before the House.

                          In the Northern Territory we have the great privilege of living in one of the most beautiful places in Australia and, indeed, the world. That is all the more true for my own electorate in northeast Arnhem Land; my home for more than 20 years. It is one of the most beautiful and pristine parts of Australia, with spectacular country and coastline and, given its remoteness, it is a place few people get to see.

                          I look back over my almost 22 years as a Territorian, the 10 years of Labor government in the Territory, and especially during my time as part of this government for the last three years, and see the enormous steps and the real changes that have been implemented and legislated under Labor to green the Territory. In fact, one of the very first debates I participated in, within a week of being sworn into parliament, was the statement from the then Environment minister who, at the time was the member for Macdonnell, about EcoLinks and the visionary plan to create a green corridor from north to south. It is more than just a plan, it is a reality and it continues to grow.

                          The Chief Minister was spot on when he said we not only have a very unique opportunity to get it right, we have the absolute responsibility to get it right. We know, and the opposition know, the Territory’s future, its capacity to grow and develop in order to create economic opportunities to create jobs, is contingent upon our ability to attract investment - but not at any price. We have a responsibility to ensure we can manage and strike the balance between growing industry in a way that it is environmentally and socially sustainable to minimise footprints and impacts.

                          That is why we have seen, in the last 10 years under Labor, some of the greenest reforms in the history of the Territory, including the establishment of the Environmental Protection Authority - something not only embraced by the community but demanded by the community. There is no doubting that having a standalone, independent authority at arm’s length from the government, and with a broad mandate to be able to review and reform environmental legislation, regulations and procedures in the Northern Territory is, indeed, a very positive, responsible and necessary step. The fact that the Environment Protection Authority does have the power to investigate any issues it considers to be a priority for the environmental protection of the Northern Territory is key to responsible and sustainable development in the NT, as it would be in any jurisdiction. The fact also that it can accept referrals from the minister, from the public, or can decide to undertake an investigation itself, is further evidence as to the independence of the EPA.

                          As the elected representative of a bush electorate located wholly on Aboriginal land trust, and with a mining company at the centre of my Nhulunbuy electorate, I know only too well the importance to all stakeholders of development which is both environmentally and socially acceptable. I spoke about the beauty of the Territory as a whole, but in relation to my own electorate in northeast Arnhem Land, it is more than just its physical beauty, it is also about its rich history embedded in more than 50 000 years of Yolngu history and culture, coupled with 400 to 500 years of Macassan contact, 200 years of European contact, and almost 40 years as a township. Next year, indeed, marks the 40th anniversary of Nhulunbuy. The origins of this township are a direct result of mining activity following the discovery of bauxite reserves after World War II.

                          Over the years, the various owners of the original Gove joint venture, which mines bauxite and processes it to produce alumina, have become increasingly green. That is, to a point, because of corporate and social responsibility driven by shareholder and community expectation but, more importantly, because of legislation. Obviously, the sale of the Gove operations is very topical at present following an announcement on Monday. The sale is made on the basis, purely and simply, of a commercial decision by Rio Tinto Alcan to divest itself of 13 assets within its alumina and aluminium business.

                          The member for Goyder, who I know well from my days with Nabalco and Alcan, at the time of her role as the Chief Executive of the Northern Territory Minerals Council, did some media yesterday about the cost of power generation at Gove and the fact there will be, by virtue of new federal legislation, a price on carbon emissions. That is certainly correct; you can no longer pollute for free.

                          Gove has relied upon firing its power station with dirty and costly heavy fuel oil since day 1 of operations. The company has long been conscious of its need to be a cost-efficient producer. I can assure you, looking at converting the steam power station there to a gas-fired power station has been on the company’s agenda for many years. As the Chief Minister mentioned yesterday, conversion to gas presents a great opportunity to build a gas pipeline into Gove in order to provide clean fuel, and will also generate jobs through the building of key infrastructure.

                          It is certainly on the public record that a body of work has already been undertaken in this area dating back to the gas from the Blacktip field in the Joseph Bonaparte Gulf with ENI. Alcan was in negotiation to secure gas supplies for Gove, which included the survey of a proposed gas pipeline across Arnhem Land, and all the necessary preliminary discussions with traditional owners and their representative, the NLC. The highest cost of the Gove operations is the supply of fuel oil to generate power and, given the incredibly pristine marine environment which is Gove Harbour within Melville Bay, surely the piping of clean gas is the preferable long-term supply, compared with the risks associated with large shipments from Kuwait and discharge of fuel oil, not to mention the risks associated with the sourcing of fuel from the very volatile markets of the Middle East.

                          As the Chief Minister has highlighted time and time again - and in so doing, has acknowledged the significant role of previous CLP governments - the Territory enjoys, for the most part, gas-fired power generation which is a far cry from the dirty coal-fired power generators of southern jurisdictions.

                          We have heard during this debate about the Territory, and particularly Alice Springs solar city embracing cost-efficient, clean, green and renewable solar energy to power our communities into the future. I recently had the opportunity to visit the Desert People’s Centre whilst visiting Alice Springs and met with Mark Crowe from Desert Knowledge. I take this opportunity to applaud the work Desert Knowledge does. Unfortunately, I was not able to step into the Centre for Appropriate Technology, but I am familiar with the innovative work they do, which includes bush lights which see solar power replace costly, noisy and high emissions diesel generators. This technology has been embraced by many communities in the Northern Territory, including the Laynhapuy and Marthakal Homelands in my electorate, and the homeland of Gutjangan on Bremer Island 3 km off the coast from Nhulunbuy where bush lights were installed earlier this year. Just last week the community of Marparu, a stone’s throw from Elcho Island situated on the mainland, also switched its lights to bush lights

                          Significant legislation passed by this government this year, with bipartisan support, has included the banning of lightweight plastic bags. Millions of these non-biodegradable bags end up in our landfill and choke up our environment, including our pristine waterways. Not a single voice of objection has been raised within my electorate - in fact, quite the opposite; people welcome the ban on bags. I notice, as I do my shopping in our local supermarket, since the ban came into place on 1 September, more and more people are arriving at the checkouts with their reusable bags. I checked in last week with the local Nhulunbuy Woolworths manager, Marian Adams, as to whether she was seeing a change in people’s habits. She said the first week saw a big run on the 15 reusable plastic bags. Since then, people are getting used to bringing in their own bags and she was very pleased to see a reduction in the requirement for plastic bags.

                          Similarly, people in my electorate, not unlike the rest of the Territory, welcome and embrace the Cash for Containers scheme. People in the Gove region, particularly those who are newer to town and have come from areas where having different rubbish streams for recycling is a way of life, are frequently horrified to find so little recycling takes place on the Gove Peninsula.

                          Interestingly, aluminium can recycling has been in place in Nhulunbuy for many years thanks to the local Lions Club which has an industrial can crushing machine and takes donations of cans, holds working bees to crush slabs that weigh several kilos, and then ships - thanks to the support of Perkins - these slabs into Darwin to the recycling depots down south.

                          Why would you throw away what is the world’s most recyclable metal when it can be renewed and community groups or businesses can make money from it? That would be a no-brainer. Of course, Nhulunbuy and the surrounding region is a dead keen fundraising community, therefore, welcomed the opportunity to be part of the new and green economy which goes for cash for all containers within the scheme, not just aluminium.

                          I was born and raised in South Australia, so this scheme is certainly nothing new to me. I have seen it work, and continue to work, with enormous success. While container deposit legislation will create fundraising opportunities and jobs, I will talk about jobs in the green economy. Again, I will talk about my electorate.

                          Ranger programs have a vital role to play in caring for land and sea country. I will highlight the work that Dhimurru does in caring for an Indigenous protected area of more than 101 000 ha in accordance with the wishes and cultural obligations of traditional owners and their ancestors, and for the benefit of the thousands of visitors to the many recreation areas they manage. In so doing, they employ 21 Yolngu staff and six Ngapaki staff. To be accurate, the role of Dhimurru is actually much more than caring; their important work encompasses recreation and land and sea country management, including wildlife protection, research, cultural heritage protection, sharing knowledge, and public education. Indeed, they have been recognised for their work, both nationally and internationally.

                          Dhimurru was established in 1992 following the growing concerns of traditional owners of the clan estates surrounding Nhulunbuy about the uncontrolled activities of visitors - and established with the strong support of the then local member, Syd Stirling, along with the federal Environment minister at the time, who I think was Robert Hill, and in the complete absence of any support from then CLP minister for Environment, Mr Mike Reed. This year is a significant year for Dhimurru with the opening in August of their new headquarters in Nhulunbuy, funded to the tune of $3.5m thanks to the federal government.

                          The good news stories of our Indigenous ranger programs reverberate around my electorate with the incredible work done by Marthakal Rangers and also Yirralka Rangers. Madam Speaker, I seek leave to table a document. It is the annual report Dhimurru has just produced, which is an important document to go on to the public record - beautiful photograph taken by me. I was quite chuffed that they asked me if they could publish it. I seek leave to table that document.

                          Leave granted.

                          Ms WALKER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. These ranger programs are just one example also of the pathways the Department of Education and Training is paving for kids in schools to see them transition into the world of work - real and meaningful work - which allows them to stay within their own remote community.

                          The whole concept of Indigenous people having work - such as Caring for Country, Caring for Sea Country that provides real and meaningful work and does, indeed, deliver incredible benefits for the land on which they are working and supporting - is a very real one. That is why the department of Education is working with the VET in Schools program to assist students who wish to follow that pathway into that line of work in their community. It is a very popular one. At Shepherdson College on Elcho Island - and I know for the member for Arafura in places like Maningrida and Ramingining as well - it is a very popular pathway for young people, both young men and women, to follow from school.

                          I will be closing shortly, but I want to say a few words about the greenest Territorians I know of; that is, our kids. They are the ones who will inherit this Earth. It is their future, and it is one reason - but a very good reason - why we need to strive to protect the environment. My kids come home from school with all sorts of suggestions about what we might be doing at home, from streaming our rubbish, to turning lights off, to closing windows, to turning taps off when we are brushing our teeth so as to not waste water.

                          As a local member, but also as parliamentary secretary for Education and Training, I visit many schools and, time and time again, I see the various programs which are happening in schools that are very much focused on sustainability and the environment - whether it is water conservation measures, power saving, or power reduction initiatives in their school. They are very big fans of container deposit legislation and Cash for Containers. Why would they not be, because they stand to be the beneficiaries of that 10 for every container. No doubt that will be going towards the many school trips, excursions, sporting trips, and whatever other demands there are for fundraising upon our schools.

                          I want to highlight the work Girraween Primary School does. I visited Girraween in early June; they were hosting a sustainability summit. It is not the first time a sustainability summit has been held, but they were the hosts this year. There were 14 Top End schools participating in the sustainability summit at Girraween. I was pleasantly surprised to see some students from out my way, from Gapuwiyak; along with students from Katherine, and students from the Darwin and Palmerston schools as well.

                          There were a series of presentations delivered by each school about some of the different projects they had undertaken in the previous year, from litter reduction to composting and school gardens. For the rest of the day, students shared ideas about how they could make a difference at a personal level, at a home level, and at a school level towards promoting protection of the environment and sustainability.

                          I am unsure which school will be hosting the summit next year. It is a big job for whichever school takes it on. However, I acknowledge the outstanding effort those schools which participate make, and stand to gain enormously from it. I see it as something that will continue to grow in the years to come.

                          In closing, our government will continue to drive environmental sustainability; it has to go hand in hand with the growth and development of the Northern Territory. We would like to think of ourselves as being a green government. I wonder what colour the opposition is? They would like to think they are a green opposition as well. I think of them as being more a khaki colour - that khaki that has different shades of green and brown, you cannot quite tell where it is, and you cannot quite see it clearly, nor can you see when people are moving around in khaki.

                          It has been highlighted for me due to the disappointing contribution from the shadow, the member for Brennan, who I know to be a very dedicated local member and a hard-working member of this House. I sometimes gasp when we hear people say things. As our minister for the Environment said during Question Time, the nature of this place is, sometimes, we do throw words across the Chamber. However, to some members’ eternal regret, we throw those words across the Chamber without a great deal of thought behind them, and those types of words will stick. They are on the public record and, already, the words of the shadow Environment minister are starting to stick; they are out there. The fact that he could make comments about scientists backing the carbon tax, that they were using it as a money-making exercise - to suggest that scientists would make a dollar out of climate change is highly offensive. Even some of the basis of the science about which the member for Brennan was talking about is very worrying.

                          I have a snippet from a news report earlier today, from Dr Stuart Blanch from the Environment Centre. He said:
                            I think scientists at Charles Darwin University and the CSIRO who work on climate change would be horrified to think that in as little as a year the future potential Environment minister Peter Chandler could be setting carbon policy for the Country Liberal Party.

                          I am worried as well. Dr Blanch went on to say:
                            For the CLP to accuse scientists of profiteering by providing data that accords with government policy I think that’s very regrettable and I think that Peter Chandler should apologise to the Territory scientists.

                          Indeed, that is the view of this government as well.

                          Madam Speaker, I will leave it at that. I again thank and acknowledge the Chief Minister for delivering this particular statement, and I commend it to the House.

                          Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Speaker, it is obvious the CLP does not care very much about the environment. If their shadow spokesperson’s contribution yesterday was any indication, it certainly has signalled to the broader Northern Territory and anyone who does think about the environment the seriousness and commitment of a CLP government. If they were to be in government, it is back to the future and back to the old days of how the CLP treated people and the Northern Territory environment with contempt. You almost have to gag every time the shadow minister talks about it and beats his hand on his chest. The contribution he made yesterday was absolutely laughable. For him to laugh today and think it was actually a childish joke when the Environment minister called on him to apologise – and he should apologise - to professional people in this field who take their work quite seriously and who have made very strong contributions, not just to our government, but to previous CLP government, is a real slight and seen as an offensive slur on the profession.

                          The Leader of the Opposition - I will pitch this to the member for Fong Lim because he probably will be the Leader of the Opposition soon; at least he has a backbone and we know where he stands - will take all of the 12 members to the planet Triton and then they might be able to come up …

                          Mr Elferink: It is not a planet!

                          Members interjecting.

                          Madam SPEAKER: Order!

                          Ms SCRYMGOUR: Well, Triton, wherever it is! I knew I would get a reaction from the member for Port Darwin. He was sitting there with his eyes closed. I was looking at the clock and thinking: ‘I wonder how long it is going to take the member for Port Darwin to open his eye, and is he listening?’ And he was listening. It is good to know I got a reaction from the member for Port Darwin. He is listening because he should. I was waiting for the member for Port Darwin, because he has an inner Darwin seat which is quite an important seat when you look at the development that has gone on, but also the beauty and the preservation of what is inner Darwin, balancing development and ensuring we have green space and other things. It is interesting that there has no been any contribution from the member for Port Darwin in this debate.

                          I go back to the statement and support wholeheartedly this Labor government’s commitment since 2001 to put in place very strong legislative reform - or taking that reform from when we came into government to what we have now; that is, an independent statutory authority in an EPA. When you look at the management that has taken place in Darwin Harbour and the marine areas that surround Darwin, and also if you go further afield into many of our electorates, funding support by this government and the federal government shows the commitment of this government in preserving and conserving our environment - not just now, but into the future.

                          It was this government, early in our first term, that put in place what has never happened in the Northern Territory; to ensure, with the development that was happening in and around Darwin Harbour, that we put in place testing regimes, and make those reports available to the public, and be completely transparent and open in relation to that testing - something the CLP never, ever did. It never wanted to let people know what was happening in and around the environment. It has been this government that put in place that regime and the resources - not just the legislative armoury required to make that happen, but also the financial resources to ensure that legislation was implemented and we were meeting our requirements under legislation.

                          The Chief Minister was right when he talked about Kakadu. Madam Deputy Speaker, you talked about your electorate. When I was listening to you describe the beauty and importance of your electorate, and the poetic way you explained the …

                          Mr Conlan: The hyperbole.

                          Ms SCRYMGOUR: Member for Greatorex, it might seem that way because you do not care about the Territory because you are just a blow-in. You will probably blow out again, member for Greatorex, because people like you come and go. I digress, because the member for Greatorex is a blow-in and does not care.

                          I was listening to the member for Nhulunbuy describing her fantastic electorate, the importance …

                          Members interjecting.

                          Ms SCRYMGOUR: Another blow-in talking.

                          … the importance of the electorate of Nhulunbuy and of ensuring non-Indigenous and Indigenous, particularly the Dhimurru Rangers, have the balance of mining, development. and caring for the environment. I look at my electorate of Arafura and the fantastic work the Djelk Rangers do, particularly in West Arnhem with the Indigenous protected areas and their role in land management. Also, as with the Dhimurru Rangers and all our land and sea rangers, they play an important role with border protection. That role in border protection in Australia is sometimes overlooked. I have had discussions with the Djelk Rangers and there are many times they have alerted Customs - they work closely with Customs.

                          I acknowledge the former federal minister at the time, minister Debus, who negotiated the agreement with the Djelk Rangers for funding for border protection. The rangers’ role is serious. I pay tribute to the important work they have undertaken. Several vessels which have come into our waters have posed quite serious risk to the environment, with some of the barnacles and other things they can bring in, and the damage that could have to the environment if those boats were left on our shores.

                          The Chief Minister also talked about the issue of sustainability, and that is so true. All the work we have done as a government in ensuring if we have development - putting in place processes to ensure the environment and sustainability is going to be there not just for today and tomorrow, but well into the future - is something we have set about doing since 2001.

                          The Chief Minister’s statement talked about that approach, and that what we have done in our programs and funding of environmental programs is part of a Labor government’s value of equity. I fully support this statement. There are many examples I could talk about in relation to what our government has done.

                          I will touch briefly on my visit last week to Central Australia. I talk about my electorate and the beauty of Kakadu, going to the coast and looking at all the coastal island communities on the Tiwi Islands. Every time I visit Central Australia - the home of my father; it is my father’s birthplace – to catch up with my father’s family, I look at the beauty. The Chief Minister touched briefly in the opening part of his statement about the Western MacDonnell Ranges. It does not matter who you are, when you fly into Alice Springs, the beauty of the Western MacDonnell Ranges is something that has to be looked after for future generations. When you look at the environment around Central Australia, any mining or anything that will go towards damaging that fragile environment, really needs to be looked at.

                          The CLP has filibustered around this, in that one minute they run to election saying they do not support Angela Pamela and, then, after their members are elected, they backflip and say they support mining, which is a real shame.

                          I was fortunate enough to go to near Owen Springs Station with the minister to, I think, Palm Valley and the Finke River Gorge. Even when you go towards Ntaria and those places, it is spectacular country with the palms and escarpments. I was told some of the palms and trees in that gorge are in danger of going. We need to look at how we continue to fund. It was good to have a long conversation with the Tjuwanpa Rangers at Palm Valley about their work and what they are doing with buffel grass, and also the work in that gorge to look after those palms and escarpment that is in danger of damage when you get wildfires through.

                          The governments, both Territory and federally - I think the Territory government put substantial funding towards the Tjuwanpa Rangers. It was good to meet all the men at the Palm Valley celebrations, and to hear their side of it. I talked to their coordinator about what their program was doing. That is just one example in Central Australia where, like our groups in the Top End, those ranger groups are so important in those programs which are running in land management. That needs to be supported into the future. Indigenous and non-Indigenous Territorians are going a long way to making sure we will look after this great land we call the Northern Territory, our home for our future generations.

                          I support the Chief Minister’s statement. We are a green government; a government that has supported many initiatives. This government brought in and continued the environment grants, particularly engaging schools in that process. It is important to have young people involved at the coalface learning about the environment, caring for the environment, and being part of sustainable environment programs.

                          Madam Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement to the House about a green Territory.

                          Motion agreed to; statement noted.
                          TABLED PAPER
                          Remuneration Tribunal Report - Entitlements of Assembly Members and Determination No 1 of 2011

                          Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Deputy Speaker, I lay on the table the Remuneration Tribunal Report on the Entitlements of Assembly Members and Determination No 1 of 2011.
                          MOTION
                          Print paper - Remuneration Tribunal Report - Entitlements of Assembly Members and Determination No 1 of 2011

                          Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the paper be printed.

                          Motion agreed to.
                          MOTION
                          Note Paper - Remuneration Tribunal Report - Entitlements of Assembly Members and Determination No 1 of 2011

                          Mr HENDERSON (Chief Minister): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the report and that I have leave to continue my remarks at a later hour.

                          Leave granted.

                          Debate adjourned.

                          TABLED PAPER
                          Remuneration Tribunal Determination – Interstate Travel Report - Member for Brennan

                          Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, I table an interstate study travel report, pursuant to paragraph 3.15 of Remuneration Tribunal Determination No 1 of 2010, for the member for Brennan.
                          MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
                          Enough is Enough Alcohol Reforms – Report on the First Three Months

                          Ms LAWRIE (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, approximately a year ago, I spoke of the most comprehensive alcohol reform package in the nation’s history; the Enough is Enough package of reforms. Much has happened since October last year.

                          Today, I intend to update the House on the first three months of the alcohol reforms that commenced on 1 July and share with you progress made. While it is still early days, the signs are promising. The Henderson government is strongly committed to cutting crime and turning off the tap to stop the violence. The damage that alcohol-fuelled violence does to Territorians is unacceptable.

                          The data is stark: 60% of all assaults occurring across the Territory were alcohol-related and 67% of all domestic violence incidents were alcohol-related. Last year, there were 55 000 incidents of police taking people into protective custody or sobering-up shelters. A survey of our prison population reported 72% of Territory prisoners stated their offence was committed under the influence of alcohol.

                          The harm that alcohol misuse causes our community is clear. A study led by the Menzies School of Health Research and undertaken by the South Australian Centre for Economic Studies deemed the social harms from alcohol misuse cost the Territory community $642m per year. This equates to $4197 for every adult Territorian, compared to $944 nationally. These costs range from hospitalisation for chronic health problems and injuries associated with alcohol misuse, or as a victim of alcohol-related violence and ambulatory costs.

                          The study also took into account the cost of road accidents, policing alcohol-related crime and antisocial behaviour, and the flow-through costs to the courts and correctional system. Impacts on the workforce such as absenteeism have also been measured.

                          The combined cost is too significant to continue unabated. A considerable amount of the $642m per year is public funds - public funds that could be redirected. Alcohol misuse is also causing considerable harm to Territory families and our community.

                          The Enough is Enough alcohol reform is the most comprehensive and targeted package in the nation to tackle alcohol misuse; targeted at the problem drinker, while also increasing pathways to treatment. The measures turn those problem drinkers off tap and into treatment.

                          Central to the success of the reform is enforcement of the problem drinker bans through the Banned Drinker Register to ensure a ban applies Territory-wide to put a stop to people following the grog. The results to date, which I will turn to shortly, indicate the reform is having a positive effect and the Banned Drinker Register is working to turn problem drinkers off tap.

                          Importantly for our government, these measures do not criminalise chronic alcohol misuse. The reform poses minimal impact on the broader community. Those who are not banned continue to buy their alcohol as normal with a quick swipe of their ID. What the reforms do is tackle the scourge of alcohol misuse in our community. The community wants government to tackle this issue and these reform measures do that.

                          The measures also increase community education about safe drinking practices. The reform focuses on takeaway alcohol sales that make up an estimated 70% of alcohol consumption in the Territory. It is grog in the hands of the problem drinker, often in an unsupervised environment, that leads to unacceptable violence and crime.

                          The reforms commenced from 1 July. This required operationalisation of the reforms into police practices, training and resourcing of takeaway licensees and staff, training and resourcing across the health sector, establishment of the Alcohol and Other Drugs Tribunal to hear BAT notice review applications, establishment of call centres for the public and for licensees, and communications material for takeaway outlets and the public.

                          Under the reform, Banning and Alcohol Treatment orders could be applied through: police issued Banning and Alcohol Treatment (BAT) notices; the courts; a newly-established court, the Substance Misuse Assessment and Referral for Treatment (SMART) Court; or a newly-established Alcohol and Other Drugs Tribunal for people with substance misuse problems who place themselves and others at risk. Triggers for a ban include: repeat protective custody incidents three times in three months; high range and repeat drink-driving; repeat alcohol infringement notices; alcohol-related offences such as assault; domestic violence order breaches; and knowingly supplying alcohol to someone who is already banned.

                          To enforce these bans, the Banned Drinker Register was operational in Darwin, Palmerston, and surrounds from 1 July. By 21 July, all takeaway outlets along the Stuart Highway from the South Australian border up, including Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Katherine, were online operating the Banned Drinker Register - an exceptional effort by Department of Justice staff, contractors, and the liquor retailers. The Banned Drinker Register is operational in all regional centres except Nhulunbuy, where an electronic permit system which requires government-issued ID already exists.

                          While it is early days, it is important to take an early read on the outcomes. I am pleased to report after three months of operation, the Banned Drinker Register is having a significant impact on reducing alcohol-related crime. Data entered by police into the PROMIS system reports a 22% reduction in total alcohol-related incidents on previous year-to-year date figures, recording 5113 incidents for the period July to September 2011, compared to 5808 incidents for the same period in 2010. Over the same period, preliminary PROMIS data also reports a 15% reduction in alcohol-related assaults across the Territory. This equates to 164 fewer alcohol-fuelled assaults in the three months since 1 July.

                          Let me make this very clear to those opposite. Left in the hands of the opposition, we would not have seen a 15% drop in alcohol-related assaults across the Territory. This includes: 20% drop in Darwin; 23% in Palmerston; 17% drop in Alice Springs; 15.8% drop in Katherine; and 19.5% drop in Tennant Creek. In fact, the only place in the Territory where alcohol-related crime did not drop was Nhulunbuy, where the BDR is scheduled to be introduced next year. Overall, the PROMIS data reports a 22% reduction in total alcohol-related incidents over the same three months since 1 July compared to the same time last year.

                          The members opposite are ignoring alcohol-related crime. The CLP has said ‘the links between community violence and alcohol consumption are negligible’, and they have said they would scrap the Banned Drinker Register.

                          The Territory police have been supportive of this initiative. When commenting on the Banned Drinker Register, Assistant Police Commissioner, Mark Payne, stated:
                            … police did see it as one of the most powerful tools, if not the most powerful tool, available to police to actually deal with the source of the problem of antisocial behaviour and the violence that was occurring in the community. I think these early indicators prove that the initiative is working.

                          The Assistant Police Commissioner also stated he would like to see the initiative continue stating:
                            From a policing point of view, we see some tremendous results from this initiative.
                          Police Assistant Commissioner, Grahame Kelly has also voiced his support of the alcohol reform and Banned Drinker Register stating:
                            New alcohol measures are probably one of the best tools that we’ve had for combating alcohol abuse and antisocial behaviour in the Territory. Certainly, we expect that we will see reductions in alcohol-related crime and in our domestic assaults.

                          The Henderson government has led a bold and targeted reform to tackle alcohol-related crime. The early data shows it is working. The Territory police say it is the best tool they have to fight crime, and the opposition has committed to taking it away from them. The results highlight our alcohol policy is heading in the right direction, targeting problem drinkers and alcohol-related crime. Terry Mills needs to explain to Territorians why he does not support a policy that is cutting crime.

                          At the end of the first three months of operation, there were 1576 people on the Banned Drinker Register. These include people banned for alcohol-related crime such as assaults, domestic violence, repeat drink-driving and other harmful practices. A total of 3221 banning notices were issued at the end of the first quarter, as at the end of the September 2011, and that includes 760 people, 71%, who had received one BAT notice; 150 people, 14%, who have received their second BAT notice; and 165 people, 15%, who have received their third BAT notice. As at the end of September 2011, of the 165 who had received their third BAT notice, 104, 63%, had breached their third BAT notice. The breach of a third BAT notice results in an automatic trigger of referral to the AOD Tribunal. The AOD Tribunal will begin hearing and assessing referrals from the commencement date of 1 January 2012.

                          The total number of people on the Banned Drinker Register as a result of apprehensions show 31% were recorded in the Alice Springs region; 24% in the Darwin and Palmerston region; 208 in Alice Springs; 74 in Tennant Creek; 73 in Katherine; four in Nhulunbuy; 98 in Darwin; 63 in Palmerston; and 152 across remote areas.

                          Of the 1576 persons on the Banned Drinker Register as at the end of September, 455 were for court ordered banning notices, including SMART orders and bail orders, and 1075 for banning and treatment notices issued by police. In total, 3221 bans have been issued under the reform ...

                          Mr Westra van Holthe: How many were for drinking?

                          Ms LAWRIE: This highlights the effectiveness of the tool and application by Territory police. In order to regulate …

                          Mr Westra van Holthe interjecting.

                          Ms LAWRIE: A point of order, Madam Speaker! It is practice in this House that a ministerial statement has to be read. With the interjections from the member for Katherine expecting me to respond to him, that is impossible. I am sticking to convention and reading the statement.

                          Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Speaking to the point of order, Madam Speaker! If the Minister for Alcohol Policy would like to point to the section in standing orders that refers to that, I will defer to it. Otherwise, continue.

                          Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: It is the convention. Resume your seat, member for Katherine. Minister, you have the call.

                          Ms LAWRIE: Madam Deputy Speaker, this highlights the effectiveness of the tool and the application by Territory police. In order to regulate these banned drinkers since 1July this year, 232 scanners have been installed in 162 licensed takeaway sites in Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs. In just three months of operation, we have installed scanners in 82.3% of the identified takeaway liquor outlets in the NT. We are investing $3.2m in this process.

                          In three months, over 1.4 million ID scans have taken place across the Territory. In total, there have been 1109 refusals of sale to problem drinkers to buy alcohol Territory-wide. People are no longer able to follow the grog, and no longer able to move from community to community causing harm and havoc.

                          There have also been 2394 point-of-sale refusals to people attempting to buy alcohol in contravention of product restrictions. In total, that is 3503 times problem drinkers have been prevented from accessing alcohol, who were likely to have caused themselves or others harm if the alcohol had been available to them.
                          The BDR reforms complement our existing ID systems in Katherine, Alice Springs, and Tennant Creek. It is because of our target reform in these areas we have seen the number of refusals for controlled liquor products doubled since the BDR’s introduction. It is a combination of improved technology, broadband connections for the point-of-sale devices, and stringent requirements for government-approved ID that has increased our capacity to enforce supply conditions and prevent access to high-alcohol volume products which cause so much harm to our communities.

                          Let us make no mistake; the members opposite would rather see grog placed back in the hands of problem drinkers in each one of these instances, causing harm in our communities.

                          Ensuring people get the help they need to turn their lives around is a vital element of this reform. Since 2001, we have increased alcohol treatment and rehabilitation services. We have done this in partnership with the Australian government, and will continue this effort. I was pleased to announce this year the Henderson government will continue this effort by committing an extra $34.3m over five years for treatment and alcohol reform. A total of $5.2m has been invested this year to expand treatment options for problem drinkers.

                          This includes: $3.5m to expand treatment and rehabilitation services with an extra 14 beds in Darwin to open in the Salvation Army Sunrise Centre, and 10 new beds in DASA in Alice Springs; $700 000 for community-based outreach services in major centres and growth towns; Aboriginal health workers, counsellors and medical officers are being recruited by the department and the Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance NT (AMSANT); $500 000 for expanded alcohol withdrawal support options, home-based residential low risk, plus high-risk hostel beds for withdrawal; $500 000 for brief interventions by GPs and primary health providers for people who have been referred by the SMART Court or tribunal for treatment orders, and people who voluntarily seek assistance.

                          Within the first three months of operation, we have seen:

                          24 new beds funded across the Salvation Army and DASA in Alice Springs;
                            the Department of Health has completed training and provided Drink Less resource packages on alcohol misuse interventions to all 71 primary healthcare services across the NT, and 120 reform training sessions have been held with a range of Territory treatment providers;
                              improved pathways have been put in place for withdrawal clients, from emergency departments to community-based services and non-government services. These improved pathways have resulted in a referral to treatment or withdrawal services occurring in less than three hours, where previously it averaged eight days; and
                                recruitment of a Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance NT (AMSANT) specialist position to work with Aboriginal Medical Services has been finalised. This position will work across the NT identifying gaps in services in remote regions, and where new resources for treatment will be allocated.

                                We will continue to work with service providers to develop responsive and evidence-based treatment services. The foundation of the Enough is Enough is a package of legislative reform: the Alcohol Reform (Prevention of Alcohol-Related Crime and Substance Misuse) Act 2011; the Alcohol Reform (Substance Misuse Assessment and Referral for Treatment Court) Act 2011; and the Alcohol Reform (Liquor Legislation Amendment) Act 2011.

                                The SMART Court: this has enabled the SMART Court to commence and, within three months, saw 46 people receiving a clinical assessment and referred to the court. Of these, 32 people were issued a SMART Court order for treatment, of which 29 have commenced treatment. In short, this means that 29 people are now on the way to getting the help they need to turn their problem drinking around.

                                The Alcohol and Other Drugs Tribunal has been established. It became operational on 1 July to hear applications for review of BAT notices and for administrative work around alcohol misuse interventions. The chair and deputy chair, as well as nine other tribunal members, have been appointed. Tribunal offices have been fitted out at both Casuarina and Alice Springs. The tribunal was to be fully operational on 1 July 2012; however, we have received a number of inquiries from people wanting to volunteer to be on the Banned Drinker Register. This is either to stop drinking themselves or to support a loved one.

                                I acknowledge and applaud the efforts of these people. I have appreciated their honesty in sharing their attempts to stop drinking and the impact it has had on their family and colleagues. The Henderson government is keen to support these individuals and, as such, considerable efforts have been undertaken so the tribunal has the capacity to begin assessing applications from individuals who wish to place themselves on the BDR from 1 November 2011 onwards. I thank the chair of the tribunal, barrister Michael O’Donnell, for his efforts and also other members of the tribunal for making this happen. The referral for assessment for people misusing alcohol and other drugs by authorised applicants such as police, healthcare providers, and family members will commence on 1 January 2012 as always intended.

                                To support the implementation of the reforms, we developed an extensive communication campaign that included TV and print advertisements, as well as education tools for Indigenous people, tourists, seniors, and other target groups. This saw 57 000 brochures outlining key alcohol laws distributed to tourism centres, caravan parks, information centres, hotels, and motels. We distributed 157 talking posters to remote police stations, health clinics, and shire offices aimed at assisting Indigenous people understand the reforms. We have found very strong support for the alcohol reforms both pre- and post-commencement among both service providers and the general public. Again, I refer to the comments of NT police who are at the coalface of dealing with alcohol-related harm every day. NT Police Assistant Commissioner Grahame Kelly has stated:

                                  new alcohol measures are probably one of the best tools that we’ve had for combating alcohol abuse and antisocial behaviour in the Territory. Certainly we expect that we will see reductions in alcohol-related crime and in our domestic assaults.
                                I reiterate the comments made at the time of introducing the alcohol reform bills to this House.

                                The Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance NT (AMSANT) welcomed the reform and the new tribunal, particularly for getting people into treatment outside of the criminal law process stating:
                                  … orders …for the first time creates consequences for people who have a major alcohol problem without recriminalising public drunkenness and without waiting for them to commit an offence.
                                That was a media release on 1 September 2010.

                                A joint media release on 2 September 2010 issued by Amity Community Services, the NT Council of Social Services, and FORWAARD also welcomed the reform stating:
                                  While some of the measures may cause inconvenience to some in our community, we would urge people to accept that this is a small sacrifice to pay for a much greater good.

                                  As treatment agencies, we are only too well aware of the enormous cost of heavy alcohol use to the individuals themselves, and to their families, friends, and the wider community.



                                  Limited restrictions of this kind, coupled with additional resources for treatment and public education, will result in a safer and healthier Territory ...

                                The Responsible Drinkers Lobby in Alice Springs gave its support, stating:
                                  … these initiatives are a great step forward and obviously well thought out … I believe they do reflect the wishes of the majority of our community. Well done!

                                Dr John Boffa of the People’s Alcohol Action Coalition also supported the reforms, stating:
                                  For the first time we’re having a consistent approach across the Territory. It gives us the capacity to act early, to act in a way that is not criminally sanctioned, and to act in a way that I think creates consequences in terms of prohibition orders and in terms of referral for treatment … which could make a significant difference. The government has dealt with the alcohol problem as a health problem, as a mental health problem outside the criminal justice system and they are to be commended for that.

                                There have been many supportive comments from the community. We know Territorians wanted the government to address alcohol misuse in our community. In reaction to the first person put on the Banned Drinker Register, I quote an NT News Text to the Editor on 6 July:
                                  While the laws in the eyes of some are not perfect this is at least one person whose access to alcohol has been stopped and whose likelihood of jumping into a vehicle while intoxicated has been greatly diminished.

                                There were many myths floated about the Banned Drinker Register and the requirement to show ID, and government responded to this in communication material. Comments from the public on having to show ID included:
                                  I don’t know what everyone’s on about, I don’t think it’s any big deal ... I have got nothing to hide. I buy a bottle of wine, show my licence and walk out the door.

                                Talkback radio, 8 July, on the Kate O’Toole show.
                                  Why all the fuss? It took just as long to scan my Fly Buys as it did to scan my ID.

                                NT News text, 6 July.

                                The liquor industry has given its support to the Banned Drinker Register. The Department of Justice worked alongside the industry on the implementation and appreciated the practical and constructive input of outlets and licensees. Nightcliff supermarket owner, Linford Feick, in support of the system and the work by the Department of Justice, stated:
                                  They have been visited by both police and government inspectors to make sure that the system was working and said that it had not caused any major problems.

                                NT News text, 6 July.

                                While taking stock of our achievements, it is important that I thank all the staff. Police, health officers, the liquor industry, the non-government organisations, alcohol and other drug agencies who worked tirelessly …

                                Mr Conlan: It is all over as far as she is concerned. Thank everyone and loosen the tie now. Done the job. Done it all; loosen the tie.

                                Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Greatorex, would you cease interjecting, please?

                                Ms LAWRIE: I will repeat that. It is important to acknowledge the people who do the work. While taking stock of our achievements it is important that I thank all the staff. Police, health officers, the liquor industry, non-government organisations, alcohol and other drug agencies, Department of Justice staff …

                                Mr Conlan: You can take your tie off now, Karl, you have achieved …

                                Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Greatorex!

                                Ms LAWRIE: … who worked tirelessly to make a difference in this area and who, unlike the opposition, are on board with our reforms and you can see the positive impact they are making.

                                Prior to the commencement of the reforms, we undertook an extensive public consultation process with stakeholders such as the alcohol industry, legal profession, police and non-government alcohol and other drug treatment agencies as well as the general community. As there was such a large degree of legislative, logistical, and technical reform involved, we anticipated there would be differing views and it was important we heard those views. This included a household survey mailed out across Darwin, Palmerston, and Alice Springs, website with online survey, a 1800 inquiries number, information sessions with key stakeholder groups, public forums in every major Territory regional centre, and exposure draft legislation tabled at the October 2010 sittings.

                                It was important that we work closely with the liquor industry as such a large part of the reforms required their assistance to ensure the reform’s success. This included the establishment of a BDR working party that included representation from the Australian Hotels Association and the Liquor Stores Association. Under the guidance of this group, the Department of Justice provided training to the alcohol industry. This included the development of information packs, online material, and a call centre dedicated to licensing needs.

                                We have worked with members of the community, including senior Territorians and Indigenous groups, to ensure all Territorians had access to free ID. There has been a strong response to this initiative, with more than 25 000 Territorians taking up the opportunity to get ID for free. We will continue to waive fees for seniors and those who hold pensioner cards. For some, especially Indigenous people who live in remote areas, this has resulted in them having government-issued ID for the first time.

                                This government has a long history and substantial record in taking action to address alcohol-related harm and antisocial behaviour. We have put a range of measures in place, some of which include: designated area precincts around nightclub areas with the ability to ban troublemakers from these areas for up to 12 months; alcohol management plans and alcohol supply plans; and dry areas providing alcohol-free areas for families and communities. These reforms built on these efforts. These efforts have also contributed to a drop in per capita consumption. In 2007, Territorians …

                                Members interjecting.

                                Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Minister, could you pause please. I remind the members for Sanderson and Greatorex, if you wish to have a conversation, you can either move outside the Chamber or go to the back of the Chamber. Thank you. Sorry, minister, you have the call.

                                Ms LAWRIE: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The reforms build on these efforts. These efforts have also contributed to a drop in per capita consumption. In 2007, Territorians consumed 14.7 L of pure alcohol, while in 2010 we have dropped to 13.55 L of pure alcohol. We have seen a decline in pure alcohol supply by around 14 000 L during this time. This equates to over 32 400 cartons of full strength beer, or more than 63 600 2 L casks of wine not being sold. This drop has occurred despite population levels increasing. The CLP would open the rivers of grog and allow these casks of wine to be sold and this achievement not to have been reached.

                                We will continue to build on the successes of the alcohol reforms. By mid-next year, we will have completed the installation of ID scanners to all identified takeaway outlets across the Territory. This includes working with permit systems in the East Arnhem region and beyond to merge with the BDR. The Alcohol and Other Drugs Tribunal will be fully operational by 1 January 2012.

                                We will continue to roll out the new treatment and rehabilitation funding package. This will involve ongoing dialogue with service providers to develop responsive and evidence-based treatment services which are innovative and cater for both urban and remote areas to support rehabilitation for problem drinkers.

                                These are the most comprehensive alcohol reforms in the nation. They are targeted, evidence-based, and go to the heart of what is costing the Territory both socially and economically. Although it is only early days the results are promising. The results highlight our alcohol policy is heading in the right direction, targeting problem drinkers and alcohol-related crime.

                                I commend the statement to the House and table a report on the first three months with the data mentioned in the statement.

                                Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the statement.

                                Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Deputy Speaker, the Labor government is attaching much to this campaign, this program, this initiative, and is desperately hoping it will work. Because they came at this from a defensive position, inherent in the selling of the message is a sense and a concern they are worried it may not work. Why they are worried it may not work is because it may look bad for them and, that in itself is, in my view, the problem. The problem is not a political one or some wishful thinking and hope that this will work and bear some positive results you can sell in the lead-up to the campaign and 25 August. They are pitching it, as I hear, in the language of ‘them and us’: they have no plan; we are going to do this, we have the best plan known to man, it is the greatest and most powerful range of initiatives the nation has ever seen. All this kind of talk sets this up in a space which is going to prove quite unhelpful in dealing with a very serious social problem.

                                If you are going to put measures in place to deal with a problem, you first have to understand the problem. The cornerstone of this response from Labor is a misunderstanding of the problem itself. It has fixed too much on the substance of alcohol being the problem; that is just a part of the problem. The problem is the behaviour that flows from the misuse of alcohol. There is a distinct difference. If you take that as being the cornerstone and the proper recognition of the problem, then you take a different journey than Labor has. You have to understand the way Labor sees social problems: as problems that are not the direct responsibility of people because they are exempt, to a large degree, from responsibility as it is society which has the problem, not the individual. Therefore, it is convenient to identify and demonise, in many respects, alcohol.

                                If you have come to that conclusion, you then take the solution as being to reduce the supply of alcohol. A logical extension is the prohibition of the substance. However, you know if you remove it - and if you go down that path the whole way as some communities have tried and failed - no matter how far you travel down that road, you will not be addressing the underlying problem; that is, the problem that arises from the irresponsible and excessive use of the substance. That is the more challenging task we need to respond to. It is the assessment of the problem.

                                Believe it or not, the Territory opposition has taken, and does take, this very seriously because we are charged with responding to a social problem which is a problem identified by behaviour - behaviour that needs a correction. When we deal with it at that level, we then can have some expectation of some long-term results.

                                The Deputy Chief Minister has listed, as has the Chief Minister, how many times the same question was asked, pumping this up to try to demonstrate that it is actually working. It always has the tag line ‘but it is early days yet’. My prediction is, it is early days and, because you have not honestly addressed and taken on board the underlying problem which is the behaviour, and that which flows from the irresponsible use of alcohol, you will find those who have the underlying problem will find their way around this system.

                                We all know people who have a problem with substances. For whatever reason, they have problems with substances. You can put a measure in place and they will take a little while to adjust to those measures, but they will find their way around it, because you have not put your attention on the spot. You have not delivered help to the point of need; that is, to put in place a very real consequence that has the real possibility of changing behaviour - real changes that are long term.

                                My prediction is, yes, it will be short term and it will have no sustainable long-term change. That is my genuine prediction: there will be no long-term benefits flowing from this. For those on the other side who can think objectively, they would hope that would not be the case, but at least they could get through to 25 August. They still may be able to demonstrate there has been some change and create the impression that it is long-term change.

                                To help with that enterprise, the Labor Party has made a decision to withdraw the official crime stats so it becomes difficult to actually measure, in an objective way, how this is really working. I do not know how you have managed to do that and keep a straight face: withdraw data so you then are unable to objectively assess. However, mark my words - another prediction: if the crime data substantiates your case, it will magically reappear. However, if it does not, it will be withheld and it will be promised to be announced at a certain time, which will be just after the next election - one way or another. It will only reappear if it turns out that you have the capacity to run a particular story to benefit your own objective; that is, to maintain this position until the next Territory election.

                                I do not hold the view that all of you have deliberately gone down this path for completely superficial reasons. Many of you really do believe this is actually going to bear long-term results. However, you just have to look at the way in which social programs measures across the history of the Territory, or in any jurisdiction. If you do not apply them directly to that point of the behaviour you end up with inconvenience and imposition of some measure to the majority where you did not really need that measure in the first place, and those who actually have the problem find their way around it and still have the ongoing problem.

                                You just have to look back at it, do a desktop study, and you will see that unless you take the more courageous step and deal with the behaviour, you are not going to get a real result.
                                So, the first thing is the proper understanding of the problem, and I do not believe Labor has that correct assessment. The Territory opposition has. We believe in freedoms first, and responsibilities run right next to that. If you abuse your freedoms as a citizen, there must be a consequence. The freedom of citizens to take responsibility when it comes to the consumption of alcohol is very important. Enjoy those freedoms but, if you abuse that freedom, there must be a consequence.

                                The measure Labor has put in place is a mechanism based on the idea that alcohol is the problem, so they will find a way of recognising those who have a problem with alcohol. Rather than drawing attention to their personal problem and picking them out from the crowd, everyone has to carry a card. We do not want to make anyone feel particularly uncomfortable, so everyone has a card. As they go up: ‘Sorry, mate, you cannot have one’. ‘Okay, I cannot get through that gate; I will find another way of getting around this’.

                                However, if the object of the exercise is to try to find some way of preventing that point of sale - that is just at the bottle shop by the way; it does not apply to standing at the front bar. You do not have to show your card to buy a schooner. We have been told - and it is not honest - you are turning the tap off. They do not have, as the member for Brennan said quite rightly, taps at the bottle shop. That is where you cannot buy it; it gets bought in bottles and things like that. The tap is in the bar and that tap has not been turned off. You can actually go in there and get the alcohol. You do not have to swipe your card to buy a schooner. So, that is not honest or correct. It is the control of the takeaway alcohol. I accept there is an argument that is part of the problem - it is a part of the problem. However, it is the behaviour that is being fuelled by those irresponsible decisions to consume at reckless levels that is the issue.

                                What is a better system to identify the problem? I do not believe a card system, which is a clumsy and broad-brush approach that is not really targeted, is going to allow us to deal with the problem. The Territory opposition has a better approach; that is, those who actually have a problem come to our attention. The Deputy Chief Minister already cited the numbers. It was in the order of 55 000 people taken into protective custody. Most of those have a problem with alcohol. Hang on - here is an opportunity - there are about 200 000 people in the Territory and 55 000 people are taken into protective custody in any year. We all know that is not 55 000 different people. I know from my time in Palmerston, sadly, there are some who are probably taken into protective custody every week, therefore, that 55 000 is actually a small group.

                                You need to deliver help to the point of need, and those who are taken into protective custody are those who need a direct and focused response. That is the Country Liberal Party response: we will direct our efforts and our focus on those who come to our attention through a different system called the legal system. Are those 55 000 people different people? Absolutely not! Repeat, frequent flyers turning up again, and again, and again. They are the ones who need the consequence; a far more serious consequence than saying: ‘Listen buddy, if you go up to the bottle shop with this card, they will not sell you anything’. He says: ‘Right, I will have to figure out a way of getting that alcohol now because I cannot get it there; I will find another way’. It might be someone’s fridge in their back yard - and I hear plenty of stories now that people are starting to find out how to get it. It could be a relative, it could be just dressing up nicely and going to the front bar. There will be a way!

                                If you are going to build a fence and you are going down this approach, you are going to have many fences built because you will never be able to keep them away from alcohol because you have not actually taken that bold step to deal with the problem. That is why those people who come into protective custody need to be dealt with, and dealt with very explicitly. Therefore, the Country Liberal approach is to reinforce freedoms and responsibilities. For the abuse of responsibilities, there is a consequence. If you are taken into protective custody three times in six months, you then face a very real consequence. My colleague, the member for Port Darwin, will go into this in much greater detail. This is the mechanism: those who have the identified problem have the specific and explicit response, which is a real consequence.

                                You are then required - in fact, obligated - to respond to the requirement for some rehabilitation and repair to your problem. You have to address your problem. You have a societal obligation to respond. If that response is not taken up, then there is a very severe consequence for that breach; therefore, incarceration, mandatory detention. ‘Oh dear’, says the left. ‘Oh dear’, said our Labor colleagues on the other side, ‘you cannot do that. You cannot criminalise’.

                                Sometimes you have to take harsh measures in the interests of those who actually have a very serious problem. Obviously, you know those in your own networks who have problems with alcohol. You cannot take a soft approach when there is that desperate point of need. We have to have a mechanism, as a society, that has the courage to have a genuine and powerful response to provide mandatory detention for those who have not taken up the requirement for a response and, therefore, there is mandatory detention. The left will say: ‘That is a punishment’. Of course it is, because there is a community standard we need to reinforce, respect, and uphold.

                                You probably do not expect this coming from the conservatives because you probably cannot see this, but No 2 is then the requirement for rehabilitation. You bring in the repair - the consequence and then the repair. I guess there is a fair amount of ignorance - that would probably be the most appropriate word - and you think you guys are the only people who care, and we do not. We understand there are many reasons for those who have the manifest behavioural problem as a result of irresponsible and reckless use of a substance to come to that point. However, the last thing you need to provide them in a response is an excuse. You cannot say: ‘It is okay, you have a range of problems, so we will minimise your responsibility because the responsibility sits on society’.

                                The last thing you need is to reduce a person’s dignity of having any personal responsibility; you should not take that away from them. However, we know there are many factors that contribute to that decision. They are the subject of many responses regarding economic engagement, a quality education, a good health system. We need to check those kids who are in early childhood to ensure they have the capacity to read and write really well. I know some young people who are at the margins, who are drifting, and the abuse of substances gives them some momentary relief from their trauma. I am able to talk to these young lads from time to time; they cannot read well. They do not feel they can cut it in that field where everyone else is, so they feel they must do something to cover up their shame. They get some identity through the reckless consumption of alcohol.

                                There is a response. When we have mandatory detention, we have rehabilitation. It comes in the form of real rehabilitation, basic literacy and numeracy - not an option but a requirement. We have to go down that path. ‘I do not feel like doing that’. ‘I am sorry, you have an obligation as a citizen to respond to this because we are here to help you’. That is called a tough love approach, and those who have raised kids know you actually have to override, at times, in the best interests of the child. In this case, it is a person in need and there has to be a harder and more caring response that punches through and delivers the real help where it is required.

                                The Country Liberals believe we have the correct position on this. We will withstand the quite unconvincing posturing of the Labor government because we can see it has a great deal riding on this. In some ways, I have started to feel even more concerned after hearing the Deputy Chief Minister give her presentation. I had this sense they are almost desperate to create the impression it is really, really good. There are signs of overreach. There is not complete confidence because, if you are really confident, you would not have to go into this silly spiel about us opening up the rivers and deliver alcohol to people who have real problems because we just do not care. That is a total mischaracterisation of our position, and you know it very well. You know it very well because, in 2008, at the last election, what I am saying now was said and there was a significant response. I love looking around here and seeing evidence of the support of the Territory community at a position which was described in the 2008 election: the numbers have increased on this side and reduced on that side.

                                I know you understand our position because you have appropriated many elements of it. However, you have always, as you do in Labor, missed the core, missed the point of personal responsibility; taking that extra and necessary step to make a difference. This is not a problem principally around alcohol; it is around the misuse and irresponsible use of the substance. Make no mistake, we are not saying, therefore, you like to characterise it in black and white so you can let as many people drink as you like. There is another story about the supply of alcohol, but the first thing is the demand for the substance has to be dealt with, then the supply issue could be dealt with as a secondary matter.

                                The first issue is we deal with the demand. Why is there such a prodigious thirst for alcohol to destructive levels that reduce our productivity as a community and reduce social cohesion? Why is there that thirst? Why is it you can go to other countries where alcohol is freely available and those citizens are able to deal with it in a different way than we do? These are the harder questions. I believe our policy goes much further in responding to the honest assessment of the problem, which is to go to the point of need and deliver that help to those who have made, for whatever reason, poor decisions over the misuse of a substance – whatever those reasons. That is why the result will be, through the mechanism we have which is through the legal system, mandatory detention and rehabilitation.

                                We are more than happy for those who have the freedom and do not abuse the freedoms to continue on their way. However, we will focus on the problem. We believe we have responded accurately and appropriately to the problem. This spurious argument about the greatest and most comprehensive - I cannot remember the other superlatives attached to this …

                                Mr Conlan: Toughest.

                                Mr MILLS: Yes, the toughest regime of alcohol reforms in the nation which the police are saying is the best tool. I could listen to the simple arguments. Once again, it is the three-and-a-half hollow men upstairs saying: ‘This is how you are meant to sell this; you have to say the policeman said it is the best tool we ever had’. The minister said: ‘This is the toughest set of legislation and programs Australia has ever had and the naughty CLP are hopeless. They are going to make everyone just swim in alcohol. There is going to be alcohol everywhere. Policeman said this is the most powerful tool we have ever had’. Are they the right words, minister? Yes, they are the right words: ‘The most powerful tool. They are even going to take that tool off them and it is just going to be terrible’.

                                That is just dumb. People out there are far more sensible. They are not going to say: ‘Really?’ As if! You have some overreach there and they are going to have some credibility. You have until the New Year - seriously, Chief Minister, you are still out there. I have not forgotten that I have challenged you to a public debate on these matters. I will be more than happy to do it out there in the real world. Let us do it in Wanguri; it will be good fun. Let us have a genuine talk about this and see whether we can cut through with our messages.

                                Madam Deputy Speaker, with that, that is the contribution I make to this important issue.

                                Mr VATSKALIS (Health): Madam Deputy Speaker, I listened with great attention to what the Leader of the Opposition said and I heard the questions, ‘What is it about alcohol? What is it about the supply?’ I remember very well when I first left Perth to go to Port Hedland. People I met told me: ‘You go up there and you are going to drink a lot.’ I thought: ‘Why should I drink a lot in Port Hedland? I do not drink a lot in Perth; what will change?’ The change was a cultural change. There is a culture that exists in those places: they are rough mining towns; there was nothing much to do, so the only thing you could do was drink.

                                The funny thing is I heard the same when I left Port Hedland to come to Darwin: ‘You are going to Darwin. Boy, you will drink a lot there. They drink a lot in Darwin!’ I came here really surprised. Why should I drink a lot in Darwin? Darwin in a big town; it has everything that Port Hedland did not. It has cinemas, restaurants, nightclubs, and bars. The reality is people up here drink a lot. They do not drink a lot because they have to drink; it is because they liaise and make friends and get together, and it is a good pastime sitting on a nice, hot, humid afternoon, downing a few beers - one at the beginning, two becomes three, becomes four, and people drink a lot.

                                As Minister for Health, I have had the opportunity to look at some surveys and studies undertaken for the Territory since the 1970s. Every survey described how much Territorians drink. What was surprising was that Alice Springs was the town where people were drinking more than anyone else in the Territory. The volume of alcohol consumed by so few people was incredible. We are talking about 40000 litres a year. We are talking about people drinking an incredible amount of alcohol every year. It does not take much to understand that unrestricted supply of alcohol and drinking a great deal of alcohol creates social problems.

                                Some of my personal observations include the way different cultures handle alcohol. There is the Islamic culture in which they do not drink alcohol at all. Some of the Asian countries have alcohol, and some cultures will drink a lot. For example, if you go to a Chinese banquet, at the end of the dinner, out comes the rice wine and everyone toasts gam bei with you. Because of the culture they have to drink with you. If you go to Thailand or Indonesia, they do not drink much.

                                In my own country, from my own experience, alcohol was always associated with company and food. When I was growing up, there was not a pub in Greece where you went to drink alcohol. It was a taverna or a restaurant where you sat down to have a meal with your friends or family, and you drank alcohol - always associated with food.

                                In the past 20 or 30 years, to my great surprise when I went back to Greece, I found more bars and pubs appeared in the neighbourhood, and more young people go exclusively to those places to drink - no food, just drink. I have seen some of my own relatives, my nephews, go to the bar and drink. They will start with shots and come home totally inebriated. It was totally different to when I was growing up. In that respect, my mother used to complain when I was growing up that I was really bad as I was involved with politics. Now, she complains about her grandsons. She says: ‘I wish they were involved in politics, not going drinking and the drugs. I wish the new generation was involved in politics’.

                                Alcohol has much to do with supply and changing habits, introduction of new customs, and new ways of doing business. The old taverna has gone out the window in Greece. The pubs and bars appeared and the endless supply of alcohol has created many social problems which we can see here.

                                With regard to supply and demand, where there is demand there will be supply. When there is a great deal of supply, people can be drawn into artificial demand and drink more alcohol. We see that all the time. How many times have I been stopped by people asking me for $2 for a bus fare, which I refused to give? Or some people say: ‘Give me $2 to buy some food’. I say, ‘Come on, I will buy you a pie’, and they just walk away. I know very well that that $2 will not buy a pie but will go to buy a can of beer. We have had the terrible effects of alcohol and, many times, people point the finger at the Indigenous societies. However, I have seen many of my mainstream, middle-class friends getting absolutely sloshed and behaving like idiots. I have seen it many times.

                                I like my drink, I enjoy my drink, and I have been drunk too. I got drunk when there was a good party, at a christening, at a wedding, which was the reason. I certainly would not go out and get drunk just for the fun of it, and misbehave in public. It is not because I am a politician; I never did it when I was not a politician, as it was not part of the culture I grew up with.

                                We have a serious problem with alcohol. Do not be mistaken; this is not a problem for the Northern Territory, this is a problem for Australia. If you look at the news about what happens in downtown Melbourne, when you see what happens in downtown Sydney, or even in boring old Adelaide, or in Perth, you find that alcohol has become a severe problem - binge drinking - for our society. It was not long ago there was a news item where the Police Commissioner in New South Wales was begging young women not to drink too much because they put themselves in danger. Young women were saying they were going with their friends to get pissed, to get drunk – those were the words they used. They were the words they used in the news item, Madam Deputy Speaker.

                                It is a problem. It is a problem for our society, not just for the Territory, but also for Australia. However, because our society is so small and some people are quite visible, we talk about problems with alcohol. The moment you start putting restrictions on alcohol, people will move. People can move very quickly in a day; many people have cars. If you put a restriction on in Katherine, they will go to Tennant Creek. If you put a restriction on Tennant Creek, they will go to Alice Springs. If you put a restriction on the sale of alcohol in the communities, guess what happens? Everybody will come to the urban centres to easily access alcohol.

                                There is a combination of efforts we have to make. We have to change the culture. If we are going to actually restrict the consumption of alcohol and the associated social problems, we have to start changing our culture. I have said many times that if you go to a sporting event in a primary school, you will see there will be a sausage sizzle and a can of Coke or a can of Lift. As the kids grow older, the colour of these cans change from soft drink to something stronger - to a green can or a red can. So, we have this association with drinking. If you go to any sporting event you will see people drinking - and drinking quite a lot. There is a serious problem we have to address in the …

                                Mr GILES: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! I draw your attention to the state of the House.

                                Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. Ring the bells.

                                A quorum is present. Minister, you have the call.

                                Mr VATSKALIS: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Changing the alcohol culture in the Territory has to be a multifaceted approach. First, there has to be restrictions on supply. The Country Liberals’ idea of opening the shops in Alice Springs earlier and closing later is a totally wrong approach. You are not going to find people getting drunk earlier, you are going to find people being drunk longer in those areas. Some of the unbelievable ideas and policies from the other side would not resolve the problem.

                                To resolve the problem we have to address the issue of supply, and we have to change the culture we have currently in the north. I am not referring only to the Territory. When I talk about the north, it includes Western Australia and Queensland. We have to educate people and, at the very end, there are going to be people who are addicted to alcohol, who will do anything to get drunk - they will get drunk. These people will be of harm to themselves, their families, and their societies.

                                How many times have we said most of the problems with domestic violence are clearly associated with alcohol? How many times have we said sexual assaults and assaults are associated mainly with alcohol? We know it very well. We choose to close our eyes, but the reality is out there. The true stories are out there. Police are not dictated to by the government to say that; police have the experience and they face these issues every day - it is in their face. I challenge any of you to go out with police one night in Mitchell Street, in Alice Springs, or Tennant Creek, and face what police have to put up with, with people who have had too many …

                                Mr Elferink: They will not let me. I asked to, and your Chief Minister said no. Could you arrange that for me please, minister?

                                Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

                                Mr VATSKALIS: As an former police officer, member for Port Darwin, you are the only one here who knows what I am referring to, drawing from what you said in an interview given to the newspaper about your past - which is a long way gone, and congratulations on that. You had those problems, and you are probably one of the few here who understands the real issue of being hooked on alcohol. You should support some of these initiatives because you were lucky enough to get out of it. Other people who are not strong enough would like to get out of it.

                                We are committed to reducing the harm alcohol has on our community. We have introduced Enough is Enough, the most comprehensive alcohol reforms in the Territory’s history - and we are not the ones who say that. In the past few months, I have been doorknocking my area and have handed out leaflets on Enough is Enough. The response I get from the community is incredible. This is one of the few pamphlets I put out where positive comments came back about what the government is doing: demanding tougher measures and stronger measures to reduce the alcohol impact on our community.

                                We can see this alcohol impact in our community. Many of these people who are turning up on the weekend to clog the emergency department are people who have been involved in fights because of alcohol, who have bashed other people because of alcohol, and people who suffer injuries because of alcohol.

                                Our government has invested $34.2m over five years to 2014-15 to increase the treatment and rehabilitation options across the continuum of care, establishing new services to meet the demand of people with significant alcohol problems. This involves services ranging from early intervention with your GP and counselling services to withdrawal treatment under clinical supervision, to residential rehabilitation, through to transitional aftercare to integrate back into a useful life in the community. The package will fund new beds and additional staff, with expanded outreach services to treat problem drinkers in remote areas.

                                My Department of Health plays an important part in the roll-out of the alcohol reforms as the lead agency in the provision of treatment services for people with problem drinking. Treatment services are at the front line of minimising the harms experienced by problem drinkers. This year, this government has invested an additional $3.5m to maximise treatment services’ capacity of the non-government residential treatment and counselling providers across all the Northern Territory regional centres. It is not only the government services that provide support to people with alcohol problems; it has to be a whole community support. That is why we are involved in non-government organisations, the NGOs, because they are part of the community, and close to the community and, in some cases, people will go to them first before they go to the government service.

                                Madam Deputy Speaker, 19 additional staff have been employed in the NGO treatment sector to enhance treatment services. These include care workers, counsellors, case managers, and the cultural support outreach workers. Funding has also been provided to the Drug and Alcohol Service Association, DASA, in Alice Springs for 10 new withdrawal beds and 14 new rehabilitation beds for the Darwin Salvation Army that became available in September 2011. The Safe and Sober program, and ambulatory model, provides new case management and therapeutic intervention programs. This model is structured around teams consisting of a therapist and Aboriginal Alcohol and Other Drugs workers who provide intensive case management and counselling to support individuals and, where possible, engage with family.

                                Additional resources have been provided to the Aboriginal Medical Service Alliance of the Northern Territory to work with officers in my department to identify the most appropriate allocation of these resources. This will see 10 ambulatory teams established across the Northern Territory by mid-2013. Dedicated Alcohol and Other Drug nurses and Aboriginal health workers are now employed to work in the emergency departments at Royal Darwin and Alice Springs Hospitals, and that will be extended to other regional hospitals. Three additional staff members have commenced, with recruitment action under way for a further five workers.

                                Since the commencement of the Enough is Enough program, there have been 464 presentations to the Northern Territory emergency departments in July, August, and September that were deemed wholly alcohol-related - 464 presentations in three months, 62% of which have been referred to the Tobacco, Alcohol and Other Drugs service clinical nurse consultants.

                                Now, with the enhanced assessment pathway, clients can progress, if required, to a residential withdrawal program in much shorter time frames. Services in Katherine, Tennant Creek and Nhulunbuy will be rolled out over the next nine months. It must be noted that measuring progress in reducing alcohol-related health harms can only be done effectively over the longer term. I look forward to providing further updates to the House as more progress is made over time.

                                Online training packages and resources manuals have been developed for NT health practitioners and health centres to support the delivery of contemporary alcohol misuse interventions. Alcohol misuse interventions have been endorsed by the World Health Organisation as a highly-effective assessment and counselling intervention to be delivered by healthcare providers in a variety of settings which, according to a solid body of evidence, can lead to reductions in drinking when delivered in a primary care setting, or reduction in recurrence of injury when delivered in an emergency department setting.

                                Alcohol misuse intervention training has been delivered by our health specialists to doctors, clinicians and health staff in 50 remote health centres and to a further 70 medical and treatment providers across the Northern Territory. A position for an additional medical specialist was recently advertised and the department is currently progressing this recruitment.

                                Community-based organisations are now funded to provide service for people referred from the SMART Court or referred from the Alcohol and Other Drugs Tribunal when it commences on 1 January 2012. Since 1 July 2011, 29 people have been referred through the SMART Court for treatment and counselling.

                                I understand people will be able to place themselves on the Banned Drinker Register from 1 January 2012 when the Alcohol and Other Drugs Tribunal comes online in full capacity. People willing to be placed on the Banned Drinker Register will undergo clinical assessment and/or tribunal assessment depending on the circumstances. That person will be issued with a Banning Alcohol and Drug Treatment order and placed on the register. This is a very positive step as it encourages people to recognise their problem and seek affirmative support to help turn their lives around. Self-motivation is a powerful driver in the treatment process.

                                These alcohol reforms are breaking new ground in the Territory. Again, I say it has to be more than that; it has to be a cultural change in the Territory. Alcohol is one of the most insidious drugs we can come across. It makes you feel euphoric in the beginning, and it will make you feel depressed at the end.

                                I always remember a myth I learnt very early in my life when I was growing up in Greece which refers to alcohol. The story goes as follows: Bacchus, the god of alcohol and partying in Greece, was visiting one of his friends, a king, but he could not visit with empty hands so he had to find a present. As he walked along the road, he found this beautiful plant growing on the side of the road, so he picked it up and carried it to give to the king. The plant started feeding from the powers of the god and started growing bigger and bigger, and the roots came out of the soil around his hand. He realised the plant would dry out and die, so he found something to put it in, the skull of a bird. He put the plant into the skull and continued to walk. The plant kept growing so he had to find something bigger to put it in, so he found the skull of a lion. He put the plant in the skull of the bird in the skull of a lion and continued to walk. As he walked it kept growing so he looked around and found the skull of a donkey. He put the whole thing into the donkey’s skull and gave it to the king. The king planted the plant and it grew and made beautiful grapes. Out of these beautiful grapes, the king made the first wine in Greece. They say when you drink that wine first you sing like a bird, then you become brave like a lion, but when you drink too much, you behave like an ass. That is the problem with alcohol.

                                Madam Deputy Speaker, alcohol has been around for a very long time; so have the problems associated with the misuse of alcohol. This government is trying to address the problem. It is going to take time and effort and, as we work together as a community to address the problems, instead of coming out with some harebrained idea that opening alcohol outlets for longer hours can resolve the problem, reducing supply, changing the culture of alcohol consumption in the Territory and providing the support where and when it is needed is going to address the problem.

                                Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Deputy Speaker, this subject has filled much air time - sometimes hot air, sometimes sensible air - in this parliament. It is a very serious subject and we should deal with it in that direction. No one has a monopoly on the solution. I have heard the debates from both sides of this parliament. When I look back at my time in the Northern Territory, matters have not become better. In fact, in some ways, they have probably become worse.

                                However, there may be other factors in our lifestyle these days that, in conjunction with the abuse of alcohol, have also caused problems in our society. One of the key issues we do not look at in relation to alcohol abuse is unemployment, people’s lifestyles in various communities, and people’s lack of education. I was recently reading an article in the Cairns Post which said reducing crime was influenced by people being able to get a job. I believe, to a large extent, many of the problems we see in the Northern Territory are based on a series of underlying issues that have yet to be really tackled. Although, naturally, there are attempts to change things with SIHIP - for better or worse - the concept of at least trying to put new houses into communities is part of the way to go.

                                The other issue is employment. As I have said many times, I believe welfare is the scourge of the Northern Territory, especially in our remote communities. People need to be able to work. I have always been told the problem is boredom. If people do not have much to fill their day, if life is pretty down, what is the cheapest drug you can use? It is alcohol. So, whilst we are talking about some specific issues here, governments talk about whole-of-government approach. There is a long way to go before we start to tackle this alcohol problem if we do not come from a whole-of-government approach.

                                One of those areas I have spoken about a number of times is the effect of advertising. If you compare advertising for alcohol with the approach to advertising tobacco there seems to be little done by governments to reduce it. Advertising for alcohol goes so much hand in hand with sport. Our cricketers wear a big VB on their uniform. We see at the football and cricket Fosters or VB or Heineken; they spend a fortune on advertising. Who sponsored the World Cup? Even I, as a non-drinker, know who sponsored the World Cup: Heineken. There is huge pressure by companies to ensure one of their main weapons in increasing their sales - that is advertising, especially in sport - is not touched by government. We have this culture which we allow to permeate our society. Where do I see much of the heavy drinking in my community? It is at sporting games and, sometimes, at club functions. It is alcohol that has caused fights or arguments sometimes at those functions or at the football. It is not all the time and, to be fair, there are many people who drink alcohol sensibly and enjoy the day’s sport and go home.

                                If the government also wants to support its own policy in reducing the effects of alcohol, will it serve, for instance, only mid-strength beer at its functions in this building? Will it take the lead and say: ‘We will not serve full-strength beer?’ …

                                Ms Lawrie: We do.

                                Mr WOOD: I hope that is the case. I would not know because I do not drink ...

                                Ms Lawrie: We did that yesterday.

                                Mr WOOD: I will take the Treasurer’s word. Thanks for that, Treasurer. The government can lead the way in showing it has a responsible approach to alcohol.

                                The other issue is drunkenness. I have said before that we seem to accept that drunkenness is okay. Young people go out and get absolutely blind; that seems to be the way you go today. You have a few drinks before you leave home so, when you get there, you only need a few more and you are well and truly over the top. You see that if you go to Mitchell Street. I have been to Mitchell Street late at night and I intend to go there again to see for myself - probably without the AHA. I went with them before and I appreciate they took me to places I never knew existed.

                                We have a culture where it is fine to be drunk. The problem with being drunk is that people lose control and, when people lose control they do things such as what happened in Katherine with the death of a policeman. Alcohol was a part of that incident on was New Year’s Eve. We know it has happened in other places with car accidents and domestic violence. People are not sober, generally, they are drunk. Unfortunately, we do not stand up and say drunkenness is not cool, and getting sloshed is not cool. We do not tend to say that, we just think it is all fun. No one minds people having a beer, a good night, and getting cheerful, but there is a difference between having a good time and getting cheerful, and getting drunk. As you know, we also have problems with people driving drunk on the roads.

                                In relation to the statement, more specifically, I believe it is too early to make a judgment. I did not vote either way on the swipe card. One of the reasons is, as I said, I prefer a government to have a go. A government should be able to have a go at trying something; we know there are major problems with alcohol in our community. Earlier this year, the member for Sanderson spoke about itinerants in Darwin and other places who become a social pest. They live around buildings and defecate, swear, beg, and are a nuisance. The reality is they are affected by alcohol. We know that is one of the problems.

                                The government has introduced a swipe card and said this will be part of a total package which it believes will help reduce and change some of that culture. I am not knocking the government for trying, but I have some issues at the moment. It is far too early, after three months to rely on statistics, and I will give you the reason why. I have been through the stats in the statement and it says there was a drop in alcohol of 15% across the Territory. If I look at all the stats, they are actually above that, so how did you get a 15% drop in alcohol …

                                Ms Lawrie: Alcohol-related …

                                Mr WOOD: I know, I know. But, when you are looking for an average, the 15% should be higher. I am saying …

                                Ms Lawrie: Nhulunbuy was up five-point-something.

                                Mr WOOD: Yes, but it does not easily explain that when you look at it. It is early days. It does not say what the 15% is - of what? Is it of last month or last quarter, or last year? …

                                Ms Lawrie: July, August, September.

                                Mr WOOD: Again, it does not quite say that; it just says 15% decrease. I am saying that three months is not a long enough time to get a real indication of whether there is an effect.

                                I say to the opposition - and I come to its policy which I have heard before, and I have some agreement with it. Some of what was said today is what I always agree with, with some variation. However, I say to the opposition: ‘Do not say you are going to scrap the government’s plan just like that if you come into power’. As there has been a great deal of money spent on it, I would say: ‘We will review that policy and see for ourselves whether it had an effect’. That would be the wiser approach.

                                I know we are coming up to an election and people are making big statements and policies. That is fine. However, I would have thought before you decide to scrap something that, by August next year most people will probably not even blink an eye when they are taking their licence out of their pocket and swiping it; they will be used to it. It would be fair for the taxpayers in the Northern Territory to see whether this program has changed things. It has cost a great deal of money; it would be irresponsible if you did not give the government’s attempt to change the culture of drinking in the Northern Territory a chance. Give that program a chance to run long enough, analyse it, and see whether there were any benefits from it before you throw the baby out with the bath water.

                                I understand where the CLP is coming from. I was looking at my speech in the Parliamentary Record from 5 May this year when this was being discussed. I also support the idea that if a person has been picked up a number of times, yes, they may be asked to undertake rehabilitation. However, there needs to be some way where people who cannot help themselves, after a number of attempts, are compulsorily required to undertake rehabilitation.

                                My difference with the CLP is I do not believe that should necessarily be a criminal offence. The CLP is saying it is a breach of an order, therefore, it is a crime, therefore, you will go to gaol. I believe abuse of alcohol, being a health issue, needs a slightly different approach. If you take that approach, you will go down the path where you might as well say drunkenness is an offence. Maybe that is worth a debate. You are saying that someone who is continually drunk and does not want to undertake rehabilitation has committed a crime, therefore, they should undertake compulsory rehabilitation.

                                I would like to see another approach which takes it away from prison but still makes it compulsory. There might be some legal eagles out there who say you cannot do that. However, if it was taken out of the prison system - because I do not see this as a crime, I see it as a real health issue. We have laws which require people who, for instance, can be mentally unstable, and can be taken from society and held. They do not have to be held necessarily in a prison, but we might be able to find a place, build a special purpose place where there is an element of education, of medical help ...

                                Mr Bohlin: You were there when we read the policy.

                                Mr WOOD: No, no, I can give you my …

                                Mr Bohlin: You are saying exactly what the policy says.

                                Mr WOOD: No, no. The CLP is holding up the policy, but thank heavens we have the Parliamentary Record, because you can go back and find out what has been said ...

                                Mr Bohlin: Here, it is here.

                                Mr WOOD: Yes, but I have the Parliamentary Record. It has the date so, if you want history, you can check it in here. I do not mind if the CLP has the same policy as me, or I do not mind if my policy happens to match with that. I do not mind if my policy matches with the ALP. I do not care. This issue is above that. It is too serious an issue. I know people will score points off what I am saying. Let us ensure we keep our feet on the ground about this important issue. I have seen too many people die from alcohol. I have seen the continual effects of alcohol in the Northern Territory, so even though we might want to score a few points, be sensible about what we say.

                                Rehabilitation could include medical assistance, education, and support, and done in a way that, even though it is compulsory, is also compassionate. There are people whose lives are, basically, stuffed by the effects of alcohol. They are locked up and they cannot help themselves. That is why that method has merit.

                                That also appears to be the way the CLP would deal with people with alcohol problems, but I am not sure whether it should go broader. One of the advantages of the system the government has at the moment is, if you are picked up for three DUIs …

                                Ms Lawrie: Three DUIs?

                                Mr WOOD: Yes. You can be banned as well. I am not saying the CLP could not incorporate that in their policy as well, because …

                                Mr Bohlin: We have said we want to see …

                                Mr WOOD: Hang on. You are hoping that they will be picked up three times. That might only apply to Darwin, it might not apply in the rural area, in Palmerston, or elsewhere, because you have to be picked up. There are other places where people who are affected by alcohol are picked up; that is, through the police booking them for being over the limit. That is why, at the moment, the banning notice is a good one the police can use on people who have been picked up a number of times for being over the limit. It might also include if people are found to continually bring grog into a dry area.

                                It is a concern for me that we have the intervention. I questioned recently whether we have enough policing when it comes to abuse of alcohol. In a community in my area - which I am not going to name because there are some good people there working hard - there was a stack of VB cans. There was a 44 gallon drum, about five garbage bags full, and a little kid, about three years old, tipping out a plastic rubbish bin to take it back to the house. All that came out were VB cans. Out of the front is a big sign: ‘No liquor - intervention’. If we are going to be serious about it we need to be serious about the laws we say should be enforced. I do not believe they are enforced enough in these cases where there are supposed to be dry communities. That is an issue of people making laws and not having the ability to carry them out.

                                There is one other question I need to put to the minister. I gather there has not been enough time to see whether people who have had banning notices more than three times and had to go to mandatory treatment orders have done so. That is why I say it is too early to make an in-depth analysis of what is happening with the stats because we had not had enough time for that to happen. I am interested to know whether there have been any banning notices for secondary suppliers? Are there figures to find out whether someone has been caught for that, because …

                                Ms Lawrie: Five. It is in the report.

                                Mr WOOD: Five. That is one of the difficulties which has been stated by the Leader of the Opposition: people will find ways around it. This may not have been a secondary supplier; however, I was at a footy match at Marrara last year – it may have been one of the AFL matches. I parked the car and these people got out of a minibus, took a carton of beer, stuck it under a tree, and went to watch the footy match. Then, someone else came along and drank it. I do not know if they were hoping to come back to it; however, there were people drinking it. People are clever enough to get around secondary supply. I am not saying it is not worth trying, but we have to have our feet on the ground and ask if it is realistic, especially when you are dealing with alcoholics.

                                The issue of banned drinkers going inside a pub – if they are at Howard Springs Tavern and are told they cannot get a takeaway, is there anything that says they cannot get a beer over the counter? It may be only if the person behind the bar knows they have been banned. The person behind the bar - there are usually different people on each night at the Howard Springs Tavern - may not know at all. Of course, if they hang around long enough at the tavern they get picked up, or they should not be served if they are over the limit.

                                The other question is in relation to alcohol-related crime. That has been in the paper, and when this was debated the first time around the question was: will you get people breaking into houses and businesses for alcohol? Those are the stats you need now. That is what was put forward as an issue way back. The stats we need now should say what they were before this came in, ad what they are now. There needs to be six months at least - maybe even 12 months - to get an accurate figure and to get some trends. At the moment, it is hard to accept you can really make some in-depth analysis of those things ...

                                Mr BOHLIN: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I move an extension of time, pursuant to Standing Order 77, for the member to complete his remarks.

                                Motion agreed to.

                                Mr WOOD: Thank you, member for Drysdale. I am raising a few points, some of which have been raised before.

                                I have looked at various places. I have walked down Mitchell Street at 9 pm to go to Coles and there were still groups of people in the parks - still drunk and still drinking. Again, this has not been in long enough, but will this legislation change those people I see in Raintree Park? Will they be rehabilitated? Will they be turned around? I am not so sure.

                                However, it is not fair to say the government looks all bad. Give the government a go and see whether its version of trying to do things will work. It may not work. I do not think there is any monopoly on solutions for this problem.

                                The Treasurer made a statement on 5 May in relation to the debate on the Substance Misuse Assessment and Referral for Treatment Court Bill where she said:
                                  … I am a strong supporter of the volumetric tax. I agree with the Henry tax review recommendation …

                                I noticed the media release that came out the other day saying: ‘Whoops! We did not get anywhere in Canberra about that’. I am interested to get a response as to why we did not. I believe the Treasurer was putting much faith in the tax reform forum; that this might happen. It has not because there are people like Dr Boffa and his group who believe that if alcohol is sold where priced on the percentage of alcohol in the product, then you will get people not drinking a cheaper product. I am interested to know why Ms Macklin - who was running the forum?

                                Ms Lawrie: No, the Treasurer and Prime Minister. The federal government ruled it out of discussions.

                                Mr WOOD: All right. Maybe you could give that answer in response at the end of the debate. I believe that is the path the Northern Territory was going and, obviously, it has not been agreed to by the federal government. I believe part of our problem is we have to work on the federal government as well.

                                When we come to tobacco, it is the federal government driving restrictions on advertising, promoting the health problems associated with tobacco, and changing the colours of the packets of cigarettes. However, when it comes to alcohol, except for upping the price of the mixed drinks …

                                Ms Lawrie: Alcopops.

                                Mr WOOD: Alcopops. What really has it done? I know it spends money on rehabilitation and programs. However, when it comes to actually trying to reduce the advertising of alcohol, promote that it is not cool, and communities that tried to restrict the hours, governments of both persuasions were not really keen on changing things around.

                                For instance, look at the effort required in Newcastle to knock back the hours. There was much hard work trying to achieve that by very few people and the New South Wales Police Association. If you look at the situation in Newcastle, and at the changes that occurred in relation to violence - in relation to the number of people who were admitted to Newcastle hospital - a small change in the closing times and in the way people could enter and exit pubs in Newcastle made a huge difference.

                                The Treasurer said things are fine in Mitchell Street. I am not so sure. When I talk informally to people outside the industry, such as the police, they will tell you things are not that crash hot at 4 am. What Newcastle did was restrict access. Once you entered a pub - I think after 1 am - you could not go into any other pub. You could not do the pub circuit. You had to stay there and you could leave at 3.30 am. We can go to any pub here and leave at closing time. Those small restrictions or small changes did not limit people’s opportunity to enjoy themselves, but they did change the way people moved around Newcastle CBD. They are quite good statistics, because there was a scientific study of this which showed it made a difference.

                                It seemed to me strange that the New South Wales Nationals came out not supporting that type of approach, even though the figures show there was a major change to the way people behaved themselves in the Newcastle CBD. It is an area we should study to see if it would apply to places like Mitchell Street.

                                There is no doubt that alcohol is a big problem in the Northern Territory, otherwise we would not have so many people in our prisons. I support the Leader of the Opposition when it comes to the option of putting people in mandatory rehabilitation. My difference is I do not think it should be a crime. I believe it would be a crime if they went down that path. They should look at seeing whether they can take it out of the criminal way of doing things and put it more into health, rehabilitation and changing people’s lives.

                                With regard to the swipe card, it is too early to make a decision as to whether it is working. Give the government a go on this. No one has the monopoly on the answers for alcohol rehabilitation or change to our culture the member for Casuarina talked about. It is very much part of our culture. So, people, step back a bit and give everyone a bit of a go on this and, in the end, we will get a combination of the two - I do not know.

                                Madam Deputy Speaker, let us leave it for a little longer. Let us see what the statistics say over a longer period. The problem at the moment is it is a bit too early to debate the statistics. Good statistics are ones that have been developed over a period of time and need to be developed in such a way you can compare it with something else - with a control. At the present time, it is very hard to make a judgment as to whether the government’s swipe card system is actually working. I leave my judgment on that, but I take up the policy of the CLP in relation to mandatory detention but, as I said, not in a criminal way.

                                Dr BURNS (Education and Training): Madam Deputy Speaker, there is no doubt that alcohol causes considerable pain in our community in many ways – many ways that are hard to quantify. However, as the Minister for Alcohol Policy pointed out, a study by the Menzies School of Health Research and the South Australia Centre for Economic Studies found that over $642m a year is what it costs the Territory - not only in lost productivity, but also in admissions to our hospital, in a whole range of ways. That is what can be quantified.

                                What is of equal concern to us, apart from that considerable amount of money, is what cannot be quantified: the pain, the upset, the terror of children, the break-up of families. You cannot measure that. Alcohol is a major problem in our community of the Northern Territory, both sides of this parliament recognise that. That is an important first step.

                                As many members have, I have Alcoholics Anonymous meet in my electorate office and, through that, I have had contact with a number of members of Alcoholics Anonymous. One of the first things they tell you is they are alcoholic and they have not had a drink in 30 years, some of them, 40 years and, for some of them, it might only be a matter of months. I admire their courage to acknowledge they have a problem, and point to the fact they are doing something about it. That takes a great deal of courage. I commend Alcoholics Anonymous for the work they do, the support they give each other, and the lives that have been retrieved and restored through Alcoholics Anonymous.

                                And so it is with us as a Territory; it took us a while to acknowledge we had a problem. In fact, our former Administrator has a song, We’ve got some bloody good drinkers in the Northern Territory, which many of us know. It was almost an anthem of pride to say how heavily Territorians could drink, as if we were bullet proof and there were no side effects of that heavy drinking. We know better; there are horrible effects of alcohol. We saw it in our road toll and through our domestic violence statistics and, over time, we have acknowledged we have a problem.

                                I have commended Marshall Perron, a former CLP Chief Minister, in the past in this House for the Living with Alcohol program. That was a visionary and courageous program. Unfortunately, it was ended through a court case and tax regimes and, then, everything fell in a heap in the Territory for quite some time.

                                When this government came to power, I remember Peter Toyne standing in this House talking about the problems with alcohol, particularly in Alice Springs, and agitating to do something about it; not only in government, but in opposition. A former CLP member – I am not going to mention his name - tried to close down Peter Toyne when he was an opposition member and tried to maintain the status quo of alcohol in Alice Springs. One had the feeling that particular member was very closely associated with the liquor industry in Alice Springs. That was just a feeling of mine. I have nothing more to back that up, but that was always a notion I had. Whichever way you put it, the CLP was very reluctant to acknowledge the problems with alcohol.

                                As this government began to move on alcohol issues, there was debate in this Chamber and criticism from the other side. We may not have got everything right in the reforms we brought in over the years. Syd Stirling started much of that reform process. I was glad when the mantle was given to me, as Alcohol minister, to make a few first steps with the alcohol ID system and further alcohol restrictions, building on the work Syd Stirling had already done in Groote Eylandt and in Nhulunbuy - significant work which goes on today. Those communities, particularly Groote Eylandt, I believe were a template for the way forward in the Territory.

                                I commend the Minister for Alcohol Policy on the very hard, detailed work she has done to build on the policies of this government, step by step. As we have said all along, we will take the further steps. We will do whatever we believe is necessary and fair to try to address this issue of alcohol in the Northern Territory. I commend the suite of reforms brought in by the member for Karama, as Minister for Alcohol Policy. They are courageous and visionary. They take in the whole of the Northern Territory. They have been comprehensive in the way they have addressed how people get on the Banned Drinker Register, and the processes around the court.

                                Yes, we had the Alcohol Court in the beginning, which was introduced by Peter Toyne. I made further changes as well, but we acknowledge they were first steps. They had to be refined; they had to be built on. You only learn through experience. As is borne out by the statistics that have been presented by the Minister for Alcohol Policy, I believe they are having an effect. This side of the House does not pretend these are a silver bullet, or a panacea; a cure all for everything. There has to be a comprehensive approach. We are talking about deep social issues that have their genesis in disadvantage in a whole range of social and cultural factors, and they are not going to be solved overnight.

                                As the member for Nelson observed, much of this goes back to people’s economic opportunities, having a job, having a place in the economy, having something worthwhile to do to contribute back to the community and support their family. That is of crucial and basic importance; we recognise that. Therefore, when the Leader of the Opposition says: ‘You are not addressing the deeper issues here’, well, I believe we are. We are attempting to, through our policies of engagement in the regions, through economic development in the regions, through a whole range of initiatives around education, employment, health …

                                Ms Lawrie: Housing.

                                Dr BURNS: And housing. We are not pretending it is a silver, magic solution to all of this. What we are saying is we are a government that is taking steps in the right direction. We are working in collaboration and partnership with the Commonwealth government, and that is a very important partnership.

                                We are not saying we have all the answers. We are not saying we have everything right, but we are saying we have had the courage to stand up and take steps, to take the criticism, and try to bring the community with us. In the community itself, in the 10 or 11 years since I have been in parliament, there has been a progression of thinking and understanding, and acceptance that action needs to be taken. Of course, there will always be those people who say: ‘I do not want to be penalised because of the actions of the minority’. I understand that and I respect that view. We should not have to do that, but we do. It is the same as if you are living in a house with an alcoholic, you have to hide the grog. You cannot give them access to the grog. Or a drug addict. You have to have strategies around handling that situation. You should not have to do it but you do. That is the reality, unfortunately, for us in the Territory. We are undertaking steps in that regard.

                                Whilst we do not always have our policies right, we have not been completely as left field as Mal Brough when, with the intervention, he brought in that if you buy $100 worth of grog you have to sign a register and say who you are buying it for and where you are taking it. One look at those registers - I am told by employees - there were plenty of Mickey Mouses and Donald Ducks. There are many jokes at parties about the way people signed off on those registers that were never going to have an effect. It was a solution imposed by Canberra. There has been much talk in these sittings about this government rolling over for Canberra, having its tummy tickled by Canberra, and doing Canberra’s bidding.

                                During the time Mal Brough brought in those changes, I did not hear a peep out of the opposition or heard it publicly oppose that register he had everyone sign. It was not just a swipe of a card that took a couple of seconds; it was lining up, signing off and doing all of the paperwork that never went anywhere - unlike the data that is gathered through the nodes, the places you swipe your card, the points of sale, with a comparison to see whether that person is on the Banned Drinker Register. Importantly, that data is not stored; peoples’ privacy is maintained. That is a very important element and one this government and this minister were very focused on.

                                We did not want to compromise peoples’ safety at all. Industry is embracing this technology. When I first started to inquire about this, there were venues down south where women felt safe going to, where people had their card swiped so they knew who was in the venue. There was some security around that and people had a sense of security. Industry and customers are valuing this type of technology.

                                The initial signs are promising, and I take what the member for Nelson said: this is initial data and he wants to see a progression of data. He is very right to say that; it is important. That progression of data will be important to this government. The minister is focused on this data because we know people find ways around things; people are ingenious about finding ways around things. We need to be vigilant about any rorting that is going on, or any aspects of that. We need to be vigilant of secondary supply, and we need to jump all over that. The police are jumping all over that, and there are a number of people, through the statistics, who have already been put on the Banned Drinker Register themselves because of secondary supply.

                                In the main, cab drivers do the right thing but there are rumours around, as there always are, that cab drivers are doing this and cab drivers are doing that. Secondary supply has been explained to cab drivers and they will be vigilant in this regard because it would be a serious offence, indeed, if they were found to be engaged in secondary supply.

                                As a community, we have to look at all the different options of what is going on. I can talk from personal experience in my little shopping centre of Rapid Creek. I was finding it unbearable. I have been around the Territory for a long time and I know people from outlying areas like to come in and have a party and, sometimes, get a bit loud and a little out of control, and some of them cannot handle drink because they have never really been socialised in drinking. However, their behaviour publicly left much to be desired. I used to despair and would go out and ask people to be quiet or not to carry on and whatever. I had my ear chewed a few times, but I still went out and did it.

                                A few times we had to call the police, who came very promptly and dealt with the situation and took people away. I really commend the work of the police in that regard. It is not the most pleasant thing to have to deal with drunks, day in and day out. They do it with patience and dignity and, in nearly all cases, they treat people very well. I understand how police can get a bit short with people sometimes, because they are dealing with it all the time, but they act professionally.

                                Since the Banned Drinker Register has come in, things have really changed around Rapid Creek Shopping Centre. The transformation has been incredible and almost unbelievable. It is like living in another world! The shops were almost battened down before because of some of the problems that would come through - not all the time, but sometimes worse than others. We had meetings of the shopkeepers in Rapid Creek Shopping Centre and, basically, they would be upset. The management was losing tenants who would move on because of the problems. However, now people are happier. The tenants are happier, their business is better, families are coming back into the shopping centre - and that is all families, including Indigenous families. I notice many Indigenous mothers and their families who were not there before coming into that shopping centre to do their shopping. It is because they feel they can go to those shops, buy what they have to, go home and feed the kids without being humbugged by all the drunks. It is fantastic that families, across the spectrum, are returning to our shopping centres. I am not going to stand here tonight and say: ‘It is heaven and it is always going to be that way’. We need to be continually vigilant in this regard. We need to take further steps.

                                I commend the opposition, although I do not agree with their policy. From where they were in the days of - I will mention his name - Richard Lim - who was completely anti-alcohol controls, any sort of things around alcohol, it should just be the open market - to where we are now, the opposition has actually moved with the public debate and is willing to take steps in that regard. That is a healthy thing in this debate, because before, as a government, we were debating with an opposition that just wanted the status quo. I am talking about 2001. They did not want to change; they thought we were radicals who were going to change the Territory forever - I know that is a mantra on the other side – but things did need to change. This is a government, through successive ministers and Cabinets, which has taken steps. The opposition has looked at its policy. The voting public will look at the next election and say, ‘Well, that is their policy’, and they will make judgments. People will have an opinion on this sort of thing. I believe it is something that has the capacity to change votes: whether people think this policy is going to work, whether this policy has worked, or whether this one has the capacity to work a hell of a lot better.

                                It is an important debate and I am glad the minster has brought this statement on in this parliament. It is of crucial importance. Once again, I commend the minister. It has been very thorough and there have been iterations. She has a fantastic team behind her. It was almost like a military operation to roll-out this scheme across the Territory, because there were many people wanting it to fail. There were many people who wanted it to have technical glitches. There were many people who just wanted to criticise it. But it was rolled out - a very complex undertaking - and rolled out very successfully. That does not mean to say there were not some glitches here and there but, generally, it has been pretty successful. What problems or issues may have arisen, I know the minister has taken on board and she will move to change, to refine to improve, to move on down the path.

                                I was in Cairns the other week on ministerial business. I visited the housing department, had a look at some of their housing properties, and talked to them about management. We were talking about tenancy management and alcohol, and they are amazed at the Banned Drinker Register implemented here. Although …

                                Mr KNIGHT: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move that the minister be given an extension of time to complete his remarks.

                                Motion agreed to.

                                Dr BURNS: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Although they were professional public servants, I could tell at a personal level, and a professional level, they were very interested in the Banned Drinker Register. Basically, I could see them thinking about it. What I am saying is there are other jurisdictions which will look at what has happened in the Territory; they will do it their own way. Other jurisdictions have similar problems to the Northern Territory; these problems are not unique to the Northern Territory. Unfortunately, we see them elsewhere in Australia.

                                Once again, our government does not say this is the silver bullet that is going to solve everything, but it is certainly a step in the right direction. It is one part of government policy I believe will address the issue. We are about economic and social development for the Northern Territory. We want to see every Territorian have the capacity to participate in the economy - not only the economic life, but also the social and political life of the Northern Territory. We want people to fully participate and we want Territorians to be happy and fulfilled. We do not want to see that millstone of alcohol around their neck. We do not want to see children crying. We do not want to see women beaten up in domestic violence incidents. We want to see people enjoy their lives in a real and fruitful way.

                                We know economic and social development is crucial to those underlying causes that drive people towards the consumption of alcohol and drunkenness. Where people do not have anything in life; no direction, no hope, and all they want to do is black it out by drinking alcohol to excess, we want people to feel there is a purpose, they can participate, they can give back to their community, there is a place for them, there is employment for them, and their families can prosper in the Northern Territory.

                                In that regard, the Leader of the Opposition is entirely correct. However, to hold everything back until you can solve those problems, you will still be talking in 100 years. We have to take action in addressing the issues around alcohol abuse and the consumption of alcohol that leads to harm. This is a government that has taken those steps. However, at the same time, we have to address those social and economic issues that are really going to lift the whole Territory forward - move us forward. This situation we have seen in the past of alcohol abuse and all the bad effects of it; we want to leave in the past.

                                Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend the statement, I commend the minister, and I will listen carefully to the debate.

                                Mr STYLES (Sanderson): Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to speak about those people who actually work in this industry. They are the people at the front line – and the second, third, and fourth lines. It is the police officers who have to deal with the fallout of alcohol abuse, and the other drugs that are normally involved, as well as the ambulance people, the nurses, the doctors, the hospital orderlies; and people in communities who deal with alcohol abuse, with rehabilitation. Many of them do it in conjunction with government. Some of them do it on their own. Some of them, just as good community people, work with people who are addicted to alcohol, both young and old, and tirelessly give their time and efforts to try to reduce the problem and repair the damage that has been done. They are a wonderful group of people. It is beholden on us as politicians - be it opposition or government - to do our very best to ensure those people have the best tools and support available to them so they can do their job to the very best of their ability.

                                Having said that, I will refer to a number of things the member for Nelson said. I agree with him; I also believe it is too early to judge just what has happened. Statistics, especially in very small jurisdictions, are very volatile; they can go up and down. I will speak a little about that further into this speech.

                                I assure the member for Nelson that, on our side, the opposition is not about, if we were to win the next election, scrapping anything the next day. That is not the case. We will be doing evaluations. We will be looking at how we transition from certain aspects of the government’s policy to our policy.

                                When we talk about policy, I have here the Country Liberals’ platform of 2008: Defeating the drunks, removing and rehabilitating street drunks. That policy has not changed. We went to the 2008 election with this policy and came very close to winning government. We changed the numbers substantially in this House, and some of those seats were very close and still remain very marginal seats. We took this - and the people said, ‘Yes, that sounds like a good idea’ - along with, obviously, quite a number of our other policies. That demonstrates, I believe, we did have the confidence of a great number of people in 2008 that we did not have in 2005 and, obviously, in the election in 2001. We can say it was here before 2008, it is still here, and we are still working on fixing that particular problem.

                                The Chief Minister mentioned that our side does not support police. Well, we do, and I will get into that a bit here. However, there are other people who are contributing to the debate along with the Chief Minister. The Chief Minister finished a greening the Territory statement in the House today.

                                There are some other people who are greening the Territory, but in a very negative way; that is, people - and I have three photos here of a block of land which is adjacent to the member for Katherine’s residence in Katherine. Since things have changed a little, people have moved on to the block of land, and what you can see here is a pile of green cans adding to the green there. These people are being disorderly. There is fornication, defecation, urination, disorderly conduct - a whole range of offences being committed. The member for Katherine reliably informs me that over the last couple of weeks he has telephoned the police about 15 times. The problem still persists. I do not know whether any of those people who, obviously, have an alcohol addiction and are there on a regular basis are on the Banned Drinker Register or not. What the people in the community are asking for is that the problem be fixed. We, on this side, take this very seriously.

                                If you listen to the government, they will tell you we just do not care; we want to turn on the rivers of grog. However, we do support the efforts of the police to fix the problem. What we do not agree with the government over is how we might go about that in its entirety. There are certain aspects of what government has done - and you have to say that government is trying to do something – we think are a little misguided.

                                The Chief Minister said earlier that the government has given police the best tool they have ever had to fight the alcohol problem, and that we do not have any responsibility over here because we would simply take that tool away. I assure you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and members of this House, that that is not our intention. What we offer is a better tool. I have spoken to numerous police officers. Having spent a large proportion of my life in the police force, I have spoken to many people I still have close relationships with in a private capacity. I have asked them for their private view and they tell me the proposal we are putting up as policy will give them an increased ability to demonstrate to people there is a capacity of the police to move people on, to get people into rehabilitation, and to generally alleviate the alcohol problems.

                                I worked with habitual drunk legislation in my early life. I was a Western Australian police officer in the days when being drunk in public was an offence. There were certain things in those days in relation to alcohol - and this has not changed. It is not a criminal offence now, but alcohol is not the problem; irresponsible drinking is. We need to have responsibility, accountability and consequences for people’s actions. In Western Australia’s habitual drunk legislation, when people were declared an habitual drunk they were put on what is called the dog act and were not allowed to drink. When they breached that they spent time in rehab.

                                Rehabilitation in those days was nothing like we might consider rehabilitation to be today. Rehabilitation was to spend time in the cells at the police station in the northwest of Western Australia. You would do some work experience, there was some training, and you were looked after - you had all your medical care, you were fed well. Out of the number of people I dealt with in those days, there were some really good successes with moving people on. I agree with the member for Nelson that there is merit in mandatory detention for people who need that helping hand to get over addiction, or to work with organisations to reduce their dependence and give them the tools they need to fight the addiction.

                                Any drug addiction is a terrible thing. What we propose is about changing peoples’ behaviour and health practices. We are aware there are health issues, as the member for Nelson correctly said. There is a health component to this, but there is also a social responsibility issue about people doing all sorts of things that are just driving good, honest taxpayers out there nuts. People are tired of it and want something done.

                                The Labor government, in the lead-up to the next election, has changed the goal posts and refuses to release quarterly crime stats. What it now dictates is it will only release crime stats annually, which means the next stats will not be released until after the election.

                                The graph the Minister for Alcohol Policy has put out demonstrates a 15% drop. Great! However, it is a little too early. The other problem we have here is at the bottom of that graph titled ‘Alcohol-related assaults down 15% under the Banned Drinker Register’ it says the data is from July to September 2011 compared with July to September 2010. My understanding is that is incorrect; it is five days short of the total period. What happened in those five days? Might it have been a 10% drop or a 5% drop? It would appear that it is a little inconsistent. I do not know whether it is a bit sloppy in the way someone has done their homework or whether it was intentional. Have they taken some figures out? This raises the question: are they correct?

                                It is like going through a stop sign. If you adopt this type of attitude, do you sneak through quietly, very slowly, or a bit faster than very slow? What is acceptable? What is acceptable when you are producing stats? Five days short? Seven? Four? Three? How many days short is acceptable when you want to compare one quarter to another in another year? It is quite odd that government would make such a mistake like that.

                                The government appears to want to hide behind the withdrawal of these quarterly statistics. It has put out the statistics and said: ‘Great! Okay, that is it. We do not have to put any out until after the next election’. So, how do we, the community, hold the government accountable for whatever is going to happen? How do we check? The government just does not want to give them. ‘No, that is it’, they dictate, ‘We are not going to give them’. The government will only release the annual crime statistics, yet it cherry picks some statistics from the PROMIS system as opposed to the official Department of Justice statistics. The next crime statistics, as I said, are not due out until 2012 and there is no scrutiny until after the next Territory election.

                                What happens if the government gets some good statistics? Are we going to suddenly see the production of a set of statistics if they believe they can spin them to support their argument? We see the statistics in Alice Springs. When you look at the statistics given, July to September, it is traditionally a quiet time. My understanding is that people of Alice Springs are not looking forward to the summer crime wave, yet the government refuses again to release those quarterly crime statistics where we can make assessments as to whether or not their strategy is working.

                                When talking about statistics, what you do not see in the statistics in Alice Springs is the fact that 15 000 litres of pure alcohol is coming into Alice Springs every year through freight services. That does not appear on the government statistics; it is just not there. It is brought in from interstate; it is delivered by various freight companies. That should ring alarm bells for us because we have to find out where that is going. Is it being sold on the black market? Are people drinking it themselves? Are more and more people, as we believe, not buying from Territory businesses and simply buying from interstate? They get their 15 litre casks, their 4 litre casks; they buy what they want and have it shipped to the Northern Territory. It is not going to be long before people figure this out.

                                Anyone who says that people who are alcoholics or have an addiction are stupid, would be misleading themselves and anyone else around them. It is not going to take long for some entrepreneurs to get on board and start this supply. Sure, the government will say: ‘Yes, we have made that illegal. Secondary supply is illegal and that is terrible’. Yet, if you talk to the member for Macdonnell, she will tell you she has information about where some of the sly grog places are. My understanding is she has passed it on to the police. It is being shipped from one place to another.

                                We have entrepreneurial people and people who are addicted to a particular product, which is a legal product. We cannot keep people from dealing in illegal stuff so it is going to be even harder to stop people dealing in legal stuff. Trying to kill the demand is probably very difficult if you are not doing something such as mandatory detention.

                                I refer to this Hudson report: Alcohol Restrictions in Indigenous Communities and Frontier Towns. I will give a brief synopsis of some of the things she says in the report. In smaller towns you can be a little successful with these banning programs and strategies; however, in bigger areas it just does not seem to work. Here is someone who has put much work into this report and has made this report available publicly. She says when you bring in new programs, there is a fall off - it works for a short period of time and, then, you often get a spike. I agree with the member for Nelson that we need to be looking at what possibly may be a blip here. It will go down, but it will be very interesting to see if it actually goes back up again. So, let us watch.

                                In 2008, there were 26 000 cases of public drunkenness and, in 2011, we are up to 55 000 incidents of police taking people into protective custody or sobering-up shelters.

                                The South Australian Centre for Economic Studies reported on the cost of social harm from alcohol misuse in the Territory. They came out with the now well-known and recognised figure of about $642m cost to the Northern Territory taxpayer. We plan to take some of that money and use it to implement our policy, and put in some mandatory rehabilitation facilities. I hope when we are looking at the next election, the member for Nelson will still support our policy and those initiatives where we can help some of these poor people who are addicted and struggle each day to get through their addiction.

                                When you talk to stakeholders, they would love to have 10% of the $642m it is costing the Territory. We might look at, say, 20%, which is $128.4m. When you start talking to these service providers, the NGOs that provide the voluntary rehabilitation services - in our policy they will certainly be involved in providing services under the mandatory detention regime - they are excited. They look at what the government is doing, they accept the government has to do something, they accept the government is trying. However, when I sit down with various stakeholders and explain our policy, they are excited. That gives me a great deal of encouragement because that excitement is across the board. I am not talking about one or two; there are many service providers that think it is a really good idea and they are looking forward to working with the opposition, should we win government and implement our policy.

                                As we listen to the government, we acknowledge it is a major issue in our community and is very important. It was in 2008, it still is, and it is probably going to be the same in 2012. I reiterate we took this policy to the people in 2008. They accepted it then; they gave us an extra seven seats in the parliament because of the policies we had. So, we are looking forward to working with them. When you talk to the stakeholders and the service providers, they acknowledge the front end is being worked on by the government; however, it seems it is failing dismally on the back end - the money is not there, the services are not there.

                                The Alcohol and Other Drugs Tribunal has not even seen anyone yet; it is not going to be up and running until the beginning of next year. That is six months after the BDR was brought into operation. The minister says it is operational but, in the next line, she said they have just finished putting in some facilities for it here and in Alice Springs.

                                Another issue the member for Nelson raised was how many people have exceeded the three BAT notices. My understanding is that 165 people …

                                Ms PURICK: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Pursuant to Standing Order 77, I move that the member be given an extension of time.

                                Motion agreed to.

                                Madam SPEAKER: You cannot actually call out when it is about yourself, member for Sanderson.

                                Mr STYLES: Oh, thank you. You learn something new every day, Madam Speaker. Thank you for that.

                                Madam SPEAKER: That is all right.

                                Mr STYLES: Still sending messages by carrier pigeon. Thank you to the member for Goyder; it is greatly appreciated.

                                The member for Nelson inquired - and I have information in front of me - 104 people have breached their third BAT notice in the three months, and these are your hard-core, problem drinkers. What happens is they issue them with their first BAT notice, they continue to access alcohol; they issue them with a second BAT notice, and they continue to access alcohol; they are issued with their third BAT notice and - you guessed it! - they continue to access alcohol. I do not know whether the government has a Plan B for these hard-core drinkers.

                                Our plan is that when those people are picked for the third time - and they exceed their third time, and the fourth time - they are going to end up in the system and into a mandatory detention facility where we will be able to give them some real rehabilitation. The government might ask: ‘What are you going to do there?’ We are probably going to do similar things to the government, except we will do much more. We want to rebuild people’s self-esteem. We need to break the cycle. From my understanding, and from what I have been informed, you need at least seven weeks to get people’s heads out of one place and into another. Then, you need a little more time.

                                We owe it to our community as compassionate human beings to run this and be a little tough. The Leader of the Opposition used the words ‘tough love’ in his contribution to this debate. I agree with him; we need to toughen up a little. You cannot just say: ‘Here is a bit of paper and you cannot drink anymore’, because the government’s mandatory rehabilitation is not quite mandatory rehabilitation. It seems to be optional; you do not have to go. If you do not go, well you simply stay on the Banned Drinker Register. There are no teeth in the legislation. There is just nothing there. So, what do people do? They just go and find their drug somewhere else.

                                What has happened as a result of some of the unintended consequences of the banning of people from alcohol? I will give a few examples of what I am hearing at my Saturday morning at the shops and at barbecues I run. I talk to various people. Here are just a few. Women are being harassed in car parks for the alcohol in their shopping trolleys. They are accosted by people who are, obviously, addicted to some form of drug. If they cannot get their marijuana, perhaps they are after the alcohol, or they are just alcoholics and they just want the alcohol.

                                There is an issue of people changing to another drug - changing from alcohol to other drugs. That is scary, because when you look at some of the information coming out of communities, they are into amphetamines, ice, marijuana, and that brings on a whole new set of problems in relation to the transport of drugs, and the medical results that flow from that sort of abuse.

                                Mental issues arise from marijuana abuse. I was given some information, probably a couple of years ago, that really shocked me. People who are in the research business claimed - and I would be happy to stand corrected by the Minister for Health - that 82% of people in Cowdy Ward were there as a result of marijuana abuse and the mental problems that have flowed such as schizophrenia and other mental problems. That is a bit scary.

                                People are making their own alcohol. You buy some cordial, get a bag of yeast, stick the bottle of cordial in the sand in the heat, tip the yeast in, and let the lid go a little, and let her rip! If you leave it there all day, by the afternoon you have alcohol. That is what they are drinking. The problem is there is no control over the amount of alcohol. We all know, especially those who have worked with people in the front line, that quite often when people drink, they fall over. However, there are times when people drink and they die. I am hoping we do not have any tragedies or serious illnesses as a result of this growing trend. The word gets around out there, and it is out there.

                                Here is one: backpackers. Backpackers are raising their petrol money to leave town. A couple of days before they leave town, they buy a slab or two, or a bottle of Jim Beam or Bundy Rum, for various people who are on the Banned Drinker Register, and off they go. For a $50 fee, they do that for about 10 or 20 people, and you have $1000 in your pocket and off you go. ‘See you later, Territory, it was great seeing you’. They take their money with them and spend it somewhere else, and we lose $1000 - although they have, obviously, spent some of it in Katherine and perhaps along the Barkly as they were leaving. That is what is going on out there.

                                Stealing: here is an article about the Hidden Valley Tavern, where the operator of those premises says he is sick to death - how many times? About 100 times he has been broken into. The guy probably cannot even get insurance. They just keep busting into his place. Now, they are walking in. I was told the other day of another story of someone who walked in, put two bottles of drink in their pockets, and then grabbed another one and simply walked out. They are addicted; they want their drug of choice and simply walk out.

                                What are we doing about that? We have 104 people who have breached their BAT orders for the third time. What is happening to those people at this very moment? Not much. We have 1574 people on the register. If those people continue to come to the attention of police, what is going to happen to them? Simply give them another BAT order and keep going and going. That is one of the problems the government has with the way it has set up this strategy. There is no teeth; no back end. We do not have enough places. There are less than 200 places for rehabilitation. During estimates, we were given a figure of about 400. But, you have 1500 people on the register and people almost daily breaching their BAT orders and their third BAT orders. What are we doing there?

                                There is an impact on tourism; an interstate downturn. Yesterday, we discussed health professionals. We have some who are turning away and saying it is all too hard here: ‘You come here and have to do this and that’. So, they are going to other places.

                                Madam Speaker, there are some major issues we have with the way the government is going about it. It is a very serious matter. I hope the government listens to some of things we have said and, when it starts to struggle a bit, take on board some of the things we have and, perhaps, have a more positive contribution. I can assure you what we want to do is give the police force the tools to do the job, not just what they consider to be great now ...

                                Mr HAMPTON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I am not sure about the clock. It seems to have …

                                Madam SPEAKER: There is a bit of a problem with the clock.

                                Mr HAMPTON: Just so we know how much time he has left, that is all.

                                Madam SPEAKER: I think it is pretty close to the end. How much do you think, Mr Gadd? Four minutes.

                                Mr STYLES: Another issue we have out there - and these are some of the problems in the original debate on this matter. The Minister for Alcohol Policy said there are in excess of 180 different types of ID the scanner will accept. The problem, for the minister, is the training they have given does not seem to have worked well because there are people in bottle shops who say a Territory driver’s licence or a passport - that is it. We are getting a reputation. If you go on the Internet and look at some of backpacker sites, they say it is all too hard, but if you do come here sell a few slabs, raise a few bucks, and get out as quick as you can. In a shrinking tourism market, we need to fix some of these issues.

                                On page 13 of the minister’s statement, in the first paragraph, the minister said:
                                  Let us make no mistake, the members opposite

                                That is us:
                                  … would rather see grog placed back in the hands of problem drinkers in each one of those instances, causing harm in our communities.

                                I do not quite understand the last bit; it does not seem to gel. However, the message is clear; the minister is saying we want to turn the grog back on to these people. Well, to the contrary; we are exactly opposite to that. We have a far tougher regime than the government. We will implement it and be very serious about it. We will give the police the tools to say to people when they have had too much to drink: ‘It is time you went home’.

                                I remember when I first came here as a police officer, you could walk down Mitchell Street or any other place - not that there was much there 30 years ago; it was the Workers Club and the Vic Hotel in those days – and say to people: ‘Excuse me, it is time you went home’. What used to happen is if it looked like you were going to take someone, they had good mates and they would say to that person: ‘Listen, Bill, you have had too much to drink. We are taking you home, mate’. If Bill wanted to jump up and down and abuse the police and punch and fight people, it was his mates who would roll on the ground with him and take him home so he would not get into any trouble and end up doing mandatory detention for alcohol abuse. That worked in most of the cases. You still had the odd person, as you do today, who would jack up. The problem is so many of them now stand up to the police and simply tell them where to go. There are no mates restraining these people who want to punch the living daylights out of police officers. The whole thing then escalates into brawls with the police in the front of nightclubs.

                                It escalates in communities too, slightly differently. Let us talk about some of the issues we have in our own back yard. We need to really fix those problems and give the police the power to say to people: ‘You guys should take your friend home, otherwise he is coming with us’. That actually works.

                                People on the other side of this Chamber might say: ‘Maybe it does, maybe it does not’. I worked with it for many years. I have talked to police officers recently and one of the things they say is when the nice police officer says to people, ‘Excuse me, it is time to go home,’ people just turn around and tell them where to go. There was a court case a couple of years ago where some young blokes did that. Their mates did not worry, in fact, they egged them on and did all that sorts of stuff and said: ‘Just go for it’. So, they had a bit of a rumble with the police officers. It went to court. They said: ’We did not really mean to do it’, and gave some excuses. When they walked out they walked past the two police officers, in full view of everyone in the public forum at the Magistrates Court, and gave them the middle finger, basically inviting them, saying: ‘Come and arrest us again because we just got out of that one and we will get out of this one too’.

                                Madam Speaker, that is one of the problems we have out there. That is why we are losing some control as a community. We need to give the police force the tools where they can then go out and tackle the problem. We need to give those people who do have an addiction some serious rehabilitation to lift their self-esteem and get them back into doing something productive. That way, we will all be able to contribute to resolving the alcohol problem and reduce it from the huge problem we have at the moment.

                                Mr McCARTHY (Lands and Planning): Madam Speaker, I add my support to the Minister for Alcohol Policy’s statement on the landmark Enough is Enough alcohol reforms.

                                It was good to listen to the Country Liberal Party’s spokesperson on Alcohol Policy. For the last, maybe 30 seconds, the honourable member was summarising some really good initiatives in the government’s policy and, I presume, supporting it. That was great to hear. Further on the member made statements such as: ‘We would probably do the same sort of things but do a little more’. That is exactly the policy on the run that needs to be clarified and explained to Territorians before anyone rubbishes policy. One of the problems I had with that part of the debate was the ‘what if’ factor. There always seems to be a ‘what if’ factor. There are always these anecdotes to go with it.

                                I have just met with the Taxi Council of the Northern Territory. There were allegations raised by the member for Sanderson in the last sittings about taxi drivers participating in illegal activities and supplying alcohol to clients who were on the Banned Drinker Register, so I have been working in that space. There were allegations from other CLP members. That is what I mean about the ‘what if’ factor.

                                For me, there are laws, codes of behaviour, and all sorts of regulations. In the last part of that debate, the member for Sanderson talked about the era of ‘it is time you went home’. I remember an era when there was no ‘it is time you went home’ but, I also remember the era of ‘it is time you go home’. That really relates to important legislation like the responsible sale of alcohol. We just had our annual rodeo in Tennant Creek and, once again, it had to be a licensed bar with volunteers who had to know their responsible sale of alcohol. They were the ones who were making the decision about ‘it is time to go home’.

                                This legislation has been in for a long time. This is good legislation which is community driven. If we take that a step forward, I was really proud to be able to participate in the development of policy that created the precinct bans recently introduced to Tennant Creek and Katherine. This is wonderful legislation to work with where people can be banned from a whole precinct and given a very firm message that enough is enough; your behaviour is inappropriate; you are not responsible to consume alcohol; you are going to have a ban; and you are going to think about your behaviour - the ‘what if’ factor. If you want to persist with that behaviour, you will start to incur further legislation and it gets quite serious.

                                I do not buy the ‘what if’, and the ‘what if’ is getting a bit boring actually. There are many hard-working people regulating the industry, and there are good people doing good things. The government knows there are times when, if we are to build a better future, tough decisions must be taken and new initiatives implemented.

                                As a Territorian, I find it absolutely unacceptable that 60% of all assaults across the Territory are alcohol-related. As a Territorian, I find it absolutely unacceptable that 67% of all domestic violence incidents across the Territory are alcohol-related. It is an issue that affects us all, and that is why we need to act together to tackle alcohol abuse and build community safety. In the member for Sanderson’s approach, there was that hint of working together, and we have much to share.

                                That is why the government has taken the courageous move of introducing Enough is Enough. The Enough is Enough package is a reform package premised on turning the tap off to problem drinkers. Problem drinkers are the target, and we are all in it together to ensure we send a clear message to problem drinkers, because the rest of us are classed as responsible drinkers. I pay tribute to the Minister for Alcohol Policy for her passion and drive in reducing the amount of alcohol abuse in our community and achieving a real change in building a safer community.

                                I have been a long-term resident of the Barkly and Tennant Creek, in particular, and I have witnessed many attempts over the years to address the rate of alcohol consumption in our community. Thirsty Thursday was one such initiative, banning the sale of takeaway alcohol in the town every Thursday.

                                We are held accountable for the things we say in this place. I heard it said - and I have heard it reiterated many times - it was irresponsible of anyone who proposed a policy where people are served earlier in the day so they will fall over earlier in the day which will take the pressure off later in the day. Those words were spoken. That is irresponsible policy - and that holds you to account. Unfortunately, the member for Sanderson is quite concerned about the CLP’s policy being thrown back. We all probably need to find a point to settle that because that was out there and, if it is to be retracted, it should be retracted formally – and we move on.

                                Thirsty Thursday was an interesting time and an interesting attempt. However, what fell down on a number of levels - not least because the problem drinkers could still head up or down the highway to get their grog and return home causing trouble - was it was not a comprehensive package or a comprehensive reform. The real difference is now having the Banned Drinker Register to achieve real change because, once you are on the Banned Drinker Register, you are on it right across the Territory. You can travel to roadhouses, you can go to the next town, you can chase the grog, but you will find that you are on that register and you will be refused service.

                                By making it an offence to knowingly supply alcohol to someone on the Banned Drinker Register, I believe that, rather than placing an imposition on Territorians, we have empowered many vulnerable people. They are able to say: ‘I cannot buy that grog for you. I do not want to be banned’.

                                As this policy was rolling out across the Territory, I used the opportunity to hold workshops through the electorate. I travelled to many remote communities and pulled people together and conducted workshops to talk about the policy and the changes. I am very pleased to advise the House that people took that change on in good spirit, because the bottom line that came out of those workshops was: enough is enough; we have tried many things, there has been no good solution to the moment; let us try something new. There was a great deal of support.

                                We talked about ID and about using ID to purchase takeaway alcohol, and about not supplying alcohol to people on the Banned Drinker Register, because that trouble will follow you back. We talked about sensitive issues such as volunteering to be banned so you do not have to incur pressure and intimidation to be the one to purchase alcohol for family members who you know will get into trouble due to the effects of alcohol. They were frank discussions, right across remote areas in the Barkly. The bottom line was, it was supported. There was nobody really giving me the ‘what if’ factor. It was let us give it a go, because we all support the outcome; that is, reducing alcohol-related harm, alcohol-related violence, alcohol-related crime and, consequently, the number of people who end up in our judicial system and often go to prison.

                                I was very pleased to hear the minister advise that soon the provisions will be in place for Territorians to nominate themselves to go on the Banned Drinker Register. With many of the vulnerable people I talk to, there is real will to do that. It will empower Territorians to help themselves, as well as empower Territorians to help their families. The member for Sanderson talked about tough love. Well that is a really good example of tough love. For people who choose to be non-drinkers, it is a power to stop the harassment to buy alcohol, and that will be a good outcome for community safety as well.

                                I have already heard some very moving stories from constituents about alcohol abuse and the effects of alcohol. I have heard some very positive stories from constituents who say they want to support the government’s legislation; they want to stop the rivers of grog. They do not think it is a plan to just let problem drinkers drink until they fall down; they think it is a plan to start to normalise the use of alcohol within their community and within their families. It is a courageous point in history where people are standing up with these reforms and saying enough is enough. This government has provided the tangible tools to deal with it.

                                For those of us who are not on the Banned Drinker Register, the ability to purchase alcohol has not changed. One very small step, scanning your licence or ID, has been added, and it takes no more than seven seconds. It is no more involved than swiping your Fly Buys card. I have had a few complaints. I will be honest, there have been a few complaints. I have debated those constituents, but the majority of people have said it is no real imposition and, for the bigger outcome - the outcome of reducing alcohol-fuelled harm and violence and crime – they support it. It has united Territorians. It is pulling people together now, who are saying: ‘I am doing my bit for the Territory and reducing this problem - a massive problem we have had for generations’. It is a good thing when people come together over issues and unite behind government policy and work together. The ‘what if’ factor? Well, what about it? I believe that can continue to create mischief, to create humbug, but we have serious ground to make and that is what is happening right across the Territory.

                                A key part of rolling out this landmark reform package was this government’s decision to support Territorians to access photographic identification. That was an interesting story in my workshops throughout a remote electorate. It was amazing to see people producing photographic identification and having the conversation that suddenly it now became very real in that it was a valuable piece of ID. It was normalising ID that became significant, that gave you power as a Territorian. The conversations were then about not just settling for photographic ID, but whether they had a driver’s licence. I was pleased to say I engaged many younger Territorians into taking that next step and getting their driver’s licence. These are small steps and early days, but I continue to have that conversation. This part of normalising a person’s life delivers real opportunities and outcomes in community safety.

                                Recognising that some Territorians did not have a driver’s licence, the government made it free to receive an evidence of age card. Initially, the period was the first three months to 20 September. It was then extended to 20 October because it was working. I was talking to people in Motor Vehicle Registry and clerks of court, and they were saying it was working. People are now coming forward, gathering documentation, looking at getting evidence of age cards, driver’s licences, marriage certificates, and those important documents that are part of life.

                                All existing, but damaged or poor quality, driver’s licences and evidence of age cards were also replaced free of charge. NT Senior Card holders and valid NT Pensioner and Carer Concession Card holders were also eligible for free evidence of age cards. I acknowledge the staff of Motor Vehicle Registry who have supported the roll-out of the reforms and increased demand for photo ID, and to the Clerk of the Court and our electorate officers. I probably share that with members opposite. I am sure many electorate officers supported this; who advised and supported people. In the Barkly, my electorate officer, Nancy Cowan, did an exceptional job liaising with the Clerk of the Court, the Motor Vehicle Registry, and the minister’s office to ensure people got that support to normalise their lives and achieve that important identification - and reinforcing the story of not to stop at evidence of age, but to go on and get more important ID that will support their lives in the community.

                                There was temporary co-location of Births, Deaths and Marriages at Motor Vehicle Registry offices at Goyder Road, Casuarina and Alice Springs for six months. That was important to support the Enough is Enough reforms. Since 1 July 2011, the Motor Vehicle Registry has issued 14 612 evidence of age cards. That compares to 3606 cards issued in the same period in 2010. That is an impressive result for hard-working public servants in delivering this important reform, and they deserve our thanks.

                                As noted earlier, 60% of all assaults in the Territory are alcohol-related. As Correctional Services minister, I take no pleasure in the Territory having a record number of prisoners. There are currently 602 prisoners in our system who identify as having committed alcohol-related offences, and 48% of offenders are back in gaol within two years compared to the national average of about 39%.

                                That is why the government’s new era in Corrections is another element of our commitment to tackling alcohol-related crime. Like the Enough is Enough reforms it supports and complements, the new era in Corrections is a raft of reforms. It aims to reduce incarceration rates and the rate of reoffending by focusing on the causes of crime, and addressing it through rehabilitation, education and training - education, training, and awareness of your offending behaviour.

                                Because I firmly believe offenders who are problem drinkers need to have the skills to get away from crime and back on track, we have included a significant raft of reforms in our new era package to directly deal with alcohol abuse. That is why, in addition to the measures under Enough is Enough in the alcohol reform package, it supports the new era and, likewise, the new era supports the Enough is Enough package, with the concepts and operations of rehabilitation and treatment.

                                In August, this House passed government legislation introducing new orders giving the courts the power to order non-violent offenders into rehabilitation and ban the purchase or consumption of alcohol. Further, the legislation supported the introduction of electronic surveillance to monitor offenders in the community. Madam Speaker, you may be interested to know that Northern Territory Corrections is currently assessing technology that can detect alcohol in the system of the person wearing the monitor, providing another tool in getting an offender off alcohol.

                                It is widely accepted that a community-based offender or parolee has a greater chance of breaking their cycle of reoffending if there is a strong support system around them. Community Corrections officers do an important job in providing the surveillance of offenders - expected by their wider community - and the support measures to help them not to go back to prison. To support that, the new era in Corrections delivers recruitment of an additional 31 Community Corrections officers. These officers will be stationed across the Territory. That recruitment process has begun. The expansion of Community Corrections is also being supported by the expansion of the Visiting Elders Program.

                                These are not ‘what if’ factors. If the Leader of Government Business would be ...

                                Dr BURNS: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I move the member be given an extension of time pursuant to Standing Order 77.

                                Motion agreed to.

                                Mr McCARTHY: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and thank you to the honourable member for Johnston.

                                Regarding the Elders Visiting Program, as it reflects a raft of reforms supporting the Enough is Enough major policy development, we are really getting into innovative territory. The Elders Visiting Program has an important component of not only cultural liaison, but starting to deconstruct offending behaviour in a true first cultural sense. The Elders Visiting Program is being strengthened as part of our new era package.

                                The Elders Visiting Program is definitely doing some innovative things at the Barkly work camp and, with a new Correctional Services facility in Holtze, there will be some amazing new programs and outcomes that will be focused on elders visiting, counselling, supporting and providing that cross-cultural healing that will be a big part of addressing offending behaviour. The expansion will allow elders to continue their valuable work with prisoners while prisoners are still in prison, and to assist offenders to reintegrate into their communities upon release. The program provides those important links back to the community for prisoners, and a strong cultural support for them to turn their lives around.

                                I am acutely aware of the importance of backing up the new court orders and expanded support systems with an investment in the non-government service sector. The member for Sanderson, the spokesperson for Alcohol Policy from the Country Liberal Party should be heartened to hear that the expansion of the non-government sector is really building community capacity. The Country Liberal Party, no doubt, will pick up on that in their policy development because it is recognised by the non-government sector, by the judicial sector and by our government.

                                Through the new era, funding will be provided to roll-out additional treatment beds in Darwin, Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs. In Katherine, a total of 15 treatment beds will be built and funded. A partnership has already been established with Kalano/Venndale for five beds and the Batchelor Institute will manage the construction of an additional five beds and infrastructure. That is an outcome. As part of the new era package, that is an outcome where education is relevant and meaningful.

                                I advise the Country Liberal Party regarding policy development, when I hear them talk about literacy and numeracy outcomes, it comes from an ex-principal, the Leader of the Country Liberal Party. I am quite bemused and I often want to challenge: ‘What does that mean?’, because I have heard nothing more. I have heard no substance or structure around those comments. A number of members who sit opposite have taken an interest in our construction programs at the Berrimah prison and the Barkly work camp. I believe there will be more visits coming up to the Barkly work camp and you will understand about the application of meaningful literacy and numeracy outcomes to real world experiences in the workplace.

                                I am very proud to say the Batchelor Institute, which has been building accommodation blocks, has been utilising the skills of Certificate III in Construction, and has prisoners working in work placements on, for instance, the new Defence at Darwin Experience on the grounds of the Darwin Military Museum - six prisoners in a shift, one of whom has finished their sentence and was picked up by TCS, the company, and offered a job in Townsville. This is real literacy and numeracy application, real outcomes in the workplace, and is addressing offending behaviour. As we have heard, there are far too many prisoners in the Northern Territory who have alcohol as a major factor in their offending behaviour.

                                The prisoners will build five treatment beds through the Batchelor program, giving back to the community, building their skills, and boosting the availability of rehabilitation beds in the community - not a bad outcome. An additional six treatment beds and supporting infrastructure at the Central Australian Aboriginal Alcohol Programs Unit in Alice Springs will be operational in 2012, and a further five beds will be built and funded in Darwin. The investment in the non-government sector to boost rehabilitation services will be further enhanced with the construction of two supported accommodation and treatment centres. The centres, one in Darwin and one in Alice Springs, will be built in the respective Correctional Services precincts.

                                That was a really important development in the new era package and directly aligned to the Enough is Enough alcohol reforms - they go hand in hand. They were recognised by the non-government sector as a real initiative in making a difference, and were certainly supported by the judicial sector as well.

                                The centres will be run by non-government organisations and provide accommodation, alcohol and other drug treatment, driver education programs, and work opportunities. The government’s focus on addressing alcohol-related crime includes the construction of new Correctional facilities. The Barkly work camp is now operational and already 33 prisoners are going to work and education programs each day. One result, one small step in the Barkly, that there was an inmate on work placement in a local business riding a pushbike to work every day. That prisoner finished their sentence and was offered a job. The manager of that organisation, that business, was so proud to tell me of the success. We are not out of the woods yet - we know that - but what a major step forward in the new era package supporting the Enough is Enough reforms.

                                When the Chief Minister opened the Barkly work camp, he was not only impressed with the infrastructure, but he was impressed with the stories he was told - and some by prisoners. He was impressed by the stories of the staff and of the community. This government has taken the courageous step to put the significant resources behind the new era in Corrections, and also the Enough if Enough alcohol reform to make a real difference. I thank the Chief Minister and the Treasurer for that, and my Cabinet and Caucus colleagues who all work together on these major reform packages.

                                Alcohol treatment programs are delivered in both the Alice Springs and Darwin prisons but, with record prisoner numbers, there are real challenges. I say that because that is the reality of working with inferior infrastructure, particularly at Berrimah where the outdated prison, built in the 1970s, simply does not have the infrastructure needed to effectively deliver treatment and work programs. The staff, the industry services section, and the education services section are working really hard there, but the place is so outdated, overcrowded, and represents inefficiency in Correctional Services management. The staff have made it very clear to government they need new infrastructure and new facilities to be able to deliver the new era focus that government has planned and demands. That is why this government has entered into a public private partnership to construct a new Correctional Services precinct that will have the dedicated space and facilities to get every prisoner into work and rehabilitation programs every day.

                                To conclude, I am a Territorian who has been through the rough and tumble. I have lived in some of the remotest parts of Australia. I have worked in remote communities and in town. I love the big city and the bush. I have seen many attempts to address the continual challenge of alcohol abuse. As a part of this government, I am proud to say the members of the Henderson Labor government - all the members - worked really hard, not only with all the components of the Enough is Enough reform, but the real reform components right across the board to make a difference in the Northern Territory.

                                As the Chief Minister said, he has a number of great mantras. He uses it in a team building exercise, personally, and with me. The mantra is: you get into this job, you get into politics to leave a legacy for the Territory, to leave a positive legacy for the kids who will come behind us. I have concentrated on the new era, but my colleagues have outlined a plethora of other reforms and other initiatives linked with Enough is Enough. These reforms will make a difference and it needs everyone to get behind it. I do not see any more time for the ‘what if’ factor.

                                Madam Speaker, we are going to see a real difference. I congratulate the Minister for Alcohol Policy on the landmark Enough is Enough alcohol reforms. I recommend that these reforms are supported by all members of this House.

                                Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I always find it edifying and relaxing to listen to the member opposite - I possibly lose consciousness on some occasions. I listened to certain aspects of what he had to say. There is an underlying presumption in the government’s approach which I find somewhat disquieting in relation to this. It was captured, basically, by what the member had to say. He thinks not for one jot of a second about the implications underlying some of his assertions. He talked at some length about the importance of photographic ID and such things as though it was, by some method, a vehicle by which you were made legitimate, and that if you do not have photographic ID, you do not carry the legitimacy of a person who does have photographic ID.

                                Surely, one of the principles of a free society is that you are not legitimised by the actions of government - including the issue of photographic identification - but you are legitimised by virtue of the fact that you conduct yourself in a way where you do not become a burden upon the people around you and, if you are an exceptional person, you contribute to the overall welfare of the common wealth of the community in which you live.

                                I do not believe it is the role of government to legitimise people, and it is certainly not the role of ministers of the Crown to preach to people that they should only feel legitimised if they get their free identification from the government to say they are a legitimate person. The application of this policy, you have to remember, is an extension of the idea that a person who is conducting themselves in a lawful fashion and is engaged in lawful conduct when they buy liquor is then asked to prove themselves to a person who is behind the counter and say: ‘I am a legitimate person. Here is my photo ID’.

                                Whilst I understand the motives behind this, I am less impressed by the fact that ministers do not couch their comments when they say they realise this is a serious imposition against people who have not conducted themselves in any unlawful fashion in the community. They do not qualify with any of those statements. They simply assert that because the community needs this they will only allow people to buy alcohol in our community if they have the legitimisation provided to you by the state.

                                I have concerns about those types of approaches, because the underlying philosophy of that is, despite the fact you are doing a lawful thing and engaged in lawful conduct - you have broken no law and offended no statute on the books anywhere - you are still expected to do something by the state which is, ultimately, an imposition, albeit a small one. Once we start to allow the small impositions, greater impositions follow.

                                The purpose of the government’s policy is to prevent people from purchasing liquor. It does that by saying: ‘If you are not legitimised through our process of identification, or we remove your legitimisation, we will put you on a banning list because we think you have conducted yourself in a fashion detrimental to the overall welfare of the community’.

                                I am still waiting for - and I will not be surprised if at some point this occurs - a court is asked to determine whether or not the inclusion of a person on a list qualifies as a penalty imposed by the state. If it does qualify in such a fashion - and whilst I realise there is advice from the Attorney-General’s department that this does not qualify as a penalty - and a court disagrees with the Attorney-General’s department, then this whole system would fall down overnight. However, that as an aside, it is essentially designed to be a penalty to prevent a person from conducting themselves in a further fashion, or restraining a person from conducting themselves in a fashion which the government has declared to be antisocial, without applying any form of test by a court. It is simply a declaration made as a result of the government deciding they are going to be placed on a BAT notice.

                                What happens next, of course, is the government is extremely mindful of this truism that it cannot impose a penalty without any form of review. So, it argues the inclusion of a person on a BAT notice is not a form of a penalty - yet to be tested – therefore, it knows it cannot impose any further penalty, because it will then be offending the fundamental concepts of the way we govern ourselves as a community, particularly through the principle of the separation of powers.

                                If members turn their attention to the inclusion - this is why we run into the problem so ably outlined by the member for Sanderson – that is the only consequence that flows from non-compliance with any of this legislation. If you continue to breach the terms outlined in this legislation you will discover the only thing that flows from it is further inclusion on BAT notices. So, you get a BAT notice for failing to comply with your BAT notice, because you failed to comply with your BAT notice. If you fail to comply with your BAT notice, for failing to comply with a BAT notice, for failing to comply with a BAT notice, we will give you at BAT notice.

                                If you turn to page 15 of the statistics released by the Northern Territory government today, already we discover 29% of people have received multiple BAT notices. That is, of the 1075 on the BDR for a BAT notice as at 30 September 2011 , 760, or 71%, had received one BAT notice. Of those, 29% received more BAT notices, and that will continue to occur. You have a system where, very quickly, people will realise the only imposition for their poor conduct cast upon their shoulders is they receive more BAT notices.

                                This, then, comes to the major point of difference between the government’s policy and the Country Liberals’ policy. The government’s policy is to try to deal with this problem without any reference to the courts at all. It is simply a method by which we deal with this within the executive. For that reason, they cannot impose a penalty and they know it. That is why we have taken a different approach. The policy announced by the Country Liberals, as far back as 2005, involved similar components in the initial stages to the government’s policy.

                                Indeed, I go so far as to suggest the government may well have drawn some inspiration from the policy outlined by the Country Liberals because, I think Clare Martin promised to introduce something similar in response to the original notification of this policy by the Country Liberals. That promise was never followed up on, but the situation with liquor and public drunkenness in our community is becoming increasingly worse.

                                I point honourable members to the police annual reports going back as far as the year 1999-2000, when about 11 000 people in the Territory where apprehended for the purposes of section 128 of the Police Administration Act; namely, protective custody. Last financial year, that number had jumped to in the order of 30 000, which means, on the government’s watch, you had a threefold increase to the point where we had apprehended about 12% of the Territory’s population for being drunk. That, of course, is nonsense. What happened was there was a handful of individuals who were repeatedly being taken into protective custody because they were drunk. These are the frequent flyers to which the government’s policy and the Country Liberal’s policies are primarily directed.

                                The government’s policy is to take that component, X number of strikes within three months. The Country Liberal’s policy was three strikes in six months. With the government’s policy, if you are apprehended for protective custody three times in three months - or three times in six months with the Country Liberal’s policy - something would flow. The government’s policy was you will get a BAT notice. The Country Liberal’s policy was you would front a tribunal, and that tribunal would then impose an order of conduct which means there would be certain expectations, on a case-by-case basis, placed on people who were frequent flyers through the protective custody system. Unlike the government’s policy, the Country Liberal’s policy would then provide a weapon, which was substantially stronger then the weapon the government provides here today.

                                The government, through its policy, says they have this new weapon. Assistant Commissioner Payne has been quoted as saying they like this new weapon. I would agree it is more than what existed before - there is no doubt about it. However, where the government is providing a pop gun, the Country Liberals are much more inclined to provide the legal equivalent of a bazooka. This is the stronger policy to which the member for Sanderson was referring.

                                The government suggests the Country Liberals are going to open up the rivers of grog again and are going to legitimise public drunkenness. That is not true. What we will do is replace a government policy which currently has limited effect - and bear in mind that only one in 1000 attempts to purchase liquor are turned away as a result of the government’s policy. We are going to change the policy where we no longer hold the community responsible for the actions of a few, but are going to hold a few responsible for their own actions.

                                That is why the tribunal in the Country Liberals’ policy is a tribunal which will have some powers. Those powers will include the capacity to issue an order which is appropriate to the person who is brought before the tribunal. That order will be issued. One of the elements of that order will, almost invariably, be that that person cannot get drunk in public again. If that person is then picked up again for being drunk in public, then they have committed a criminal offence, which is the criminal offence of breaching the legitimate order issued by the tribunal.

                                The government will call this criminalising public drunkenness. The Country Liberals call it criminalising the breaching of legitimately issued orders. In any instance, I am not worried about the semantics of it because what I do know is the public is sick and tired of the drunks that sit in their parks and their public places, urinating, defecating, expectorating, fornicating - and all the other things they do in those places. Those drunks are the ones who offend the public sensibilities so profoundly.

                                The government claims its system is working. I drove along Parap Road the other day. I saw at least 20 Aboriginal people at about 7 am - on the way to the Parap Markets where I have my stall - sitting drinking from Mt Franklin bottled water bottles. Curiously, Mt Franklin water had taken on the same hue as port wine. This is the disconnect between the government’s policy and stated results, and what people see in the streets. The Country Liberals’ policy will see the removal of these people by a vehicle which not only holds them personally responsible but, much more importantly, has judicial oversight. Once you are charged with a criminal offence of breaching an order issued by the tribunal under the Country Liberal’s policy, and you are convicted of breaching that criminal offence, then a sentence flows from it which sees that person removed from the community for a period of three months and placed in an institution of detention, the function of which will be, primarily, the rehabilitation of those people brought into that place.

                                We make no apologies for the firmness of these actions. The Country Liberals’ policy will have the fundamental impact of making one big difference in the community’s eyes: the drunks will be removed progressively from our parks, gardens and public places, and they will be placed into custody for forced rehabilitation. Inside that institution, rehabilitation will be brought to bear in an environment where these people are, essentially, held in custody and are duty bound to follow the legitimate orders of the institution that holds them. There is no order to go and engage in a treatment program and, then, off you go and sort it out for yourselves.

                                These people have demonstrated by their conduct that they are so profoundly incapable of conducting themselves in a standard which is expected by the community, that they should be removed from the community for two reasons: protection of the community and protection from themselves. Once you have a person in that environment, then you can start to bring to bear a treatment program and responses which are far more effective than simply ordering a person on their own initiative to go and have treatment in some voluntary arrangement, otherwise, they will be put on another BAT notice if they do not comply.

                                It sounds tough and it will have an effect on prison population numbers. We will build the appropriate institution in Katherine. The new era in Corrections stuff the minister talks about is modelled on the ideas the CLP has been talking about. They have placed their workers camp in the Barkly area; that is fine, I am very happy for government. We will build a substantial institution in the Katherine area to house these people specifically. In that three-month period, hopefully, some of them will start to realise the error of their ways and seek another way forward. We do not, for one second, anticipate that every person who goes through this process will have a road-to-Damascus conversion but, if they continue to live the lifestyle they had been living before, they can find themselves back in that institution until the institution becomes a poorer outcome for them than getting drunk in public on a regular basis.

                                That is the intervention we seek to bear. It is judicially overseen, unlike the government’s process. It involves a penalty, unlike the government’s process. It will see people removed from the streets for their conduct, unlike the government’s process. For that reason, we are arming the police – in fact, society - with a weapon which is substantially stronger than what the government has flirted with.

                                The other component of our policy is we do not hold the whole of the community responsible for the actions of a few; we target those people themselves, allowing the community to get on with its day-to-day business without having to deal with these people or a state-based and enforced legitimacy, which is what is suggested by the minister for Corrections.

                                One component of the Country Liberals’ policy that I want to focus on particularly is we want to bring pressure to bear on those people who choose to continue to live a negative life. When, however, we get examples such as the ones referred to by the minister for Corrections, we will also smooth that process out the other end. For argument’s sake, if a person who comes through that process finds a way to get themselves a job out the other end, good for them. So much so, that a simple application …

                                Mr KNIGHT: Madam Speaker, I move an extension of time for the member to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.

                                Motion agreed to.

                                Mr ELFERINK: Sorry, I did not think I was going to be this long.

                                A simple application to a court through a very simple means will have that component of the criminal history relating to incarceration, in accordance with this policy, expunged from their criminal history - happy to do it. If a person is out getting a job because they have decided to change their ways, this part of their history should not be an impediment for them to do so.

                                The government has, obviously, taken steps which are unusual, and probably unique, in relation to a problem that has occurred in our community. They have had to respond because of the threefold increase of public drunkenness in the last 10 years, and the 80% increase of violent assaults in our communities during the time of their government. They have responded with their policy, which is going to be of limited success once people find ways to get around it. The point is, with the policy being promoted by the Country Liberals, there is no way around it. You end up inside a mandatory rehabilitation facility, essentially as a prisoner, for the purposes of corrective guidance. That is what should occur. The government’s policy is, basically, a half-baked cake and it will not be long before people find a way to circumvent it.

                                I notice the Northern Territory government’s statistics that have been placed on the table here today refer to Alice Springs, Katherine, and Tennant Creek, showing similar drops to the ones they have seen in Darwin. I find that surprising because these alcohol restrictions have been in place in those places a lot longer. There is some other thing happening here that probably has a lot to do with the winter recess of violence in our community.

                                Madam Speaker, the government itself acknowledges it is early days from a statistical point of view, but the truth is their policy will, ultimately, be something that people can circumvent, step over, undermine, and step around. The Country Liberals’ policy will not afford that sort of latitude, because the people who are engaged in that sort of conduct will, ultimately, be forced to reside in institutions where treatment programs will not be an option; they will be demanded, expected, and enforced.

                                Debate adjourned.
                                OPPOSITION SHADOW CABINET SECRETARY – APPOINTMENT
                                Member for Macdonnell

                                Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Speaker, I discussed this briefly with the Leader of Government Business. It is a small amendment to our administrative arrangements on this side of the House.

                                I advise that the member for Macdonnell, Ms Alison Anderson MLA, is the parliamentary secretary to shadow Cabinet, assisting on Indigenous Policy, Parks and Wildlife, Arts and Museums.

                                Madam Speaker, further discussions I had with you today are still under examination.
                                MATTER OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
                                Failures of Government in Local Government Reform

                                Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received the following letter from the member for Katherine.

                                Madam Speaker,
                                  I propose for discussion this day the following definite matter of public importance:

                                  The failed implementation of the shires and the poor ongoing management of local government reform by the Northern Territory government which has led to the disempowerment and disenfranchisement of ordinary Territorians in remote areas of the NT.

                                It is signed by the member for Katherine.

                                Is the proposed discussion supported? It is supported.

                                Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE (Katherine): Madam Speaker, this evening I speak on this very important issue because it is vital to the fabric of the Northern Territory. It is important for the people of the Northern Territory that we talk about not only the failure of this Labor government’s shire implementation and the ongoing failure of the Labor government in its duty to properly manage the ongoing reform process, but also about the real impacts this is having on every single Territorian - certainly those who live in regional and remote parts of the Northern Territory serviced by shires.

                                Of course, the impact of the shire reform process has been felt in the shires themselves; that is, by the many people who live within the shires, many of them remote. However, there is also an impact on those who live in our towns and cities. Before I go on, I point out a few things to those who sit opposite and to those who will listen to this broadcast, and also to those who will read the Parliamentary Record of what is said this evening.

                                I have publicly acknowledged in the past the system of local government in the Northern Territory prior to the 2008 reforms was riddled with problems and needed to be reformed. I can speak of my personal experiences with the old community government councils and progress associations. I have worked in relatively remote parts of the Northern Territory as a police officer, having spent some five-and-a-half years in the areas to the south and southeast of Katherine in the Maranboy and Mataranka areas in the 1980s and 1990s. I saw both good and bad examples of those types of councils. I was a councillor at Mataranka for two years, which a well-run organisation. Yet, other community government councils within a radius of Mataranka were not so well run. I had a number of friends and acquaintances who worked in some of those councils. I knew the stories about two sets of books, stories of theft, stories of misappropriation and corruption, the firsthand experience of blatant misuse of council vehicles and property. Many of the allegations were investigated on various levels. It really was a mess.

                                A number of councils went bust, and some more than once. If my memory serves me right, Ngukurr went bust on a number of occasions - just one example. Make no bones about it, I am aware of the problems of those bygone days, and can assure you I do not counsel the return to that problem-ridden system. However, I say that in the context of the latest tactic employed by this tired, lazy Labor government - this lazy government with a penchant for pedalling mistruths about the opposition, putting words in the mouths of members on this side of the House, verballing us and, often, totally misrepresenting what we say. I want to be quite clear. Of course, there have been a number of examples where the Labor members opposite have conducted themselves with that type of behaviour over the last couple of days.

                                I want to make it perfectly clear we are not going to return to an old system of 70-odd community government councils and progress associations. Additionally, this MPI is about the way the people of remote parts of the Northern Territory are feeling. It is not a shot at the staff of the shires; it is not a shot at the shires. I, for one, know just how hard shire employees work. My wife, for example, works in the Victoria Daly Shire in Katherine. I know how hard she works. In fact, she is on leave at the moment - or supposed to be - and was called into work today. That type of hard work and dedication is replicated right across the shires with employees doing their best, notwithstanding the system that has been foisted upon them by the Labor government.

                                So, it is not about the shires and their employees; it is about what this Labor government has done to its remote constituents. Those people - the employees, the shire constituents, everyone in the Northern Territory – have been sold a pup with the shire reform under this moribund Labor government. To make matters worse, members of this government are trying to shift the blame.

                                Just to clarify one thing - another mistruth being peddled by Northern Territory Labor members in their electorates is the shire reform was a part of the Howard intervention. They go out there and say: ‘Oh, Howard did the shires’. That is not true and we all know that. Of course, those without any shame on the other side of the House - those shameless Labor MLAs - are out in their electorates peddling nothing but lies. That is a mistruth.

                                I want to set the record straight. It was the Labor government that foisted shire reform on the people of the Northern Territory - the Labor government, no one else! It was the former minister, the member for Daly, who was sacked from his Local Government portfolio for his horrendous failures in local government and his gross incapacity to handle the ongoing reforms! He brought it in!

                                Mr Knight interjecting.

                                Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: He brought it in - the member for Daly! People in Daly River and the people living in Palumpa, Emu Point and Peppimenarti - all those communities - Woodycupaldiya and Wadeye know; they are getting it. They know their local member foisted this shire reform on them. They know; they understand; and they are not happy.

                                What did the member for Daly foist upon them? Millions of dollars spent on a computer system that did not work on day 1 - a computer system that needed more than $5m worth of additional Territory’s taxpayers’ money to remediate. All that, despite the fact that LGANT had spent millions already on a suitable IT system that actually worked. What a joke this government is! This computer system was the same system that prevented most shire councils from meeting a number of their reporting and financial obligations under the Local Government Act. How many shires could not produce financial statements for council meetings, and for how long? I can answer that in general terms. Most of the shires for well over a year! This government and its fast-tracked reforms put the shires in a position of breaking the law! And they did it on more than one occasion. They set them up and, then, to add insult to injury, a number of shires were fined by the Australian Taxation Office for not lodging their Business Activity Statements on time. So, the Labor government’s failure to provide a sound, usable financial IT system cost the shires money in fines. Is this not a classic? It is absolutely shameful! You should hang your heads!

                                Never mind the shires’ inability to acquit grants, both historical and current, and never mind about the asset system, which many of the shires are just coming to terms with. While we are talking about finances, how many shires are still in financial strife? I pose that question to the minister. Perhaps she might like to answer that question in the same way it was answered during estimates this year. I will come back to that. We all know the Labor government continues to hide the financial sustainability reports into East and West Arnhem Shires, because they, no doubt, paint a very alarming picture and represent a damning indictment on this government’s failures.

                                Now, the government has commissioned financial sustainability reports into all the shires, to tell them what they already know: that they are struggling under a regime of limited capacity to generate own source revenue and they are not funded sufficiently to do everything that - guess who? - Northern Territory Labor promised people in the Northern Territory when they steamrolled these shire reforms through in 2008.

                                Let us go back to estimates. We uncovered that three shires finished in the red at the end of the 2009-10 year, with one of those shires facing a situation where it had more debt than it had reserves in the bank. That would have been insolvency, other than for the fact they probably had enough assets to bring the books back into the black. Who did this? The member for Daly. These are Labor shires. Make no bones about it; these are Labor shires.

                                After the member for Daly was sacked from Local Government, along came the member for Arnhem, the current minister - a minister who has proved herself to be a complete and utter waste of space when it comes to driving the ongoing shire reforms …

                                Mr Knight: Driving a Toyota? Driving a troop carrier?

                                Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Sadly, I have to say …

                                Mr Knight: A troop carrier?

                                Madam SPEAKER: Order!

                                Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: It is not a personal attack, but I am going to say it anyway. I talk to a number of people in the Northern Territory who have an interest in portfolios that are held by various ministers on the other side. The comment I get about the member for Arnhem - many people say it - is: ‘Nice lady but’ …

                                Mr Knight: Do you hear what they say about you?

                                Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: I am not here for personal attacks, Madam Speaker, because that is a Labor tactic. We will leave that up to them. We are looking forward to that.

                                What they should have done is stuck with Elliot McAdam. They should have stayed with the ideas that Mr McAdam had. He wanted smaller regional shires, I believe, and I think Jack Ah Kit was a part of all that as well. He wanted a raft of reforms that might have worked for people who lived in remote parts of the Northern Territory. To his credit, Elliot McAdam resigned from his ministerial position and the Labor Party on a matter of principle and, because he was so royally shafted by his Labor mates - so-called Labor mates - on shire reform. They should have listened to him.

                                The other failings of this government with respect to shire reform is well-documented, including the transition from the CDEP employment program the federal government threatened to cease funding for because the Northern Territory Labor government did not meet its commitments to transition CDEP workers into real jobs. Thank goodness the Northern Territory opposition, those sitting on this side of the House, championed the cause of those workers, otherwise the Labor government would have let 500 jobs slip into the ether …

                                Ms Scrymgour: You are a joke!

                                Madam SPEAKER: Order!

                                Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: You think so? I will pick up on the interjection. The member for Arafura thinks I am a joke. Perhaps we had better go back to some of the questions, some of the letters that have been written, and back through the history and discover just how the situation developed around that period of time when the federal government was about to pull funding because you mob had not done your job. Even when they did it, do you know what they did? They kept the CDEP workers on CDEP, told the shires they would have to fund half of the salary and, if they did not, guess what? The reality was those people on CDEP wages would be on nothing more than welfare …

                                Members interjecting.

                                Madam SPEAKER: Order!

                                Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: I am glad the others over there are so interested, Madam Speaker, because I will be asking, particularly the bush members, what they think about the shires and what their constituents are telling them. I know the member for Arafura had a few things to say in the newspaper not so long ago. It is a shame; I thought Labor had a tradition of working for the underclass but, no, Labor would rather keep the people in the underclass so they can trot out false hopes. That is all they do.

                                So where does that leave us now? This MPI is about the disenfranchisement and the disempowerment of people in the bush. They no longer feel – in fact, I do not think they ever really felt - they have any role in the provision of local government core services since these shire reforms. Is it any wonder? That is the message that is coming back to me loud and clear. I have been listening for the past three years. I have been traipsing around the Northern Territory listening to the very people for whom the shires were reformed; those people on the ground. I reckon that just about everyone I spoke to in the early days was critical of the process that Labor went through to introduce these shires. I qualify that by saying most of them were willing to give it a go to see how it would pan out. They did not like the idea, they were not fussed, but: ‘No, let us give it a go’. We have given it a go, and those people are saying it has not panned out very well at all.

                                In more recent times, just about everyone I speak to who are recipients of local government services say to me: ‘Get rid of the Labor shires’. That is what they say, even people on local boards, councillors, people of standing in the community, senior traditional owners: ‘Get rid of the Labor shires’. That is the message coming back from the bush. I am interested to hear whether the members for Barkly, Arafura, Stuart, even, dare I say it, Daly, what their remote constituents are saying …

                                Mr Giles: Oh, we know what he is saying to his remote constituents.

                                Members interjecting.

                                Madam SPEAKER: Order!

                                Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: I pick up on the interjection from the member for Braitling. Yes, we do know what the member for Daly has been saying to his constituents ...

                                Mr Giles: I had a chat with him about you.

                                Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: Did you now?

                                Members interjecting.

                                Madam SPEAKER: Order!

                                Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: As I talk to people who bring me these messages, I get the same message all of the time. Message 1: ‘We do not get the local government core services’. They mean roads and rubbish. That is the message I am getting: those core local government services. That is evident as I travel around the Territory and look at communities. In some places, there is rubbish from every boundary of the community to the other boundary, and every point in between. Surely, local government constituents can expect to live in a clean community, I would have thought. I live in a clean community. I have Katherine Town Council that provides services to ensure the main street is clean. Yet, remote communities seem to be missing out on that. Unfortunately, what happens is the people out there blame the shire. You know who I tell them to blame and where the blame fairly and squarely sits? With the Labor government.

                                What about the roads? Let me start with an example of good roads in a community. North Camp at Elliott is one. I cannot remember the name of it, but it is a nice little community. The roads are as good as anywhere. They are kerbed, they are sealed, they are reasonably well maintained. It could be a little suburb anywhere. Yet, as I drive around most communities, I see nothing of the sort: roads of dirt, broken bitumen, ragged, potholed, and falling apart. No wonder the people in these communities are angry. Who do you blame? Well, most of the time the poor old shires cop it, but it is not the fault of the shires, it is the fault of the Northern Territory government. That is who is responsible: the Labor government; the one that introduced the Labor shires.

                                What else do people think about the shires? Well, they feel cut off from the decision-making process. In other words, disempowered and disenfranchised. People on local boards feel they have no say within the council structure - no say at all. There are examples where shires have difficulty recruiting people to local boards because they just feel there is no point. There are specific examples: the Daly River local board which, I am told, is the only board without Indigenous representation. During the consultation process when the shires were being reformed, prior to 2008, those people were assured they would not be disadvantaged by not having Indigenous representation on their board - not disadvantaged in any way. Well, surprise, surprise! Even the non-Indigenous people in the shires feel disempowered. They feel as though they have no voice. That is the feedback I have. It is a theme repeated right across the Territory as I get out there and talk to people.

                                This has occurred because this whole process of the Labor shires was implemented from the top down. This Labor government even fudged the consultation process. Elliot McAdam had it right. There were others who wanted to see a different model, yet Labor overran them and brought this top-down approach to the reform. You did not take the people with you, and that was your fundamental mistake. You have people from large swathes of the Territory who are - well, I will not say quite ready to revolt, but they certainly are ready to stand up and be heard as a voice of great discontent.

                                We will listen to those people as we work our way through the process of unscrambling this horrible egg the shires are that were foisted upon the Northern Territory by Labor in 2008. We will be defining a model that works for everyone. It will not be a one-size-fits-all. Different parts of the Territory will have local government representation that is appropriate to their situation with regard to geography, language, population and infrastructure, to name just a few of those criteria. We will favour a more regional model of local government that will empower local people.

                                That does not mean those in the head office of current shires need to be worried - those working in Darwin, Katherine, Tennant and Alice Springs. The reform process will take some time. Importantly, there will, more than likely, be a need for a support and administrative head office-type role. Some of the functions - payroll or head office - will more than likely need to be serviced from a more central location. We are working through that process; it has begun and we will find a model that works and provides essential core services to regional and remote communities. A model that brings the people with it, Madam Speaker, is the important part.

                                Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Katherine for bringing forward this MPI. I had a laugh about 7.05 pm listening to the ABC news. They had already worked out what the opposition and I were going to say. Now, it is 7.50 pm. They must have been able to read our minds. I hope later on it reports what I am going to say and not guesses it.

                                One of the important things in this debate is not make the mistake the Labor government made at the very beginning, but really communicate with the people in local government. I am very much a supporter of local government. We have to be very careful here. Words have been used such as ‘toxic’. That word came up recently in the East Arnhem conference held at the convention centre. The message from the member for Katherine said we are supporting local government, but that does not mean we cannot review the way it is operated and see whether we can put in place better systems to make it work. To me, two reforms need to be looked at. One is the economic reform and one is the geographic reform.

                                One of the biggest hurdles for local government in the Northern Territory has been they do not have enough finances to carry on the job they have been asked to do. A classic example would be the Tiwi shire. The government built a lovely football ground with lights, then gave it to the council to maintain. Simply, the council does not have that sort of money to maintain that oval. In fact, the oval is not being used as a home ground this year for the Tiwi Bombers. I suspect that is because there is not enough money to maintain it in a good enough condition. Also, there are swimming pools. How many communities were given swimming pools? How many of those communities have to find the money to run those swimming pools?

                                I was recently at Roper Gulf, at Borroloola, and attended a Roper Gulf Shire meeting. I say again, the people involved in that council are genuinely working hard. This is not about picking on people working in councils; it is about saying there are some structures government has put into place that are not working because some of these councils are in dire straits financially. I asked the Roper Gulf Shire how much money it made in rates. $500 000. That would pay about three or four people in the administration of some of these shires. How are they expected to fix up the pot holes and clean up the roads on that sort of money? They get money from the federal government through federal assistance grants. They get operational funding. Of course, most of them have to make up the money through looking after agencies. In other words, there has been the responsibility of other governments put on local government, and it has been their job to maintain those agencies. Sometimes, I feel the concentration has gone on those agencies more than the requirement to keep up core services as they should.

                                The member for Katherine has been out to the Daly region, and I was out there last year as well. I saw bitumen roads that looked like they had not had bitumen put on them for years. I saw rubbish everywhere. I have to ask: surely the council has someone to pick up the rubbish? In fact, they had at that time a brand new rubbish collection truck. Something is not working here. I worked for local government at Nguiu in the same field, picking up rubbish, planting trees, patching roads. Yet, I go to some communities and I do not see that happening. There are many communities like that. You would have thought one of the core functions of councils was to pick up litter. Whether that is because councils are simply not doing the job or whether it is because of lack of funding, I do not know. The reality is some councils either do not have the money to do it property or are not fulfilling that role.

                                The member for Arafura has raised an issue the Council of Territory Cooperation has raised which, to me in some ways, reflects the problem councils have in raising money. You have these councils that have a large amount of Aboriginal land and it cannot be rated. The member for Arafura has raised it a number of times. I believe the Council of Territory Cooperation mentioned it just recently in their report. In the first Council of Territory Cooperation report on page 28 the council recommended the Northern Territory government amend legislation to enable shires to increase their own revenue base, such as through service fees in remote Aboriginal communities.

                                With the changes in the Local Government Act, that was taken away. Since this report came out in 2010, we have asked, time and time again, for that to occur and, yet, it has not changed. You are making councils hamstrung when it comes to raising revenue. It is no more highlighted than in an e-mail I received from a gentleman at Timber Creek complaining that the garbage rates there were $500. The reason I think those rates are so high is because the council is limited in how much money it can raise. So, whoever is out there the council thinks it can raise money from, it hits them fairly hard. Whereas, if we could share that burden across all people in the shires by introducing a service fee, the councils would become more viable. This is an economic change, and a change that is needed.

                                The Council of Territory Cooperation has repeatedly asked – as it has been asked here - that councils should have been able to take over the refurbishments. That would have been a form of income; that would have employed people. Again, we gave that work to outside companies, whereas councils could have done that work as well.

                                I have also repeatedly said there should not be welfare in some of these communities – but welfare money topped up with some more money to make it a reasonable wage. With enough money for councils to have infrastructure such as trucks, tractors, backhoes, wheelbarrows and lawnmowers, it could be the main employment centre for these communities. Much of the work we are talking about – rubbish, patching roads and all that type of work - could be done using money that was welfare, but turned into wages for employment which would give people pride in their communities. That is what councils were about: giving people pride in their own communities.

                                I had a nursery. We sold plants to everyone every Saturday morning so they could plant their own garden. We planted many of the trees you see at Bathurst Island - not all of them because it is a fairly old community, but the ones down the main street I planted with help from the Aboriginal people who lived there, the Tiwis, and we took pride in our community. All the roads used to have their names up; every family in the Tiwis had a street named after them. When I go back there now, I see a few but do not see very many. It is sad that what I believe was a bonding through local government has disappeared, to some extent.

                                Also with regard to the issue of government contracts, when we were at Roper Gulf Shire Council, they complained they were not getting many of the contracts. They said they only found out at the last minute that the government was going to do some minor works in their area and, by the time they got their act together, that contract had gone; instead of the government and the councils being proactive and saying: ‘We are going to have work out here. Can you get yourselves ready?’ If they knew those programs were going to happen often, they could gear up for that. They could also start to teach their council workers skills in road making because they would know they would have a constant road program the government was putting forward. So, the government should be leaning towards making sure these councils get some of those contracts.

                                While I talk about roads, councils are hamstrung. One of the big issues is: what is the relationship with land councils? West Arnhem and the East Arnhem shires are probably two councils that have nearly all Aboriginal land. Who owns the road? The Tiwi shire is the same. If there is a road on this land, who owns the road? Then, you get traditional owners complaining the council is not maintaining the road. The council says: ‘We need some gravel’. And the traditional owners say: ‘Well, that is going to cost you X hundred dollars per cubic metre’ - and a council does not have that money. We have this real issue that has not been solved as to what roads council should maintain, and what rights they have to gravel to build those roads. I do not think councils would mind paying for gravel, but at a reasonable price. You have to remember the council is building roads for those communities. After talking to someone from local government, I know there were a few roads earlier this year the Local Government Association just refused to maintain because the traditional owners wanted too much money for the gravel to fix the roads - even though the traditional owners use that road pretty well exclusively.

                                There is a real issue about the delineation of who owns what and whose responsibility is what. That is an area that makes it very difficult for councils to operate. People ask for their roads to be maintained; they are probably not technically public roads or gazetted roads. This also fits in with the growth town issue. If we are going to have growth towns, if growth towns are going to be so-called normal towns with no permits, then the roads to those towns need to be open roads the council looks after; they are not private roads which can be shut off or are hindered because they cannot get gravel to fix them. That is a really big area for some local governments.

                                As well as that, I have raised an issue before as a motion, saying that government non-profit assets should not be charged any more than a peppercorn lease. You have local governments with their buildings on some of these communities who are going to be charged leases through the land council for their property - and that is going to be based on unimproved capital value. I believe they should pay a lease, but only a peppercorn lease, because those councils are there for the benefit of the community and, if you hit them with a large lease amount, that means less money for the community. That is an issue that needs to be sorted out.

                                It seems the Commonwealth government believes that any government assets out there on Aboriginal land should be hit for a large sum of money. What they do not understand is some of these councils do not have much money and, if they have to pay leasehold money to a group of traditional owners or the land council, that means fewer services. These councils are non-profit bodies and they are providing services to the very people who want to charge them a large amount of money. Notwithstanding, most of those people, unless they are paying a fee through Northern Territory Housing, are not paying any rates to that council. To me, that is all very confusing. The area of roads and the leases is one where a bit of common sense has to apply to make it easier for councils to know what they have to do, and how to maintain those assets.

                                In relation to the size of the councils, I have always felt they are far too big. The member for Katherine mentioned regional; these councils are probably more like regional. Jack Ah Kit, in his time as minister mentioned 22 regional councils. However, the word is ‘local’ and that is probably what I always found difficult with the development of these shires. I have said before, how can a council like Central Desert Shire Council - where it is 1000 km from Tobermory Station to Lajamanu - be local? When I have been to places like Daly River, I can see why people are finding these changes to their detriment; they lost a good council.

                                I understand there were some councils - not all councils - in the Northern Territory that were dysfunctional. Sometimes, it is said that all these councils were dysfunctional - they were not. However, some were.

                                Nauiyu Nambiyu was a good council. It not only lost its council, but because it was not a growth town, it lost any chance of getting new houses, even though it is one of the best communities around. It has had a long track record of building houses since 1955. It probably was one of the first places to have block houses. Yet, it is not allowed to have new houses because it is not a growth town. On top of that, we have word that CDEP is going to drop off and we are going to have a Centrelink version of CDEP.

                                Why do people feel dejected? Why do they feel there is no great future? Because, somehow, the policies of both the federal government and the Territory government have forgotten about the people on the ground and what effects some of those policies make. I am not saying it is easy for government to overcome the issue of housing, but I tell you what the people at Nauiyu say to me. For years, they showed they can look after houses, build houses, and maintain their houses in a good condition. Another community a few hundred kilometres to the west has never looked after their houses, yet they got 98 brand new houses. I am not saying that community does not need new houses, but it sends a message to the people at Nauiyu that all that good work was for nothing. I believe that is where people did not understand the feelings on the ground.

                                I believe there needs to be reform. I say again the reform needs to be done through talking to the people, because the mistake at the beginning was this was, to some extent, rammed down people’s throats. I used to go to transition meetings at Litchfield Shire. I was told I had to get permission to speak and I could speak for two minutes. The agendas were already set up and, basically, what the agenda said was going to be approved, and that was what happened. That is why we had rallies around this Parliament House, because we felt we had no control.

                                Many councils were also told to take on core functions, which they should have left alone with a bargepole - even things like aged care. To me, that is a Northern Territory government function. You would not get the council in Darwin looking after aged care - you might private bodies but, generally speaking, it is regarded as the Northern Territory government ...

                                Mr Westra van Holthe: It is called cost shifting.

                                Mr WOOD: That is exactly right. That was one of the reasons these councils have struggled. I have never agreed with the big centres being in places like Katherine and Darwin. I can understand that, but I look at West Arnhem Shire Council over near the land council. I go past and think, that is a long way from West Arnhem Shire. I might have agreed that you could have had a pool of computers that were run by LGANT that did some of that work - that would have made more sense. However, the administration and the managers should be out there to show the people they have faith in the bit of country they are administering. All right, it might be a bit difficult for some people, as many of these original CEOs came from down south. However, that is life; that is where people live.

                                We need to talk to the people. My personal feeling is we need to have smaller councils. Some of the councils could be working, so be careful. Some might be in good nick. So, when you are doing a review, make sure you investigate it thoroughly. I could ask the government what happened to the sustainability reports for West and East Arnhem Shires. How are we supposed to know if they are really good? Those reports were done. Those reports needed to be released ...

                                Mr Westra van Holthe: Hidden in Cabinet.

                                Mr WOOD: Yes. So, if there is a problem, tell us there is a problem. Believe it or not, if you have problem, maybe we will not all be about knocking it; we might be saying: Here are some ideas about solving those problems’. However, we have not been shown those sustainability reports.

                                We need to ensure the community comes with any changes we make. We need to ensure we are still talking local. Local is about community. Community is very much part of the equation of good local government. I will stress, I know, of the councils that exist at the moment, some of those councils do put a big effort into community-type work. I know Roper Gulf Shire Council does. I have seen their minutes and some of the work they do - on Australia Day and at NAIDOC time. That is part of what they should be doing, and they do that part. However, they must struggle to do some of the other core functions because of the lack of the ability to raise enough revenue.

                                I should make a couple of other quick remarks on how I believe the councils have been let down. When these councils were starting up, who remembers, in the days of Elliot and the other gentleman who disappeared as soon as councils were formed …

                                Mr Knight: Nick Scarvelis.

                                Mr WOOD: Mr Scarvelis. He was one of the main people behind this. I remember this CTC recommendation on page 33 of his first report. It says:
                                  The council recommends the Northern Territory government seek an explanation from the Australian government for why there has been no increase in road funding in the newly incorporated shires, as there was for the Pitjantjatjara Council.

                                One of the big promises made for the amalgamation of councils was they would get more money for roads; that was part of the sweetener. They used the example: ‘When you get together you will be able to fight the federal government and ask for funds just as happened in the Pitjantjatjara Council’. Here we are – what? - three years down the track - not a dollar! The Northern Territory government has not even worked out, with its own roads, which roads it will hand over to councils. How do councils operate if they do not know what their future is in relation to that? Why was that not sorted out before the councils existed? Roads are one of the most important functions of councils. So, they have been left with promises, and those promises have not been kept.

                                Madam Deputy Speaker, I support what the CLP is saying. I add my own version saying: ‘Make sure you talk to the people’. Not all councils are the same. See which ones are working well and adapt. You might be able to change the model a bit. However, remember local government is about people. Keep them in mind and do not denigrate the people who are working for the councils at the moment; they work hard under difficult conditions. However, if we are to bring change - and change is needed - bring the people with you and we will end up with a better model than we have at the moment.
                                _____________________
                                Visitors

                                Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Mr Tony Tapsell, CEO of LGANT, accompanied by Ms Fran Kilgariff, Senior Executive in the department of Local Government. On behalf of honourable members, we extend a very warm welcome to you.

                                Members: Hear, hear!
                                ____________________

                                Ms McCARTHY (Local Government): Madam Deputy Speaker, I appreciate this matter of public importance coming before the House. I am keen to hear the thoughts and views of members opposite, even though they have flagged quite publicly their thoughts and concerns with regard to the shires.

                                I take this opportunity to welcome Tony and Fran in the gallery, and also those members across the Northern Territory who are tuning in to this very important debate. We have shire mayors, presidents and CEOs who, no doubt, want to listen very carefully tonight, or in the next couple of days, to the debate and discussion of the members opposite and my role as Minister for Local Government.

                                I take this opportunity to put on the record my congratulations to the MacDonnell Shire President, Sid Anderson and the CEO, Diane Hood; the Central Desert Shire President, Norbert Patrick and the CEO, Roydon Robertson; the Barkly Shire President, Rosalie Kunoth-Monks and CEO, David Shoobridge; the Roper Gulf Mayor, Tony Jack and CEO, Michael Berto; Victoria Daly Shire’s newly-announced Mayor Reginald King - congratulations, Reg – and CEO Sandra Cannon; the East Arnhem Shire President; Banambi Wunungmurra and CEO, Ian Bodill; the West Arnhem Shire Mayor, Ralph Blyth and the CEO, Adam Seiler; the Tiwi Islands Mayor, Lynette De Santis and the CEO, Alan Hudson. I thank each of you and your staff across the Northern Territory in each of the eight shires for the work you are doing under incredible duress and the political battle that has been waged in the media so publicly and viciously against the shires.

                                The member for Katherine said this is not about attacking the shire employees or the shires themselves. That is a complete contradiction. Calling the shires toxic, no good, in need of surgery is very much a direct criticism of the shires and employees …

                                Mr WESTRA van HOLTHE: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! The Minister for Local Government is misleading the House. I never once uttered the words ‘toxic shires’. I ask her to withdraw.

                                Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order, member for Katherine. However, under standing orders if you wish to make a personal explanation, you may do so by approaching me. You have the call, minister.

                                Ms McCARTHY: Madam Deputy Speaker, in this, the 100th year of the Northern Territory, as we reflect on democracy in this country, let me bring to this Northern Territory parliament the importance of democracy ...

                                Members interjecting.

                                Ms McCARTHY: Australian society is defined, among other aspects, by a belief in elected government, by a commitment to the rule of law, to equal rights for all before the law, and by a belief in freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom of association ...

                                Members interjecting.

                                Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Greatorex!

                                Ms McCARTHY: … The fundamental principles of democracy in this country are what we are about. The local government reforms across the Northern Territory ….

                                Ms SCRYMGOUR: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! Standing Order 51: the minister listened to members of the CLP in total silence while they gave their contribution. The clowns opposite should allow the minister to respond in silence.

                                Members interjecting.

                                Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Order! Members of the opposition, I remind you of Standing Order 51. I do not think I need to read it because you are very familiar with it. Please allow the minister to be heard without the constant interruptions. Minister, you have the call.

                                Ms McCARTHY: Madam Deputy Speaker, this great nation of Australia prides itself on democracy. For almost three decades, we had to look at what was going on with the dysfunctional aspects of democracy in local government across the Northern Territory. We recognised, as a government, when we came into power in 2001, there had to be enormous changes to the local government system across the regions of the Northern Territory. We make no apology whatsoever for wanting to improve the transparency and accountability for local government in the Northern Territory.

                                As Professor George Williams, a constitutional law expert and member of the Northern Territory Constitutional Convention Committee has said:

                                  The democratic project is never finished, The long-term health of a democracy demands ongoing engagement.

                                That is exactly what we in the Labor government are consistently on about: ongoing engagement and, a consistency in the firm fundamental beliefs of democracy. We are in our third year of a very historic reform that has taken place across the Northern Territory - a reform that is by no means without its flaws or its problems. However, we are not afraid to challenge a way of system, a way of life, that has left the Indigenous people across the Northern Territory, in particular, without the form of transparency and accountability that is very much local government.

                                Not once in the 20 minutes the member for Katherine - the person who could one day be Local Government minister – spoke did we hear any plan whatsoever for his vision, his view, his policy for the people of the Northern Territory in any of those shires or regions. In fact, for the full 20 minutes, all we heard was trashing the Territory ...

                                Members interjecting.

                                Ms McCARTHY: The No 1 record of the CLP is trashing the Territory. In fact, we have heard what the real vision for the CLP is for the Aboriginal people of the Northern Territory. We know for a fact, on the Parliamentary Record, that the member for Fong Lim, with all his colleagues on the other side, calls each and every one of these communities ‘hellholes’. The CLP’s vision for the Northern Territory is to move everyone back on the Stuart Highway under a centralised government system. The record they keep swinging around is trashing the Territory.

                                We know we have a long way to go in these reforms, particularly in empowering our local boards and strengthening the connection of local people to shire decision-makers. It was our government that had the courage to do something about local government and not shy away from allowing the rot and the decay of the smaller councils to continue - which is exactly what you did for so long.

                                The need for local government reform was an issue which was always apparent to the CLP government for so long, but they did nothing. Despite understanding that fundamental reform was a necessity, the CLP did not have the courage to take action to properly reform our local government system to create stability and strong regional local governments. The CLP saw that as a threat and not an opportunity.

                                As I have said in this House before, let us not forget the reasons for our local government reform. We needed to make councils outside the major urban centres more effective and sustainable. In March 2006, we conducted a risk assessment of 56 councils; that is, the 30 community government councils, the 23 association councils, and the three ORAC councils. The risk assessment classified 50% of councils as either high risk or dysfunctional. No mention from the CLP, as they trashed the Northern Territory - no mention of this history. That same year, the department of Local Government was required to make 17 major interventions into the affairs of councils due to financial, administrative, and governance irregularities. These interventions included four show cause notices to chief executives involving allegations of serious financial mismanagement. Clearly, this was a situation that could not continue.

                                We took action in cooperation with the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory, its members, and local communities to fix these structural problems and provide long-term certainty for individual communities with regard to core services and their capacity to influence the allocation of resources and the way things are done at the local level. We knew that fundamental reform of local government was required to create stability, through strong regional local governments with robust business and management systems, to deliver efficient and effective services and an improved governance framework through regional representation. Our local government reforms were also about reducing the duplication of services and reducing the costs in small communities with hub-type provision of services.

                                This reform was never going to be a quick fix! We are building something that will work into the future. We have seen decades of under-investment and neglect across the regions. Our government is about building the firm foundations of a future built for prosperity for all people of the Northern Territory. We want to see decades of prosperity into the future. To have that, one of the fundamental structures of any kind of prosperity into the future has to begin with transparency and accountability at the local level. As the Chief Executive Officer of the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory, Tony Tapsell said:
                                  … we went from 50-odd councils down to eight. And, you know, that it an incredible structural change and, you know, there were a lot of teething problems earlier on and there are still, you know, things to be sorted out. We’re doing lots of development, there’s lots of development work going on at the moment with asset and financial management, emergency management, elected member training, local boards, community engagements.

                                That is what we are focused on: continual development and improvement to help reconnect local communities to local government. Again, I quote Tony Tapsell:
                                  … I think the biggest benefit of the reform is about capacity and financial strength ... they’re more likely to be viable and sustainable if they are larger ... that’s a trend that’s occurred right around the world let alone just in the Northern Territory. Certainly greater accountability and transparency than there ever was previously ...

                                I also put on the record the comments by the mayors across the Northern Territory - Alice Springs Mayor, Damien Ryan; Palmerston Mayor, Rob Macleod; and the Lord Mayor of Darwin, Graeme Sawyer. Each of the mayors has agreed - even though it has meant an even greater focus in my role as Minister for Local Government and the department on these infant shires that are trying to grow, to improve the services for all people who live in the region – and have come out and spoken. Damien Ryan said:
                                  My council this year’s 40 years old, they’re four years old, they’ve got a long way to go, they’ve got a lot of work ahead of them.

                                Rob Macleod, the Mayor of Palmerston:
                                  … what they had before was totally unacceptable, with the new system at least it’s accountable, controllable and it is young and it needs to be just tied up, tightened and moved ahead.

                                The Lord Mayor of Darwin, Graeme Sawyer:
                                  … they’re four years old, it’s going to take a while but the model I think is much, much better than the model we did have and it’s up to the government and all of the people in local government to make it work.
                                That is the absolute key to where we are at today. It is up to every single member of this parliament and the Northern Territory to work together …

                                Mr GILES: Madam Deputy Speaker, time has expired!

                                Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Your time has expired, minister.

                                Mr GILES (Braitling): Madam Deputy Speaker, I start by thanking my colleague, the member for Katherine, for bringing on what is definitely a matter of public importance. I thank him for his contribution. I valued his contribution; it was fantastic. I also thank the minister for her remarks and I particularly thank the member for Nelson. Based on what I mostly heard – I drifted off a couple of times because I was reading – I have to say I probably agree with him 100% on most of the issues I heard. It was a very valuable contribution.

                                Let me start from the outset by saying no way will the Country Liberals be going back to the old model. We will not be going back to the old model. However, we recognise there is a problem. When I and my colleagues, the member for Katherine and the Leader of the Opposition, recently spoke at Wadeye about the nature of the shires and the position they were in, it came after exhaustive consultation and visiting people across the Territory. I have done the length and breadth of the Territory many times, and it does not matter where you go, shires are the boil on the backside. By my colleagues and I talking about this, we have lanced that boil.

                                The term ‘toxic’ is taken as offensive by some people. The reason I use the term ‘toxic’ is because that is what it is out bush. Everybody is complaining about it. It is not a reflection on the shire CEOs, the shire staff, or the shire service managers; it is what they have become. Whether that is an outcome of a poor design of a model for local government in the remote communities, it is because head offices are not in the communities, it is because assets were stripped, it is because people lost their jobs or people are still on CDEP, or it is because the funding model is not quite right - I believe it is a combination of everything - they have become toxic.

                                That is why the Country Liberals’ position is that we will move to a model of regional governments that are smaller than the shires. We will ensure the head offices of these new regional councils are actually within the boundaries of those councils, because the current model, where you have every head office sitting on the Stuart Highway, taking vast amounts of money out of the shire boundaries which they are supposed to be supporting, is not supporting them economically. It has seen the build-up of enormous bureaucracies where some CEOs are getting paid more than the Prime Minister. This is not some philosophical or ideological position; this is recognising there is a problem. This has reached out to the people in the bush.

                                How can CEOs get paid more than the Prime Minister; three times our salaries on this side; three times a backbencher’s salary to run a shire of 5000 people? It is just ludicrous. I have heard the comments from the minister referring to what the Mayor of Alice Springs said. I am sure he would like to get paid the same as some of these shire CEOs are being paid. He gets nowhere near it. It is six or more times what he is being paid, as far as my rough estimation goes, and he is looking after 28 000 people. I recognise Tony and Fran in the gallery - Fran is a former mayor. I am sure she would like to be paid what the Prime Minister is paid to oversee 5000 people. It is a problem with the model.

                                Tony, from LGANT, was on the radio recently criticising our comments about the toxicity of the shires. It is not about the people, let me make that clear. Di Hood from MacDonnell Shire and other bureaucrats or people in representative positions were criticising the word ‘toxic’ and our position. However, the one thing people are not talking about - and I congratulate the member for Arafura; non-politically; she referred to what we have been saying – is the people on the ground think they are toxic. Everyone who has commented on this has come from a centralised position in a bureaucracy and has not spoken to the people.

                                The member for Nelson likes to talk about Daly River. I will come back to Daly River in a second. The swimming pool at Santa Teresa is to be removed because there is no money to fix it. It was always looked after before. I understand there are problems with cracks in the tiles and pumps. I get it. The pool is being removed and we know the swimming pool helps kids with ear and eyes - it helps with their health.

                                Getting back to Daly River, they used to have a very functional housing program. Putting aside the argument the member for Nelson raised about growth towns and how they do not get any new housing, they are a very functional community and used to have a fantastic housing program. Now, the man who runs the housing operations and is employed by the shire at Daly River has no money to do any repairs and maintenance. He is told to drive the car around and not work - not repair the houses because there is no money for repairs and maintenance. That is happening right now. It is crazy! The football oval on the Tiwi Islands!

                                Go down Daly River Road and, as you turn off to the community, there is a section of about 15 m of dirt road which has had barriers put around it since last Wet Season because there is an argument between the Territory government, which looks after one road, and the local government which looks after the other. They cannot decide on the 15 m in the middle so they have roadside barriers around. You have to drive through the bush to get back on the road and into the community. I am not attacking the Construction minister, these are just failures. That is why people think they are toxic. The shires are toxic - and it is not the people; let me make that clear.

                                The assets that were stripped - I remember going to Territory Wreckers at the end of Smith Street in Alice Springs. They had a smorgasbord of - and still do for that matter - vehicles. They have all come in and the new shires have written the assets off ‘beyond economic repair’. They were flogging them off everywhere. Territory Wreckers have been on-selling them for parts and everything. The member for Stuart would appreciate what I am saying. They milked all the assets out. When they want to get a garbage truck to collect rubbish, you cannot get your garbage collected.

                                Go to Palumpa in the member for Daly’s electorate. We heard about the causeway bridge from Alissa Betts several years ago, where kids had to wade through sewage and crocodile infested waters to get to school. The bridge still is not built and the causeway is not sealed. It is crazy! Who is in control? This is in the former Local Government minister’s electorate - the person who brought the Labor shires in!

                                We have lanced the boil of the toxicity of shires. We want to move to a more regional-based approach, not the old model. I looked through the 2003 speech by Mr John Ah Kit when he was an MLA. He gave a speech as minister for Community Development at the Indigenous Governance Conference in Jabiru in 2003. He reported on the importance of the shires:
                                  Strategies will be set out in regional development plans …

                                I am quoting from some sections of his speech. He talked about the success of the Building Stronger Regions, Stronger Futures paper:
                                  Some in the Territory have found the emphasis on regions as opposed to communities threatening. I do not walk away from my emphasis on building regional capacity, despite what I regard as unfounded fears.

                                We support him. It is about regions. He was referring to language groups. I will just read out a short section. He said:
                                  So the idea of looking at the Northern Territory as a series of regions both overlapping and interconnected for service delivery is not one born of bureaucratic convenience or ministerial faddishness on my part. It is based on an understanding of the reality of the Northern Territory’s population which is remarkably decentralised and dispersed on the basis of traditional affiliation to lands. Uniquely, the Northern Territory is a jurisdiction that reflects, in large part, pre-colonial boundaries rather than notions of individuated, isolated community disconnected from the region in which it exists.

                                That is important because the Territory is unique. The Territory is not like New South Wales, Victoria, or South Australia where there is the conceptual model of economies of scale of centralising populations for ease of servicing. We are not like that. We have strong cultural connections to land, language, law, and culture. People will not move into town in vast masses. Sure, with the shires’ toxicity, failures, and their disenfranchisement of people out in the bush, the removal of the outstations policy by this government, and a lack of economic development is driving urban drift in droves into Darwin, Palmerston, Alice Springs, Katherine and Tennant Creek.

                                I am surprised by those mayoral comments the minister read out, because I remember when the Palmerston mayor was complaining about all the people coming from the bush moving into Palmerston and causing trouble. There are more and more people who are moving into the northern suburbs. The problems we talk about in Alice Springs relate to urban drift.

                                I have no problem with people coming and going to any part in Australia but, if you do not have the social and economic infrastructure to be able to deal with the mass of population - and that includes ability to access affordable housing. If people are on the dole, to put it bluntly, they cannot afford a house for $600 per week. That is where we get overcrowding and living in poor housing conditions, and homelessness. With homelessness and all those other scenarios you get alcoholism, antisocial behaviour, and crime. That is part of the problem. We need to be able to support the regions.

                                The minister made the comment: ‘The CLP want to move people to the Stuart Highway’. What a load of rubbish! That is exactly what the shire model is. Macdonnell, Central Desert, Barkly, Roper Gulf, Victoria Daly, East Arnhem, West Arnhem, Tiwis - all on the Stuart Highway. They are all based on the Stuart Highway. Groote Eylandt should have its own council. What about supporting the Warlpiri as one – Anmatjere, Daly? We are not being prescriptive about our approach; it is all about consultation, as the member for Nelson said. We are going to consult. We are not going to come out with: ‘This is our exact model’. We are going to go to the community after the election and say: ‘What do you think the new model should look like?’

                                We are providing security to those people who currently work in shires. We know the SSMs work hard. The people in the head offices work hard, like the member for Katherine’s wife. She works hard in the shire office in Katherine. This is not about those people in a negative sense; we will provide security for those people. However, we need to have a model that supports the regions, acknowledges the cultural connection, and does not disenfranchise people - along with a whole stack of other things that have gone on in the background which I acknowledge. Plus, the removal of Labor support for outstations is driving people off country into town. That is what is causing much of the problem. So, when people stand up and say, ‘How dare you say toxic?’ talk to the people. The people hate the shires.

                                Whether the shires have not marketed properly, or Labor has done the wrong model, that is something to be looked into. However, the fact remains they are hated. That is why the Country Liberals will get rid of these toxic shires - not because of the people working in them like the poor shire service managers who have to fill out a purchase order and send it to head office so they can buy a new pen, and it takes two weeks to get a new pen or a pencil to write on a notepad.

                                The shire managers at the local level are all complaining. The GBMs are complaining - and I am not here to talk about government staff - but, most importantly, the people are complaining.

                                The Country Liberals have committed to getting rid of the shires. We are not going throw the baby out with the bath water - exactly what the member for Nelson said. Some areas will need more correction than others, no doubt. Some are not in as bad a way as others. However, clearly, something needs to happen. Labor should have actioned this. For the minister to have some sort of a hissy fit and be all angry - she has practised that well, looking straight at the Speaker and trying to be direct. She said: ‘How dare we?’ Talk to the member for Daly who, it is alleged, was in Wadeye on Friday telling his constituents that he wants to get rid of the shires because he hates them and he wants a regional council model. Or the allegation that there is going to be a meeting tomorrow in Peppimenarti where the same thing is going to happen with the minister.

                                She said we are the bad guys here, but we are responding to the needs of the community. From all the conversations I have heard and I understand are going on, the members opposite in Labor are following what we are saying and going out and promoting getting rid of the shires themselves, because they recognise the political damage that is being caused.

                                It is politically damaging for Labor because they have not addressed the issue of the shires in the short-term previously, so the Country Liberals have responded to the needs of the community, and we will get rid of these shires. We will move to a regional approach. We will support the community’s needs. We will support the community’s desires. We will provide security for those people working in shires right now. We will ensure we build the Northern Territory, we build the regions, and we build the future of the Northern Territory.

                                Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Madam Deputy Speaker, I support this MPI. I have travelled my whole electorate and spoken to nearly everyone in my electorate about the shires. What they have told me is their voice has been taken away; the model is just too big. I went to Docker River. When we talk about the structure, what we need to emphasise here is the fact that the social connection, the interaction that people had before, is gone. Where people used to go into the office and say: ‘Can you ring up the hospital to find out how my mum is?’, or ‘Can you ring up the gaol to make an appointment for us to go in and see a prisoner?’, or ‘Can you ring up Yirara College, or St John’s, or Wiltja, or Worawa in Victoria to see how the kids are going?’ They have lost that interaction with people.

                                I take this opportunity to say that this side of the House will speak on behalf of the voiceless who have told us there are terrible things happening inside the shires, where they have lost their voice, where there is no power left for these people any more.

                                When I went to Docker River, Pastor Howard Smith told me: ‘We cannot even get into the front of the office anymore. These people just do not listen to us’. If you go to Imanpa, it is the same thing. The shires are just too big. Maybe the reforms this side of the House will do will be bringing the culture, the law, and the language back.

                                I also acknowledge Fran and Mr Tapsell sitting up there. However, these people do not have to live on the communities. They can have their opinion, but they do not live out in Kintore. They do not live out at Ampilatwatja where the services are not provided to these people. They can be commentating on the radio but they are not the beneficiaries of the poverty and the misery these people live in; the fact the services are not being delivered. You can put that book up - no problems about that ...

                                Dr Burns: Good.

                                Ms ANDERSON: I will pick up on that interjection. You kept that hidden as well. Do not forget, I know where the bodies are buried …

                                Dr Burns: Do you?

                                Ms ANDERSON: Yes, so I suggest you just shut up.

                                Member interjecting.

                                Dr Burns: We have not started yet.

                                Ms ANDERSON: Bring it on, bring it on.

                                These people do not have to live out on the communities, so they can be commentators in any arena they want to. However, this House has to listen to the voices of the people - the people we are supposed to be listening to.

                                Last sittings, I asked the minister a question in Question Time: are you looking at some kind of review into the shires? That was an honest question I asked in Question Time, and the minister said no; they were not looking at a review of the structure. I asked that question specifically because, as a local member, I was going around hearing what people were saying.

                                I have been to Ampilatwatja. Got to Bonya where, minister, you are building a beautiful school. It is nearly finished now. It is a beautiful school, but the people who live there live without windows. They have air-conditioners inside the house - live without air-conditioners. You have kids, like Melanie, who is disabled, who live on the verandahs of those houses. So, do not just go for a photo opportunity when you open the school at Bonya. Make sure you introduce yourself to Melanie, and maybe camp with her on the verandah, so that Melanie can ask you for CDs of Slim Dusty, and ask you for writing pads and pens you can send back to her, because that is the simple things people want. People just want to be heard; that is what they want.

                                It is okay for anyone who is living outside of these communities to be commentators on ABC, in the NT News or the Centralian Advocate, but we have to be listening to the voice of those people. It is very important we listen to the voices of those people.

                                This side of the House is not talking about going back to the old system; we are talking about reforming it in a culturally appropriate way. If you have a look at the Western Desert, you have Docker River, Mutitjulu, Imanpa, Finke - one language, one family group, married into each other. Kintore, Mt Liebig, Papunya, Haasts Bluff - one family, married into each other, one language. Take the Central Desert Shire, where you have Kaititja and Alyawarra people in the same shire as Warlpiri people. These people do not even understand each other’s language. That is what we are trying to tell you. We have to be listening to the voices of those people out in the bush, not commentary by people who are not affected by a lack of service delivery, and that is what we are talking about.

                                As I said, Leader of Government Business, bring it on; if you want a fight, bring it on!

                                Discussion concluded.
                                ADJOURNMENT

                                Dr BURNS (Leader of Government Business): Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.

                                Mr McCARTHY (Barkly): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I wish to speak about a very lame and fragile adjournment from the member for Katherine last night.

                                In response to his challenge that I should speak, we have recently awarded a tender to local company Sinclair Knight Merz, to develop a new land use plan for the future growth of Katherine. Much of the background work to inform a land use plan consultation paper for Katherine has been completed by the Department of Lands and Planning, and the role of the consultants will be to build on this work and consult with the community, and particularly the Katherine Town Council.

                                I acknowledge Mayor Anne Shepherd who has lobbied me on a number of occasions on my visits to Katherine and has explained to me, with her staff, the importance of doing a new up-to-date land use plan for Katherine to support its growth. The Katherine Town Council is talking positive, but the shaky and lame approach last night, the negative spin from the CLP member - look at the vision, look at the Hansard – a cheap shot, once again no consultation and no understanding of what has been going on in your electorate, member for Katherine.

                                Since the Katherine Planning for the Future Forum in November 2008, the Department of Lands and Planning has undertaken background studies and will continue to work on the Katherine plan for the life of the project. Recent experience with the preparation of land use plans for Darwin, Weddell and Alice Springs demonstrates the benefits of involving independent consultants in drawing together the diverse range of opinion and interests of local government, various government agencies and community groups and interests.

                                The consultants appointed have demonstrated a commitment to skill development of local employees, and this project will create further opportunities for capacity building in both the private sector and the government. The appointed consultants also have the potential to build on local knowledge which has been acquired as a result of recent transport studies undertaken in the Katherine region. I look forward to the completion of this project which will then be placed on public exhibition.

                                I would like to walk the members of the House through a recent visit I had to Katherine. I spent the weekend there and did a tour of Northern Territory Labor government projects that have been rolling out in Katherine and the region over a long time, and it has been fantastic to see them progress. Since I do not hear anything positive, I will take the opportunity to tell the House about it.

                                I was fortunate enough to open October Business Month on behalf of the minister and was able to tell constituents of Katherine about the Katherine urban enhancement program and how I had been visiting the town for a couple of years watching it eventuate; and about the Katherine Regional Cultural Precinct, an incredible project which will guide Katherine’s cultural development and bring that town together like never before. One of the highlights of working on the site and learning from the contractors are 15 apprentices - with all the subbies and tradies put together, 15 Katherine apprentices working on the incredible piece of infrastructure.

                                There is the Cadel Evans bicycle path - what a story that is - and the land release program in Katherine. I was able to talk to constituents about 39 lots of land supported by government that have provided for growth in Katherine …

                                Mr Westra van Holthe: The first time you have released land in Katherine in your entire tenure.

                                Mr McCARTHY: I pick up on the interjection; more negativity from the local member. This week we have talked about working with the Australian government - a new sobering-up shelter supported in an in-kind way by the people of the Barkly and Tennant Creek; a renal dialysis centre - I looked at the site and …

                                Mr Westra van Holthe: It was not in-kind. You had to kill your project to pay for the one in Katherine.

                                Madam SPEAKER: Order! Order!

                                Mr McCARTHY: … and it will be another great facility for Katherine. I talked to the constituents in Katherine about the regional nature and the challenges of the region and compared it to Tennant and the Barkly. I also talked about the opportunities of being in a region. When we talk about partnering up with the Australian government there is a $1.45m upgrade of Jasper Creek crossing to provide better access during the Wet Season, including the Kidman Springs Research Station, Yarralin and the VRD communities. The upgrade included the demolition of the existing reinforced concrete culvert and construction of a new single lane bridge. A large cost saving was achieved by recycling old bridge beams from the Victoria Highway flood plain project.

                                The $1.6m upgrade to Illawarra Creek bridge will provide better capacity to carry large trucks. The upgrade included the demolition of the single lane bridge and installation of new beams, an asphalt surface and guard rails. The upgrade now caters for double deck trucks, and is set to benefit the Northern Territory livestock industry. Also, $9m to the Cullen River bridge to provide better flood immunity. The upgrade includes raising the new bridge 2 m higher than the existing bridge and provides overtaking opportunities. In total, more than 35 job opportunities were created for local tradies, including three apprenticeships and seven Indigenous employees. Work is being finalised to the Cullen River bridge and is expected to be completed by the end of October.

                                The $1.5m upgrade of the Jasper Creek bridge is funded by the Territory government. The $1.6m upgrade to Illawarra Creek bridge is jointly funded by the Territory government and the Australian government. The $9m Cullen River bridge is funded by the federal government; and next year we see the King River bridge.

                                It is wonderful to tell this story on behalf of the member for Katherine.

                                The member for Katherine is on shaky ground with his lame adjournment last night. A waste of taxpayers’ dollars and a waste of this House’s time when the member for Katherine made the statement:
                                  Let’s face it, I could probably cut and paste a few things out of these documents, build that as a base to some more contemporary information, and produce a land use plan. I would not need to spend $213 000 to do it.

                                He was waving a land use plan from 1991 and one from 2001. That lines him up with the Country Liberal Party policy, that is for sure, because they dusted off a 20-year land use plan for the greater Darwin region, a great old chestnut, did some cut and paste, drew a few new pictures, and pushed it out for the Territory. Then they wondered why they did not get any comment, why they did not get any media, why they did not get any reaction. This guy summed it up when he told intelligent, hard-working and creative public servants and private consultants that he could do the job with a cut and paste. I bought a packet of crayons for him because he might like to colour it in when he finishes his cut and paste. What a disgrace!

                                Importantly, at the end of my speech opening October Business Month, I spoke with a number of constituents. One constituent came to me privately and said that she was very happy I was there talking up Katherine and talking up the region. I will not share the personal comments she made about the local member. By the way, she is a supporter of yours, but she did make an interesting comment: ‘I do not know you from a bar of soap, mate. I do not know much about you, but you are in our town and our region, talking it up. I liked the speech’. Nothing really about the speech, it was about constituents hearing the truth and hearing the real story and celebrating the real story. When constituents start to hear the real story and not the spin, then we get some balance in the argument.

                                So, get real, member for Katherine. I have heard some of your adjournments and some of them are great. I like adjournments and I listen to them. Last night, listening to yours, I was extremely disappointed. It was lame, it was light, and it was shallow. I watched your body language. You stumbled around and you really went out of your way to make it negative, to try to drag something down.

                                There is a story and take it where you like, but I was really proud to tell your constituents what is happening under the Henderson Labor government …

                                Mr ELFERINK: A point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker! The minister well knows his comments should be directed through the Chair.

                                Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, I am sure he does.

                                Ms LAMBLEY (Araluen): Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight I would like to talk about the relationship between Qantas and Alice Springs.

                                Alice Springs has just one national passenger airline that transports people from Alice Springs around Australia. We have just one national carrier serving the whole population of Alice Springs and the Central Australian surrounds, which includes approximately 40 000 people. With Tiger withdrawing its services from Alice Springs mid-year, we are beholden to one airline now, which is Qantas. We are at the mercy, literally, of one airline, the Flying Kangaroo.

                                Over the past few weeks we have seen an impasse in negotiations between the unions and Qantas over pay and conditions for their workers which has caused major disruption to hundreds of flights throughout Australia. It has been estimated that over 500 flights have been cancelled in the past few weeks, with rolling strikes and union action threatening to cause even more disruption to Qantas flights in the coming months.

                                What we are seeing is the unfolding of, potentially, a major disaster when it comes to the future of airlines in Australia. This morning on news stories throughout Australia we heard that Qantas has suggested they may be forced to cut jobs if the rolling strike action by the unions continues. People may lose their jobs; services will be cut; people throughout Australia will not only be unable to get to where they need to go but, due to Qantas flight disruptions and cancellations, it will cause major disruptions to every part of their life. Political and economic analysts are predicting that Qantas could suffer irreparable damage.

                                Qantas may have to take extreme action to pull their business back from the brink. Qantas may be forced to make decisions about the future operations of their business that will impact on people across Australia, from coast to coast, desert to desert, regional centre to regional centre. This is potentially a looming disaster for all Australians.

                                Taking all this into account, the Northern Territory parliament needs to take action now on what the potential impact the diminishing, downsizing, demise, or deterioration of Qantas services may have, particularly on the township of Alice Springs. What will happen to Alice Springs if Qantas goes down the gurgler? What will happen to Alice Springs if Qantas cuts its flights and services to Alice Springs under this enormous pressure from the unions? In a word, Alice Springs will be well and truly sunk; literally up the creek without a paddle, if Qantas was to go down.

                                Those of us who were in Alice Springs 10 years ago when Ansett met its demise will remember the distress it caused to not only the staff and customers of Ansett, but the whole economy of the Alice Springs region. It took a long time to recover; we may never have recovered from the demise of Ansett in Alice Springs. People rely extraordinarily heavily on Qantas in Alice.

                                The airline industry is quite vulnerable; we know this from the rise and fall of many airlines over the years, including Ansett, as I have just mentioned. These airlines are not bulletproof. They are businesses like any business, and they have a breaking point. The question needs to be asked: what would Alice Springs be like without Qantas; without our only national passenger airline? Alice Springs would not have hundreds of people travelling to and from Central Australia every day; our tourism industry would crumble; our residents would not be able to fly interstate to attend meetings, funerals, weddings, parties, and business functions - the normal practices of anyone living in any part of the world.

                                The people of Alice Springs would be stuck. The only way out of town would be by road, rail, or expensive charter flight. Alice Springs could suffer immensely if Qantas was to pull its flights in and out of Alice Springs. The economy and the quality of life of people in Alice Springs would take a complete and utter battering.

                                The federal Opposition Leader, Mr Tony Abbott, came out in the media last Friday and called on the unions to use caution in how they proceed with their industrial action. The federal Opposition Leader, Mr Tony Abbott, came out and warned of the potential disaster that may emerge if the unions put too much pressure on Qantas. Mr Abbott knows the fragility of the airline system; the federal Opposition Leader, Mr Tony Abbott, understands how dependent towns like Alice Springs are on Qantas; he knows people in regional and remote areas of Australia may suffer greatly if Qantas withdraws services. So why has the Northern Territory government not gone into bat to defend and protect Alice Springs and Central Australia from this potential disaster?

                                Tonight, we heard on the ABC news that the unions have undertaken to ease their industrial action against Qantas over the next three weeks. This is a short reprieve, but their intention is to ease their industrial action, not to completely suspend their action, for just three weeks. The threat is still there.

                                Alice Springs is still very vulnerable. So why has the Northern Territory Chief Minister, the Minister for Tourism, or the Minister for Central Australia, not come out and publicly warned the unions off like the federal Opposition Leader, Mr Tony Abbott, did? Why have they not warned the unions off creating major social and economic distress and even disaster for the people of Central Australia? Why have we heard nothing from the Northern Territory government on this issue that could potentially break Alice Springs? Why? Because this Labor government does not care about Alice Springs. They never have, and they never will. They will never stand up and defend, protect, or go into battle for Alice Springs. They would rather ignore, neglect, and disregard the issues that are important to the people of Alice Springs.

                                I call upon the Northern Territory Chief Minister, the Minister for Central Australia, and the Minister for Tourism to speak out on behalf of Alice Springs and warn the unions of the potential disaster they are creating for the people of Alice Springs by their industrial action against Qantas. I cannot stress enough how serious this problem is.

                                Mr HAMPTON (Stuart): Madam Deputy Speaker, last night I spoke in the adjournment about my trip through the Western Mac region and Watarrka and Uluru, and I will continue tonight on that visit to inform the House.

                                I was talking about the Watarrka National Park, and I acknowledge the rangers there, Cherie Hunt, Garth Neilson and Ross Nowland, three enthusiastic park rangers who are committed to conserving the biodiversity of the park, educating visitors and maintaining the values of Watarrka. The fire loads there have been substantial, and those three rangers in particular have worked tirelessly over recent weeks to control some of those fires. It was great to go with them to the canyon and listen to them talk about some of the issues they face, particularly with visiting tourists, and the exciting plans they have for future walks around the canyon

                                I acknowledge and thank Gary Weir from Parks and Wildlife who accompanied me on the visit, particularly through the parks of Owen Springs, Finke Gorge National Park and Watarrka. He did a fantastic job and we had some great chats about his job and about the jobs of our rangers out there on country.

                                I would particularly like to thank all those other professional members in the Parks and Wildlife section of my department of NRETAS and pay tribute to their hard work.

                                I was pleased to attend a celebration at Watarrka. For those who do not know, it is about 450 km southwest of Alice Springs and was part of my journey through Western MacDonnell and the Watarrka/Uluru region. I was pleased to reopen the Watarrka School, formerly known as Lilla School. It is a small, remote school within the Lasseter Group School; nonetheless, it has some great spirit and many fantastic supporters. Watarrka School is a great example of people committed to education and working together to make their dream of enhanced student outcomes a reality in remote areas.

                                The new Watarrka School, formerly known as Lilla School, was closed for about 15 years, and during that time the children accessed School of the Air. Last year, it was the families from the communities of Lilla, Ulpanyali and Munmorah who worked together to get their school reopened for the start of this year. In April, through their discussions with Education department workers and their efforts, it was their idea to rename it to Watarrka to reflect all those three communities in the region they live in.

                                The school has undergone refurbishment which includes two classrooms with the capacity to cater for up to 30 students from Transition to Year 6. The celebration was well attended by many local families and children from those three communities in particular, and many other visitors attended the opening and I would like to acknowledge them. The Lasseter Group School Principal, Geoff Hobson; teachers Wilma and Neville Lambert; the traditional owners, Sadie Williams, Vera Williams and Sonja Williams; the General Manager of the nearby Kings Canyon Resort, Daniel Boissevain, and it was great to have dinner with Daniel on the night I was there and listen to some of the exciting plans they have for the resort; and also Reg Ramsden from Outback Tours.

                                I thank the school community, the traditional owners and the members of those three communities for the invitation to reopen their new school. I wish them all the best for the remainder of the year. I am sure they are going to grow further and learn more in a great environment where every child, every day goes to school.

                                I also acknowledge some of the other schools I visited, particularly those in my electorate, to attend Building the Education Revolution openings. I acknowledge the community of Lajamanu and the fantastic facilities they have; it was a really great event. Pigeon Hole was the last one I went to and it was great to see the students and teachers from Pigeon Hole School here this week. They had a fantastic visit to the big smoke. I am sure the kids will go home with plenty of stories.

                                I visited Amoonguna School with the Chief Minister, and also the health facilities. The health clinic is fantastic. They have great staff and are doing some great things for the community and working with the community. They also have a renal facility as well. For those members of the House who do not know, Amoonguna was established in 1963 as a government reserve to provide accommodation for Aboriginal people in close proximity to the town of Alice Springs. The community is 15 km south of Alice Springs with a population of around 350 people.

                                It was great to meet the school Principal, Cherie Gibbens. Her parents were visiting from Darwin and it was great to speak to them and hear some of the stories about their adventures. Cherie spoke to us about the challenges; she was quite open about it and it was great to hear. Very proudly, she spoke of some of the achievements being made by her students, particularly in the areas of numeracy and literacy.

                                The health centre currently employs a health centre manager, two nurses, two trainee Aboriginal Health Workers and several other support staff. We were able to meet the Health Clinic Manager, Carly Pearson, and some of her team. The clinic is a fantastic facility opened in August 2007 and has very modern facilities, including seven consultation rooms.

                                We also met the acting Shire Service Manager. There have been many discussions about shires tonight in the MPI, but one of the shire service managers doing a good job is Michael Liddle, a local man from Alice Springs. I go back a long way with Michael. He showed us around the community, including the store. We also met team leader of the trades, Joe Rawson, and I am grateful for that assistance on the day.

                                Another school I visited during my trip through the West MacDonnell Ranges and Nyrripinyali was the school of Mutitjulu. They are doing some fantastic things there. Every Child, Every Day is the mantra we go on about in the House, but Mutitjulu is one school that has increased its attendance; it has gone from 78% to 96%, a fantastic effort from the community of Mutitjulu. It was great to visit the school and see some of the great work they are doing.

                                Finally, rounding off with schools, at Braitling school in Alice Springs, I had the pleasure last week of attending the recognition ceremony for the Braitling Primary School’s new facilities under the federal government’s BER. The hall and multipurpose learning area were officially opened by the federal member for Lingiari, Warren Snowdon. Braitling school received $2.38m for the facilities from the federal government’s BER program for the hall and security fencing.

                                It was great to see and hear what a difference these new facilities are making to the school, particularly the fence. The school is experiencing a reduction in vandalism. It was a very proud moment for the school. The hall was decked out with artwork and the kids were very excited. I have been there a couple of times now and the school hall has been very well used. The students spoke about how they were utilising the hall and had even made a DVD highlighting what a difference it was making to their school and all the different activities that were being conducted there, such as gymnastics, cooking, and school assemblies. The facility is also used after hours, which a real bonus for the community of Braitling; I understand even the netball team is using it.

                                Support was shown by a large number of parents and supporters who turned out for the BER ceremony last Friday night to enjoy the celebrations. I acknowledge the young school captains, Georgia O’Neill and Marcus Cohen, who did a fantastic job welcoming everyone and doing the emceeing. The school choir put on a great show. I acknowledge the Principal, Sue Crowe, who said the fencing has made a huge difference to the school’s security and its finances. The bill for vandalism has declined from tens of thousands of dollars to a few hundred dollars. The project has been a real economic benefit to the Alice Springs business community, particularly Probuild which, I understand, employed around 50 workers on the construction of the new hall.

                                Madam Speaker, it was a great event. However, the absence of the member for Braitling was noted. He was not at the event; I am unsure why. As local members it is important that we get out to these great community events to celebrate with schools and families and parents. I am unsure if he decided not to come on grounds of principle and what Tony Abbott says, but BER projects have been fantastic in Central Australia and throughout the Northern Territory.

                                Mr ELFERINK (Port Darwin): Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish to express my deep concern about the flagging condition of the Northern Territory economy. Whilst we had the results from the Access Economics report which hit the public domain in recent days, the Northern Territory government has released figures relating to the building activity occurring in the Northern Territory. These figures are nothing short of shocking and dreadful. I am left with a grave sense of misgiving as a result of the numbers I have now seen.

                                The Northern Territory government quietly placed onto the website of the Northern Territory Treasury the June quarterly report for the year 2011, and the overall figure change on the original terms for the Northern Territory, which is the full comparison of the previous financial year to the financial year reported on ending in the June quarter of 2011, is a collapse in building of 8.9%. In terms of residential work done it is a fall of 8.2%, and non-residential work, a fall of 5.7%.

                                My concerns are even more profound when you compare the latest quarter with the same quarter last year. The June quarter for the year 2010 was 31% higher than the last June quarter, which means that there has been a fall of 31% when you compare the June quarter of 2010 to the June quarter of 2011.
                                If you take those figures for the Northern Territory in terms of houses, the comparator between the June quarter 2010 and the June quarter 2011 has seen a fall of 41.1% in houses constructed. There is nothing, with one or two exceptions, but minus signs in front if all of these figures.

                                If you compare the year-on-year comparison of a fall of 8.9% overall, the Australian economy posted a flat result. If you look at residential building work done, the collapse of 8.2% in residential building work done in the Northern Territory compared with Australia, Australia saw an increase of 5.4%. In terms of non-residential building work done there has been a sharp decline of 5.7%; Australia has seen a non-residential improvement of 6% growth in that area.

                                It is no small wonder that the Treasurer has remained silent about these issues. This is not a case of talking the Territory down - this is the reason we are losing so many jobs from the Northern Territory economy. These jobs will be very difficult to replace, and even if the promise boom of the future that the Treasurer talks about materialises, many of the jobs needed to fill those vacancies will not be able to be sourced locally.

                                Moreover, I continue to be utterly dismayed that the Treasurer, in the face of such figures, and she will have known about these figures at the time that she said this, can only be accused of being deceptive in her comments when she continues to say that the Northern Territory economy is strong. It is not showing signs of strength. These types of figures show a definite weakness. I am deeply concerned that the Treasurer continues to mislead Territorians about the condition of the Northern Territory economy because it means she will be positioning the government for growth during the current period. The fact is that it is not a growth period; it is a period of sharp contraction.

                                This is just not about percentages and figures. This is about the ability of people to put food on their table; feed and clothe their children; and make sure their families stay intact. These are shocking figures. I am deeply concerned that the Treasurer refuses to acknowledge how serious these numbers are. I am deeply concerned that this government continues to ignore this problem which is as plain as the nose on your face.

                                I invite the Chief Minister to take a walk down the mall and through shopping centres around Darwin and the other communities, and ask the Chief Minister to explain why the economy is going so well, in his opinion, when so many shops are now empty.

                                It is incomprehensible that this government continues to take such an arrogant approach. This arrogant approach is reflected in its answers to the House today, and its attitudes towards the House overall. The government has now had two motions calling upon it to do things in this House and, on both occasions, the government has refused to pursue the directives of those motions despite the fact that the will of the majority of Territorians has urged them to do what the House has told them to do.

                                The arrogant response from the Chief Minister today to simply dismiss yesterday’s motion as merely stupid is to, by inference, say that the majority of Territorians are stupid. It is not a reasonable position for the Chief Minister to take; government is answerable to this House and even the relationship I do not doubt with the majority of members will continue to decay, including the member for Nelson, if the government continues to flaunt the resolutions of this House.

                                This government is not beyond or above this House and, if they think they are, that arrogance means they will ultimately pay an enormous penalty. The arrogance I refer to in terms of the motions they are ignoring, passed by this House, are now reflected in the way they are conducting themselves in the face of these awful and dreadful results in the building activity document released by Treasury. This government’s incapacity to respond is clear.

                                I return to one other component of this particular report. We hear endlessly that the Northern Territory government is spending in these difficult times. That is not reflected by the public expenditure figures and, in comparison with the same quarter last year to this year, public expenditure has fallen 30.2%. In an effort to be fair, I will point out that the year-on-year comparison over that period is 0.6% increase.

                                However, the quarter-to-quarter comparison of minus 30.2% is of grave concern because the money is not being spent right now when it is needed. In the last quarter, that fall of 30% has amplified the pain in our community. The answers from this government in response to these issues do nothing but amplify the lack of credibility they have in the face of public scrutiny, in relation to their attitudes, their arrogance, and their dismissiveness of the pain that is occurring in our community at the moment.

                                Mr HENDERSON (Wanguri): Madam Deputy Speaker, on a bright note, I was pleased to help celebrate the Nightcliff Family Centre’s 30th anniversary last week. In Cunjevoi Street in Nightcliff, the Family Centre has been looking after pre-school children for over 30 years. It is a fantastic facility, and a fantastic part of the Nightcliff community. The centre has come a long way from the post Cyclone Tracy demountable that originally started with a roster of parents participating in a roster of duties in return for care.

                                The philosophy of community-based care continues today and it offers a unique childcare experience where you can be involved in the care that your child receives. It was great to be there, to speak with the mums, and the workers who work there; it had a really great community feel about it. I also thank Bendigo Bank representatives who were there on the day and helped contribute, with the Northern Territory government, to new play equipment for the family centre. That was really well received by the kids, in particular, who had a great deal of fun playing on that equipment.

                                The local member, my friend and colleague, the member for Nightcliff, could not be there on the particular day; she was busy with business as the Speaker. The member for Nightcliff is a great supporter of the family centre, and I was more than pleased to give the member’s apologies. She does a huge amount of work to support the childcare centre and I know that support is really appreciated.

                                I thank President, Kate Race, and her committee who work so hard to keep the family centre on track. It was great to meet Kate and some of her committee, who do an amazing job.

                                I pay particular tribute to a couple of people who have worked at the childcare centre for a long time. First of all, Caterina Venturin, who has been there for as long as the centre. So for 30 years Caterina has been caring for children in Nightcliff. I would have thought over those 30 years probably several thousand kids have been cared for by Caterina. She was saying to me that she is as happy and excited today doing the work she does as she was on the first day she started. She is a real legend. Irene Billias has been at the centre for 25 years. I would not have thought there would be another family childcare centre anywhere in the Northern Territory that would have two people who had contributed 55 years of service between them. Irene is also a legend there, and 25 years is enormous dedication to the Nightcliff Family Centre.

                                Talking to both Caterina and Irene, quite amazingly, some of the children they cared for 20 or so years ago are now mums, and they are caring for their children as well. I thank and congratulate Caterina and Irene for their dedication to children in Nightcliff over all those years.

                                To President, Kate Race and her committee, thank you for your commitment to looking after the children of Nightcliff; and to the Nightcliff Family Centre, happy 30th anniversary.

                                Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I put on record this evening my condolences and thanks to an old man I knew only late in his life, for five years, George Chaloupka, and to say thank you to Pina and his children.

                                Thank you to Pina for sharing George with everyone, all the friends. Lampe Street on Saturdays will never be the same again, Pina, going around having those cups of tea with you and George, and enjoying the conversations we had with George about the rock art and the old friends he had at Jabiru. Those people became his lifelong friends, and he often spoke about those people and how he was connected to them, and how he loved them. He shared that love and emotion, not just with them, but also with his family and the country around Jabiru.

                                I remember one Saturday sitting with George and he showed me photos of his journey, not just Jabiru, but also in Central Australia. He stood at the base of Ayers Rock with old Mr Nipper and Barbara Tjikaru. He travelled around Mount Wedge country in Central Australia not far from Papunya, between Papunya and Yuendumu, to have a look at sacred sites with my old uncle, with old Paddy Carroll. He had photos of my old uncle Paddy Carroll, my old Aunty Ruby and my cousins Ada and Emily. They had taken him to the rock hole of Mount Wedge to show him the old Tjungurrayi that stands up there as a guardian of that country.

                                He was a really special person. I cannot describe here the love he showed for Aboriginal people no matter where he went. The path that he crossed with anyone was always gentle, loving and kind, and his home was always open to people who had come from the Jabiru area. While he was in the hospice, the family and friends of his old friends came to the hospice to keep him company. They would see him often in the evenings to make him relax and make him go back to the times and spend time with their fathers.

                                I take this opportunity to put on the record that he was the most gracious, beautiful man I have ever met in my life.

                                As I said, I only spent a very small time knowing George, and I thank you again, Pina, for sharing him with us. I pass on my condolences to Pina and the children. I hope everything goes okay. Stay strong, having the strength George has left there for you, Pina.

                                Dr BURNS (Johnston): Madam Deputy Speaker, I inform the House of the wonderful 40th birthday celebrations for Jingili Primary School I attended on 2 September. It was a terrific community event to celebrate what is a truly fantastic local school at the heart of the Jingili community. Forty years is no small feat, and many Territorians have been fortunate to attend the school over the years. Many terrific Territorians have also worked at the school as teachers, principals and support staff.

                                To celebrate their 40 years, Jingili school planned a full day of events which started off with a special assembly I was delighted to attend, and was well attended by school students, staff, parents, grandparents and past staff members. The assembly’s emcees, students Melanie Lu and Shaquille Holloway did a terrific job in getting the formalities under way. Special guests included past Principal, Eva Lawler, who is still very well remembered by the older students at the school.

                                They had some videos of past students at the school and, if memory serves me well, one was the member for Port Darwin who spoke about the naming of the school houses at that time after astronauts. I am unsure if there was a Sputnik, but there was Gagarin and a whole range of things. He had very clear memories of his school days, which was fantastic, together with many other people who attended the school. It was a great spirit for the 40th celebrations.

                                Special gold awards were received by Janelle Ingles, Martin Kanzi, Daphne Cholakos, Shakira Hood, Erica Burmester and Isabela Charles. The assembly was also treated to a special digital presentation by the Year 6 class who interviewed past students, and I have mentioned the member for Port Darwin and his early school days. Special mention must go to Rhianna and Malini Stephens for working with a group of Year 6 students to interview past students and staff to create the digital presentation. It was enjoyed by everyone.

                                Other highlights included the performance by the school of The Beat choir singing Imagine, and they led the school in singing Happy Birthday. Zoe and Bella Davis played a duo of Happy Birthday on their recorder and flute. Year 4/5 Magoulias led the school in dancing Nutbush City Limits which was very action packed with much movement in their dancing and they did it with much energy.

                                The assembly was also the first opportunity for the school to unveil their new outdoor learning area delivered under BER. It is a terrific addition to the school and has modernised the facility. The school also had an open morning, which featured a commemorative display of photographs, yearbooks and newspaper clippings over the 40 years. It was very interesting to see the fashion changes in the teachers, particularly the male teachers - there were mullets, maroon pants, socks, horizontal stripes. It was very interesting indeed.

                                A tree-planting ceremony was held with 40 trees planted to celebrate the school’s 40 years. I was pleased to donate one. Lunchtime featured a school picnic, and later that night the school held a community 1970s disco. It was a worthy celebration of four decades of history.

                                Events like this are not possible without the hard work of staff and volunteers to make them happen. Thank you to the 40th birthday organising committee parents: Tracy Rowlands; Rhianna Suttie-Gunson, Jane Fryar, Carol Kerr, Ambrie Tracy and Malini Stephens. Staff: Principal, Carin Symonds, and teacher Deneil Sachs.

                                Special thanks also to Jane Fryar for making a huge cake to feed the whole school; Robert and Brigitte Grahl from Wolpers Grahl for organising all the holes for the trees; Lee and Ambrie Tracy for marking the tree planting and also digging some holes for the trees; Carol Kerr, Bridget Riggs and Hazel Kerr for cooking meals for everyone for the 1970s disco; and Tiann and Steve Carter for donating the coffee machine for the 1970s disco; and Rhianna Suttie-Gunson and Deneil Sachs for sorting through the boxes of photos and other memorabilia to create some great displays.

                                Congratulations to Jingili Primary School on its 40th birthday. Well done to all who organised the wonderful celebration. I look forward to seeing many more achievements and students graduating from Jingili Primary School in the coming years.

                                Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
                                Last updated: 04 Aug 2016