2007-04-19
Madam Speaker Aagaard took the Chair at 9.30 am.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the Speaker’s Gallery of Hon Nick Griffiths MLC, President of the Western Australia Legislative Council. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I also draw your attention to the presence in the public gallery of students from Year 7 from the Traeger campus of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, together with teachers Andrew McKie, Cameron Neyland, Helen Smythe and Greg Thorpe. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
MINISTERIAL REPORTS
Drought Assistance for
Central Australia Pastoralists
Mr NATT (Primary Industry and Fisheries): Madam Speaker, I would like to update the House on the continuing impacts of drought in some areas of Central Australia, and report on what this government is doing to support pastoralists through these difficult times.
The recent rains in the Alice Springs district have provided some relief to pastoralists currently affected by drought. However, the rains did not affect all areas, and there are still pastoral properties which have not received drought-breaking rains. The national agricultural monitoring system identifies that the areas to the south and east of Alice has received extremely low effective rainfall over the past five years.
In 2006, 12 pastoralist properties in the Alice Springs region were declared to be in severe or second-year drought and, therefore, qualified under the Northern Territory government’s drought assistance arrangements. Under the Northern Territory Drought Assistance Scheme, the options available to producers include stock freight subsidies, grants for interest rate subsidies or loans. A freight subsidy of up to 100% of costs for destocking or restocking is offered – up to $20 000 per year. The subsidy can apply for the return of breeding stock up to 24 months after the end of the severe drought. Pastoralists can also apply to have pastoral lease payments waived or held over.
In late 2006, I met with the federal minister for Agriculture, together with a delegation from the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association, to discuss an application for exceptional circumstances assistance for the drought-affected regions to the south and east of Alice Springs. My department, in consultation with the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association, prepared a comprehensive application based on climatic information for Central Australia. The application included a number of case studies to demonstrate that the pastoral industry in Central Australia is viable, and that the current drought is beyond what pastoralists could reasonably expect to manage.
The Northern Territory’s exceptional circumstance application covers the drought event between October 2003 and September 2006. I am happy to report the Commonwealth minister has considered the Northern Territory government’s application made on behalf of pastoralists, and the views of the industry, and has recently agreed that a prima facie case exists for exceptional circumstance support for an area to the south and east of Alice Springs.
The next step in the exceptional circumstance assessment process is for the National Rural Advisory Committee to tour the region before preparing its recommendations to the Commonwealth minister on whether full exceptional circumstances should be granted. If successful, further business support will become available to pastoralists within the declared area, including interest rate subsidies. This will assist pastoralists with up to a 50% interest rate subsidy in the first year, and then up to 80% in the second. These arrangements would be administered by the Territory government with 90% of the costs to be recouped from the Commonwealth government.
My Department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Mines is working with pastoralists to ensure a robust approach for managing climatic variability. Programs such as the Territory’s Pastoral Water Enhancement Scheme and the FarmBiz serve to build self-reliance and capacity in the industry.
Recent rains in the drought-affected areas have resulted in inundation of large numbers of camels in the area to the south and east of Alice Springs. Pastoralists tell me that camels have dispersed in recent weeks. While the pet food industry is to examine the options for harvesting animals in Central Australia, this is an emerging environmental issue for Central Australia. Government will continue to work with pastoralists, the CLC, and interstate agencies in developing a coordinated solution to this national issue.
Madam Speaker, we recognise the serious impact of drought on pastoralists in Central Australia, and we will continue to support pastoralists while they recover from one of our worst droughts on record.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I understand the pressures of drought. In fact, it was as a result of droughts that caused me to leave the farm and, ultimately, end up standing here. The primary industry sector is often typified by being very self-reliant but, when it comes to extraordinary pressures out of their control, such as the withholding of rain from the skies, they begin to speak. They do not speak at all times; they like to sort their own business out. However, when they speak, I would expect that they would be listened to with excessive closeness and sensitivity.
I was at the Cattlemen’s Association AGM. The core message that came through that presentation and the questions from the floor was a request that you, minister, understand those who are carrying excessively heavy loads in working off the land and that you represent them. There are two core issues that they seek your representation on. One is the roads but, more importantly, is local government reform. Though it may not be, as you described at the time, in the domain of other ministers, it is, in fact, your position at that table to represent their best interests. There is not a lot we can do about rain. There are some aspects that you describe regarding trucking subsidies and lease payments being deferred, and engagement of other agencies, both federal and local. However, it is those two core issues of local government reform and attention to the road system along with, ultimately, knowing that you are going to be standing up for the best interests of the cattle industry.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, again, the member for Blain has stolen my thunder. Some of the issues he raised, minister, have been repeated throughout the Territory, the local government reforms in particular. The question is whether they are going to add another burden to pastoralists who are already struggling. They need to have that clarified and to be involved in the process. They feel as though they have been excluded, as the member for Nelson has been saying over and over again. When you think about it, many of our pastoralists maintain their own roads and the roads into their properties so you must be careful that you are not going to ask them to contribute even further for that.
It is good to see that some pastoralists have diversified because they realise cattle is not the only the thing they need to do. However, you should be addressing the problem of camels on some of these pastoral properties and national parks. Pastoralists would appreciate some support and planning for how they can control these camels, and use them to their best advantage. Let us face it: there is a product that could be utilised. We are all pleased that they get drought assistance. We all have to pray a little harder for rain.
It raises the issue of making sure water tanks are subsidised. Already, these pastoralists rely on bores, but we should make sure that we capture rain that does fall, not just in pastoral properties but in communities. Government should heavily subsidise implementation of water tanks. That is an added bonus for them, and I am glad the minister for Environment is helping.
Minister, I think you are listening and I hope you continue to listen to these pastoralists because they are a good part of our economy.
Mr NATT (Primary Industry and Fisheries): Madam Speaker, I thank the members for Blain and Braitling for their constructive comments. Yes, we do understand the problems for pastoralists in Central Australia. They have had a hard time down here lately, and we are listening to them. I most certainly am.
The member for Blain raised the interest from the Cattlemen’s Association AGM in roads and local government issues. The government has provided over $30 000 to the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association to engage a consultant to assist them to prepare a submission on this issue. I know that the Minister for Local Government has been working closely with the Cattlemen’s Association in consultation to ensure that they are working through those issues. They have a member on the committee also.
As for the roads, again, I know our minister is working very hard to ensure that roads come up to standard. We have a huge road budget of about $130m …
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, your time as expired.
Dr BURNS (Health): Madam Speaker, today I report on our plan to reduce the wait for elective surgery in the Northern Territory. This government has increased the health budget by 64% and employed over 270 extra full-time equivalent nurses and 100 full-time equivalent doctors since we came to government.
However, our health system, like all those across Australia and the western world, faces increasing demand. Elective surgery waiting lists are a matter of concern here, as they are for the public right across Australia. While it is heartening that the Northern Territory hospital system performs well compared with other jurisdictions in Australia in relation to elective surgery, we need to know that the numbers of those waiting for elective surgery are gradually falling. However, there is much more to do. Since being appointed as Health minister, I have made no secret of the fact that elective surgery waiting times need to be reduced.
Today, I would like to describe a number of initiatives specifically targeted to reduce the numbers waiting for elective surgery. According to the Commonwealth’s latest State of our Hospitals report, the Territory has the greatest demand for elective surgery in the country, with 37 admissions per 1000 people compared with a national average of 27 per 1000. Despite the higher demand, the median waiting time for elective surgery in the Northern Territory is 29 days, which is the same as the national level and better then New South Wales, Tasmania, South Australia and the ACT.
Management of the elective surgery waiting list is a complex and a difficult process, but it is important to note that elective surgery is adversely affected by increasing demand for emergency care. However, despite increasing demand on our hospital Emergency Departments, I am pleased that our elective surgery procedures have managed to keep pace.
The number of people on waiting lists has been stable for several years and is slowly trending down. In March last year, there were 3449 people on the elective surgery waiting list. As at 31 March 2007, there were 3143, which is a fall of 306 cases or 8.9% over the last year.
Despite these results, we need to make a concentrated effort to bring the numbers waiting for elective surgery down further. Today, I am pleased to highlight a targeted effort across our public hospitals to reduce waiting times for elective surgery. These initiatives are already under way, or will be very shortly. They include, first, the opening of a third operating theatre at Alice Springs from last week, in March 2007; a partnership that commenced on 2 April 2007 with Darwin Private Hospital to provide 10 beds, Monday to Friday, and five beds over the weekends for postoperative care; visiting ophthalmology and ENT services at Katherine Hospital; and, sponsoring visiting proceduralists at the smaller hospitals in Gove and Tennant Creek. These initiatives will be focused on those who have being waiting the longest for their elective surgery.
I also recently announced in Alice Springs a partnership between the Northern Territory government, the Australian government and the Fred Hollows Foundation for a blitz on eye surgery in Alice Springs. This will further reduce waiting times for eye surgery, with 40 patients planned to be treated in May 2007 and further episodes in September and November 2007.
With respect to the waiting times reduction initiatives I have just outlined, I am pleased to announce that Maureen Brittin, the Director of Nursing for Emergency and Critical Care at RDH, has been seconded to coordinate this activity across all Territory hospitals. Maureen Brittin is regarded as a very competent and well-respected nurse.
A clinical reference group has been formed comprising clinicians involved in surgery across all hospitals to oversee surgical efforts. I am confident that these initiatives will make a significant impact on reducing waiting times for elective surgery although, as I have said, progress with elective surgery depends on a complex range of issues, not least demand on our Emergency Departments. The aim of these initiatives is to cut elective surgery waiting lists by 20% over the next three to four months.
Madam Speaker, this is a significant initiative. It is something that I focused on as soon as I become Health Minister. There has been a lot of planning behind this, and I am confident that we will strive hard to reach these very significant targets.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, I welcome the minister’s report. I saw his media release of two days ago expressing the same points. We need to thank the Fred Hollows Foundation and the federal government for coming to assist the Northern Territory government to carry out as much eye surgery as possible. Obviously, that is going to make a huge difference to the numbers of people waiting for eye surgery and will effectively reduce the waiting list by 20% because of cataract and other eye surgery that is required.
I want the government to give me a commitment that the third theatre in Alice Springs Hospital will stay open and never be closed. They will not be able to promise me that; I know they cannot. Regarding waiting lists, three weeks ago, the news media rang to seek information from the government, and they went right around the block and told the media nothing about what has happened. What they did not state was they rang every patient in the Territory who is on the waiting list. Some had been waiting for more than 12 months. I suggest someone had died, or even gone interstate or elsewhere for surgery and, therefore, fell off the list. This is how the Northern Territory government proposes to reduce the list, by keeping people waiting for so long that they go elsewhere to look for remedies. That is what has happened here.
A member interjecting.
Dr LIM: Check your figures. The worst part of it all is that you still do not have enough beds. In fact, the Northern Territory has 2.8 beds per 1000 population, and the closest is News South Wales with 3.8 per 1000, the highest being Western Australia with 4.9 beds per 1000 people. You do not have enough beds, you do not have enough nurses, and that is the problem. You have bed block and, therefore, you can not treat elective surgery because you cannot get patients into hospitals.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for the update. It is good news. It is just a shame that we have to scream so loud sometimes to get your attention to the problems at the hospital. We have some exceptional medical practitioners in the Alice Springs Hospital. For too long we have been saying Darwin has been making decisions for us and we have not had the senior people here to make those decisions; they have had to go to Darwin. I would like you to update exactly what decision-making positions are now in Alice Springs other than the General Manager of the hospital. That has been the concern and frustration of everyone.
The initiative of the Fred Hollows Institute coming here is really important. You have to remember the demand on our hospital occurs because the primary health of many people is not as good as it should be. Do not attempt to fix some of our problems within our hospital regarding our waiting list, but make sure you also address the other problems to try to keep those waiting lists down; ensure that people attend hospital before it gets to the stage that it does.
Someone rang me yesterday and said they were on the waiting list for elective surgery and they were rung as part of this audit to find out whether they still required it or not. It seems to them as though you are trying to push people off the waiting list.
I have had success when someone has come to me. An example was a young girl whose mother had had bowel cancer and she wanted to have the tests for that. She had been put on the waiting list, even though it was quite urgent for her to have that because of her condition. With lobbying, yes, it was fast-tracked. I appreciate the hospital and the Minister for Health, but we should not have to bend over backwards to make these urgent cases come to the top of the list. Perhaps this whole question of elective surgery is frustrating for the person who is on that list, more so than you and I.
Dr BURNS (Health): Madam Speaker, I acknowledge the difficulties that people face when they are on elective surgery waiting lists. That is why, as I said, when I became minister, this was one of my first targets. This is a program that is going to bear fruit.
Regarding people being rung to find out what their situation is in regard to elective surgery waiting lists, they are simply being rung to be given the time to come in and have their elective surgery …
Dr Lim: Oh, rubbish!
Dr BURNS: For the member for Greatorex to assert that somehow, the reduction being proposed for elective surgery waiting lists is because of that is absolutely fatuous. That is why we are operating overnight in theatre in Alice Springs. That is why we have partnerships with …
Dr Lim interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Greatorex.
Dr BURNS: Procedures will actually be carried out. That 20% reduction is going to be welcomed by people, not carped at by the member for Greatorex.
Madam SPEAKER: As the Chief Minister comes to the Dispatch Box, honourable members I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Year 5 Living Waters Lutheran School students with teachers Hilary Saunders and Ben Martin. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, it is good that the member for Greatorex is writing letters to government because his boss does not.
Today I report on the progress of the Alice Springs Alcohol Management Plan. Alcohol is a major factor when it comes to crime and antisocial behaviour we are seeing in and around Alice Springs. I am pleased to report the initial feedback about the alcohol restrictions from licensees, police, the hospital and the wider community is encouraging.
In the first three months of alcohol restrictions, there has been an 11% decrease in the takeaway sales of pure alcohol. Serious assault charges have decreased, and there has been a significant reduction in the number of admissions to the Alice Springs Hospital for assault-related injures. While it is still too early to draw definitive conclusions from the data, it is reassuring to see presentations to the Emergency Department of Alice Springs Hospital for alcohol-related conditions are down in a number of areas. For example, data for the final quarter of last year, which coincides with the first three months of alcohol restrictions, compares favourably with the same period in 2005. People presenting with acute intoxication were down by 29%, alcohol gastritis down 12% and those presenting with acute pancreatitis down a whopping 43%. These are encouraging figures.
Alcohol restrictions are just one part of the alcohol management plan. We have placed a moratorium on the approval of new takeaway liquor licences, supermarkets will no longer be granted liquor licences and alcohol courts have been introduced. We are also looking at making community patrols more effective as a prevention and intervention tool, and that includes greater use of sobering-up shelters. Legislation has been put in place to allow individuals or organisations to apply for the declaration of both private and public dry areas. Alice Springs Council has their dry area application pending.
We are also examining strategies for takeaway liquor outlets including the ID-Eye system which will allow licensees, police and the justice system to better manage problem drinking. While we are making good progress, alcohol restrictions have produced some unintended consequences. The shift to lower volume alcohol products has resulted in a big increase in the amount of litter and glass in the town. Many of these areas are very public, and we are working with the town council and Tangentyere Council to address the issue.
The alcohol restrictions have also produced increased activity in supermarkets and shopping hubs outside the CBD area; in particular the north side of town is experiencing higher levels of antisocial behaviour. Let me assure the residents of North Side that police are responding with additional personnel and resources. Alice Springs now has a full quota of police, and earlier this week we were assured by senior police in Alice Springs that they have enough resources to do the job.
In addition to these assurances, yesterday Police Commissioner Paul White issued a public statement undertaking to maintain the full quota of police. With other initiatives like City Safe continuing, and the introduction of a social order task force, which is a dedicated team of police officers patrolling the CBD and other hot spots around town, I can assure businesses and residents that we are determined to protect your security and safety.
Another strategy is management of special events in Alice Springs. The recent NAB Cup is a good example. Events like this bring many people to town, which puts pressure on resources, particularly in the areas of police and health. Special measures were put in place for the match including extra Night Patrols, more police and special alcohol restrictions which were agreed to in partnership with licensees. The measures worked well and the match was a great success. Congratulations to everyone involved.
Madam Speaker, these are just some of the strategies from our alcohol management plan. We have received great support from the Alice Springs Town Council, the Chamber of Commerce, the tourism association, health service providers, licensees, Aboriginal leadership and the public service. I thank them all for their hard work. We know there are no easy solutions to the complex problem of excessive alcohol consumption but, by getting on the front foot and working with the Alice Springs community, I believe together we can make a real difference.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, we have to agree that alcohol has caused huge social problems in Alice Springs. We also know that a small portion of this population in Alice Springs is the cause of the alcohol problems across the board. When the Chief Minister talks about the hospital figures, what she omits is that more and more presentations to the hospital are women with trauma related to alcohol, and it still happens. The most interesting thing is that when the minister reports figures from the hospital, there appears constantly to be a discrepancy between what is reported by the police and the hospital. I wish the government would give us one set of accurate figures that we can all understand, rely on and believe in. At the moment, there is so much spin from this government that we cannot believe anything that they say.
The only thing that I would support this government on is the ID-Eye system. The ID-Eye system is the best thing that has been introduced by this government. I suggested that alcohol dependent people in Alice Springs should be given some sort of alcohol licence before they are permitted to buy alcohol. The ID-Eye system will go a long way to its dealing with those drunks. At the end of the day, you should not be penalising the whole of the community. There are many people on fixed incomes who would like to enjoy the benefits of alcohol. They cannot because of the way this government has, in an ad hoc way, introduced licensing controls that blocks out the whole town. It impacts on tourists and that impacts the whole town’s industry.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, the facts sound good - they really do, and, yes, there has been an improvement. However, the overall social effect cannot be so easily judged. The residents of North Side in the Braitling area have had their lives turned upside down. The change in hours for people to buy grog has been disastrous. I went there at 8 pm one night. It was dark. There were a lot of people milling around. The security people move people on but, as soon as they turn their back, they return. People are not feeling safe. A parent said yesterday: ‘I have lived there for about 10 years, but I feel uncomfortable about sending my child to the shops after school because of the milling around the shopping centre at the moment’.
The grog restrictions and the times of sale have had a disastrous effect on our social wellbeing, not just the people who live in the suburbs, but people who live in the camps opposite the shopping centre. Hoppy’s Camp is a disaster and it has to go. There is no doubt about it. You have to light the car park so people can easily be seen at night; light up the crossing so people can see people crossing the road at night; and light up the river bank so that people can see.
Change the hours of trading. I do not know how long we are going to have this trial, but it has been disastrous, so change the hours of trading. Let them buy the grog they want to drink, the drink of their choice, at 10 am and, perhaps by night time, we might have a little peace and be able to sleep.
Be careful of the laneways. Perhaps we should close the laneways behind the shopping centre in that neighbourhood. It has changed the whole social tone. It has always been such a good place to live. You have to address it in some way. You have to acknowledge that this has caused additional problems. The stats are good, but the social effects are bad.
Reports noted pursuant to standing orders.
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly appoints an Estimates Committee and a Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee pursuant to the terms circulated to members.
We have debated the role, function and operations of the Estimates Committee in this Assembly on many occasions. After last year’s Estimates Committee and representation from the Leader of the Opposition by way of her response in parliament, I took it on board, as Leader of Government Business, to again look at the operations of the Estimates Committee to see if there could be further improvements in the way the committee operates to facilitate questions and responses.
There was a public process by which the Standing Orders Committee called for submissions from CEOs of government agencies, members of the public, members of parliament and the media. In responses to the Standing Orders Committee, there were some minor changes suggested but, by and large, everyone believes that the committee operates well. We have had four or five sittings of the Estimates Committee since we came to government and things are bedding down. People are becoming familiar with the process. The public service is becoming more confident in the process and preparation for it.
I acknowledge that the opposition thinks there should be further change, but that is certainly not supported by way of any other comments received by the Standing Orders Committee. Overwhelmingly, the feedback was positive and refinements over the past few years have been welcomed.
One change the Standing Orders Committee very quickly agreed to was that we are going to limit the time for ministers to make opening remarks to five minutes. If we look back over the years, maybe introductory comments from some ministers who have carriage of large agencies with large budgets went on for too long, thereby reducing the amount of time available to the Estimates Committee to ask questions of ministers. Therefore, there will be a five-minute cap on the opening remarks of ministers this year.
The Standing Orders Committee also wrote to the Public Accounts Committee suggesting that the Public Accounts Committee, which actually makes up the Estimates Committee, could look at refinements to how the committee operates to facilitate smoother operations. The Standing Orders Committee has agreed that the gap between completion of the Estimates Committee hearings and commencement of the sitting of the Assembly to consider the report be increased to an hour, which will give the Estimates Committee and Public Accounts Committee greater time to prepare their final report for debate in parliament.
We have also suggested that the Public Accounts Committee meet earlier as an Estimates Committee, say two to four weeks earlier, to facilitate focus on areas of interest to the committee’s inquiry and achieve better planning within the Estimates Committee. The history of the Estimates Committee was to come together pretty quickly, maybe the day before or even on the day of the hearings. There is not much planning going on within the committee. We all agree that if there are not going to be questions asked in particular output areas, the committee should focus on areas of interest in respect of a minister. We have suggested to the Public Accounts Committee that they consider meeting earlier and plan an approach to estimates that would obviate people asking questions that are not a focus of the committee’s interest. That is an issue for the Public Accounts Committee to consider.
In terms of the structure and operations of estimates, it is incumbent on all of us to look at our own processes and how we can better facilitate what estimates is all about, which is rigorous scrutiny of the budget and outcomes from appropriations to agencies.
With those comments, I have circulated the terms of reference. Essentially, estimates will occur this year in much the same way it occurred last year. It is a process which, as I said, was introduced by this government to give an opportunity for the Estimates Committee to seek, from ministers and government agencies, real detail about budget allocations and outcomes from appropriations. It is certainly serving the Territory public, parliament and public sector well in respect of accountability. I look forward to debate on the motion.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of Government Business for the motion. The opposition always looks forward to estimates because it is an opportunity for us to compare the government’s spin with what is actually happening with spending and intended outcomes.
I note the Leader of Government Business said that he took on board what the opposition said in what we thought was fairly constructive criticism or comments, and how we could improve the system for all Territorians. However, from what the Leader of Government Business just said, none of the matters that were put to him have, in fact, been taken up.
There have been a couple of changes. One is to reduce the time for ministers when making opening remarks to five minutes. Would it not it be better, Leader of Government Business, if you similarly reduced the time of ministers to five minutes when they are answering questions? Some of them have made filibustering such an art form that some answers can take more than that. The minister for Police and the Minister for Health, one and the same person, has traditionally won the gold medal when it comes to filibustering.
There is the farcical process of the minister being asked a question by the opposition or Independent members – to which the minister does not know the answer, which is, not surprisingly, often – and the minister then says: ‘I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question’. Then the minister turns to the public servant beside them and says: ‘I will ask Mr Smith from the department to answer that’. …
Mr Henderson: That is the whole point of it.
Ms CARNEY: No, the whole point of it, Leader of Government Business, is the question is for the minister; ‘the minister’ is the bit you forget. It is your budget. You will not even let us address questions directly to public servants. I understand that happens in the federal parliament. You throw a hissy fit …
Members interjecting.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms CARNEY: You throw a hissy fit every time we go directly to public servants. Sometimes it happens as a result of normal human behaviour because the public servant is the one looking us in the eye and giving the explanation. Then we go to do a follow-up and the minister jumps in and says: ‘Through me, Leader of the Opposition, through me’. Then we say: ‘Okay, through you, minister …’, but you are looking at the public servant: ‘… can you please answer this question?’ Then the minister says: ‘I will ask Mr Smith sitting on my left to answer that question’. The voice I am mimicking is, of course, that of the gold medal winner, the minister for Police.
Government members, as they usually do, can say whatever they like, but it is a joke. The journalists think it is funny and members of the public - and let us face it, there are not many of them who come to estimates, but those who do - are aghast at how we do things.
Moving to something else, we asked for more time to question ministers. The minister for Police and Health, again, the same person, the bloke who sits over there; he is minister for Police. Is police a big issue in Alice Springs this week? Yes, that is a seriously big issue, not only in Alice Springs but throughout the Northern Territory. Is health a seriously big issue? Yes, even government says that health is a seriously big issue. That particular minister has at least one other portfolio, Racing and Gaming. How much time will we get for him? Four-and-a-half hours! You prioritise, obviously, so you get two hours for Police, two hours for Health, and maybe half-an-hour for Racing and Gaming, given the very strict time constraints this government has imposed.
The minister for Police is a great example. What he does when answering – and he does not bother to answer my letters either and I ask very specific questions in writing – is look at me and in his snail-paced way of talking says: Thank you for the question, Leader of the Opposition’. Then he basically says: ‘I do not really know the answer, but Mr Smith does’. If you were to add up the time the minister for Police took in just getting to that point, it would be a great deal.
Why is this important? It is important because this Labor government - and I look almost admiringly at the member for Nhulunbuy, who made that wonderful speech not long after coming to office. It was a ripper and I have quoted from it before. Unfortunately, I do not have it with me today to quote …
Mr Stirling: I will get a copy for you.
Ms CARNEY: He said: ‘After years in the wilderness, we are going to be an open, honest, transparent government’. Remember when you said: ‘We are going to open the books’? Even your little mate over there, the Leader of Government Business, said that the Estimates Committee would be a rigorous scrutiny.
Mr Stirling: And it is.
Ms CARNEY: No, it is not! You are not open and transparent when you give one of your senior ministers, with arguably two of the most important portfolios in the Territory, two hours and then he fills half of it just by speaking slowly, and the other half by flicking to Mr Smith or Mrs Jones because he does not know the answer.
They were your words, not ours. They were your words. The true believers that you once were, and the member for Nhulunbuy was, are now coming into this parliament. Every year you go to estimates with your media releases and spin of ‘we are an open and transparent government’, and yet you are the most secretive, sneaky, arrogant, slippery bunch of politicians anywhere in the country.
Having said that, Madam Speaker, we look forward to the Estimates Committee process. We wish we had weeks. You need weeks to be questioned; you need weeks. The people of the Northern Territory expect us to get in there and do a good job. We will. We know that you do not like answering questions. We know that the word ‘scrutiny’ does not mean the same to you these days as it did. We will do our job, and all we ask on behalf of the people of the Territory is that you do yours.
Mr Kiely: You can read last year’s speech, Gerry.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, the member for Sanderson is probably right: I can read last year’s speech. I will probably hear last year’s reply, too, but it is worth repeating.
I thank the minister for this Estimates Committee motion. It is great to have it changed to only five minutes per minister for opening remarks.
I wish we could apply the Leader of the Opposition’s view to Question Time, which is not much different from estimates. It is a time for us to ask the government about what it is doing. To have only two questions from Independents on both days of parliament is a disgrace. We would normally be able to have three in Darwin. Is it the cold weather? You keep warm by creating more hot air with longer answers. I do not know what it is, but we only have two questions from the Independents and that is a disgrace. People want to know, they want to scrutinise the government. They will not get it from dorothy dix questions but they will from the opposition and Independents. We should be making sure they have the opportunity in Question Time to ask more questions.
Be that as it may, we do that in estimates. One of the things I have been concerned about is that in the large departments, over the number of years that I have been on the Estimates Committee, we have not been able to ask questions of, for instance, the minister for ports, which is part of Planning and Infrastructure. I do not believe, in my time, we have been able to scrutinise a minister about how our ports are run. It is not minor area; it is a major area of government expenditure. There have been huge amounts of money spent on the Port of Darwin. There has been the failure of some rods which caused a part of a wall to collapse. Have we been able to scrutinise how much that cost, whose fault it was or where there are continuing major problems? We have not been able to talk about it.
The government would know that I do not believe that East Arm Port should be under Local Government. One of the reasons it should be kept out of Local Government - as it is in local government reforms - it will not be part of the Local Government area - is because it does not come under Planning Authority scrutiny. When there is development in areas of Darwin, Palmerston, and Litchfield, you have a public meeting as part of the planning process. East Arm Port does not have that process; the minister is the planning authority and delegates to a member of a department. I can write a letter saying I think a certain development in that area is not good and I have some concerns. How do I know it has not been put in the rubbish bin? I get a reply: ‘Thank you very much, goodbye’. There is no public process by which I can get up at a public forum and expand on what I said in the letter and tell the Development Consent Authority and the people who attend of my concerns.
We have one of the most important areas developed in the Northern Territory - that is the port and the industrial area surrounding it - and yet it is not subject to proper scrutiny through the planning process and, because of time constraints through the Estimates Committee, we have not been able to question the government about it. That is just one example.
If we are going to stick to these times, there needs to be a method where perhaps we turn the numbers around. When we question ministers, there is a set guideline as to which areas of responsibility will come first. If we are going to be stuck with that process on an annual basis, we should turn those numbers around, rotate them, so we can ask the minister first about ports ...
A member interjecting.
Mr WOOD: No, no, because the opposition and the Independents regard all of what the government does as important. The minister who looks after Infrastructure and Planning has an extremely important portfolio. It is one of the biggest budgets in the government. It affects many people because planning, by its very nature, affects everyone. Roads and infrastructure of all sorts affect us. We need to test the government as to whether that money is being well spent. Unfortunately, as I said, with things like the port, we have not been able to do that.
I raised a classic example. I have been told there were three entrances built for the port. There was the original one, then they built another one, and they have built another one since they moved it close to the East Arm boat ramp. When they built it, they found that it was too high for the trucks. In fact, they built a temporary shaded area for the person who had to check your licence when you entered the port because it was not built in a manner that suited both trucks and passenger vehicles. How much did that all cost? I have not been able to ask because we have never reached that stage in the Estimates Committee.
I understand that you have limitations on how long we are at the Estimates Committee, but we need to have a process which allows the bigger departments more time than some of the little ones, although some of the little ones, such as the department of Primary Industry, should be scrutinised as much as others. I realise in the mix of which departments have the biggest expenditure, the department of Primary Industry does not have the same expenditure as the Department of Planning and Infrastructure.
We need to have a way so that if, in one year we have not been able to get to a certain section of the department, that should be put at the top of the list for the next year. At least we then have a chance to scrutinise those areas. That would not be too hard to do. It is a matter of being able to have this format so that the output groups not reached last year can be put on the top of the pile this year, and can have some scrutiny.
I look forward to the Estimates Committee. It is a very important part of government. It is not that easy being an Independent on the Estimates Committee because, being the shadow minister for everything, you try to cover everything. Even though it is a tiring period, it is a very important part of my duties as a parliamentarian. I try to ask questions that are relevant and that people would expect from their local member or a member of the Estimates Committee.
I look forward to the coming budget, which I am sure I will have the time to scrutinise. Hopefully, I will get a nice copy with a spiral insert so one can actually use it without having to have three bricks to hold it down when you are trying to open a page. I thank the Under Treasurer for giving me a copy this year in that format.
I am looking forward to estimates. As I said, it is a very important part of the political process. The government will not entirely agree with what I have said today, but I hope they take it on board and, perhaps, next year they will change the way we do things.
Madam SPEAKER: Treasurer, as you are coming to the Dispatch Box, I acknowledge the presence in the gallery of Year 5 students from Living Waters Lutheran School, with their teacher, Roy Jackson. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Welcome, Year 5; it is good to see you here.
Madam Speaker, we go through this in a similar format each year. The Leader of the Opposition and her colleagues remain scathing of a process that we have sought to strengthen each year since we have been in government after inheriting the former processes under the Country Liberal Party government itself.
The Opposition Leader now suggests that the process should take weeks. Should the government accede to this and say: ‘Okay, we will set aside three weeks of sittings’? No sooner would we allow that the process would then require months. All that means is a longer and longer process. It underlines the inept way in which the opposition approaches the estimates task. Under the structure, and it is a quite disciplined structure, the larger budgets within a government are given greater amounts of time. I am there for 7 or 7 hours. I have seen the opposition spend four hours chasing down a $10 000 grant in a major agency. The whole agency would cover a few hundred millions of dollars that they might want to get to and flesh out any particular issues, but to spend three or four hours on a $10 000 grant suggests that they are not putting their resources and all their expertise in any strategic sense in scrutinising the budget.
You must remember what this is about. This is for scrutiny of the expenditure of nearly $3bn worth of expenditure year on year - taxpayers money - and it deserves close scrutiny. We have a process which allows that, but the fact is the opposition cannot get their heads around it in being strategic, focused and using their time in the best possible fashion.
The largest session ever, from memory, under the previous government was 41 to 41 hours. It might have been the same year that we had the infamous 2500 questions. Over all of those years, even including that 41 to 41 hours, I think the average was around 31 to 33 hours. The process now has 43 hours or 46 …
Mr Henderson: Forty-three.
Mr STIRLING: Forty-three hours, which is in excess of the longest-ever session estimates took when the CLP was in power and Labor was in opposition with 2500 questions, in advance, plenty of time to get the answers. The difference is we got through that process, even allowing that many questions, because we were disciplined, focused, and we knew where we wanted to go.
You have to ensure you reach major spending areas. You have to allow yourself enough time and flexibility to get to any political exposure you think you might have up your sleeve. After all, that is a big part of the process; it is at its heart, at its essence. It is political and that is what you need to do. I suggest that it does not need weeks, it does not need months. It now has in excess of the longest period ever taken before, and it is simply a matter of the opposition sitting down, planning a disciplined and strategic approach, and saying: ‘Which are the areas we are going to concentrate on? Where are the areas we need to get to?’
It ill behoves the opposition to come out of the estimates process and say: ‘We did not have an opportunity to get to Licensing’, or: ‘We did not have an opportunity to get to the Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment’. That is their choice. If they want to get to the Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment, use less time on other areas, have your questions ready, and make sure you have your eye on the clock to get those questions up. Again, it simply underlines the inept approach taken by the opposition, when they come away from a process where they are given 43 hours to scrutinise the budget, and complain that they did not have time to get to particular areas.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, aspects of this are being ignored by members opposite. The reference to previous systems and current systems neglects the view that there was flexibility in the original system. Albeit there may have been an equivalent amount of time, you had the capacity within that to focus on an area and take it to its end. The system you have now is to create an impression that something is happening but, in fact, the system itself gets in the way.
This government is more interested in presenting a perception or creating a notion that there is openness and transparency. There is greater effort put on that, in fact, than what is occurring. You can have a system that is more flexible, that allows weight to be given to the areas that need the attention, where you can follow the argument all the way through. We could then take time from areas where we do not need to take that amount of time.
In the previous system, there were some strengths; you could ask the line of questions all the way through to the end. Then you were able to call on the next minister, and maybe you needed less time. The fact that there was, trusting what the Treasurer just said, roughly an equivalent amount of time, it strengthens that argument that if you had the flexibility required to allow certain areas to receive the level of inquiry that is required or necessary, then you can take that time from other areas. We do not have that flexibility. We have a model in place, and it appears to be for the purpose of creating this idea or sustaining this notion that it is open, honest and transparent.
If that were the case, I put this to you: honourable members opposite, if you are so enamoured and so trusting of this system, bear in mind that you will not always be in government, will you not complain one speck once you are in opposition and we operate exactly the same system? Do not think for a moment, caught up in the idea that you have 19 members and there are four members of the opposition and two Independents, that it will last forever. You are the very group that sincerely presented an idea to the Territory that you were going to breathe life into this idea of openness, honesty and transparency.
You create a notion and structure to carry the idea, but not the substance thereof. You are the same outfit that presented, in all sincerity, to the Territory community that you would have fixed parliamentary terms. Once you came to the position to honour that agreement, suggestion and position to the Territory community, once you had the power in your hand, you changed that.
You are changing very little; you are putting your efforts into self-protection. I warn you: you will not be in government forever, and the bed that you create for yourself, you will have to lie in when you are in opposition.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Claire Ryan, who sang at the concert on Sunday night and who is a member of the Youth Minister’s Round Table. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I thank members for their contributions.
I will respond to members who commented. I do not know if the Leader of the Opposition just does not get it. She went into histrionics here at the Dispatch Box about ministers answering every question and should not defer to public servants for details. It just goes to show that the Leader of the Opposition does not get what estimates is all about.
What estimates is about is scrutiny of the budget in allocations to agencies, and to ascertain if outcomes are being achieved from the allocations of funding. To expect a minister to be across the operational details of service delivery across the Northern Territory is absolutely ridiculous. If you want a political exercise, the minister would answer every question; you would have a political exercise. However, if you want access to information about service delivery, value for money, how resources are allocated to what priorities, how we are spending the money, then to have public servants provide that information is totally appropriate.
Maybe the member for Araluen, the Leader of the Opposition, lives in a cocoon here in Alice Springs. We know that she does not leave Alice very often to see what is happening around the rest of Australia, or even turn on the television to see what happens in federal parliament during the Estimates Committee process, where public servants probably answer 90%-plus of questions.
Ms Carney interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Leader of the Opposition.
Ms CARNEY: Sorry, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes withdraw, thank you.
Ms CARNEY: I withdraw, Madam Speaker.
Mr HENDERSON: Maybe the Opposition Leader does not turn on the television very often to see what happens in the rest of the world, or understand what happens in other parliaments. The establishment of this Estimates Committee in the Northern Territory was facilitated by the Public Accounts Committee doing a significant review as to how Estimates Committees operate across Australia. They visited various jurisdictions such as Tasmania. The member for Johnston went. We have a parliamentary practice in the Northern Territory, which is contemporary, for facilitating access to information.
If you look what we had before, the farcical process we had with the Committee of the Whole, yes, ministers did answer every question. Do you know what happened, Madam Speaker? The opposition was required to put every single question in writing to ministers and bureaucrats disappeared into the agencies and wrote out answers. The ministers in the Country Liberal Party government were so lazy and dim-witted, they could not answer the questions. You had to write …
Ms Carney interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Leader of the Opposition!
Mr HENDERSON: … a letter with your questions on it. It would go to the public servants. The public servants would write the answer for the minister. The shadow member would stand up and very politely read the question, and did the minister answer the question? No, the minister got his letter in reply from the public service, and read out the answer that the public servant had given. So dim-witted and lazy, they read a prepared answer from the public service.
Then you could ask follow-up questions. You would ask the minister the follow up question. Did the minister answer the question? No. No, not off the top of the head. He would go to the advisor’s box. Whisper, whisper, whisper. The CEO or the chief financial officer would give them the answer and he would stand up and repeat the answer.
To say that ministers should be able to answer the detail of each and every question, and every dollar that might be spent in an agency that has an appropriation of say $700m is absolutely farcical and certainly did not happen. It did not happen in any way, shape or form when the Country Liberal Party was in government.
The Leader of the Opposition said we ought to be able to grill public servants directly, not through the minister. The reason that process is in place is to protect public servants from monstering and vilification from the opposition. We have had countless experiences over the years where the questioning of public servants directly has been hostile, offensive and downright rude. Our public servants do not deserve that. You can be hostile, offensive and rude to ministers - that is fine. Our public servants do not deserve that. They do their job under the Westminster system of implementing government policy, and spending money as appropriated by this parliament for particular purposes. They do not deserve to be monstered or yelled at by members of the opposition. For the questions to go through the minister is totally appropriate to protect public servants from monstering by the opposition.
The Leader of the Opposition talked about time frames and what have you. We have tried to be constructive, as the Standing Orders Committee, and what we are suggesting to the Public Accounts Committee is, with respect, to get your act together. Meet two to four weeks before estimates occur, which should not be a totally political exercise.
I digress a little from the Treasurer. This is a committee of parliament. The member for Nelson said that he does not get time to scrutinise the Darwin Port Corporation. Surely, as we go through minister by minister, all members of that committee should have an opportunity to say: ’I am really interested in scrutinising this output group for the Darwin Port Corporation this year. I need about 10 or 15 minutes to do that’. The committee should work through the areas that they are interested in and come to some an agreement as a committee as to where they are going to apply their focus and what their priorities are going to be.
That has not happened in the past. It has been Rafferty’s Rules at the table; there has been no game plan. Quite often, the Independents miss out. The Public Accounts Committee that becomes Estimates Committee needs to meet earlier and work out an approach for addressing questions to each minister, the areas of priority, and to ensure, as a committee, that everyone has an opportunity rather than the opposition dominating the process and the Independents having the scraps at the end of the line. That is an organisational issue.
As the Treasurer said, we provide 43 hours for scrutiny of the government budget. It is historically in excess of any amount of scrutiny that occurred under the previous administration, farcical as that process was. The process was so farcical that there was no example similar to it in any Westminster parliament around the world. It really was a totally mickey mouse process to protect ministers who were lazy, incompetent and had no idea what was going on in their agencies.
We have had this debate over and over again. Having been in opposition for two years and having to work through the previous process, I can see that this process is much better. I would not be complaining about it. Some four-and-a-half hours is ample to get to the issues of ministerial responsibility and the budget.
The member for Nelson asked whether in Question Time ministers should be restricted to five minutes for answers. I do not have the numbers in front of me, member for Nelson, but this government is answering at, I am pretty certain, around double the number of questions that occurred under the previous 27 years of the CLP. There were a couple of times yesterday, and we have spoken about it this morning, when a couple of answers went on a bit too long. We do take account of those things. We talked about it this morning.
Again, history is there to inform the present and, hopefully, we will not repeat the mistakes of the past. You can go back to previous parliaments and you would be lucky to get four or five questions up in one day. Ministerial answers would go for 20 minutes. That certainly does not occur in this parliament under this government.
The member for Nelson said we could re-order output groups so we reach areas we did not get to last year. That is an issue for you to take up within the committee. If you really think that there are significant issues in the Darwin Port Corporation, for example, I am sure that consensus should be able to be reached on the committee, unless numbers are being crunched on you, member for Nelson, so you have some time to ask questions about it. I would be disappointed if the committee does not operate on a bipartisan basis in scrutinising the budget. If it operates on some sort of political and numbers dominance that seeks to squash the Independents out of the process, that is a pity and it should be sorted out by the committee itself.
We continue to refine the process. We have said this year ministers’ introductions are limited to five minutes, and we granted additional time for the committee to prepare its response to parliament. We made suggestions that the committee meets earlier to better prepare for estimates on areas that the committee wants to scrutinise, and get much better planning in place. Hopefully, the committee will take up that suggestion from the Standing Orders Committee,
Madam Speaker, I must say that estimates is a challenging time. It does focus government agencies and public servants on accountability. They have to be prepared to answer questions without notice. The public service does a lot of work in preparing for estimates. Where questions without notice cannot be answered at the table, they are certainly responded to later. We have had very few examples where questions have been answered outside of the committee process because the information has not been available. In the accountability in the public service, public servants understand that they have to be accountable to the Estimates Committee and it has been a very important step. It is a very important process for the people of the Northern Territory to ensure that money allocated to agencies is achieving the policy outcomes of government. With that, I conclude my contribution.
Motion agreed to.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I acknowledge the presence in the gallery of primary students from Ipolera School, accompanied by their teachers, Sian Munn and Glenda Munn. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Continued from 21 February 2007.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, this is a bill which, as the Attorney-General said in his second reading speech, reflects changes in terminology concerning lawyers that have occurred following the enactment in November 2006 of the Legal Profession Act. This is a very short second reading speech. It is a very straightforward bill. Accordingly, my response will be short. Not surprisingly, Attorney-General, we support the bill.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition and the opposition for their support of the bill. It is straightforward. The bulk of the amendments have been developed within the Department of Justice to ensure that all Territory legislation accords with the new Legal Profession Act 2006.
The Supreme Court was closely involved with the amendments relating to the Supreme Court Act, and I thank the justices for their constructive suggestions and assistance. It is also supported by the Law Society. I noted in the second reading speech that the Legal Profession Act, passed by the Assembly last year, fulfilled the Territory’s part in achieving uniform regulation of the legal profession across Australia.
It was interesting last week attending the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General in Canberra. I was very pleased and proud to note that we are at the front of the queue in getting this legislation through. Other jurisdictions are following suit with their own legislation. It makes amendments consequential to the enactment of the Legal Profession Act 2006. Fifty-nine Northern Territory acts and items of subordinate legislation require such amendment, and it makes amendments which will ensure there is consistent use of terminology in the statute book when references are made to lawyers.
The key distinction between legal practitioners and lawyers is that legal practitioners practice the law as a profession, and such persons are required to have a practising certificate. Lawyers, in contrast, are persons entitled to practice law, but who have chosen not to. For example, judges do not have practising certificates. The distinction is necessary because there are many requirements under legislation for lawyers that are sufficiently met if the person is qualified but is not actively practising the law. A good example of that is chairing a statutory tribunal.
The most substantial amendment of the bill is to section 22 of the Supreme Court Act. The amendment sets out the circumstances in which matters involving a lawyer will be heard by the Full Court or by a single judge. The default position is that of a single judge except that, where rules are made to the contrary, it is anticipated that such rules will be made. The drafting of section 22 reflects suggestions and commentary from the judges of the Supreme Court.
It is primarily of a statute reform nature. There are no major policy changes contained within it. However, the Department of Justice has closely consulted with the Law Society following the development and enactment of the Legal Profession Act to ensure that it meets the expectations of the Northern Territory legal profession. It also incorporates suggestions and recommendations from other parts of government and from the judiciary so that all relevant Territory legislation works cohesively.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General)(by leave): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
JUSTICE LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 88)
Continued from 21 February 2007.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, my response to this bill will be longer than the previous one. This is the Justice Legislation Amendment Bill and it seeks to amend many items of Territory legislation. Some of the amendments are supportable. Others are curious, to say the least. I say from the outset that the bill should have been separated for reasons that will become obvious later.
We will deal, Attorney-General, with some of the straightforward ones first. First, I go to the Agents Licensing Act, which, as we know, is legislation that covers the registration of real estate agents, business agents and conveyancing agents. It is going to be amended by allowing a discretionary power to be extended to the Agents Licensing Board. The new power is to allow the board to admit people as agents based on experience and other qualifications as an agent. Basically, it is, in a sense, a legislative way of recognising prior learning. The board may seek an assessment of a person’s prior learning and experience in forming its opinion. The amendments to the Agents Licensing Act are supported and are decidedly supportable because, to grant discretionary power to the Agents Licensing Board is desirable and, as I understand it, the board sought this change.
Moving to the Northern Territory Employment and Training Act, again, it is a commonsense and worthy amendment and should be supported. I simply refer, I suppose it might be quicker, to the comments made by the Attorney-General in his second reading speech as to why that change came about.
We now move to amendments to the Anti-Discrimination Act. Put simply, it seems to be amended to fix a small loophole brought about by section 41 of the act. Again, it is a commonsense and supportable amendment because it is the intention of this legislation that is important. I commend the government on this amendment.
In relation to the Business Tenancies (Fair Dealings) Act, once again the amendment is commonsense and supportable. It is made so that the intention of the legislation is reflected. To a large extent, they are the easy bits.
Attorney-General, I turn to some of the other legislation affected by this bill. I hope that you will be able to address some of these matters in your reply.
I go first to amendments to the Criminal Code. In your second reading speech, Attorney-General, you said there are three amendments to the Criminal Code. As you said in your second reading speech:
I ask: who?
In the next paragraph appearing in the Parliamentary Record, the Attorney-General said:
A couple of important issues arise from what I have read of the Attorney-General’s second reading speech. First, Attorney-General: what is it exactly in Schedule 4 that is complicated? Schedule 4 has a series of headings, which is pretty straightforward stuff. I have not known of a lawyer who works in the area of criminal law who has put anything vaguely resembling a persuasive argument about the complicated nature of Schedule 4. I invite people to look at Schedule 4;. It is far from complicated.
The second issue that arises from those parts of the second reading speech that I read, which I think is very concerning – I will not use the word ‘trend’ because I hope this is not a trend - is the order in which counsel address the jury in criminal trials. The accused and his or her lawyer, like any advocate, must decide whether to call witnesses and what impact that will have on their client’s case. They are decisions made by legal practitioners, advocates, officers of the courts, every day. It is invariably a tactical decision, one made invariably in the interests of a lawyer’s client. It is always a matter of choice and judgment.
One wonders why there appears to be, from these comments and this change that this Attorney-General has made, a favouritism of the accused. I ask the Attorney-General in his reply to advise of a case, either in the Court of Summary Jurisdiction or the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory, that has brought about this change. It is, I would say, invariably the case when important changes like this are made to this type of legislation that there has been an example, an instance. Often they receive publicity; sometimes they do not. However, there has been something that has caused the community concern which, in turn, might cause government to say: ‘We have to do something about this. We should amend legislation so that this sort of difficulty, this problem, does not happen again’.
Attorney-General, I ask you very specifically: was there a case that brought about this change? If so, could you provide me with the citation? I have not been able to find one. Similarly, lawyers to whom I have spoken have not been able to find one. I have not talked to every lawyer in the Northern Territory, but I have spoken to some, all of whom I respect greatly and who are certainly learned in the law.
In the absence of a specific case which has brought about this change, I ask: what exactly was it? There is a view, Attorney-General, that when the former Director of Public Prosecutions retired, and in his now oft cited farewell speech at SKYCITY, he suggested the order of things should be changed. He expressed, having been a prosecutor for many years …
A member interjecting.
Ms CARNEY: No, you were not, I do not think. Having been a prosecutor for many years, he said the rules should change in favour of the defence in some respects. I was there. I heard the speech. Many lawyers still talk about it. Why am I mentioning this? It is because I would like to know whether this was done as a result of a formal or informal request by the former Director of Public Prosecutions who now co-chairs the inquiry into sexual abuse in Aboriginal communities. If it was not done informally by the former director, and it may not have been the case, can you advise whether the former Director of Public Prosecutions consulted with other prosecutors in his office as to whether these changes were (a) required or (b) desirable?
If, as you said in your second reading speech, this amendment is proposed in response to concerns raised by the former Director of Public Prosecutions, did he raise those concerns at any time with you, or your predecessor, and I am sure your staff can assist you in answering this question, while he was the DPP? I would be very grateful, Attorney-General, if you could provide me with answers to those questions.
In the absence of a specific case or any details other than concerns raised by the former DPP and other legal associations, the underlying question is: why the change? From the second reading speech, it is hard to see the policy or legal basis for the change. It is, frankly, difficult to see any political basis for the change.
The third issue is a very general one. I appreciate the Attorney-General yesterday introducing the Evidence of Children Amendment Bill. Those of us who were in the last Assembly can certainly remember that long and, at times, very heated debate, and my contribution when it came to that legislation. I understood that the legislation was going to be changed. I look forward to, after these sittings, reading the Attorney-General’s second reading speech.
However, there are some urgent changes required to the legislation which, I understand, government has known about. The Attorney-General can correct me if I am mistaken; he can either do it now or when we are talking about the legislation in due course. I make this point to illustrate that, on the one hand, you have changed the order of address for defence lawyers when addressing juries but, on the other, there are some significant changes that should have been made when reviewing legislation. Let us face it: the bill before us now does that. It begs the question: where are your priorities? Why are some quite curious changes made without, apparently, any basis at all when there are pressing changes to be made in relation to the giving of evidence by children?
I will use an example; I know there are others. The Evidence Act and the Justices Act have created an inconsistency. Members will recall that, in the Evidence Reform (Children and Sexual Offences) Bill which we debated about October 2005, changes were made regarding the pre-recording of evidence for child witnesses and people with intellectual disabilities. When we look at the Justices Act, we see that a child witness who gave a pre-recorded statement or evidence cannot be cross-examined because their statement is tendered. They are not allowed to be cross-examined but this is, as I am advised, not the case with witnesses who are intellectually disabled. That is an obvious inconsistency. It affects vulnerable witnesses. It certainly goes to the heart of the policy that the government said it was trying to address and implement when it introduced the Evidence of Children Amendment Bill. One wonders why it has taken so long to fix it. At the end of the day, it is a pretty straightforward amendment and it should be fixed. It may be in the legislation or the bill you introduced yesterday. It still, nevertheless, illustrates the point. Curiously, and without any basis, you are changing the order of address for defence counsel when addressing juries, tipping the balance, it can fairly be said, in favour of the accused. Why? For no apparent reason.
Yet, you have an inconsistency created by your own legislation that goes to vulnerable witnesses, and you have apparently ignored it or, if it was in the bill that was introduced yesterday, it has been a long time coming. They are the issues that arise from the proposed amendments to the Criminal Code.
I now move to the Domestic Violence Act. When I first looked at this amendment, as I do regularly, I wrote on the side of it: ‘An oops amendment; another oops amendment’, something to which the government forgot to turn its mind when it introduced its legislation. However, the more I looked at this, the worse it became. It is noteworthy that we are debating this bill a day or so after it became apparent that officers from the Domestic Violence Unit are going to move from that unit to other areas of policing, thus leaving Aboriginal women without the services of which the government was once so proud, and without the concentrated effort from police that these women so deserve.
The amendments in this bill to the Domestic Violence Act are, it can be said, somewhat interesting. The Leader of Government Business does get himself into trouble. We were talking about the separation of powers last night. The Leader of Government Business is a bit of a bovver boy; he was having a go. The Leader of Government Business is on the Parliamentary Record of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly saying that the separation of powers involves, and you will love this …
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I have a new-found interest in these sorts of terms, as Attorney-General, and have to come to grips with them myself, unlike a former premier in Queensland who, even near the end of his career, failed to understand exactly what separation of powers actually meant. I overheard, maybe by way of interjection, the Leader of the Opposition mumbling something along the lines, and a fairly accurate portrayal, of exactly the separation of executive government and judiciary. The point of order is that it was, in fact, the minister for Police, I think, who was referring to separation of powers, not the Leader of Government Business.
Ms CARNEY: The Honourable Paul Henderson, 1 December 2005, was Leader of Government Business and, I think, Police minister at that time. In relation to the concept of separation of powers, which is arguably interesting in itself, he referred to it as being between the parliament, the police and the judiciary. The minister for Police, a minister of the Crown, Leader of Government Business, and Chief Ministerial aspirant, does not get the separation of powers!
In this country, all sorts of people can become politicians but, I would have thought, an understanding of that one was important. I am sure some of our school students, if they have not looked at the separation of powers already, might look at in years to come.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Leader of the Opposition, I clarify that the Deputy Chief Minister believed that you were referring to a comment made by the Police minister last night, which is what he said then.
Madam SPEAKER: Before we continue with debate, I acknowledge the presence in the Speaker’s Gallery of the South Australia Legislative Council President, the Honourable Bob Sneath and his wife, Mrs Sneath. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: I acknowledge students in the gallery from Year 7 from the Alice Springs High School, with teachers John Prewer and Janine Pearce. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms CARNEY: I see a couple of students who were participants in the Youth Parliament on Monday. With your indulgence, Madam Speaker, we should specifically acknowledge their attendance.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of members of the Youth Parliament who were debating in this Chamber on Monday. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms CARNEY: The former Police minister, current Leader of Government Business and Chief Ministerial aspirant does get himself into trouble.
The amendments to the Domestic Violence Act are, I should say, supportable, but you missed it the first time around. We have had a few heated debates in this parliament, and I refer members to the debate of 25 August 2005. That was when we were debating the very legislation that is being amended today. During the debate in August 2005, I said:
I went on to say that in relation to the act the government was introducing:
I asked about what impact the changes that were made in August 2005 would have on the ongoing review of the act. I asked about what safeguards and what comments you had in relation to that concern. I was not answered. I quoted a letter. Most politicians, I am sure, got the same sorts of letters I received. I cannot remember; it is not immediately clear from this copy of the Parliamentary Record who this letter was from, but it can be tracked back, I am sure. I read a letter dated 30 September 2005 from a domestic violence organisation, which said:
Many agencies wrote to politicians. They certainly wrote to me; I assume they wrote to government. They said: ‘Hang on, there is a review of the Domestic Violence Act. You are tinkering with it now and you are rushing it’, which you were: ‘Is that a thoughtful way to implement policy and draft legislation in any jurisdiction?’ The answer is no. I voiced my concerns; I noted the concerns of women’s groups, domestic violence services, who shared my concerns. We shared each others’ concerns.
Now I get back to the then Police minister and current Leader of Government Business. He said:
I now know, if I did not then, the answer to that question. It goes to show that the Leader of Government Business did not bother to cast his eye, learned or otherwise, over the legislation. What he did, as he usually does, is attack anyone who had some issues with the legislation. He went on and dug himself further into the hole, the man who has no concept of the separation of powers, when he said:
The minister for Police, with his usual confidence, came in here and said words to the effect of: ‘Jodeen, do not worry about it. You do not know what you are talking about. You are up on your soap box.’ - I think you did say that, actually - ‘You just sit down, girly, because we have it in hand’. Yet, what happens now? Here we are again changing the very things we were talking about in August 2005.
I seriously invite the Attorney-General to address this in his reply. Where are we up to with the review of the Domestic Violence Act? I also ask, in hindsight: would it not have been a better approach not to rush in, to be thoughtful about legislation, to have a clear policy direction? It is abundantly clear from this government in this area that, if it had a policy direction once, and I think they did, it has lost it. It has lost the plot on women’s issues. It has lost the plot on violence against women and children, much of which we will argue another day and, indeed, we have argued so far.
In respect of the Domestic Violence Act, when is the new act going to surface? When are you going to encourage members of your team to read the legislation that comes before us? When will the Leader of Government Business stop being so utterly revolting and hostile when it comes to debates involving these very serious issues?
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, do you mind if we pause? Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the Speaker’s Gallery of Mrs Dianne Guise MLA, Deputy Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Western Australia. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms CARNEY: Madam Speaker, there are two more bills the legislation seeks to amend. I will deal first with the Vexatious Proceedings Act. That was introduced on 30 August 2006 by the Honourable Peter Toyne. The opposition supported the bill; it was a supportable bill …
Mr Stirling: Which one are you talking about?
Ms CARNEY: Vexatious Proceedings. It has happened, or was happening, or will happen pretty much all around the country. In other words, every jurisdiction is enacting vexatious proceedings legislation, as they should, and it is a good idea. However, typically from this government, we see government ministers giving second reading speeches to the Assembly, saying: ‘Yes, we have looked at his. Yes, we are satisfied with it. Rip into it. Pass the bill and, by the way, if anyone dares to criticise, politely or otherwise, strongly or otherwise, passionately or otherwise, you do not know what you are talking about, you idiots, because we have it in hand’.
I should be counting the number of what I call ‘oops bills’ because this is another oops bill. The amendment is supportable, so you got that far. Why can you not bring legislation into this Chamber that is right from the start? Why is it that ministers of the Crown, the Attorney-General, the member for Nhulunbuy, and his predecessor, Peter Toyne, on a regular basis stand there and say: ‘Yes, job is right,’ and then, down the, track: ‘Oops!’? This is yet another example and I should point it out.
The final amendments relate to the Victims of Crime Assistance Act. I note that a couple of days ago, there was a further amendment proposed to the bill which amends all of the legislation we are debating today, another amendment proposed to a bill contained in the bill. One wonders what these ministers are doing with their time.
The bill seeks to make further changes to the Victims of Crime Assistance Act, and the amendments, in essence, seek to fine-tune the act, which government amended significantly in about May last year. We strongly opposed the changes to the Victims of Crimes Assistance Act, as did the Police Association, and, from memory, a number of individuals and groups around the Northern Territory. We have had that debate. There is not a pressing need for us to revisit it.
Having said that I will, however, take the opportunity to restate one of the many objections we had in relation to the change. That was my claim and others that the changes disadvantaged those who were victims of years of child abuse, and multiple rape victims. We criticised it because there was also an introduction of a minimum threshold of $7500, which would see many victims of crime being precluded from claiming compensation. Victims of child abuse and multiple rape victims would be among the worst affected by the changes. Under the old scheme before it was changed by this Labor government, such victims were able to make an application for each offence. Of course, we are talking about victims of multiple incidents. They were able to claim for each and every offence. Labor changed that so it was no longer going to be the case. Did we have something to say about that? Yes, we did.
In legislative terms, not long after Labor changed the act for the worst, again today we are here with more amendments. Then, a couple days ago, I was provided with notice of a further amendment. What does all of this tell us? It tells us that this government does not have their eye on the ball. We have heard a lot in Alice Springs this week from the people of Alice Springs about the fact that this government does not have its eye on the ball when it comes to all things Alice Springs. It can be well demonstrated, and it can be beyond doubt, that the government does not have its eye on one of the core functions of a government, and that is to introduce sound legislation to the Legislative Assembly. I do not suggest for a moment that legislation should never be amended. Of course, it should. However, should it be amended so quickly after it was introduced? No. Should it be amended for reasons that are not outlined in the Attorney-General’s second reading speech, and I refer again to the amendments with respect to the order of address to juries? Should we have so many oops bills? No.
Madam Speaker, I have done my best to go through the issues as I see them. I have, as I have said, spoken to lawyers, particularly in relation to the domestic violence changes and the changes to the Criminal Code. I am sure that they will be interested to hear the Attorney-General’s reply. I can assure him that I will be providing his reply to them.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for her comments and support of those various parts of the amendment bill that she said they were supporting: the Agents Licensing Act, which is pretty straightforward; the Anti-Discrimination Act, which is also straightforward; and the Business Tenancies (Fair Dealings) Act amendment, which was also supported.
I believe I have managed to pick up each of the issues. If I have not, it is necessary to go into committee in relation to transition provisions, which gives the Leader of the Opposition further opportunity to ask any follow-up questions that she may have, and I will do my best to obtain an answer for them.
The issue around the amendment to the Criminal Code and the order in which parties in a criminal trial address the jury occupied a fair amount of the Leader of the Opposition’s contribution. She said you can look at the schedule and it is not particularly complicated. However, there is a dilemma here. What I understand to be the complication is the dilemma confronted by the defence lawyer when directed to address the jury last in a criminal trial, unless they want to call witnesses where they are then not able to exercise any option in relation to addressing the jury last. It seems to me it puts a hurdle there if the defence lawyer has to wrestle with this question of, on the one hand, ‘I have these witnesses who I think are invaluable to my case, to the defendant’ and, on the other, there is the desirability of addressing the jury last. They may, depending on the decision they make, choose to forgo the use of witnesses in order to retain the ability to address the jury last, or use the witnesses and, of course, not have that ability.
It is done this way in some other jurisdictions. I believe it is equally mixed across the jurisdictions of Australia. However, the Leader of the Opposition was quite keen to understand where this came from. There is no mystery here. It was the Bar Association and Criminal Lawyers Association. I am not aware, and no case was brought to my attention, as to whether there was a particular case that brought this amendment about. I am not aware of that. I saw it as a simplification process that a criminal lawyer ought to be able to do both in defence of their client in court. That is, if they wish to call witnesses, yes, do so. Did they wish to go last before the jury where they are already directed unless they called witnesses? Why should that change it? They are already directed to address the jury last unless they called witnesses and they cannot ...
Ms Carney: That is the point …
Mr STIRLING: Well, that is silly. That is just silly to me. Why they would have to wrestle with that problem? Other jurisdictions say: ‘Yes, call witnesses if you think they are going to help your case, go last’. You are directed to go last anyway. It was put to me as an exercise in simplification and that is why I was quite happy to support it. I would have thought the defence lawyer ought to be able to do both.
I am not aware of any discussion at all on this matter between the former Attorney-General and the former Director of Public Prosecutions. The Leader of the Opposition may well be aware they had a working relationship in their respective roles. Why would I be party to any previous conversation or discussion between the former DPP and the former Attorney-General? The former Attorney-General did not leave me any riding instructions, I can tell you. He did not say to me: ‘You must do this, you have to fix this’. No such conversation took place between me and the former Attorney-General. As to what may or may not have transpired between him and the former DPP, I know not, and I have no intention of finding out.
Suffice to say that in the second reading where I talk about the DPP supporting this amendment, I referred to the current DPP. The former DPP may well have supported it. According to the Leader of the Opposition, he did. So what? The comment in the second reading refers to the current DPP, and the same comments, as I said, are supported by the Bar Association, the Law Society and the judiciary, all of whom were consulted about this. I think some of them said it makes no difference, anyway.
Of course, if I can find it in the second reading, where an accused person or their representative raises issues, draws conclusions or introduces evidence in their final address to the jury that are not supported by the evidence before the court, the court is still able to grant leave to the prosecution to make a supplementary address dealing with any such issues.
I am not sure what the intent of the Leader of the Opposition’s queries were around the former DPP and the former Attorney-General and, as I said, nor am I particularly interested. It was put to me that there is a dilemma here, there is an easy way to simplify it and other jurisdictions do it this way. The amendment was canvassed, it was supported by relevant organisations, the judiciary itself, and by Cabinet, and finds its way in here as an amendment as a result.
The Leader of the Opposition went further than that. She said it is curious in terms of priorities; there are other urgent things that you should be doing around the Criminal Code. I point out to the Leader of the Opposition one of my first items of legislation in here as Attorney-General was to get rid of that ‘dangerous act causing death’. I will tell you why that was important to me, and the work was done by my predecessor, the former Attorney-General. However, I was hot on his heels about it and I will tell you why. it was because, as local member in Nhulunbuy, I know people were murdered. Make no mistake about that; they were murdered. They were alive and well one day and they were dead the next. They were dead because of an act of violence that was murder. In anyone’s view, it was murder. When it got to court, it was downgraded to manslaughter and, in three individual cases, it became ‘dangerous act causing ‘death. One of the accused individuals was released within six months of imprisonment, after murdering someone! That is why I was keen to stay on Toyne’s coat-tails, to follow this through Cabinet and get those amendments before parliament. It was because ‘dangerous act causing death’ was an excuse for murder. It is no longer part of the Criminal Code of the Northern Territory.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr STIRLING: They are the priorities we put when we bring legislation before this House, and the Leader of the Opposition tries to suggest, in some way, that we are soft on crime.
Ms Carney interjecting.
Mr STIRLING: That we are soft on criminals.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Leader of the Opposition!
Mr STIRLING: Well, my …
Ms Carney interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Leader of the Opposition!
Mr STIRLING: … record already speaks for itself in relation to priorities around amendments. No longer will someone be murdered in my electorate - speared to death, kicked to death, trampled to death, punched to death in a drunken rage - and the person offer up ‘dangerous act causing death’. ‘Okay, sonny, six months time and you are out’. We said murder is murder, and we amended the act accordingly. There may be other urgent things we have to do and continue in the Criminal Code, and they will be brought to my attention, and we will see to it that they are.
Do not talk to me about curious priorities and what we might or might not do, Leader of the Opposition. You are welcome to bring your amendments to this parliament and you are welcome to have them considered.
In relation to the amendments yesterday, again, I thought them very important. These are around the ability of children and vulnerable witnesses to have their evidence admitted in court and accepted without having to comply with the Oaths Act, without having to go through the additional trauma and the arduous task of having to be present in court, necessarily, and confront the offender in the intimidating circumstances that the judicial system presents in the form of courts.
The Leader of the Opposition has suggested there was undue delay in getting these through. I am not aware of that. I am prepared to follow up after the process of this bill as to whether there was undue delay, and get back to the Leader of the Opposition. These issues were already well in train before I became Attorney-General. They certainly did not sit on my desk in the Cabinet submission. They were not delayed getting around the agencies. They had the backing of Cabinet, and were supported by way of introduction yesterday.
Madam SPEAKER: Attorney-General, do you mind if we pause to recognise some students? Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of students from Years 8 and 9 at ANZAC Hill High School with teachers, Joss Bennett, Michael Kanaan, and Naresa Hall.
We also have students from Sadadeen Primary School, Years 4 to 6 with teachers, Arama Nataira, Wendy Haynes, Emma Bollington and Martin Cardona.
On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you, Attorney-General.
Mr STIRLING: Madam Speaker, I hope there are some budding lawyers in that audience. If they are not interested in the law, they might find this a little dry.
The Leader of the Opposition said the amendments in relation to crimes victim support was another one of those ‘oops bills’, and it is in part. I am quite prepared to accept that. However, it is also exacerbated by the outcome of an appeal decision in New South Wales which could well have had flow-on effects here. There was a bit of front-footing and the recognition that it needed to be in the act to do the job properly.
If we go back to the debate when this was put through last year, the Leader of the Opposition may have had some scepticism about it, but she was prepared to await the outcome of the regulations and see what the result would be. She supported it at the time. The government believed that the act had made it clear that all the victim had to prove was that, in fact, they had been sexually assaulted in order to claim victims of crime compensation. They did not have to subsequently prove the physical or mental harm arising from the assault itself, further trauma and further evidence, in order to be eligible for crimes victim compensation.
Under this, of course, the Director of the Crimes Victim Support Unit can award $5000 compensation up-front if they are satisfied that the victim has been subject to assault. This was the original intention, as I said: to, as far as possible, reduce any further trauma to the victim. If it was an oops, and it probably was a slight oops in the first place, it was exacerbated on the basis of the New South Wales appeal case and further legal advice to the effect that we could not achieve this through regulations, hence the amendment today.
The Leader of the Opposition asked about the Domestic Violence Act and where that is up to following the review. I am advised that the Cabinet submission is in circulation around agencies for comment as we speak. It will be before Cabinet in the near future, I would think.
Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition has a further opportunity if there is anything that I missed from her contribution that she wanted followed up because there is a committee stage amendment in relation to transition proceedings following the passage of this bill.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Clause 1 agreed to.
Proposed new Clause 1A:
Mr STIRLING: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 18.1. The amendment introduces a new commencement clause to the Justice Legislation Amendment Bill. The bill makes a number of minor amendments to legislation falling within the Justice portfolio. In particular, it makes amendments consequential to the passage of the Victims of Crime Assistance Act to ensure that the act operates effectively from its commencement on 1 May 2007. The provisions of the bill currently commence on assent, with assent scheduled to take place in the last week of April 2007. This would have the effect of amending legislation to remove and replace references to the current Crime Victims Assistance Act with references to the not yet commenced Victims of Crime Assistance Act. It is not possible to delay assent, as a number of other processes are dependent on the bill’s commencement.
Mr Chairman, the committee stage amendment inserts a new commencement clause into the Justice Legislation Amendment Bill. It has the effect of ensuring that the bill continues to commence on assent, with the exception of those parts of Schedule 2 which amend references to the Victims of Crimes Assistance Act. Those parts of Schedule 2 will commence on 1 May 2007.
Proposed new Clause 1A agreed to.
Remainder of bill, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Bill reported with amendment; report adopted.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of some more students who are visiting us today. We have Years 11 and 12 from Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, Sadadeen campus, with their teacher, Robyn Osland; Years 5 and 6 from the Larapinta Primary School, with teachers, Cathy Bridges and Candy Kerr; and students from Year 7 at Alice Springs High School, one of whom is Sean Chalmers, a Youth Parliament participant, and their teachers, Sharron Hill and Marg McHugh. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, on behalf of the Chief Minister, I nominate Wednesday, 2 May 2007 as the next day on which precedence will be given to General Business pursuant to Standing Order 93.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, prior to calling questions today, I put on the record my thanks, and I am sure on behalf of all honourable members, to a number of people for organising these sittings in Alice Springs. As you would be aware, there is a huge amount of organisation required, to bring the entire parliament from Darwin to Alice Springs. In particular, I thank the Clerk of the Assembly, Mr Ian McNeill; Captain David Horton, the Deputy Clerk; and Derek Stafford, who does a lot of the backstage things.
Also, I thank the Parliamentary Education Unit. Over these last few days, we have had the Youth Parliament and around 1500 students visit us. I thank Mrs Jan Sporn, Anna-Maria Socci, Renee Manley and Sharon Young who have done a wonderful job in the lead-up to this.
Lastly, I thank my own staff, Chris Grace and Kent Rowe. I should say, although he would be very embarrassed about this, that Kent turned 24 on Tuesday. I thank them for all of their hard work in organising, particularly the concert on Sunday and the art competition.
I am sure members will join me in extending to these people a great many thanks.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have given my leave to the Minister for Local Government to make a personal explanation.
Mr McADAM (Local Government): Madam Speaker, this is in response to the question asked by the member for Greatorex earlier. Effectively, as reported in the NT News of today, 19 April, the paragraph reads:
I place on the record that the question asked by the NT News was: ‘Is Tangentyere being held to ransom?’. I said: ‘It appears that way. I am very confident that there is a great capacity for Tangentyere Council, the Australian government and the NT government to get outcomes for the benefit of the people on the town camps’.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I seek leave to call on General Business Notice No 2 relating to the Aboriginal Lands Act Amendment Bill 2007.
Leave denied.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I therefore move - That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Aboriginal Lands Act Amendment Bill 2007 being presented and passing through all stages today.
I will outline the reason I need to move this motion. It is a matter that I trust honourable members have had the opportunity to look at, as the amendment has been provided to the Attorney-General and the offer has been made to have a discussion about the nature of it. As is the case with members opposite, often when they are defending a position, they will call upon the opposition to ensure that they have had an adequate briefing. They will also call upon the members opposite to ensure that they have written a letter to seek further clarification. I have received no such letter, e-mail or request for a briefing.
Therefore, what I presume, by having even the request to have an item placed on the agenda for discussion during this parliamentary sitting denied, I am now forced to bring it on as a matter of urgency and explain why I need to do so. I only hope - and I live in the eternal hope - that this parliament will genuinely be a parliament. I trust that all members are fully briefed and conversant with this very complex issue so we can debate it on sensible and principled grounds rather than an ideological or herd basis by which they have been told by one to say: ‘When this business comes up, because it comes from the opposition, it will be rejected. Do not even bother to work out what it might contain, or how it needs to be considered in the best interest of the Northern Territory’. Not necessarily in the best interest of a political position, but in the best interest of the Northern Territory.
Any correspondence that has been circulated on this issue is on the basis that there is a high level of uncertainty at this moment within the Territory community, particularly in the Top End. What is proposed by this amendment is simply a goodwill amendment to provide an element of certainty in a time of uncertainty. It is as simple as that.
If that is understood, I will proceed to explain further why this matter needs to be put on urgency. I state again it is a matter of goodwill; it is a matter of creating certainty in a time of uncertainty.
A member interjecting.
Mr MILLS: If you mock and ridicule even that statement, honourable member, you are doing yourself no service because you do not even understand what it is …
A member interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MILLS: … that we are endeavouring to bring through. I have not received any correspondence whatsoever; not the slightest interest, no question, no seeking a briefing for a deeper understanding rather than a shallow, mocking response.
It concerns me that the parliament is being denigrated into a place where there are fixed positions. We may as well give it away and forget the charade. People do not have to bother to turn up because they know what is going to happen and we will organise it by media release.
Madam Speaker, members will be aware of the recent Federal Court decision that has caused so much controversy in the community in the Top End. There has been a stunted response by government, other than to appeal the decision to the High Court, a position that is supported by the Territory opposition. There has also been an appeal lodged by the federal government, which has taken out a full-page ad saying that it is litigating. I argue that other steps can be taken. One of the steps is to empower the Northern Land Council, in particular, to sign off on a general waiver of permits and the taking of fish on behalf of traditional owners between now and the High Court appeal. That is why we need to provide certainty. You know very well there is immense uncertainty at this point. It is a simple measure that we can pass as a parliament to ensure that there is goodwill and clarity at this point. That is all we endeavour to do, and that is why we need to proceed with this amendment so we can move to that point and bring certainty right up until the time the High Court makes a decision.
We already have an indication that there is resistance to even going down the path, which does cause some concern,. Nonetheless, I will proceed because I have 30 minutes. It may be offensive to a member opposite for me to stand and speak but, in this parliament, I have the right as an elected member to speak and explain why.
This matter is of grave community concern. It is also, as the Attorney-General at the AFANT AGM described it, quite accurately, political dynamite. Such political dynamite, notwithstanding the social impact that may be borne upon a period of uncertainty over such a profound issue as access to waterways …
Mrs BRAHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker! First, we have had no notification that this was to be brought on. We assumed that it was going to be on General Business Day. The second point is the motion is about suspending standing orders; it is not about discussing the motion.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, the notice has the date on it, Thursday, 19 April; so it was clear it was going to come on today. That aspect has already been overturned. Member for Blain, I ask you to contain your comments to the suspension of standing orders and the need for urgency in particular.
Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker, I am endeavouring to do so, but it is not a matter of just saying we need to hurry up with something but I cannot tell you what it is that we need to hurry up with and why we need to hurry it up.
Madam SPEAKER: I am aware of that, member for Blain. I am reminding you of the Standing Order to remain …
Mr MILLS: I appreciate that, thank you. That is for members who are concerned that it is difficult to understand because it is a complex matter.
As I was saying, if you are aware of it, on a social basis, it is causing grave community concern. It has the potential for social division. It is, as the Attorney-General rightly described it, political dynamite. So much so, that advice has been received by the opposition that the Labor Party is currently at work on focus groups so they can get proper intelligence to work on this matter. There are focus groups in place at the moment to give that deeper analysis because, of course, they are more concerned about the politics of this rather than the justice of it.
All we need at this point is clarification on the matter between now and the time that the High Court makes a decision. It is as simple as that. There are focus groups being conducted at the moment. We have an understanding of the sorts of questions that are being asked, which is an indication of the level of concern of the current Labor government on this issue of great political import. More importantly, it is a social matter that needs to be addressed. By addressing this as a matter of urgency today, we can provide that certainty between now and the time the High Court makes its decision.
The High Court must examine this decision. It really is the only course of action now available to government. That is not a criticism; that is understood and accepted. If the Territory loses the case, the Territory then loses the control of up to 80% of the Territory coastline unless the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act is given to the Territory to administer, and that is an offer the current government has refused to accept.
Currently, the Northern Territory Aboriginal Land Act provides that permits - and you need to understand this, honourable members; just relax a bit - must be obtained by people entering Aboriginal land. That is the Aboriginal Land Act; it sits with this parliament. It provides that permits must be obtained by people entering Aboriginal land.
The CLP amendment is a goodwill amendment. It will enable the Northern Land Council to demonstrate goodwill by waiving the compulsory requirement for permits. It provides them with the legal and legislative capacity to waive it because, currently, the act says it must be in place for people wishing to undertake recreational fishing in intertidal zones until the High Court appeal is heard. Nothing in the proposed amendment would force the NLC to waive their right to demand permits. There is no obligation. It provides the legal capacity for that option to be made in the best interests of providing certainty at this time. I expect that there would be support from members at that point, because they say they are opposed to the permit system and, yet, have a temporary arrangement. We can provide the means whereby there is no legal necessity to have those permits if the Northern Land Council so chooses.
The CLP is seeking an acknowledgement of the efforts being made at this point to try to find some clarity. Nothing in the Federal Court decision prevents the NLC or traditional owners from giving permission for fishing to occur in the waters in question. What the decision says is that the Northern Territory Fisheries Act, and this is an important point about not only access but permission to take fish, does not operate on Aboriginal land and that there is not a public right to fish.
The CLP proposes the same right that a private landowner has to allow people to come on to private land to hunt with permission. By permission, it is a choice, it is the exercise of a private right of ownership, not a public right concept that was rejected by the court. There is no attempt in the proposed bill to acquire property rights. That is most important: there is no attempt to acquire property rights. The government’s and the NLC’s response has been to dismiss the proposed amendment as being beyond the power of the Northern Territory parliament. Incorrect.
The fact is that our amendment will address the specific and, effectively, absolute requirement by law that non-indigenous people in the intertidal zone must have a permit. It will create the option for traditional owners to waive their right to issue a permit. This is something that cannot happen unless our proposed amendment is successful. It is not beyond the power of the Northern Territory parliament, the traditional owners, or representatives of the land council. The CLP is hopeful that the NLC will welcome the proposal so that they can demonstrate their goodwill leading up to the High Court decision. It is to ensure some clarity and exercises the expression of goodwill.
This should be something that the land councils welcome as it will increase the capacity for Aboriginal people to make decisions about their own land by extending to them a property right that they do not currently enjoy. This approach does not offend the philosophy of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act of the Commonwealth.
Madam Speaker, the reason that this matter is urgent is because the amendment needs to be made so that these steps can be taken by the NLC in the best interests of a harmonious Territory, and bring certainty where there is currently uncertainty.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, the government will not be agreeing to the introduction and passage of this bill today. It would be absolutely unprecedented action by an opposition, only ever attempted once in the Northern Territory parliament - and that was by Chief Minister Ian Tuxworth from the government benches in the mid-1980s.
We do understand what the opposition is attempting to do because they signalled this policy approach last week. I have touched on the basics with the member for Blain; I have not discussed it at length. However, I have pointed out to him the difficulties that I believe lie in his way. I thank the office of the Leader of the Opposition for providing us with a copy of the bill.
When we got the bill, I asked my office to send it to the Solicitor-General to have a look at it, and I will table his advice. What he says in summary is this:
In conclusion, the Solicitor-General said:
That advice from the Solicitor-General is conclusive. The bill the member for Blain is proposing to introduce and pass on urgency is not a valid bill. I table the full advice for the benefit of all members. Therefore, it is pointless proceeding any further with this discussion.
However, I do make the offer to the opposition that I did before: they are welcome to a full briefing on the Blue Mud Bay decision. They have not sought a briefing to date in what is, in the words of member for Blain, an incredibly complex decision coming out of the Federal Court. I recommend to the member for Blain and the opposition to come in for a full briefing on not just the implications of the Blue Mud Bay Federal Court decision, but the impact of it; what it means and how it disempowers, clearly, the Legislative Assembly from having any role in a legislative way out of this.
I also invite the member for Blain and the opposition to come up with their advisors and we will arrange for a full meeting with the Solicitor-General and the staff of the Solicitor-General’s office. I am happy to organise it. If the member for Blain and the opposition then think, following advice and a full briefing on the matter from the Solicitor-General’s office, there is a way through achieving what they want in legislation, government will welcome it at the first opportunity, which will be the next General Business Day in 10 days, a week-and-a-half’s time.
It is our view, and I am pretty sure it is the clear advice of the Solicitor-General in this Memorandum of Advice I just tabled, there is no way, on a Northern Territory legislative approach, that you can achieve it. However, it is incumbent on the member for Blain to accept the invitation to meet with the Office of the Solicitor-General, to hear the highest quality legal advice the government can bring to bear on such a complicated matter as this. Then, if he thinks there is still a way through, bring it back next week.
Madam Speaker, we reject the motion to suspend standing orders on urgency to have this bill heard and passed through all stages.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I will keep it brief. I appreciate the presentation by the Attorney-General. I am still not persuaded that my view is incorrect. I do not want any member to take from this that we have been trying to concoct some kind of …
A member interjecting.
Mr MILLS: No, not you. You are above reproach. It is others who, by body language, indicated they think this might be some kind of ill-considered scheme. I can assure members, just as the Attorney-General and other members who have obviously engaged themselves in the complexity of this matter, because it is such a matter that is going to involve and have an impact on all of us, they have had an opportunity to try to understand it. I will take that offer up …
Mr Stirling: Yes, I will have them …
Mr MILLS: Certainly. I am still persuaded that what we have presented has merit. I will carry that with me to the offer you have made. There is one important element to this, which is that it creates no obligation. It is simply the removal of the requirement for a permit system. With this amendment, the ball will always remain with the Northern Land Council; it simply removes an option. There is no intent to acquire any right that is currently afforded to the Northern Land Council. It just clears the way and to make it possible for clarity between this moment and the moment that the High Court makes a decision. That is all this proposition is based on. Judging by the comments that have been made by the Attorney-General, I do not think that point has been adequately grasped. There is no attempt to acquire any right.
I remain ever hopeful that these matters are being assessed independently by members, that they are not just lining up and receiving marching orders, but they are giving some consideration to these matters. I can assure members opposite, just in case you have such a view of members on this side of the Chamber, we do read, we do have our own advice, and we have spent many long hours dissecting this and trying to find a solution. This is a solution. Obviously, by weight of numbers it will be rejected. Nonetheless, we will continue on and I will attend the briefing.
Motion negatived.
MOTION
Note Statement - Government Initiatives and Achievements in Central Australia
Continued from 18 April 2007.
Mr NATT (Mines and Energy): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement. I take this opportunity to inform the Assembly of the considerable contributions that primary industry and mines make to Central Australia. As members are aware, areas of Central Australia have received good rain over the last few months, providing welcome relief to some properties that had been in the grip of one of the worst droughts on record. However, the rains did not affect all areas and there are still pastoral properties that have not received drought-breaking rains. It will take some time for properties to recover from one of the worst droughts on record in rebuilding stock levels.
This government is well aware of the hardships experienced by pastoralists in the region and we are assisting in a number of ways. In response to a detailed application by the Territory government on behalf of pastoralists in Central Australia, the federal minister has agreed that a prima facie case exists for exceptional circumstance for drought funding for pastoralists in Central Australia. This is a first for the Territory. The next step in this process is for the National Rural Advisory Committee to tour affected properties. The advisory committee plans to visit drought-affected areas before the end of this month with a view to making final recommendations shortly. This is good news for pastoralists and again shows the value of cooperation between industry and government in achieving positive outcomes.
Separate from exceptional circumstances, the second part of the process involves Northern Territory drought assistance arrangements, and will see departmental officers visiting those properties already declared in drought under the Northern Territory arrangements to determine their ongoing status. These initiatives show that solid and practical processes are in place to assist pastoralists in these difficult circumstances. I have no doubt the Assembly will hear more about this in the not-too-distant future.
While I am on the topic of drought, research and development in Central Australia’s grazing strategies project on Old Man Plains Research Station and regional pastoral properties is supplying information to assist the initiative to move from the current assistance arrangements to a drought-preparedness model. An integral approach to extending this information in the department’s grazing land and management program aims to address both sustainable management of pastoral natural resources and economic viability. These are sensible and exciting developments and bode well for the future of the industry and will play a part in ensuring that, in the future, properties are more prepared for extended dry events.
As the Chief Minister mentioned, the government is committed to ensuring that our booming resources sector continues to benefit all Territorians. The minerals and petroleum industry underpins our economy, with the mining sector accounting for 26% or $3bn per annum, making it the largest contributor to our economy.
I announced last week that the government will allocate $12m over the next four years to the program called Bringing Forward Discovery which follows on from the highly successful Building the Territory’s Resource Base. Bringing Forward Discovery is about creating jobs and keeping our economy strong by expanding the mining sector. It is a four-year program that will see $2.75m allocated to geoscientific data in the 2007-08 budget, and $0.25m put into promoting the Territory as part of the government’s long-term exploration investment strategy.
Rather than just riding the resource boom, we are actively encouraging explorers to come to the Territory. Worldwide, it is a very competitive environment. Since Building the Territory’s Resource Base began four years ago, there has been a 76% increase in mineral exploration and an outstanding 783% increase in petroleum exploration. That means two new mineral and six offshore oil/gas discoveries, and the commissioning of three new mines in 2005-06, with a further four to five mines expected into 2007-08, evidence of a government initiative that is working well for the benefit of all Territorians and our economy.
While I am on the subject of geoscience, my department’s Northern Territory Geological Survey Unit held the 8th Annual Geoscience Exploration Seminar, or AGES, in this building, the Alice Springs Convention Centre, on 20 and 21 March. AGES is the pinnacle of our NTGS and it is the meeting that explorers, researchers and industry representatives rely upon to hear about the latest research and scientific information in the world of geoscience. AGES has enormous credibility in the industry and attendance continues to grow. This year, AGES grew yet again, with 56 exploration companies represented, a 33% increase over the 2006 numbers.
There is also a Mining Services Expo and Seminar held in association with AGES. These activities are organised by the Department of Business, Economic and Regional Development, or DBERD, and although it is only the second time the activities have been run, attendance and content have grown considerably. I reported details of AGES to the Assembly in Question Time last night. Suffice to say that it continues to be the single most important minerals and energy industry meeting in which my department is involved.
Alice Springs is also about to become a solar city, a place where alternative power use is a reality, under the Commonwealth Solar Cities program. The vision is for a community where people are not only aware of and concerned for the environment, but have access to knowledge, equipment and support to enable them to act in an informed and intelligent way to actively contribute to the sustainability of the community.
The announcement made earlier this week means that over $21m in cash and in-kind contributions will be spent in Alice over the next eight years. This funding will allow a smart meter trial for some 200 homes to demonstrate how electricity bills can be reduced by using time-of-use tariffs and smart meters. It will also mean there will be widespread installation of grid connection photovoltaic systems. These convert solar energy into electricity and are similar to the systems already in use in Hermannsburg and Lajamanu power stations. Between 500 and 1000 homes will be installed with PV systems to demonstrate their effectiveness.
Finally, residential and commercial customers will be offered a range of energy efficient services and products aimed at reducing total energy consumption. All in all, Alice Springs becoming a solar city is one of the most sensible, forward-looking initiatives for Central Australia in many years.
My congratulations go to the Alice Springs Town Council as the bid coordinator, as well as the other bid partners including our Department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Mines, the Power and Water Corporation, Desert Knowledge Australia, the Tangentyere Council, the Centre for Appropriate Technology and Charles Darwin University. I am sure you will agree that there is not a city in the country more suited to the use of solar power than Alice Springs.
Continuing the theme of innovation in Central Australia, companies like Arafura Resources, Peko, Newmont and Bootu Creek Resources are interacting well with local communities and the government, and are opening up new projects in the region that provide employment and a boost to the local economy.
Arafura Resources has undertaken extensive exploration on its Nolans Bore tenement, located 135 km north of Alice Springs. Its program utilised much of the material generated and provided by my department’s Geological Survey Unit. Nolans Bore is now considered to be a major deposit by world standards. This discovery will be a huge benefit to Central Australia, and my colleague, the Minister for Business and Economic Development, has previously outlined the significant contribution that exploration and mining offers to Central Australia. Moreover, Arafura plans to construct a pilot rare earth processing facility this year, with a full treatment plant slated for 2009. This will be the second mineral value-adding plant in the Territory, Alcan’s alumina plant at Gove being the first, and will provide significant new job and local business opportunities.
Just outside Tennant Creek, there is significant activity with Peko Rehab’s tailings retreatment project, producing gold and magnetite, employing about 15 local people in the extraction process. In addition to those employed directly, this project also uses local tradesmen as required, once again giving a significant boost to the local economy.
Many of you will be familiar with Newmont’s gold mine and the processing operation in the Tanami. However, apart from the obvious economic and development benefits, this company has an exciting indigenous employment and training initiative that means around 20% of its workforce is indigenous. The company has a strong compulsory cross-cultural training program for all employees that is a model for the industry. It is initiatives like this that assist us to meet the goal of increasing indigenous employment and economic development.
I also wish to outline what has been achieved through the highly successful Indigenous Pastoral Program, or the IPP, which began in 2003. A memorandum of understanding was signed between all parties involved in the Indigenous Pastoral Project in an historic signing ceremony at Kalkarindji last August. This MOU guarantees the innovative program a further five years of funding. This means that the program’s initial three years has been extended, giving the program the opportunity to bed down the work already achieved and to tackle new projects. The program returns inactive indigenous properties to pastoral production, trains young indigenous men in station hand skills, and teaches good land management principles. The program has been outstanding since its inception and, in its first three years, saw several Indigenous Land Use Agreements signed, placed more than 50 indigenous people in pastoral employment, and saw a staggering 25 000 increase in the number of cattle being run on participating properties. It is planned that a further 10 000 head of cattle will be run on indigenous properties over the next 18 months, with the long-term aim of adding 60 000 head to the Northern Territory herd.
The IPP is a model of cooperation with the Northern and Central Land Councils, the Indigenous Land Corporation, Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association, DPIFM and the Commonwealth Department of Employment and Workplace Relations all involved. The IPP is one of the real success stories of Central Australia, developing indigenous economic capacity, improving land management, providing indigenous employment and training, and helping to keep the Territory economy strong.
While I am on the topic of our pastoral industry, there is another innovative program that my department is running in Central Australia. The 21st Century Pastoralism Project looks to explore innovative mechanisms to reduce operational expenditure of Central Australian pastoral enterprises. Part of the secret of this is to use the technologies and telemetry to manage remote watering sites and weigh stations. This is yet another example of the department working smarter and using technology to save on man hours, time and effort in running pastoral enterprises. The end result is greater efficiency and profitability. The industry has been enthusiastic in its uptake of this project.
Another program undertaken by my department in Central Australia is the Central Australian Grazing Strategies Partnership. This seeks to evaluate the impacts of different grazing systems on sustainability and productivity. It looks at water rotation trials, stocking rates as they apply to individual participating properties and a level of utilisation of natural resources. A heifer fertility project is another aspect of the program that assesses the fertility of a young breeding female and seeks to improve her fertility by establishing managing strategies.
Another highly successful program being introduced by my department across the Territory is the National Livestock Identification System or NLIS. The introduction of NLIS in the Territory will allow the tracing of an animal from farm gate to the plate, and is seen as vital to maintaining both international and domestic markets for Territory cattle. The system fills a critical need for a fast, accurate traceability system for livestock in order to maintain consumer and public confidence in the quality and safety of meat and dairy products. We have committed $790 000 directly to this initiative. At the heart of the system is the use of radio frequency identification devices, or RFIDs, which individually tags each animal and allows tracing of their movement. RFIDs are attached to the animal’s ear and are read by a scanner or wand at saleyards and trucking depots, with the information being entered in the national database.
The NLIS database is the central repository of electronically recorded stock movements and, to date, has recorded over one million cattle movements, including 740 000 individual cattle movements from property of origin, and 260 000 cattle movements via 3000 saleyards throughout the country. So far, the system has been embraced by industry to the extent that, at a recent Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Conference, a visiting American expert stated that our NLIS system was years in advance of anything in use in the USA, and he was envious of what we had achieved.
We are all aware that Central Australia is a unique region, and one that presents us with certain challenges. I am pleased to be able to report that my department is pushing ahead with several projects that not only support government priorities but address some of the challenges I mentioned a moment ago.
Cropping and horticultural activities are contributing to industry and capacity growth in Central Australia. A farm-ready program has been developed by the Anmatjere Community Government Council, the Ti Tree table grape industry, and DPIFM staff introduced the Anmatjere people to horticulture and train them in the basic skills required to obtain employment in the industry. Skills gained include pruning, irrigation maintenance and machinery operation. Ti Tree Research Farm is used for training purposes and as a base for community and industry interaction. The program has been attended by 20 local indigenous men and has recently resulted in work on commercial table grapes and melon properties. It is expected that the program will provide the foundation for Centre Farm training activities and will, ultimately, be provided by a registered training organisation.
The community gardens project aims to increase indigenous communities and individuals’ involvement and participation in horticultural enterprises and is seen as an early step in the horticultural economic development of indigenous communities. Community gardens have been developed with the assistance of the DPIFM horticultural staff at Six Mile at Ti Tree and at Emu Point in the Top End. A range of easy-to-grow crops are planted and tended by either individuals at the Six Mile or groups of Emu Point women, and have resulted in fresh fruit and vegetables being available for local consumption, and a sense of achievement for the growers.
DPIFM has assisted Centre Farm to develop environmental management guidelines for use in horticultural enterprises on indigenous country. The objective is for landowners and commercial proponents to have a set of protocols to which they can refer. Once implemented, they can reasonably expect to have sustainable production from the land into the future. The Anmatjere region development plan released by the government in November 2003 under the Building Stronger Regions, Stronger Futures initiative is well under way and is ushering in considerable expansion in the region’s horticultural industry. Indications are that existing horticultural development in the Ti Tree/Pine Hill area of approximately 25 permanent employees and 250 people at peak times can be expected to double within five years, with the local Anmatjere people providing the bulk of workers under a program administered by Centre Farm and the Central Australian Horticultural Development arm. Once again, this program is an example of cooperation between the CLC and the local community and my department for the benefit of the local community, regional economy, and the Territory as a whole.
It is not only at Ti Tree that my department is kicking goals in the field of indigenous economic development. The first ever Comprehensive Shared Responsibility Agreement in the Northern Territory has been signed covering the indigenous community at Ali Curung near Tennant Creek. The CSRA is valued at around $1.5m and sees to the department’s horticultural office engaged in on-the-ground assistance to the indigenous community to ensure that the project is an ongoing and viable horticultural venture.
In many of these projects and, indeed, in national debate, water is a key element. I am pleased to say that the government is involved in an innovative, cooperative project involving the Power and Water Corporation and DPIFM to reuse the waste water produced by Alice Springs. At present, 3000 mL of waste water from Alice Springs is evaporated. This project seeks to use that water and, once up and running, will move the Northern Territory to the forefront of commercial water reuse. This water reuse project involves turning a waste problem into a commercial opportunity by eliminating overflows of waste water into the Ilparpa Swamp. Power and Water has invested $10.4m into research development and infrastructure to produce high-quality water for reuse.
The scheme pumps the waste water via a 6 km pipeline from the city of Alice Springs to AZRI. The water will be treated and then filtered into a natural part of the channel.
Mr HENDERSON: Mr Deputy Speaker, I move an extension of time to allow the minister to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr NATT: I have nearly finished. The water will be treated and then filtrated into a natural palaeochannel, the Todd River, where, over time, an underground mound of water will form. The project has been through an extensive public consultation process and initial projections of production for the site, based on planting 100 ha of table grapes that will directly employ six permanent and 50 casual staff with considerable opportunities for indigenous training and employment, have been accepted.
In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement and ask that the Assembly note DPIFM’s projects and initiatives throughout the Territory.
Mr McADAM (Central Australia): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the statement by the Chief Minister in respect of priorities and achievements in Central Australia.
I would like to begin by making an observation in respect of the last three days in Alice Springs and this parliament. There is absolutely no doubt that there are high levels of passion, concern and feelings on a whole range of issues. Clearly, we, as parliamentarians, particularly we on this side, have been subject to some of that over the last few days. That is a very healthy sign. What it shows is that people care about their community. They are concerned about quality of life issues. They are concerned about unacceptable levels of crime and antisocial behaviour. I honestly believe that gives this community great capacity to move forward together and to work through some of the many issues that we, as a community, face in Alice Springs and, indeed, other places like Tennant Creek. There is a real sense of community here, even though there are differences.
The point is that, as a community, we have to fix it. People will be aware that there is a very significant number of people from the business community who expressed concerns, particularly about law and order issues. Again, that just shows our community is very committed to growing businesses and creating employment opportunities, equally so in respect of the North Side Action Group. They are very concerned about the placement of dongas at the Dalgety site. There is an underlying position that people were prepared to stand up and let their views be known, equally so in regards to Advance Alice. You may not agree with everything they do, but the point is they are in same position. They felt passionate, they care about the community, and they voiced their concerns in a very forthright way, but, at the same time, I believe constructively.
The same applies to Tangentyere Council, which, members will be aware, held a Special General Meeting in the mall yesterday. It is also an integral part of this community; it contributes a lot. Members are very concerned about the status of the town camps and wanted to get their views across. Equally, they believe they should be listened to and that they should be part of the solution.
I have mentioned those four because it is a really good basis for a community to get together and work through some of the very pressing issues that we face. I had the opportunity today to have lunch with Pat Turner and Neville Perkins, both born in Alice Springs. They know many of the issues. They have been out of town and they have come back. I was inspired by their commitment to and vision for Alice Springs as a community, not only from an indigenous perspective, but also from a non-indigenous perspective.
It gave me great hope in the sense that they, and a whole lot of other people here, are going to work very strongly in trying to alleviate some of the issues in this town. There are other people who, I believe, will contribute; people like Mr Tilmouth from Tangentyere Council, Mr Steven Brown from Advance Alice, Mr Murray Stewart, Heather Laughton from the Arrernte Council, Betty Pearce and Frank Ansell from Lhere Artepe, and Stephanie Bell from Central Australian Aboriginal Congress. I am certain that I have missed other people, but I know there are a lot of people of that calibre who will work in the best interests of everyone in this community to make a difference.
The Leader of the Opposition in the past, I think in Darwin probably about 12 months ago, talked about a strategy, which I understand she described as Alice in Five, as a means of engaging the community, the bottom line being to make it a more safe and secure community and a more friendly environment. At that time, I said to the Leader of the Opposition that I, as the Minister for Central Australia, would do whatever possible to engage in that process in an apolitical way. That position remains. I hope that the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Greatorex, and all members of this House, share that commitment to work together in this community to make a difference because there is no need to beat around the bush. There are some very pressing issues.
We have to be honest, straight and mature about it, and we have to tackle it together. The community forum on crime, which is going to be convened tomorrow by Her Worship the Mayor, Fran Kilgariff, is but one step in trying to get people together to deal with these issues. I mentioned it on radio a few weeks ago in the context of many of the issues in Alice Springs particularly around the issues impacting on our young people, and not only those who live in Alice Springs but those who come in from the bush communities. I said there can no longer be a time for organisations, people and individuals to work in isolation, and I believe that that is the key to the solution for this community.
Before I go on to the rest of my speech, Mr Deputy Speaker, that is the commitment I have in respect of this community, as I have to Tennant Creek and other places such as Borroloola. We do have some very pressing issues which are not going to go away. They are not going to go away, so we have a choice. We can work together, or we can choose not to, and we know where that is going to end up. However, the pressing need is to do it now, to start working now because if we do not start now and we do not get on top of some of the issues impacting on this and other communities throughout the Northern Territory and, indeed, regional Australia, then perhaps it could be too late.
I do not wish to sound alarmist, but people are going to continue to move into the regional centres. There is not much happening out in the communities; we have to be honest about that. This is where most of the health services are. This is where, in the main, in the southern region anyway, the secondary education is. This is where all the footy is being played. This is where all the shops are. Indigenous people who live in bush communities really are no different from those who live in town, and I am referring to young people here, because they have the same aspirations as non-indigenous people. They want the same opportunities and the same quality of life.
It is for that reason I believe we do have a great opportunity to work together. I know that members on my side of the House such as Karl Hampton, who is the member for Stuart, a long-time resident of Alice Springs; in fact, born in Alice Springs, is that right, Karl?
Mr Hampton: Yes.
Mr McADAM: Born in Alice Springs, from a very respected family. The member for Stuart and I speak, and we know that something has to be done. I know the member for Stuart will play a very important role in the tasks that we have ahead. The member for Macdonnell, Alison Anderson, is from this country, part of the Central Australian region. She has great expertise in being able to consult, liaise, and speak to people in the bush communities. She has excellent language skills and I know that she is committed to making a difference.
That is all I have to say in respect of this community because Alice Springs is a great place. It is one of the real innovative, creative and courageous small towns in regional Australia. That is the challenge, and I am absolutely certain that all members of this House, regardless of our political persuasions, will do everything we possibly can to make this place better.
In many cases, we know that alcohol is the single most critical reason many of these things occur. Something like 96% of contacts with police across the Northern Territory, I do not know what they are here, are alcohol related. It is for that reason I believe the alcohol management plan initiated by the Chief Minister, involving many of the people I have mentioned before and others, is a very good way of dealing with some of these issues.
It is important that we get on top of some of the grog problems. There have been some encouraging results over recent months in regard to the alcohol management plan. The figures indicate that there has been a 31% reduction in admissions to sobering-up shelters, 50% fewer people are taken into protective custody, and there has been a 12% drop in selected offences against property. As I said earlier, statistics can tell you anything, but what they do indicate is that maybe the plan is working and is part of the solution. That is why it is very important that this community continues to engage with all sectors of Alice Springs in driving alcohol reform, which is going to bring about some real differences.
In the time that I have, Mr Deputy Speaker, I will refer to some other portfolio areas. Local government, of course, is one issue which has been much discussed and debated over the last three to four months. Members of this House will be aware that the government has made a decision to reform local government as we know it across the Northern Territory. We are going to be moving to a new shire-type model which will consist of nine shires: three in the central region; one in the Barkly region; and the rest in what we describe as the Top End. Effectively, what we hope that will do is provide a greater capacity for communities to coordinate to access dollars, which have in the past, I believe, been denied.
The key to the new reform is that local government is the third tier of government right across Australia. It is a recognised form of governance, and something which is accepted by all the major parties and state governments. Effectively, I believe that this new model will provide certainty in communities going forward, because we know that many of the smaller community councils in the bush have struggled over the last few years for various reasons. Some of those reasons are because of lack of expertise and skills of employees. Another reason is that there has been a lack of commitment by governments, both Commonwealth and the NT governments, past and present. They effectively said: ‘Out of sight, out of mind’. That sort of approach has to stop, and I believe this new model will provide certainty.
It will also give councils in the bush the same opportunity to access dollars which has, perhaps, been denied in the past. There has been a tendency in the past for agencies to go to, as we knew it, the Commonwealth government’s ATSIC or, as we know it now, FaCSIA, the Commonwealth Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. Indigenous people who live out in the bush and, indeed, all people who live in the bush, should not rely on one government agency in respect of dollars. There should be the same choice to be able to access those sorts of dollars. I believe the new model will provide that.
Roads are an example. At the moment, there is much talk about roads. We have heard the Chief Minister. At the very least under this new model, we believe that communities out bush will be able to access dollars which they hitherto were not able to.
Another area is housing. Without a doubt, housing is one of the greatest challenges facing this government, particularly in the remote regions. Much has been said and written, but people have talked about a shortfall of something like $1.2bn. We know that we are not going to be in a position to secure that money in the first instance. We have to be more creative, more innovative in housing construction and design. We have to bring down construction costs. It is for that reason that the Indigenous Housing Advisory Board has been very proactive in engaging the construction industry.
The bottom line is that we have to drive down the cost of housing. Indigenous housing cannot remain insular or isolated; we have to expose it to the broader sector. That is what we are trying to do. There have been some good results of late. Most houses across the Territory cost from $360 000, $380 000 up to $0.5m. I am very pleased that Nyirranggulung in Katherine has been working with Bluescope Steel in regard to a pilot project for a three-bedroom house that meets all compliances. The advice I have received is that they have this cost down to around about $260 000. That is a really a big improvement in the cost of construction.
The other important point is that the house in question was built by employees, indigenous people, which is a great outcome, and the head of the project was an indigenous builder. It just shows you that at the very least you should try to be innovative and creative, and that is what the Aboriginal Indigenous Advisory Board has done. They have challenged past conventions in regard to housing.
Much has been said and written about the town camps issue. I probably will not go into great detail here because I do not have the time. Tangentyere Council is a very good organisation in Alice Springs which has served …
Mr BONSON: Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the member for Barkly be granted an extension of time to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr McADAM: As I say, Tangentyere is a very professional organisation which has served the needs of town camps for a very long time. Members will be aware that it was the Northern Territory government which set up the Town Camps Task Force, which consists of membership of the NT government, Lhere Artepe, Tangentyere Council, Alice Springs Town Council, ICC and other agencies. Effectively, it was set up to improve the quality of life of people who live in town camps, and to provide better infrastructure such as roads and parks; better municipal-type services.
I pay tribute to the Tangentyere Council and the Alice Springs Town Council, which worked very closely to make a difference. I believe that into the future, some real changes will occur in these suburbs - they are not town camps - that will make it so much better for those who live in them.
Much has been said and written regarding the Northern Territory government’s relationship with the Commonwealth on this and other matters. Underlying all the political humbug that goes on between political parties, which we are probably charged to do although we should not do it in regard to such pressing issues, there is a great degree of coordination in trying to make a difference. I pay tribute to the federal government. We have our differences; there is no doubt about that, but they are showing real goodwill on the town camp situation in Alice Springs, and they are trying to make a difference. I am absolutely confident that the Northern Territory government, Tangentyere Council and the Commonwealth government will be able to agree on a way to secure the outcomes those communities thoroughly deserve.
In conclusion, I want to speak about my community in Tennant Creek, which is also part of Central Australia. Tennant Creek is a very strong, courageous, small community dealing with many of the same issues affecting Alice Springs and, indeed, other places like Katherine. Despite all the hardships and differences, the community as a whole takes its role very seriously. They work very hard toward overcoming some of the issues, which are not dissimilar to here. The Tennant Creek Town Council, Julalikari Council, Anyinginyi Health, Papulu Apparr-Kari Language Centre, and all the surrounding communities are working together. We are trying to make a difference, and I hope the benefits that are going to accrue in the future will make it a better place.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I have digressed from my speech but, nonetheless, I pay tribute to all those people in Central Australia, both indigenous and non-indigenous, who have the community’s interests at heart. Many of them were born here and few of them will leave. Many of those people believe in Alice Springs and Tennant Creek. I am very confident that, despite some of the difficulties and issues we have, people will work together in the interests of all.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement. I am fortunate to live in this unique part of the Territory. Like many, I benefit from the distinct features that make this place so great. One renowned feature is the land. That has made us who we are; the land is the foundation that makes us Central Australians. Like all who live here, I am fortunate to live near the MacDonnell Ranges, with its ancient formations and contrasts, the dry river beds, the red soil, and the rocky hills between roads and suburbs. The kinds of plants and animals that live here all have a purpose. Everything here is a reminder of the wisdom etched into this country, and there is an appreciation and connection that grows with you the longer you live here.
Members of this Legislative Assembly from other parts of the Territory are reminded of this on these occasions when parliament sits in Central Australia. Many visitors from across the globe come to see these natural wonders. They are here only for a short period but, for Alice Springs and Central Australian residents, this is the place we are fortunate to call home.
Another renowned feature that makes this place so great is its culture and people. Aboriginal culture and its strength add to the vibrancy and distinction of this place. Arrernte, Luritja, Pitjantjatjara, Pintubi, Yankunytjatjara, Warlpiri and Anmatjere are foreign names to some, but to people who live here, they are an integral part of our language and identity. To many who live here, they are more familiar than the English words that most Territorians hear and speak every day.
Understanding these dynamics is important, but it can never be fully appreciated. We can only begin to grasp the true impact this dynamic creates, but it is an important aspect to consider in formulating and shaping policy. To borrow a word from a federal counterpart, considering this point gives some context to the five second media grab: normalisation.
In summary, it is these two distinct features, our culture and land, that form two significant resources benefiting all Central Australians. They are essential components of our society, of who we are. For those who are not immersed in Aboriginal culture, they are, nevertheless, an important feature of identity and perception. For those who are, they form the bedrock of our existence. They are part of what makes us all Central Australians. They are resources that are highly valuable in terms of our regional economy. The survival of our distinct culture and the land are two resources that cannot be measured accurately. They can also be overlooked.
While members opposite are quick to polarise division, it is important to remind the Assembly of the positive features of this place. It is important to consider the dynamics that exist in our social interactions. It is important to value and acknowledge what makes this place special. I challenge members of this Legislative Assembly from Central Australia to demonstrate the importance of these features because, as I hear the rhetoric, I recognise the fundamental failure to appreciate the challenges we face. I recognise the failure to acknowledge those resources - our distinct culture and our land - that makes us strong. I fail to see how our young people, faced with many significant challenges, can ever be inspired or motivated by hearing what the CLP leadership has been saying. This is an important distinction to make.
When members opposite talk about Aboriginal issues, they are not talking with Aboriginal people, they are not talking to Aboriginal people in a constructive way. When they do talk to Aboriginal people, they sit on their high horse, the one Mal Brough sits on when he strides into town. Their motivations are punitive. Whether it is Tony Abbott talking about the need for more paternalism, or the Leader of the Opposition seeking national media attention, there is one common motivation, and that is to have discourse between non-Aboriginal people as to what the solutions are for Aboriginal people. It is to promote the idea that solutions are exclusively opposite to Aboriginal people and that they can only be embraced if Aboriginal people were to take it upon themselves to cross that line.
The Liberal and CLP leadership is more concerned about the media focus - what words to use in a four-second national media grab - than what works and what should be built on. They are more concerned with populism and rhetoric than dealing and engaging with Aboriginal people. They fail to recognise that solutions come from within, and that governments and politicians should serve an enabling and empowering purpose. They fail to recognise that their motivations can compound problems. These are the reasons why I feel it is important to remind the Legislative Assembly of the positive aspects of this place. I challenge those opposite to find similar examples; to talk positively about the identity we all share in this place.
One example I will use today is a story about the Aboriginal art industry. Last month, I visited the Kintore community near the border of Western Australia to attend the launch of art centre. The centre was built not from public tax revenue, but from the private investment of artists involved with the Papunya Tula Art Cooperative, at a cost of $1.2m. It was inspiring to see an art centre built for communal reasons; a comfortable place for every artist and resident, away from sometimes extreme weather conditions. Recent reports indicate that Aboriginal Australians will fare worse with climate change, and Kintore is one of the places most affected. The art centre will assist in countering these possibilities and will produce health benefits that cannot be accurately measured. I congratulate Papunya Tula Arts, all of the artists, artists of Central Australia, and Kintore residents on this proud achievement.
This is a proud success story of the Aboriginal art movement. Through painting on canvas, our people convert Aboriginal culture, storytelling and creative skill to produce a highly valuable resource. It is an industry that is as significant as the cattle industry, and is worth a combined $25m a year.
It is the role of the tourism industry to harness the resources that make our place so distinct and vibrant. By strengthening markets, the tourism industry attracts investment to the region. This investment, in turn, assists all sectors of our economy. In an economic climate where regional economies are facing big changes, the tourism industry continues to enjoy solid potential. I support the direction of the Martin Labor government and its support for the tourism industry. This support builds on investment made by private sector.
The Chief Minister stated in this Assembly that private sector investment in capital works programs for the December quarter of 2006 was just over $33m. This is in addition to the $58m directly invested by the Martin Labor government. This investment demonstrates confidence by the private sector. This confidence is important as it adds substance to the regional economic prospects that we share. It adds weight to the argument and counters the negativity which has become such a hallmark of the CLP. The government is making positive inroads in this town and surrounding communities. As with all Alice Springs residents, including those opposite in this Assembly, I can see the practical results of this investment. My office is located opposite the Yeperenye complex, and directly opposite the development of new office buildings. Across town, the developers of Alice Plaza Shopping Centre and the new Imparja studio are well advanced. Then there are the Quest Serviced Apartments and the Desert Knowledge Precinct. These are but some of the examples of new infrastructure that will provide lasting benefits for the town.
In the electorate of Macdonnell there are numerous developments that will assist all Central Australians. The Mereenie Loop will go a long way to building on the resources I mentioned earlier, our distinct culture and land. The $4m committed to the construction of visitor centres will enhance the capacity for tourists to learn about these timeless resources. Such investment is aimed at attracting tourists for longer periods so that they can enjoy the services offered by a range of sectors. Further, the Chief Minister noted a recent contract worth $13.4m to seal the road between Glen Helen and the southern boundary of the West MacDonnell National Park. These investments will continue to build our tourism and construction industries and will open up new paths of experience.
The rapid and expanding growth of the Territory economy in the previous six years has created the conditions for increased investment. Without the economic growth overseen by the Martin Labor government, we would not see the capacity for investment that we are seeing now. This is in stark contrast to the years prior to 2001.
I have outlined briefly two important resources that contribute to economic growth in Central Australia. All sectors of our economy benefit from these resources. These sectors actively build business structures that harness resources in a way that creates employment and benefits all. I have talked about the significant economic investment made by the Martin Labor government, both in direct financing and through an expansion of the Territory and regional economy. Maintaining a strong and growing economy is an important achievement of this government.
However, it is also important to discuss another role of government, and that is to ensure a safe and secure community. Through talking to Alice Springs residents and receiving feedback from constituents in my electorate, I am concerned about the level of antisocial behaviour. Antisocial behaviour occurs everywhere and is always unacceptable. I am concerned about the extent of abusive behaviour caused by the misuse of alcohol and other drugs. Recognising the link between such behaviour and substance misuse is a necessary step to tackling the problems.
From my own observations, I am concerned about the numbers of young people on the streets at night and the intentions of the minority. Not all young people have negative intentions, but the fear of crime should not be an emotion experienced by any person walking at night. Issues of poverty, social and individual isolation, alcohol and substance misuse, lack of housing and education, and lack of employment all have an effect on community safety. The ability of an individual to navigate through the dominant system that many of us take for granted is also relevant. Isolation is not only a geographical factor; it can affect whole communities. We must consider the effect of social isolation because when individuals face the fact of isolation, all of society is challenged.
Our challenges - and they always exist - demand a collective response, rather than polarising division. We must work and build on what we share in common because division creates an ‘us and them’ mentality and merely serves to isolate the impetus for positive change. Creating a collective response also involves moving with the people. It involves access to information and making an informed decision. I suggest using the radio and television services of Imparja and CAAMA to promote the government’s achievements and direction as outlined in this Assembly.
All people need to have confidence in the support systems of government. These systems include justice, health, welfare, and education, and they need to be shaped in the way that aligns with local circumstances. In essence, they need to be shaped in a way that considers the social dynamic I mentioned earlier.
Alcohol and substance misuse, as we are all aware, are closely linked to community safety. In many instances, it has eroded traditional authority and led to incidents that have isolated violence and harm. It often creates shame, and it always distorts perception and behaviour.
I am proud to be part of the team that recognises the connection between alcohol and substance misuse and community safety. This government recognises the importance of taking measures to reduce targeted supply. The alcohol management plan implemented by this government has produced results. It reflects leadership on the part of a government willing to implement strong measures that risk isolating its own support. This government is prepared to take leadership on such an important issue.
The results of the alcohol management plan are evident by a reduction in charges of serious assault and admissions to the Alice Springs Hospital for assault-related injuries. Those facilities which provide a safe place for people to sober up have also seen a large reduction in admissions. However, while the plan has produced positive results, we must work to improve the plan. We have the opportunity to build on the leadership credentials of a government willing to make hard decisions.
Constituents in the Macdonnell electorate have relayed to me their concerns for young ones and how the abuse of alcohol impacts upon their families and loved ones. One suggestion put to me is to mandate, as part of the ID proposal, the requirement to furnish a residential address as a place of residence. By enforcing rules of supply around a place of residence, we can enhance responsibility on the part of visitors. This system can be linked with aspirations of remote and regional communities. If elders of a community want a reduction of supply to their people, then they can have that choice. It could also be linked to the justice system in that the aspirations of elders could be enforced as part of alcohol court initiatives. Such a system will create stronger incentives for young people to seek respite, and will assist in restoring the authority of traditional family structures.
There are obvious aspects of this suggestion that need further consideration, but it is one suggestion that demonstrates strong interest on part of the Macdonnell constituents. It demonstrates a strong determination on part of Aboriginal residents to see through the problems of alcohol abuse. There are many similar suggestions. All need to be carefully examined. There is no easy answer. I am confident that we will find ways to respond collectively to the reality of alcohol misuse.
The Martin Labor government is also taking strong action on another issue that is important to community safety and that is high population mobility. Understanding population mobility patterns assists in revealing the capacity of service systems to meet demand. Like Tennant Creek, Alice Springs is the major service centre for hundreds of communities, pastoral outstations and homelands scattered throughout Central Australia.
There are a number of commonly cited reasons as to why we have such high population mobility. One reason is the need for family members to access essential health services, especially renal dialysis. One patient on renal dialysis sometimes leads to 15 family members coming into town. Another common reason is that Aboriginal artists are encouraged to stay and paint at certain places. These artists are manipulated for monetary ends. Often, the artist is given immediate benefits at the loss of making a genuine and deserved gain on their paintings. Carpetbagging is a significant problem in Alice Springs, and it attracts many elderly artists and their families to town.
Another commonly cited reason is the trend experienced across Australia. In this day and age, it is common for young people to leave regional areas and live in the metropolitan cities, often as a lifestyle choice. The fact is Alice Springs offers a significantly larger range of choices in services, businesses and social opportunities. We cannot discount this reality.
Increased mobility brings economic benefits to the region. Many people come into town with money that has been saved, and a range of businesses benefit from additional consumption. Of course, high mobility also creates pressure and places a strain on the sustainability of services in Alice Springs.
A question that appears to be irrelevant to the CLP but very much alive in Alice Springs is the question of constructing safe and affordable accommodation options to alleviate the pressures that high mobility brings. When people come into town, they are often presented with no safe options. Town camps are often chronically overcrowded. Private sector accommodation options can be too expensive, especially for those living below the poverty line. Public spaces are often the only option for too many families, and then there is the pressure of enforcing rules that relate to sleeping in public places.
This is why we are working in partnership with the Commonwealth government to provide safe, secure and affordable temporary accommodation facilities in an area that is accessible in town. Free from alcohol, these facilities will be a place where families can stay safely, and will accommodate those families who visit town for legitimate and positive reasons. The redevelopment of Stuart Lodge and Yeperenye Hostel will add to this capacity.
Addressing the lack of safe accommodation options is important in regulating public housing and town camps, and enforcing the rules relating to sleeping in public. In the current climate, such regulations and enforcements are inhumane because families simply have nowhere else to go. Safe accommodation options will create the impetus for enforcing existing regulations and rules. It is for these reasons that I support the partnership between the Northern Territory and Commonwealth governments in this important area.
In closing, I return to the start of my speech and restate how fortunate I am to live in this unique part of the Territory. I am proud to make a positive contribution in emphasising two important features of this place: our culture and land.
I ask that members of the Legislative Assembly consider some important points that will assist in moving Alice ahead. First, I ask members to embrace the leadership approach adopted by the Martin Labor government. If we are to recognise the extent of our social problems, then we must also accept reform through hard decisions. Surrendering to populism and rhetoric without responsibility is weak. I ask that members …
Mr BONSON: Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the member for Macdonnell be granted an extension of time pursuant to Standing Order 77 in order to conclude her remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Ms ANDERSON: Thank you. I ask that members consider a collective response to our social problems. Solutions are not exclusive opposites to Aboriginal people; they require commitment that first starts within. I ask that we keep a clear head and first acknowledge the strengths that bind us.
Finally, I ask that we all consider the distinct social dynamic that lives in Central Australia. It is a complex dynamic, but it gives us a glimpse as to how motivation is shaped. I ask that we consider these points in the formation of policy, and that we work towards shaping government systems to local circumstances.
I also want to urge members, as leaders, and especially the members from Central Australia, to encourage positive moves and discussions, and urge residents of Alice Springs not to take action into their own hands. As leaders, we should not be party to one group taking the law into their own hands. We have a position as leaders, people who live in Central Australia and Alice Springs, to be true to both indigenous and non-indigenous people and to talk about the issues that we face as Central Australians. I urge members opposite, especially the Central Australian members, to keep at the forefront of their minds when supporting and discussing ideas for moving Alice Springs forward, rather than supporting the negative things that are coming out of Alice Springs, and always talking down Alice Springs.
As a person who talks to young people in town camps, I see that our young Aboriginal people are not scared of violence any more. When you tell them that there are vigilante groups walking in the streets of Alice Springs, trying to get them out of the streets, their thoughts are that they will fight back. Do we really want that kind of situation to occur in our beautiful town that we call home?
Mr Deputy Speaker, I urge all members of this Assembly, and especially the members from Central Australia, to take no part in any group actions, but to stand up as true leaders and face the problems of antisocial behaviour that we have in Alice Springs.
Mr HAMPTON (Stuart): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on this government’s initiatives and achievements in Central Australia. This is my first parliament in Alice Springs, and I am pleased to be here representing the people of Stuart. As a local who was born in Alice Springs, I am proud of being able to speak about my home town as a member of the Legislative Assembly.
As it is my first parliament in Alice Springs, I acknowledge the traditional owners and native title representatives of Lhere Artepe on whose country we meet. We are on the country of the Arrernte people. We need to acknowledge the custodians of this land. During the ceremonial opening of parliament on Tuesday, the address by those speakers indicated to me the visions and hopes they hold for Alice Springs and Central Australia. It also demonstrated to me how seriously each speaker and the groups they represent take the traditional owners and native title owners of Alice Springs as members of our community.
I noted that all the speakers, with the exception of the Leader of the Opposition, acknowledged the Arrernte people, and Mr Frank Ansell, the Chairperson of Lhere Artepe. I do not know, maybe it was an oversight by the Leader of the Opposition. However, as I have stated, this acknowledgement is important because the Arrernte people are important stakeholders in the future of this town. We need to engage and bring them with us when we face these challenges and plan for the future.
As I stated in my first speech to parliament in Darwin in October 2006, six months ago:
These words and the meaning behind them have not changed. During my first speech to parliament, I proudly spoke about many of my family’s achievements as well. Alice Springs and Central Australia have been places for my family for generations. They participated in and contributed to many aspects of our community. I would like to repeat something else that I said in my first speech, and I feel it is very important for the people of Alice Springs to hear it: the Northern Territory and Alice Springs are places of remarkable opportunities, places where someone like me can become a member of parliament. I see myself as just another local bloke who grew up in The Gap area of Alice Springs, just across the Todd River from here. Through a good education and with the help of my family and good role models along the way, I have been able to achieve something in my life. Alice Springs is my home and I am proud of the town and the diverse range of people who make up our community.
There are many reasons why so many people enjoy the lifestyle in the desert. One is the range of sports available in a town of this size and the great sporting facilities. Another reason has to be the weather to which I am sure my colleagues can attest this week; it is just fantastic. Due to living in such a small community, there is a lot of extra time to spend with family and visiting the amazing country in our region.
We can celebrate our lifestyle, but we also have to protect it. Part of protecting of our community is making sure that Alice Springs is a safer place to live. I believe that holding parliament in Alice Springs demonstrates to the people of Central Australia that this government takes this part of the Northern Territory seriously; it is genuine in its efforts to address the challenges we face. Holding parliament in the Red Centre gives people of the region an opportunity to express and demonstrate their opinion. This is good and healthy, both for the community and for we politicians to experience. Over the past few days, I have attended the rallies and listened to the very strong representations the people of Alice Springs have made.
However, it is more than just listening; this government has acted. We recognise that the people in Alice Springs are concerned about their safety and security. This is not a newly found recognition; it has been a long-held understanding. That is why this government commissioned the O’Sullivan Report. That is why this government responded to the former CLP government’s policy of recruitment inertia by rebuilding the police force over the last four years. Alice Springs now has a full quota of police, and the Police Commissioner yesterday committed to maintaining that full quota. Police have also responded by committing to the continuation of the City Safe initiative and the introduction of a social order task force, initiatives that will see more uniformed police patrolling our streets.
In a further demonstration of our commitment to making Alice a safer place to live and grow up families, the Chief Minister this week announced the $150 000 grant for the Alice Springs Town Council to contribute to the installation of CCTV in the Todd Mall. The Chief Minister and this government have been acutely aware of the need to tackle antisocial behaviour and crime.
The alcohol management plan and its component parts are aimed at reducing the harmful impact that alcohol is having on this community socially, culturally and economically. Excessive alcohol consumption is a major cause of crime and antisocial behaviour in this community. As we all know, it places a massive demand on our Police and Emergency Services, clogs up our health system and results in a disproportionate number of Aboriginal people entering the justice system. This government has taken the hard decisions to turn down the tap to limit the impact of grog on this community. It is up to all in the community - Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people - to engage and to be part of the solution. This is not just a government problem. The Chief Minister is leading from the front and we will support her every effort. I call upon all of our community members, as my colleague, the member for Macdonnell did, to do likewise. These examples highlight some of the ways this government is listening to the people of Alice Springs.
The rhetoric we hear from the member for Greatorex and the Leader of the Opposition is just that: rhetoric. The CLP does not have a plan, and their poor contributions and performances this week clearly show this. In 1990, 17 years ago, when the CLP was well entrenched in government, almost 400 Aboriginal women and children from remote communities joined forces with the people of Alice Springs and marched in the streets urging the government to listen and act. These people wanted something done about the level of alcohol-related violence in the town back then. They wanted something done about alcohol supply - and that was in 1990. The CLP’s record in government speaks for itself. Alice Springs is now reaping what the CLP government sowed by its inaction.
On Wednesday morning, I attended another rally that was attended by, I would say, around 300 people. It was a Special General Meeting of Tangentyere Council in the Todd Mall. I attended with the Minister for Central Australia, the member for Macdonnell, as well as the Treasurer and the member for Sanderson. This rally emphasised that residents of town camps are equally concerned about safety and security, and the lifestyles of everyone living in Alice Springs. Like everyone here, they have a right to expect services and infrastructure of an equivalent standard to the surrounding suburbs. They have a right to expect that governments and all members of parliament will listen to their needs and respect their aspirations for future generations.
The Chief Minister has stated in this place that Alice Springs and Central Australia are facing some significant and complex challenges, and there is no running away from them. As I have said previously, this is true with alcohol abuse, antisocial behaviour, and town camps, all major challenges for both the government and our community in Central Australia. To tackle these issues and challenges is going to take enormous courage and work from everyone from the government, from indigenous and non-indigenous people.
I try to focus on the issues at a number of levels. The first level is as an individual, parent and family member; the second is as a local member of parliament; and the third level is as a member of government. It is not easy at any one of these levels. Dealing with individuals and families in my electorate, who are at the grassroots of some of these problems, is very hard. Witnessing the heartache families endure after death of a loved one is equally hard and, sadly, far too common out there. You only have to sit in the sorry camps to feel the emotion and energy that families go through when they have lost a family member. I am sure many of my colleagues know personally of people or family members who have tragically died before their time. Through all these hard times, it is important to keep focused on what we can do to stop the abuse, the deaths and the sorrow. As I have said before, these are not new challenges. In fact, these challenges arrived when non-indigenous people settled this region. By saying this, I simply mean to demonstrate the complexity and the longevity of the issues. These challenges have developed and grown over generations of Central Australians and require a generational plan.
I was astonished to read in the NT News on Wednesday, 18 April, that the Leader of the Opposition said that Alice Springs does not want a five-, 10-, 15- or 20-year plan. That is exactly what we do need. There is no short-term fix; there is no silver bullet. These challenges require long-term, sustainable solutions developed in partnership with the people of Alice Springs. As the member for Braitling stated in her contribution to the censure motion on Tuesday, she has listened to the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Greatorex during their contributions and both of them had nothing constructive to say. The member for Braitling was right when she said it is easy to stand up in this parliament and blast each other. It is great for the crowd listening, but what is it really achieving?
Yesterday, the Chief Minister launched Moving Alice Ahead and this is a great plan. It is a comprehensive strategy to address many of the challenges we face to continually grow our economy, to maintain our fabulous lifestyle, and to deal with the complex social needs of its people.
I take this opportunity to remind people of the Chief Minster’s 20-year plan to tackle indigenous disadvantage in the Northern Territory that was brought to parliament late last year. I note that at a recent meeting of the Council of Australian Governments, there has been an agreed position to a national commitment for the Chief Minister’s generational plan. This generational plan is vitally important and significant, particularly considering that it is the 40th anniversary of the 1967 referendum on indigenous citizenship and rights this year. The hard task is getting the community and government working together to address these challenges.
As a member of government who lives in Alice Springs, I say again that this government does take the significant and complex challenges seriously and will not run away. I, as a local Alice Springs person and a member of this government, can assure everyone in the community that we have not and will not let these serious issues be ignored. I am sure my colleagues can attest to my parochialism in respect of Central Australia during meetings and conversations I have with them.
We must stop the blame game and politics that have been used in this debate, particularly by the media. The issues are too important to be used this way. We need to focus on how we can fix the problem. In recent months, I have been privileged to attend events in Alice Springs and in my electorate that give me great confidence that things are moving ahead.
The signing of the Indigenous Land Use Agreement at Mulga Bore community signifies that by working with the local people and communities, economic development can happen in the bush. The horticulture development on Pine Hill Station will include three new blocks for development. As my colleague, the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries, stated in his contribution, there are already up to 15 local Anmatjere men participating in horticultural training at the Ti Tree Research Farm. These are tangible examples of regional economic development providing hope, opportunity and real jobs for the future.
The next stage of the Desert Peoples Centre at the Desert Knowledge Precinct is another example that Central Australia has its own unique product which will benefit not only us living in the Centre but, potentially, everyone living in desert communities throughout the world.
Education and our young people also give me great optimism. Over recent months, I have visited many schools in Alice Springs, particularly looking at the learning units mainstream schools have established to assist town camp children with education. This is an initiative born out of the Town Camp Task Force, and I congratulate the Minister for Housing and Local Government for his vision and resolve in tackling the challenges of town camps.
In mentioning the Minister for Local Government, my colleague from the Barkly, I genuinely congratulate him on his courage for tackling the issues of town camps; also his courage in working on the reform of local government in the Northern Territory, which is not an easy one. However, he has shown great leadership and direction in both these areas. Both are areas in which the CLP has failed Territorians.
Another initiative supported by the Northern Territory government is the introduction of the Clontarf Football Academy in Alice Springs at ANZAC Hill High School, Yirara College and Alice Springs High School. The program will be established next year at Centralian College. This is groundbreaking stuff for the Territory, and I thoroughly congratulate the Minister for Employment, Education and Training for his support.
The impact of skill shortages faced by businesses in Central Australia can and will be decreased if we can recruit locally. It is fantastic to see local business getting behind the Clontarf Football Academy program. Clontarf offers young indigenous males the incentive to attend school, to stay at school and to achieve. Clontarf has achieved great results in Western Australia, and it is already showing signs of achieving great results here in Alice Springs. School attendance at Yirara College has been the best in 14 years, and at ASHS and ANZAC, school attendance is averaging about 90% for the first term, up from levels of about 50% in previous years.
From a personal point of view, as the father of one of the Clontarf students, I have seen first-hand the impact that this program has had on my son and his friends. Speaking to many parents and teachers of students who are now attending the Clontarf Academy, I can attest that it has changed the lives of many young men already.
Other initiatives, like the Polly Farmer Foundation program to be introduced at Centralian College shortly, will support individual students with mentoring, tutorial assistance and vocational planning. This is another great initiative coming from the Indigenous Education and Employment Task Force. It is a great example of what can happen when collaboration occurs. I also congratulate Centrecorp, NT DEET and DEST on their support and contributions to this wonderful program.
Getting kids to school and, importantly, keeping them there, is the essence to achieving long-term change in this community. With our changing demographic, it is incumbent on government to invest wisely and provide the right environment for our kids to grow up healthy and prosper. It is also the responsibility of all of us - government, business and the community – to develop opportunities and economic participation for all. At the centre of this is the need for and the right of Aboriginal people to be gainfully employed and active participants in the economy, not passive recipients.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I conclude my contribution to this debate by recalling and sharing the vision and words of one of our great elders who has passed on. His words give me great hope for the future, particularly for our children:
That quote was from the late Mr W Rubunjta in his book The Town Grew Up Dancing. Coincidentally, Mr W Rubuntja’s State Funeral was held in this very building on 21 July 2005. I will miss you, old man; your vision, wisdom and your words are very much needed today.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank all those who contributed to this debate. Listening to the member for Stuart I was reminded of the book The Town Grew Up Dancing. It is a marvellous history of Alice Springs and the role Mr Rubuntja played. I was very privileged to be at the launch of the book. You forget, sometimes, when it has not been mentioned for a while, what a superb book it is and what a great contribution it is to the history of, not only Alice Springs, but the Territory.
I thank everyone for their thoughtful contributions to this statement. What really rang through many of the contributions was a real honesty about the issues faced in Alice Springs and in the Centre. There was a balance between talking about the tough issues, the ones that are creating negativity - not just in Alice Springs but the Centre broadly - and an appropriate concentration on the positive things that are happening in Alice Springs. It was a statement that covered, in so many different areas, where we are now with Alice Springs and the Central Australian community, and where we need to go.
I do not want to go back over the negatives. We have spent much of this week talking about the negatives and the difficulties being faced in the Alice Springs community, and the strong voice of the Alice Springs community saying we need to take action, and to have better focus on policing. We have been through those issues extensively this week.
The positives of Alice Springs are gigantic. What is currently happening in the economy is very positive. Tourism numbers, over the last two years, have grown by 22 000, from 111 000 to 133 000. Every business in town benefits because of that growth in tourism. Talking to operators, the start of this tourism season is very positive. The numbers look good and there is a really strong, positive spirit about tourism and its place in Alice Springs, and in the surrounding area of course. If you talk to businesses, a very positive outlook has been reflected for quite a time now. Businesses are investing in their businesses and in this community. When you look at a raw figure like the construction figure for the December quarter last year, there was $91m worth of construction taking place in the Alice Springs region. One-third of that was private sector investment.
While, on one hand, there is certainly some anxiety about some of the issues to do with the future of the Alice Springs community, there is also strong confidence that this community has a bright future. I thank those business people who are investing in the future of Alice Springs, because I believe that it represents great confidence in where this community is going.
We have also talked about government investment in the future of Alice Springs, looking at investments in key areas of roads, buildings and the hospital with $6m announced this week for a new Emergency Department. Really heartening for Alice Springs, with such a young population, are the changes to education, the investment in education and training, which is really the key to the future of the community. Young people are going to school and getting the skills they need to be part of the future. One element of that is the introduction of the Clontarf Academy with positive results after just one term. Some 170 young Aboriginal men - and I have talked to them; many people here have talked to them – are now better engaged in the school system because of that link with their love of playing football. They also have the link to go to school and achieve academically.
There are many positives. There was the announcement today that in the next budget there will be nearly $16m spent on roads in the Central Australian region and a significant increase in the repairs and maintenance budget, again, a vital component of building this community. When you think of the distances that need to be travelled, and those who come to Alice Springs because it is such a strong service hub, we have to ensure that the roads are working well. There is a lot more money going into repairs and maintenance. There is a significant capital spend when you look at areas like the Red Centre Way, one of the largest NT road contracts currently under way in Central Australia. With the balance in repairs and maintenance and capital on roads, again, it is a strong commitment to the Central Australian region.
Thank you all for your contributions to this debate. Parliament has certainly found this week a very engaging, challenging and rewarding week here in the Centre. This government is very committed to Alice Springs and to the region. We have strong local members in the members for Stuart and Macdonnell. They are certainly very strong supporters, on a daily basis, of this region and take their concerns straight to government. I am looking forward to a very strong and positive future for Alice Springs and the region. This community is a great place to work, to live and to raise a family. I believe working together, we can make it an even better place to work, live and raise a family.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
TABLED PAPER
Remuneration Tribunal Report and Determination No 2 of 2007 for Magistrates
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, under the Assembly Members and Statutory Officers (Remuneration and Other Entitlements) Act 2006, the Remuneration Tribunal is required to at least once a year inquire into and determine the salary, allowances and other benefits that persons are entitled to receive in respect of their service as magistrates appointed under section 4(3) of the Magistrates Act. Any report or determination must be tabled within six sitting days of receipt by the minister, and the Assembly has a further 10 sitting days to disallow all or any part of the determination if it so wishes.
The Remuneration Tribunal has now handed down its latest report and Determination No 2 of 2007 for magistrates. The tribunal, in its report, deals with a range of issues including: salary levels, travelling allowance rates, conference travel, motor vehicles, mobile phones and removal expenses. The determination sets new salary rates for the various classes of magistrates, and deals with allowances if a magistrate is appointed to be the President of the Mental Health Review Tribunal and if a magistrate based in Alice Springs is performing special administrative duties under the direction of the Chief Magistrate.
In relation to travel to conferences, it includes one relevant overseas conference travel and provides for an increase in removal expenses. It is not appropriate that I go into any further detail at this point, but allow time for members to consider the report.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the paper, and that I have leave to continue my remarks at a later hour.
Leave granted.
Debate adjourned.
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly at its rising adjourn until Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 10 am in Parliament House, or such other time and/or date as may be advised by the Speaker, pursuant to Sessional Order.
Motion agreed to.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, if that is all the business in front of the House, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mrs AAGAARD (Nightcliff): Mr Deputy Speaker, tonight I thank the many people who have been involved with the putting together of this Alice Springs sitting. It is a huge event and it has taken many people much time to organise.
First, I place on the record my thanks to the people of Alice Springs. I have been coming down regularly for the last six months in organising this, and the wonderful reception I have been receiving in relation to the organising of this sitting has been terrific. The numbers of people we have had come to Question Time, ministerial reports, and other functions throughout this sitting indicates the real interest that the people of Alice Springs have for regional sittings. I thank the government for agreeing to have the sitting in Alice Springs. It is a terrific initiative.
I extend my thanks to the staff of the convention centre, particularly Scott Lovatt, Natalie Prior and the team for their hospitality and assistance with the organising and running of this Alice Springs sitting. I believe members will agree that the layout of the precinct has been terrific.
Every year for the past 13 years, the YMCA has run Youth Parliament with the Legislative Assembly. This year is the third time that the Youth Parliament has been brought to the Centre and the first time that the Alice Springs YMCA and Darwin YMCA have worked together for Youth Parliament. Youth Parliamentarians at this sitting discussed bills with topics relevant to our lives such as public smoking, dog licences, recycling, and making Alice Springs a dry zone. I extend my congratulations and thanks to Reg Hatch from the YMCA of Central Australia and Raquel Nicholls-Skene from the YMCA of the Top End, together with Legislative Assembly staff who helped bring this together. I also make special mention of Donald Young who has also put in a lot of personal time. Without his support, staging Youth Parliament would be extremely difficult.
The family concert which we held on Sunday night was an exciting new addition to this year’s program. The free family concert saw many local acts perform in front of over 1500 Alice Springs residents. I would like to name all of the people who were involved with this concert, particularly Nicky Shonkala from Watch this Space, who coordinated the event on behalf of the parliament. She certainly worked very hard and made it into a very special night. I thank Pat Dodds for the welcome to country; to Katya Quigley from the ABC for being the master of ceremonies; to the Tangentyere Circus for their wonderful acrobatic performance; the Carl and Max Jugglers and Humbert’s Academy of Dance who roamed the audience with their performances; the Alice Springs High School Breakers with their dancing performance; the OLSH Traeger Singing Group; the Bureaucrats; Braitling Primary School Year 3 Choir for the National Anthem; Lisa Maria and Claire Ryan from St Philip’s; Bradshaw Primary School middle choir; Drum Atweme; Michelle Murphy for a wonderful country performance - Michelle was also at Telstra’s Road to Tamworth finalist; Super Raelene Brothers with some wonderful original songs; Katrina Stowe who did an interactive drumming performance; and as the sun was setting on the day, the real stars came out, such as Warren H Williams, who is the national NAIDOC Artist of the Year of 2006, and had the 2006 Song of the Year; and my personal favourite from Alice Springs, The Moxy. The Moxy had a wonderful performance at last year’s BassintheDust, and they definitely have a bright future ahead.
I need to make a special mention of His Honour the Administrator, also to the Minister for Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage, Dr Lesley Cameron, Mark Nelson, Chris Grace and Kent Rowe for letting loose and joining me dancing at the concert. There is photographic evidence of this in, I believe, today’s Alice Springs News, which is a little scary, of the minister and I dancing at the concert. I advise you to have a look at that if you cannot believe we were dancing.
During the concert we announced the winners of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly’s Central Australian Schools Artwork Competition. The competition focused on community leadership. At the start of the school year, schools in the Central Australian region were invited to be part of the competition in the lead-up to the Alice Springs sittings. Schools which entered the competition had their art displayed in the Yeperenye Centre in Alice Springs. I thank Melissa Adamson from the Yeperenye Centre for her help and support for the competition.
The first prize in the competition was $3000 for the school, and this prize was won by Wallace Rockhole School for their very beautiful work. I add that the students who put this painting together got up very early in the morning and went to school early for some weeks especially to put the painting together. It is wonderful that they have won. The second prize, which was $1000, went to Ross Park Primary School. Third prize was $500 and went to Acacia Hills School. The People’s Choice went to Sadadeen Primary School. The winning entry, the Wallace Rockhole painting, will hang permanently in Parliament House. I am considering that it will, in fact, be hanging in my office in Parliament House so that members will see that when they come to Darwin next.
I thank the people who helped with the opening of parliament. In particular, I thank Drum Atweme who backed up their performance from the concert on Sunday by playing while guests were being seated; and the Salvation Army Indigenous Choir for their beautiful rendition of a local hymn.
I thank her Worship, the Mayor of Alice Springs, Ms Fran Kilgariff, and the Alice Springs Town Council for their sponsorship of the concert and in-kind support for this sitting. It is tremendous that the parliament is able to work closely with the Alice Springs Town Council in this way, and I thank them for that.
It would not be possible to put something like this together without the extreme effort of people such as the Clerk and the Deputy Clerk. The Deputy Clerk, Mr Horton, has worked for six months now putting the sitting together and has coordinated almost every aspect of it. David, thank you very much on behalf of all members for your really hard work and dedication. Each time we have come to Alice Springs, it has become better, so thank you very much, Mr Deputy Clerk.
A feature of this sitting has been the large number of students who have come to visit. In the lead-up to the sitting, we had an education program organised by the Parliamentary Education Unit and 1500 students went through that program. Through the sittings, there have been about the same number of young people visiting. It is a terrific way for our young people to understand parliamentary democracy. I thank Jan Sporn, Anna-Maria Socci, Renee Manley and Sharon Young for their involvement in this very important area, which is one of the most significant things that we do as a parliament.
I extend a big thank you to Rita Henry, the Director of Alice Springs Region of DEET, and Annette Ballard and Sharna Richards for the coordination of the volunteers who have been involved with the Parliamentary Education Program.
In relation to the set-up, Derek Stafford from the Department of the Legislative Assembly has been a very significant and hard worker over many months, and I thank Derek for his hard work.
IT is always something which can make or break us, and I thank Clifton and Gary for their help with the set-up and all our IT needs during this time.
The Chamber staff, once again, have put in an excellent effort: Graham Gadd, Annette Brown and the Acting Serjeant-at-Arms, Steve Stokes. Thank you for your excellent service.
I thank Robyn van Dok and Joanne Burgess for their help behind the information desk. The Office of the Chief Minister has assisted with much of this work. I thank the Chief Minister for allowing some of her personal staff to assist in coordinating some of the aspects of this parliament. I particularly thank her Chief of Staff, Ross Neilson, and Aaron Ross; and from the Chief Minister’s Office in Central Australia, John Gaynor and Kelsey Rodda. It has been terrific to have that level of coordination between the parliament and the Chief Minister’s Office.
Finally, I thank the people of Alice Springs. Thank you for making this all possible and for being involved.
Dr BURNS (Johnston): Mr Deputy Speaker, it has, indeed, been a busy sitting and we are in adjournment at approximately 4.45 pm on the last day. The use of adjournments is for a whole range of purposes. I usually use it to talk about my electorate. I know that other members, including opposition members, use it to talk about matters of importance, and I am going to do that this afternoon.
This relates to false claims made by the member for Greatorex, Dr Richard Lim, the shadow minister for Health, at the last sitting in relation to nurses working 19 and 21 hours straight at the hospital.
First, I acknowledge the hard-working nurses in our hospital system who do substantial overtime to support the health system and, most importantly, their patients. Dr Lim made these claims about people working 19 and 21 hours straight at the height of an EBA negotiation between the government and the Australian Nursing Federation. I believe his comments were very inflammatory and destructive to that process.
Nonetheless, in the last four weeks or so - and I commend my colleague, the Minister for Public Employment - there has been substantial progress in this EBA negotiation. It features an 18-month agreement, with two salary increases in 2007, a 4.5% increase backdated to February, and a further 3% in August; a $1200 one-off sign-up bonus; improved rates for professional development allowance; and improved on-call allowance. There is a balloting process for the nurses, which is expected to be concluded in early May 2007. Passed by the nurses, this agreement will see Territory nurses remain amongst the best paid in Australia
The ANF did have a very important campaign in relation to nurse overtime, and it is a very important issue. It is unacceptable for any nurse to work unsafe hours. Sometimes, overtime is necessary to cope with the peaks of demand that all hospitals experience. In response to the ANF’s campaign on overtime, in consultation with the department, the CEO brought in a rule that any nurse working any more than 60 hours per week, or 20 hours overtime, must now have those extra hours approved by the Director of Nursing. Since this new system has been introduced, I am advised, that only two nurses at Alice Springs Hospital and two at Royal Darwin Hospital have worked more than the 60-hour limit in one week. I am sure that this has been after discussion with the nurse manager responsible. I can assure the House that the aim of ensuring safe working hours for nurses is being achieved.
Turning now to the member for Greatorex, on 22 February, in parliament, he tabled a number of payslips of nurses, and I have copies of them here. They have been blown up so people can see. He said in public that they constituted evidence of nurses working 19 hours on a single day and, by implication, 21 hours. I assume this is his handwriting, I have circled there, 19 hours, 21 hours. To quote what he said during Question Time:
By implication, he was saying that this other nurse worked 21 hours in one day which is, obviously, unacceptable.
In a media release, he started to gloat. On 15 March 2007, he said, as part of his media release, a copy of which I have here, talking about me, the Minister for Health:
These are very serious allegations and, as promised on the day, I have had the member for Greatorex’s claims investigated very thoroughly by the department. In fact, I have asked them, for the pay period the member for Greatorex talked about, to go through each and every line of overtime to ascertain whether the claims of the member for Greatorex were true.
This is the advice that has come back to me from the department. These nursing rosters for the pay period 20 January to 7 February have been examined in detail and I can report, first, no nurse in either Alice Springs or Royal Darwin Hospital worked 19 or 21 hours in one day. These payslips show overtime in two of these lines. In one line it has 25/1, 15 hours and, in another line, 25/1, six hours. What the member for Greatorex then did is total these up and say that is 21 hours. In reality, what those two lines apply to is total overtime worked within that pay period. In other words, during the pay period from 25 January to 7 February, this particular nurse worked a total of 21 hours over a two-week period. He or she did not work 21 hours in one day. I say: shame on the member for the Greatorex ...
Members interjecting.
Dr BURNS: Shame on the member for Greatorex because, in essence - I will place it on the record here - the member for Greatorex has apparently led this House to believe claims that are not true. These claims are not true, and he made political mileage out of them. He has misrepresented the true meaning of the documents he tabled. They do not represent what he said, and he has mischievously misused these documents for his own political end and to mislead the public and the media of the Northern Territory.
These are very serious claims indeed. It really shows the desperation of the member for Greatorex and the ends to which he will go to get a headline, to get himself on the media. I saw him the day after that parliament. He was dancing around like someone in front of the Eiffel Tower, but I will not say who. He had this big win; he had won the war. Short-term gains never really help anyone because you are always found out. The member for Greatorex has been found out. I have to flag to this House that I can no longer trust the member for Greatorex and the sorts of claims he makes. If he comes into parliament again during Estimates Committee with documents that purport to show this and that, I will not believe him.
The Leader of the Opposition tabled her bogus documents about police and police resources across the Territory, which were shown to be untrue as well.
Tonight, I am voicing my disappointment with the member for Greatorex because as a medical practitioner, someone who has taken an oath in this place and, with his experience and connections in health, I was looking forward to a good, clean debate with him But what have I had? The documents are not bogus but the assertions made by the member for Greatorex are. I will leave it there and move on to my normal electorate adjournment now.
I draw your attention to the recent election of volunteers to school councils around my electorate. As we are aware, school council meetings are extremely important in the running of our schools, and the committees elected to support the school are made up of fantastic, dedicated people. The councils play a vital part in ensuring the whole community is involved in the important decisions of the school.
The beginning of the school year brings a flurry of excitement for the students as they stand for SRC councils and captains and vice-captains of various houses. It is great to hear that schools encourage their students to nominate; they go through a voting process. I congratulate all candidates on school representative councils and the houses, and their willingness to stand for positions and commitment. I wish all the best for this year to all of those children.
Wagaman Primary School had its AGM on 19 February, and I congratulate Justin Heath who was returned as chairperson, together with Rose McKenzie vice chair; Kate Barnes, secretary; and Bob Babu, treasurer. Parent members include Steven Jackson, Sylvia Mavros, Tanyah Nasir, Wayne Neilson, Louise Winter and Katie Karamanakis.
The Wagaman Primary School SRC was also elected, and I congratulate Hannah Motter, president; vice-president, Somenah Dooley, secretary, Tiara Ladju; and treasurer, Emma Jackson on their success.
The class representatives are Molly Kingdon and Samantha Martin from Year 2/3; Sharny Neilson and Danica Cigobia from Year 3/4; Tristan Garces and April Camposo from Year 4/5, Tyre Neilson and John Mamartzis from Year 5; and Vernon Fransisco, Rui Sihombing, Broden Neilson, Julienne Vargas from the two Year 6/7 classes.
At Moil Primary School AGM, Sita Harrison was re-elected chair. She has done a great job over a number of years. David Adams was elected vice-chair; Ian Butler as manager administration; and treasurer, Desleigh Pidgeon and Ingrid Roche were both elected to serve as secretary; and Meagan Luis, Wendy Carpenter and Michael McRostie join the council as parent members. I extend my best wishes to all those fantastic people and look forward to working with them during the year.
The SRC was voted in during February at that school and Phoebe Mansfield and Tahlia Mason were the Year 7 representatives; Kieren Fiorenza and Daniel Lai from Year 6; Davin Ferreira and Jessica Fuller, Year 5 representatives; and Ben Rehrmann and Elliot Williams from Year 4.
House captains were also elected the same month. Congratulations to Adrienne Turner, Elysia Jongue of the Wilson Wallabies; Vaanathy Kandiah and Matthew Rehrmann of the Greenwood Greenants; Cameron McKenzie and Tegan O’Connor of the Byrne Barras; and Jessica Agung and Shane Creeper of the Lindy Lorikeets. I offer my sincere congratulations to these students and I hope I can help them at any time.
At Jingili Primary School, the executive council was elected and included Ian Johnstone as chairperson, ably assisted by Mrs Kelly Anstey as deputy chair; Ms Jane Black, secretary; and Ms Karen Avery as treasurer. Unfortunately, Ian has had to resign as chairperson for personal reasons and Kelly has kindly stepped into the breach for Term 2. I extend my best wishes to the Jingili Community Council for being on hand to assist them when and where necessary.
I also take this opportunity to farewell the Principal of Jingili Primary School, Eva Lawler, who has accepted a position in minister Henderson’s office. I know she is going to do a great job. I have worked with Eva over the years and she is a very capable person, a great educator and very experienced. During her three years with the school, Eva has been a steady hand and a great support for the parents, students and the school council. I look forward to working with her in the new role.
Ms Jodie Green has joined Jingili Primary School as Principal for Term 2 and I extend my sincere congratulations and offer my support during her tenure. Jodie was recently Assistant General Manager of Student Services and brings a wealth of experience to her new position.
The Jingili Student Representative Council went through its election in February and Shannen Pugh was voted in as school captain and citizenship ambassador. Class representatives elected include: Teka Voysey, Brayden McLennan, Ellie Price and Jordan Williams from Years 1/2; Jane Laughton and Lucien Mckaige from Years 3/4; Anthony Mehonoshen and Brianna Haase from Years 4/5; and Kailin Rosas, Theo McMahon, Mietta Russell and John Hoskins from Years 5/6/7. Congratulations to all of those students. I offer my support to the students as they work with their student school community. Jingili school does a great job in fundraising for a whole range of causes.
Casuarina Senior College held its annual general meeting on 15 March 2007. I offer my best wishes and support to the following committee members who stood and were elected: Inta Tumuls, Elizabeth Foggo Thynne, Lesley Collins, Cindy Impelmans, Jac Stirrat, Konni Ketteritzsch, Lynne Cook, with Ayriel Harburn and Anthony Watts as the student representative council representative. Mrs Inta Tumuls was subsequently voted in as chairperson.
As you are aware, Casuarina Senior College has a new Principal, Mrs Annette Jamieson who took over from Steve Sjoberg, who made a fantastic contribution to the college over his six year tenure. The college has an exciting year ahead ...
Dr LIM: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker!
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Excuse me, member for Johnston, there is a point of order.
Dr LIM: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I seek that the minister table the documents that he was referring to before, plus the advice that he received from his department regarding the payslips I provided at the sittings in February ...
Members interjecting.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, please members. Order! I will seek some advice. Stop the clock.
Dr LIM: I asked him to table what he was referring to in terms of his adjournment.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: I understand the question and I will seek some advice, member for Greatorex.
Member for Johnston, I am advised that if you quoted from the documents, you should table them.
Dr BURNS: These documents here, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, are the documents that the member for Greatorex tabled himself. They speak for themselves. The other documents that I have I read from. I read them into the record. The member for Greatorex can just accept that. That is the advice that I have received from my department. With your concurrence, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I will continue with my adjournment debate.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: One second, member for Johnston. I will seek clarification. Member for Johnston, continue your speech and we will sort out the clarification in the meantime.
Dr BURNS: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, apart from these documents that the member for Greatorex has already tabled, I was reading from speech notes which I do not have to table, and which I will not table. I have already read what is in there. The member for Greatorex can deal with what I have put on the Parliamentary Record, which is the truth ...
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Johnston, continue. We will sort this out. I will seek advice while you are concluding your remarks.
Dr BURNS: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, the college has an exciting year, with major infrastructure being completed and the Year 10 students settling in nicely. As I stated, schools depend heavily on the work of their councils, both school and student, for the smooth management, fundraising and general community spirit. I congratulate all members of these councils and look forward to working with them during the course of the year.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, I will begin my adjournment while you decide what to do with the point of order. It is amazing! It is 5 pm on the last day of sittings in parliament and the minister, in an adjournment, uses about five minutes to lash into me on a personal level. That is fine. Why now? He had three Question Times to put it on the record and have it on radio as well, and he did not. Why did he take two months to get his data here? When I asked him to provide the advice that he received from his department, he said he would not. We have to take his word for it.
I produced the documents. I produced the payslips, and I did not put one pen on those documents. Those circles, those handwritten notes, were done, obviously, somewhere else. I received the documents from the ANF and I was provided an explanation from the ANF …
Members interjecting.
Dr LIM: The minister can call me a liar. That is fine; that is the politics of this game. I can accept that. If he calls me a liar, he is calling the ANF a liar. It is up to the minister ...
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr LIM: Madam Speaker, what happened was I was provided the documents by the ANF at the office of the ANF. They explained to me what they understood the payslips to mean, and I came into parliament with those documents. That said, I rest my case. The minister can call me a liar, and he is calling the ANF a liar.
Madam SPEAKER: Before I call the next speaker, member for Johnston, would you mind coming to the Dispatch Box, please, with the documents? Member for Johnston, I understand from what I heard as I was coming into the Chamber that they are personal notes. Is that correct?
Dr BURNS: Basically, personal notes, Madam Speaker, some cuts and pastes, but basically handwritten personal notes with some other notes. These were my speaking notes. The substantive documents that I was speaking about are these ones, blow-ups of the ones the member for Greatorex already tabled at the last sitting of parliament. That is the long and short of it. What I did here today was to express or to reiterate the advice that I have had from my department on this issue. It is very emphatic advice. There has been a lot of effort go into this, and that is why it has taken a while because I wanted to be absolutely sure of what I said.
Madam SPEAKER: All right. Member for Johnston, I have enough information. You do not need to table your personal notes, but I ask you to table the two documents which are the same as the ones that you say that the member for Greatorex tabled previously.
Dr BURNS: Yes, I can table those documents and documents of what the member for Greatorex in his media release, and Hansard, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you. Do we have anyone else to adjourn?
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! It is a bit sad to have to use the gavel at this hour.
Mr HENDERSON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, on to some very important issues in my electorate. I begin by extending my congratulations to Mrs Margaret Ferguson from Leanyer Primary School. Early this year, Margaret retired from teaching art at Leanyer School after 10 years of loyal service to the school and the community. Margaret had been working as a teacher for over 30 years, and is retiring to travel the world with her children and her husband. I attended a farewell lunch for Marg on Thursday, 15 April, at the school, and also at a special assembly held by the students to farewell Margaret.
Students were inspired by Margaret and, under her guidance, they developed a keen desire to participate in school and extracurricular activities. Included was the school’s active participation in the Keep Australia Beautiful and Territory Tidy Towns competitions. In these, Margaret led the way in encouraging keen and eager productivity from both older and younger students. Margaret has been an inspirational teacher whose enthusiasm positively impacted on her classes across the school into extracurricular activities, and extended to enhance Northern Territory education.
Margaret’s career was a shining light and an outstanding example to others. She has earned both the Pride of Workmanship Award from Darwin North Rotary Club and was Darwin’s Citizen of the Year in 2005. Those who come in contact with her are the richer for their association. She has been there for others; a person who willingly and unrequitedly gives of herself for others. Margaret Ferguson has made a positive difference. She has instilled in hundreds of our students a love of art and crafts that will live forever. I am certainly going to miss Margaret and her trips to the electorate office at Hibiscus where she would give me art work from her students to display in my electorate office. Marg, I wish you a very happy retirement.
In February, we celebrated Chinese New Year. On Saturday, 17 February, I attended a dinner held by the Chinese Timorese Association in their clubhouse, together with a number of other members, including the member for Sanderson. What a fantastic night! It was a cracker of a night! The NT Chinese Timorese Association put on a fantastic night filled with food, fun and fireworks. Some of those fireworks did not quite go off as expected, but nobody was hurt and it was a fabulous night. Special thanks must go to Rui Mu, George Mu and the rest of the community for putting on such a fabulous evening.
Also, on the celebration of Chinese New Year, on Saturday, 24 February, my electorate office in the Hibiscus shops was blessed by the Chung Wah Society’s Chinese lion. The lion dancers and musicians put on an amazing show. The noise was enough to scare a few shoppers. It was great to see the lion traveling around the suburbs bringing its luck to many places along the way.
We are now in the second term of the school year. The first term was filled with welcoming of new students and new teachers, as well as settling in those who were returning to school for another year. The schools are really into the swing of things with the election of new school councils. Well done to all parents and teachers who make up our 2007 school councils, which are the backbone of our schools. The schools have also been busy organising and electing school captains, vice captains, student representative council members, as well as school leaders.
I had the pleasure of attending St Andrew’s Lutheran School to present the elected school leaders with their badges. To hear those young people take their pledges to represent the school to the best of their abilities was just fantastic. Congratulations to Lucy Campbell, Brayden Keirs, Lewis Kilburn, Joel Kay, Matthew Vaughan, Paige Peek, Alison Stennett and Jacob Hazeldine, who have been elected the 2007 St Andrew’s school leaders.
I also attended Wanguri Primary School for their presentation of house captains, vice house captains, SRCs and hub monitors, of which my son, Liam, is proudly one. Again, the dedication written on the faces of these school representatives was great to see. I am sure they will work tirelessly to keep the school running smoothly. Well done to every student who has put their hand up to represent their school, and congratulations to the 2007 school leaders all over the Territory. I seek leave to incorporate around 150 names of those various school SRC members, house captains and vice captains into the Parliamentary Record.
Leave granted.
Leanyer Primary School
SRCs:
Mr HENDERSON: Mr Deputy Speaker, still on schools, I have had a chance to catch up with all the principals, including Mrs Bernadette Morriss, the new principal at Holy Spirit Primary School. It was great to sit down and to spend some time with Bernadette. Bernadette has settled in very well. Getting around to all the schools is a great part of being in the job; I certainly enjoy it. I wish Bernadette all the best as the new principal at Holy Spirit Primary School.
On Monday, 2 April, I made an announcement at Wanguri Primary School that, in the 2007-08 Territory budget, $1m has been set aside to undertake upgrades to the primary and the preschool. This funding will see redevelopment of a second preschool unit, improvements to the school assembly area, an upgrade of the current transition area, another two existing classrooms, as well as an upgrade to the reception area and offices. With Wanguri Primary School being the main feeder school for the new Lyons development, which will see 700 new houses built over the next few years, an upgrade is certainly required. All current and future teachers and students will benefit from these upgrades and redevelopments. I look forward to watching Wanguri Primary School become even better.
Talking of the Lyons subdivision, earlier this year, I went down to see the new suburbs of Lyons for a site tour. What amazing progress! I have since driven there again and have seen new Defence Housing Authority houses that have sprung up, seemingly overnight. The community centre is coming along well. Once the tenants move into the houses, I can really see a sense of community is going to develop. Everyone at DHA, and the developers, are doing a great job.
With those words, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, it has been great to be in Alice Springs again. My personal thanks, as Leader of Government Business, to all staff of the Department of Legislative Assembly who have worked so hard to make this sitting such a big success – certainly to the IT people. It is a huge logistical and technical exercise to hook up for Hansard and give all members access to IT facilities down here. Everyone has done a fantastic job. We will see Alice Springs again as an Assembly in a few years.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
DISTINGUISHED VISITOR
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the Speaker’s Gallery of Hon Nick Griffiths MLC, President of the Western Australia Legislative Council. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I also draw your attention to the presence in the public gallery of students from Year 7 from the Traeger campus of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, together with teachers Andrew McKie, Cameron Neyland, Helen Smythe and Greg Thorpe. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
MINISTERIAL REPORTS
Drought Assistance for
Central Australia Pastoralists
Mr NATT (Primary Industry and Fisheries): Madam Speaker, I would like to update the House on the continuing impacts of drought in some areas of Central Australia, and report on what this government is doing to support pastoralists through these difficult times.
The recent rains in the Alice Springs district have provided some relief to pastoralists currently affected by drought. However, the rains did not affect all areas, and there are still pastoral properties which have not received drought-breaking rains. The national agricultural monitoring system identifies that the areas to the south and east of Alice has received extremely low effective rainfall over the past five years.
In 2006, 12 pastoralist properties in the Alice Springs region were declared to be in severe or second-year drought and, therefore, qualified under the Northern Territory government’s drought assistance arrangements. Under the Northern Territory Drought Assistance Scheme, the options available to producers include stock freight subsidies, grants for interest rate subsidies or loans. A freight subsidy of up to 100% of costs for destocking or restocking is offered – up to $20 000 per year. The subsidy can apply for the return of breeding stock up to 24 months after the end of the severe drought. Pastoralists can also apply to have pastoral lease payments waived or held over.
In late 2006, I met with the federal minister for Agriculture, together with a delegation from the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association, to discuss an application for exceptional circumstances assistance for the drought-affected regions to the south and east of Alice Springs. My department, in consultation with the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association, prepared a comprehensive application based on climatic information for Central Australia. The application included a number of case studies to demonstrate that the pastoral industry in Central Australia is viable, and that the current drought is beyond what pastoralists could reasonably expect to manage.
The Northern Territory’s exceptional circumstance application covers the drought event between October 2003 and September 2006. I am happy to report the Commonwealth minister has considered the Northern Territory government’s application made on behalf of pastoralists, and the views of the industry, and has recently agreed that a prima facie case exists for exceptional circumstance support for an area to the south and east of Alice Springs.
The next step in the exceptional circumstance assessment process is for the National Rural Advisory Committee to tour the region before preparing its recommendations to the Commonwealth minister on whether full exceptional circumstances should be granted. If successful, further business support will become available to pastoralists within the declared area, including interest rate subsidies. This will assist pastoralists with up to a 50% interest rate subsidy in the first year, and then up to 80% in the second. These arrangements would be administered by the Territory government with 90% of the costs to be recouped from the Commonwealth government.
My Department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Mines is working with pastoralists to ensure a robust approach for managing climatic variability. Programs such as the Territory’s Pastoral Water Enhancement Scheme and the FarmBiz serve to build self-reliance and capacity in the industry.
Recent rains in the drought-affected areas have resulted in inundation of large numbers of camels in the area to the south and east of Alice Springs. Pastoralists tell me that camels have dispersed in recent weeks. While the pet food industry is to examine the options for harvesting animals in Central Australia, this is an emerging environmental issue for Central Australia. Government will continue to work with pastoralists, the CLC, and interstate agencies in developing a coordinated solution to this national issue.
Madam Speaker, we recognise the serious impact of drought on pastoralists in Central Australia, and we will continue to support pastoralists while they recover from one of our worst droughts on record.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I understand the pressures of drought. In fact, it was as a result of droughts that caused me to leave the farm and, ultimately, end up standing here. The primary industry sector is often typified by being very self-reliant but, when it comes to extraordinary pressures out of their control, such as the withholding of rain from the skies, they begin to speak. They do not speak at all times; they like to sort their own business out. However, when they speak, I would expect that they would be listened to with excessive closeness and sensitivity.
I was at the Cattlemen’s Association AGM. The core message that came through that presentation and the questions from the floor was a request that you, minister, understand those who are carrying excessively heavy loads in working off the land and that you represent them. There are two core issues that they seek your representation on. One is the roads but, more importantly, is local government reform. Though it may not be, as you described at the time, in the domain of other ministers, it is, in fact, your position at that table to represent their best interests. There is not a lot we can do about rain. There are some aspects that you describe regarding trucking subsidies and lease payments being deferred, and engagement of other agencies, both federal and local. However, it is those two core issues of local government reform and attention to the road system along with, ultimately, knowing that you are going to be standing up for the best interests of the cattle industry.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, again, the member for Blain has stolen my thunder. Some of the issues he raised, minister, have been repeated throughout the Territory, the local government reforms in particular. The question is whether they are going to add another burden to pastoralists who are already struggling. They need to have that clarified and to be involved in the process. They feel as though they have been excluded, as the member for Nelson has been saying over and over again. When you think about it, many of our pastoralists maintain their own roads and the roads into their properties so you must be careful that you are not going to ask them to contribute even further for that.
It is good to see that some pastoralists have diversified because they realise cattle is not the only the thing they need to do. However, you should be addressing the problem of camels on some of these pastoral properties and national parks. Pastoralists would appreciate some support and planning for how they can control these camels, and use them to their best advantage. Let us face it: there is a product that could be utilised. We are all pleased that they get drought assistance. We all have to pray a little harder for rain.
It raises the issue of making sure water tanks are subsidised. Already, these pastoralists rely on bores, but we should make sure that we capture rain that does fall, not just in pastoral properties but in communities. Government should heavily subsidise implementation of water tanks. That is an added bonus for them, and I am glad the minister for Environment is helping.
Minister, I think you are listening and I hope you continue to listen to these pastoralists because they are a good part of our economy.
Mr NATT (Primary Industry and Fisheries): Madam Speaker, I thank the members for Blain and Braitling for their constructive comments. Yes, we do understand the problems for pastoralists in Central Australia. They have had a hard time down here lately, and we are listening to them. I most certainly am.
The member for Blain raised the interest from the Cattlemen’s Association AGM in roads and local government issues. The government has provided over $30 000 to the Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association to engage a consultant to assist them to prepare a submission on this issue. I know that the Minister for Local Government has been working closely with the Cattlemen’s Association in consultation to ensure that they are working through those issues. They have a member on the committee also.
As for the roads, again, I know our minister is working very hard to ensure that roads come up to standard. We have a huge road budget of about $130m …
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, your time as expired.
Elective Surgery – Waiting Time
Dr BURNS (Health): Madam Speaker, today I report on our plan to reduce the wait for elective surgery in the Northern Territory. This government has increased the health budget by 64% and employed over 270 extra full-time equivalent nurses and 100 full-time equivalent doctors since we came to government.
However, our health system, like all those across Australia and the western world, faces increasing demand. Elective surgery waiting lists are a matter of concern here, as they are for the public right across Australia. While it is heartening that the Northern Territory hospital system performs well compared with other jurisdictions in Australia in relation to elective surgery, we need to know that the numbers of those waiting for elective surgery are gradually falling. However, there is much more to do. Since being appointed as Health minister, I have made no secret of the fact that elective surgery waiting times need to be reduced.
Today, I would like to describe a number of initiatives specifically targeted to reduce the numbers waiting for elective surgery. According to the Commonwealth’s latest State of our Hospitals report, the Territory has the greatest demand for elective surgery in the country, with 37 admissions per 1000 people compared with a national average of 27 per 1000. Despite the higher demand, the median waiting time for elective surgery in the Northern Territory is 29 days, which is the same as the national level and better then New South Wales, Tasmania, South Australia and the ACT.
Management of the elective surgery waiting list is a complex and a difficult process, but it is important to note that elective surgery is adversely affected by increasing demand for emergency care. However, despite increasing demand on our hospital Emergency Departments, I am pleased that our elective surgery procedures have managed to keep pace.
The number of people on waiting lists has been stable for several years and is slowly trending down. In March last year, there were 3449 people on the elective surgery waiting list. As at 31 March 2007, there were 3143, which is a fall of 306 cases or 8.9% over the last year.
Despite these results, we need to make a concentrated effort to bring the numbers waiting for elective surgery down further. Today, I am pleased to highlight a targeted effort across our public hospitals to reduce waiting times for elective surgery. These initiatives are already under way, or will be very shortly. They include, first, the opening of a third operating theatre at Alice Springs from last week, in March 2007; a partnership that commenced on 2 April 2007 with Darwin Private Hospital to provide 10 beds, Monday to Friday, and five beds over the weekends for postoperative care; visiting ophthalmology and ENT services at Katherine Hospital; and, sponsoring visiting proceduralists at the smaller hospitals in Gove and Tennant Creek. These initiatives will be focused on those who have being waiting the longest for their elective surgery.
I also recently announced in Alice Springs a partnership between the Northern Territory government, the Australian government and the Fred Hollows Foundation for a blitz on eye surgery in Alice Springs. This will further reduce waiting times for eye surgery, with 40 patients planned to be treated in May 2007 and further episodes in September and November 2007.
With respect to the waiting times reduction initiatives I have just outlined, I am pleased to announce that Maureen Brittin, the Director of Nursing for Emergency and Critical Care at RDH, has been seconded to coordinate this activity across all Territory hospitals. Maureen Brittin is regarded as a very competent and well-respected nurse.
A clinical reference group has been formed comprising clinicians involved in surgery across all hospitals to oversee surgical efforts. I am confident that these initiatives will make a significant impact on reducing waiting times for elective surgery although, as I have said, progress with elective surgery depends on a complex range of issues, not least demand on our Emergency Departments. The aim of these initiatives is to cut elective surgery waiting lists by 20% over the next three to four months.
Madam Speaker, this is a significant initiative. It is something that I focused on as soon as I become Health Minister. There has been a lot of planning behind this, and I am confident that we will strive hard to reach these very significant targets.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, I welcome the minister’s report. I saw his media release of two days ago expressing the same points. We need to thank the Fred Hollows Foundation and the federal government for coming to assist the Northern Territory government to carry out as much eye surgery as possible. Obviously, that is going to make a huge difference to the numbers of people waiting for eye surgery and will effectively reduce the waiting list by 20% because of cataract and other eye surgery that is required.
I want the government to give me a commitment that the third theatre in Alice Springs Hospital will stay open and never be closed. They will not be able to promise me that; I know they cannot. Regarding waiting lists, three weeks ago, the news media rang to seek information from the government, and they went right around the block and told the media nothing about what has happened. What they did not state was they rang every patient in the Territory who is on the waiting list. Some had been waiting for more than 12 months. I suggest someone had died, or even gone interstate or elsewhere for surgery and, therefore, fell off the list. This is how the Northern Territory government proposes to reduce the list, by keeping people waiting for so long that they go elsewhere to look for remedies. That is what has happened here.
A member interjecting.
Dr LIM: Check your figures. The worst part of it all is that you still do not have enough beds. In fact, the Northern Territory has 2.8 beds per 1000 population, and the closest is News South Wales with 3.8 per 1000, the highest being Western Australia with 4.9 beds per 1000 people. You do not have enough beds, you do not have enough nurses, and that is the problem. You have bed block and, therefore, you can not treat elective surgery because you cannot get patients into hospitals.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for the update. It is good news. It is just a shame that we have to scream so loud sometimes to get your attention to the problems at the hospital. We have some exceptional medical practitioners in the Alice Springs Hospital. For too long we have been saying Darwin has been making decisions for us and we have not had the senior people here to make those decisions; they have had to go to Darwin. I would like you to update exactly what decision-making positions are now in Alice Springs other than the General Manager of the hospital. That has been the concern and frustration of everyone.
The initiative of the Fred Hollows Institute coming here is really important. You have to remember the demand on our hospital occurs because the primary health of many people is not as good as it should be. Do not attempt to fix some of our problems within our hospital regarding our waiting list, but make sure you also address the other problems to try to keep those waiting lists down; ensure that people attend hospital before it gets to the stage that it does.
Someone rang me yesterday and said they were on the waiting list for elective surgery and they were rung as part of this audit to find out whether they still required it or not. It seems to them as though you are trying to push people off the waiting list.
I have had success when someone has come to me. An example was a young girl whose mother had had bowel cancer and she wanted to have the tests for that. She had been put on the waiting list, even though it was quite urgent for her to have that because of her condition. With lobbying, yes, it was fast-tracked. I appreciate the hospital and the Minister for Health, but we should not have to bend over backwards to make these urgent cases come to the top of the list. Perhaps this whole question of elective surgery is frustrating for the person who is on that list, more so than you and I.
Dr BURNS (Health): Madam Speaker, I acknowledge the difficulties that people face when they are on elective surgery waiting lists. That is why, as I said, when I became minister, this was one of my first targets. This is a program that is going to bear fruit.
Regarding people being rung to find out what their situation is in regard to elective surgery waiting lists, they are simply being rung to be given the time to come in and have their elective surgery …
Dr Lim: Oh, rubbish!
Dr BURNS: For the member for Greatorex to assert that somehow, the reduction being proposed for elective surgery waiting lists is because of that is absolutely fatuous. That is why we are operating overnight in theatre in Alice Springs. That is why we have partnerships with …
Dr Lim interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Greatorex.
Dr BURNS: Procedures will actually be carried out. That 20% reduction is going to be welcomed by people, not carped at by the member for Greatorex.
______________________
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: As the Chief Minister comes to the Dispatch Box, honourable members I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Year 5 Living Waters Lutheran School students with teachers Hilary Saunders and Ben Martin. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
_______________________
Alice Springs Alcohol Management Plan
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, it is good that the member for Greatorex is writing letters to government because his boss does not.
Today I report on the progress of the Alice Springs Alcohol Management Plan. Alcohol is a major factor when it comes to crime and antisocial behaviour we are seeing in and around Alice Springs. I am pleased to report the initial feedback about the alcohol restrictions from licensees, police, the hospital and the wider community is encouraging.
In the first three months of alcohol restrictions, there has been an 11% decrease in the takeaway sales of pure alcohol. Serious assault charges have decreased, and there has been a significant reduction in the number of admissions to the Alice Springs Hospital for assault-related injures. While it is still too early to draw definitive conclusions from the data, it is reassuring to see presentations to the Emergency Department of Alice Springs Hospital for alcohol-related conditions are down in a number of areas. For example, data for the final quarter of last year, which coincides with the first three months of alcohol restrictions, compares favourably with the same period in 2005. People presenting with acute intoxication were down by 29%, alcohol gastritis down 12% and those presenting with acute pancreatitis down a whopping 43%. These are encouraging figures.
Alcohol restrictions are just one part of the alcohol management plan. We have placed a moratorium on the approval of new takeaway liquor licences, supermarkets will no longer be granted liquor licences and alcohol courts have been introduced. We are also looking at making community patrols more effective as a prevention and intervention tool, and that includes greater use of sobering-up shelters. Legislation has been put in place to allow individuals or organisations to apply for the declaration of both private and public dry areas. Alice Springs Council has their dry area application pending.
We are also examining strategies for takeaway liquor outlets including the ID-Eye system which will allow licensees, police and the justice system to better manage problem drinking. While we are making good progress, alcohol restrictions have produced some unintended consequences. The shift to lower volume alcohol products has resulted in a big increase in the amount of litter and glass in the town. Many of these areas are very public, and we are working with the town council and Tangentyere Council to address the issue.
The alcohol restrictions have also produced increased activity in supermarkets and shopping hubs outside the CBD area; in particular the north side of town is experiencing higher levels of antisocial behaviour. Let me assure the residents of North Side that police are responding with additional personnel and resources. Alice Springs now has a full quota of police, and earlier this week we were assured by senior police in Alice Springs that they have enough resources to do the job.
In addition to these assurances, yesterday Police Commissioner Paul White issued a public statement undertaking to maintain the full quota of police. With other initiatives like City Safe continuing, and the introduction of a social order task force, which is a dedicated team of police officers patrolling the CBD and other hot spots around town, I can assure businesses and residents that we are determined to protect your security and safety.
Another strategy is management of special events in Alice Springs. The recent NAB Cup is a good example. Events like this bring many people to town, which puts pressure on resources, particularly in the areas of police and health. Special measures were put in place for the match including extra Night Patrols, more police and special alcohol restrictions which were agreed to in partnership with licensees. The measures worked well and the match was a great success. Congratulations to everyone involved.
Madam Speaker, these are just some of the strategies from our alcohol management plan. We have received great support from the Alice Springs Town Council, the Chamber of Commerce, the tourism association, health service providers, licensees, Aboriginal leadership and the public service. I thank them all for their hard work. We know there are no easy solutions to the complex problem of excessive alcohol consumption but, by getting on the front foot and working with the Alice Springs community, I believe together we can make a real difference.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, we have to agree that alcohol has caused huge social problems in Alice Springs. We also know that a small portion of this population in Alice Springs is the cause of the alcohol problems across the board. When the Chief Minister talks about the hospital figures, what she omits is that more and more presentations to the hospital are women with trauma related to alcohol, and it still happens. The most interesting thing is that when the minister reports figures from the hospital, there appears constantly to be a discrepancy between what is reported by the police and the hospital. I wish the government would give us one set of accurate figures that we can all understand, rely on and believe in. At the moment, there is so much spin from this government that we cannot believe anything that they say.
The only thing that I would support this government on is the ID-Eye system. The ID-Eye system is the best thing that has been introduced by this government. I suggested that alcohol dependent people in Alice Springs should be given some sort of alcohol licence before they are permitted to buy alcohol. The ID-Eye system will go a long way to its dealing with those drunks. At the end of the day, you should not be penalising the whole of the community. There are many people on fixed incomes who would like to enjoy the benefits of alcohol. They cannot because of the way this government has, in an ad hoc way, introduced licensing controls that blocks out the whole town. It impacts on tourists and that impacts the whole town’s industry.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, the facts sound good - they really do, and, yes, there has been an improvement. However, the overall social effect cannot be so easily judged. The residents of North Side in the Braitling area have had their lives turned upside down. The change in hours for people to buy grog has been disastrous. I went there at 8 pm one night. It was dark. There were a lot of people milling around. The security people move people on but, as soon as they turn their back, they return. People are not feeling safe. A parent said yesterday: ‘I have lived there for about 10 years, but I feel uncomfortable about sending my child to the shops after school because of the milling around the shopping centre at the moment’.
The grog restrictions and the times of sale have had a disastrous effect on our social wellbeing, not just the people who live in the suburbs, but people who live in the camps opposite the shopping centre. Hoppy’s Camp is a disaster and it has to go. There is no doubt about it. You have to light the car park so people can easily be seen at night; light up the crossing so people can see people crossing the road at night; and light up the river bank so that people can see.
Change the hours of trading. I do not know how long we are going to have this trial, but it has been disastrous, so change the hours of trading. Let them buy the grog they want to drink, the drink of their choice, at 10 am and, perhaps by night time, we might have a little peace and be able to sleep.
Be careful of the laneways. Perhaps we should close the laneways behind the shopping centre in that neighbourhood. It has changed the whole social tone. It has always been such a good place to live. You have to address it in some way. You have to acknowledge that this has caused additional problems. The stats are good, but the social effects are bad.
Reports noted pursuant to standing orders.
MOTION
Estimates Committee and Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee - Appointment
Estimates Committee and Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee - Appointment
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly appoints an Estimates Committee and a Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee pursuant to the terms circulated to members.
We have debated the role, function and operations of the Estimates Committee in this Assembly on many occasions. After last year’s Estimates Committee and representation from the Leader of the Opposition by way of her response in parliament, I took it on board, as Leader of Government Business, to again look at the operations of the Estimates Committee to see if there could be further improvements in the way the committee operates to facilitate questions and responses.
There was a public process by which the Standing Orders Committee called for submissions from CEOs of government agencies, members of the public, members of parliament and the media. In responses to the Standing Orders Committee, there were some minor changes suggested but, by and large, everyone believes that the committee operates well. We have had four or five sittings of the Estimates Committee since we came to government and things are bedding down. People are becoming familiar with the process. The public service is becoming more confident in the process and preparation for it.
I acknowledge that the opposition thinks there should be further change, but that is certainly not supported by way of any other comments received by the Standing Orders Committee. Overwhelmingly, the feedback was positive and refinements over the past few years have been welcomed.
One change the Standing Orders Committee very quickly agreed to was that we are going to limit the time for ministers to make opening remarks to five minutes. If we look back over the years, maybe introductory comments from some ministers who have carriage of large agencies with large budgets went on for too long, thereby reducing the amount of time available to the Estimates Committee to ask questions of ministers. Therefore, there will be a five-minute cap on the opening remarks of ministers this year.
The Standing Orders Committee also wrote to the Public Accounts Committee suggesting that the Public Accounts Committee, which actually makes up the Estimates Committee, could look at refinements to how the committee operates to facilitate smoother operations. The Standing Orders Committee has agreed that the gap between completion of the Estimates Committee hearings and commencement of the sitting of the Assembly to consider the report be increased to an hour, which will give the Estimates Committee and Public Accounts Committee greater time to prepare their final report for debate in parliament.
We have also suggested that the Public Accounts Committee meet earlier as an Estimates Committee, say two to four weeks earlier, to facilitate focus on areas of interest to the committee’s inquiry and achieve better planning within the Estimates Committee. The history of the Estimates Committee was to come together pretty quickly, maybe the day before or even on the day of the hearings. There is not much planning going on within the committee. We all agree that if there are not going to be questions asked in particular output areas, the committee should focus on areas of interest in respect of a minister. We have suggested to the Public Accounts Committee that they consider meeting earlier and plan an approach to estimates that would obviate people asking questions that are not a focus of the committee’s interest. That is an issue for the Public Accounts Committee to consider.
In terms of the structure and operations of estimates, it is incumbent on all of us to look at our own processes and how we can better facilitate what estimates is all about, which is rigorous scrutiny of the budget and outcomes from appropriations to agencies.
With those comments, I have circulated the terms of reference. Essentially, estimates will occur this year in much the same way it occurred last year. It is a process which, as I said, was introduced by this government to give an opportunity for the Estimates Committee to seek, from ministers and government agencies, real detail about budget allocations and outcomes from appropriations. It is certainly serving the Territory public, parliament and public sector well in respect of accountability. I look forward to debate on the motion.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of Government Business for the motion. The opposition always looks forward to estimates because it is an opportunity for us to compare the government’s spin with what is actually happening with spending and intended outcomes.
I note the Leader of Government Business said that he took on board what the opposition said in what we thought was fairly constructive criticism or comments, and how we could improve the system for all Territorians. However, from what the Leader of Government Business just said, none of the matters that were put to him have, in fact, been taken up.
There have been a couple of changes. One is to reduce the time for ministers when making opening remarks to five minutes. Would it not it be better, Leader of Government Business, if you similarly reduced the time of ministers to five minutes when they are answering questions? Some of them have made filibustering such an art form that some answers can take more than that. The minister for Police and the Minister for Health, one and the same person, has traditionally won the gold medal when it comes to filibustering.
There is the farcical process of the minister being asked a question by the opposition or Independent members – to which the minister does not know the answer, which is, not surprisingly, often – and the minister then says: ‘I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question’. Then the minister turns to the public servant beside them and says: ‘I will ask Mr Smith from the department to answer that’. …
Mr Henderson: That is the whole point of it.
Ms CARNEY: No, the whole point of it, Leader of Government Business, is the question is for the minister; ‘the minister’ is the bit you forget. It is your budget. You will not even let us address questions directly to public servants. I understand that happens in the federal parliament. You throw a hissy fit …
Members interjecting.
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!
Ms CARNEY: You throw a hissy fit every time we go directly to public servants. Sometimes it happens as a result of normal human behaviour because the public servant is the one looking us in the eye and giving the explanation. Then we go to do a follow-up and the minister jumps in and says: ‘Through me, Leader of the Opposition, through me’. Then we say: ‘Okay, through you, minister …’, but you are looking at the public servant: ‘… can you please answer this question?’ Then the minister says: ‘I will ask Mr Smith sitting on my left to answer that question’. The voice I am mimicking is, of course, that of the gold medal winner, the minister for Police.
Government members, as they usually do, can say whatever they like, but it is a joke. The journalists think it is funny and members of the public - and let us face it, there are not many of them who come to estimates, but those who do - are aghast at how we do things.
Moving to something else, we asked for more time to question ministers. The minister for Police and Health, again, the same person, the bloke who sits over there; he is minister for Police. Is police a big issue in Alice Springs this week? Yes, that is a seriously big issue, not only in Alice Springs but throughout the Northern Territory. Is health a seriously big issue? Yes, even government says that health is a seriously big issue. That particular minister has at least one other portfolio, Racing and Gaming. How much time will we get for him? Four-and-a-half hours! You prioritise, obviously, so you get two hours for Police, two hours for Health, and maybe half-an-hour for Racing and Gaming, given the very strict time constraints this government has imposed.
The minister for Police is a great example. What he does when answering – and he does not bother to answer my letters either and I ask very specific questions in writing – is look at me and in his snail-paced way of talking says: Thank you for the question, Leader of the Opposition’. Then he basically says: ‘I do not really know the answer, but Mr Smith does’. If you were to add up the time the minister for Police took in just getting to that point, it would be a great deal.
Why is this important? It is important because this Labor government - and I look almost admiringly at the member for Nhulunbuy, who made that wonderful speech not long after coming to office. It was a ripper and I have quoted from it before. Unfortunately, I do not have it with me today to quote …
Mr Stirling: I will get a copy for you.
Ms CARNEY: He said: ‘After years in the wilderness, we are going to be an open, honest, transparent government’. Remember when you said: ‘We are going to open the books’? Even your little mate over there, the Leader of Government Business, said that the Estimates Committee would be a rigorous scrutiny.
Mr Stirling: And it is.
Ms CARNEY: No, it is not! You are not open and transparent when you give one of your senior ministers, with arguably two of the most important portfolios in the Territory, two hours and then he fills half of it just by speaking slowly, and the other half by flicking to Mr Smith or Mrs Jones because he does not know the answer.
They were your words, not ours. They were your words. The true believers that you once were, and the member for Nhulunbuy was, are now coming into this parliament. Every year you go to estimates with your media releases and spin of ‘we are an open and transparent government’, and yet you are the most secretive, sneaky, arrogant, slippery bunch of politicians anywhere in the country.
Having said that, Madam Speaker, we look forward to the Estimates Committee process. We wish we had weeks. You need weeks to be questioned; you need weeks. The people of the Northern Territory expect us to get in there and do a good job. We will. We know that you do not like answering questions. We know that the word ‘scrutiny’ does not mean the same to you these days as it did. We will do our job, and all we ask on behalf of the people of the Territory is that you do yours.
Mr Kiely: You can read last year’s speech, Gerry.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): Madam Speaker, the member for Sanderson is probably right: I can read last year’s speech. I will probably hear last year’s reply, too, but it is worth repeating.
I thank the minister for this Estimates Committee motion. It is great to have it changed to only five minutes per minister for opening remarks.
I wish we could apply the Leader of the Opposition’s view to Question Time, which is not much different from estimates. It is a time for us to ask the government about what it is doing. To have only two questions from Independents on both days of parliament is a disgrace. We would normally be able to have three in Darwin. Is it the cold weather? You keep warm by creating more hot air with longer answers. I do not know what it is, but we only have two questions from the Independents and that is a disgrace. People want to know, they want to scrutinise the government. They will not get it from dorothy dix questions but they will from the opposition and Independents. We should be making sure they have the opportunity in Question Time to ask more questions.
Be that as it may, we do that in estimates. One of the things I have been concerned about is that in the large departments, over the number of years that I have been on the Estimates Committee, we have not been able to ask questions of, for instance, the minister for ports, which is part of Planning and Infrastructure. I do not believe, in my time, we have been able to scrutinise a minister about how our ports are run. It is not minor area; it is a major area of government expenditure. There have been huge amounts of money spent on the Port of Darwin. There has been the failure of some rods which caused a part of a wall to collapse. Have we been able to scrutinise how much that cost, whose fault it was or where there are continuing major problems? We have not been able to talk about it.
The government would know that I do not believe that East Arm Port should be under Local Government. One of the reasons it should be kept out of Local Government - as it is in local government reforms - it will not be part of the Local Government area - is because it does not come under Planning Authority scrutiny. When there is development in areas of Darwin, Palmerston, and Litchfield, you have a public meeting as part of the planning process. East Arm Port does not have that process; the minister is the planning authority and delegates to a member of a department. I can write a letter saying I think a certain development in that area is not good and I have some concerns. How do I know it has not been put in the rubbish bin? I get a reply: ‘Thank you very much, goodbye’. There is no public process by which I can get up at a public forum and expand on what I said in the letter and tell the Development Consent Authority and the people who attend of my concerns.
We have one of the most important areas developed in the Northern Territory - that is the port and the industrial area surrounding it - and yet it is not subject to proper scrutiny through the planning process and, because of time constraints through the Estimates Committee, we have not been able to question the government about it. That is just one example.
If we are going to stick to these times, there needs to be a method where perhaps we turn the numbers around. When we question ministers, there is a set guideline as to which areas of responsibility will come first. If we are going to be stuck with that process on an annual basis, we should turn those numbers around, rotate them, so we can ask the minister first about ports ...
A member interjecting.
Mr WOOD: No, no, because the opposition and the Independents regard all of what the government does as important. The minister who looks after Infrastructure and Planning has an extremely important portfolio. It is one of the biggest budgets in the government. It affects many people because planning, by its very nature, affects everyone. Roads and infrastructure of all sorts affect us. We need to test the government as to whether that money is being well spent. Unfortunately, as I said, with things like the port, we have not been able to do that.
I raised a classic example. I have been told there were three entrances built for the port. There was the original one, then they built another one, and they have built another one since they moved it close to the East Arm boat ramp. When they built it, they found that it was too high for the trucks. In fact, they built a temporary shaded area for the person who had to check your licence when you entered the port because it was not built in a manner that suited both trucks and passenger vehicles. How much did that all cost? I have not been able to ask because we have never reached that stage in the Estimates Committee.
I understand that you have limitations on how long we are at the Estimates Committee, but we need to have a process which allows the bigger departments more time than some of the little ones, although some of the little ones, such as the department of Primary Industry, should be scrutinised as much as others. I realise in the mix of which departments have the biggest expenditure, the department of Primary Industry does not have the same expenditure as the Department of Planning and Infrastructure.
We need to have a way so that if, in one year we have not been able to get to a certain section of the department, that should be put at the top of the list for the next year. At least we then have a chance to scrutinise those areas. That would not be too hard to do. It is a matter of being able to have this format so that the output groups not reached last year can be put on the top of the pile this year, and can have some scrutiny.
I look forward to the Estimates Committee. It is a very important part of government. It is not that easy being an Independent on the Estimates Committee because, being the shadow minister for everything, you try to cover everything. Even though it is a tiring period, it is a very important part of my duties as a parliamentarian. I try to ask questions that are relevant and that people would expect from their local member or a member of the Estimates Committee.
I look forward to the coming budget, which I am sure I will have the time to scrutinise. Hopefully, I will get a nice copy with a spiral insert so one can actually use it without having to have three bricks to hold it down when you are trying to open a page. I thank the Under Treasurer for giving me a copy this year in that format.
I am looking forward to estimates. As I said, it is a very important part of the political process. The government will not entirely agree with what I have said today, but I hope they take it on board and, perhaps, next year they will change the way we do things.
_____________________
Visitors
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Treasurer, as you are coming to the Dispatch Box, I acknowledge the presence in the gallery of Year 5 students from Living Waters Lutheran School, with their teacher, Roy Jackson. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
____________________
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Welcome, Year 5; it is good to see you here.
Madam Speaker, we go through this in a similar format each year. The Leader of the Opposition and her colleagues remain scathing of a process that we have sought to strengthen each year since we have been in government after inheriting the former processes under the Country Liberal Party government itself.
The Opposition Leader now suggests that the process should take weeks. Should the government accede to this and say: ‘Okay, we will set aside three weeks of sittings’? No sooner would we allow that the process would then require months. All that means is a longer and longer process. It underlines the inept way in which the opposition approaches the estimates task. Under the structure, and it is a quite disciplined structure, the larger budgets within a government are given greater amounts of time. I am there for 7 or 7 hours. I have seen the opposition spend four hours chasing down a $10 000 grant in a major agency. The whole agency would cover a few hundred millions of dollars that they might want to get to and flesh out any particular issues, but to spend three or four hours on a $10 000 grant suggests that they are not putting their resources and all their expertise in any strategic sense in scrutinising the budget.
You must remember what this is about. This is for scrutiny of the expenditure of nearly $3bn worth of expenditure year on year - taxpayers money - and it deserves close scrutiny. We have a process which allows that, but the fact is the opposition cannot get their heads around it in being strategic, focused and using their time in the best possible fashion.
The largest session ever, from memory, under the previous government was 41 to 41 hours. It might have been the same year that we had the infamous 2500 questions. Over all of those years, even including that 41 to 41 hours, I think the average was around 31 to 33 hours. The process now has 43 hours or 46 …
Mr Henderson: Forty-three.
Mr STIRLING: Forty-three hours, which is in excess of the longest-ever session estimates took when the CLP was in power and Labor was in opposition with 2500 questions, in advance, plenty of time to get the answers. The difference is we got through that process, even allowing that many questions, because we were disciplined, focused, and we knew where we wanted to go.
You have to ensure you reach major spending areas. You have to allow yourself enough time and flexibility to get to any political exposure you think you might have up your sleeve. After all, that is a big part of the process; it is at its heart, at its essence. It is political and that is what you need to do. I suggest that it does not need weeks, it does not need months. It now has in excess of the longest period ever taken before, and it is simply a matter of the opposition sitting down, planning a disciplined and strategic approach, and saying: ‘Which are the areas we are going to concentrate on? Where are the areas we need to get to?’
It ill behoves the opposition to come out of the estimates process and say: ‘We did not have an opportunity to get to Licensing’, or: ‘We did not have an opportunity to get to the Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment’. That is their choice. If they want to get to the Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment, use less time on other areas, have your questions ready, and make sure you have your eye on the clock to get those questions up. Again, it simply underlines the inept approach taken by the opposition, when they come away from a process where they are given 43 hours to scrutinise the budget, and complain that they did not have time to get to particular areas.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, aspects of this are being ignored by members opposite. The reference to previous systems and current systems neglects the view that there was flexibility in the original system. Albeit there may have been an equivalent amount of time, you had the capacity within that to focus on an area and take it to its end. The system you have now is to create an impression that something is happening but, in fact, the system itself gets in the way.
This government is more interested in presenting a perception or creating a notion that there is openness and transparency. There is greater effort put on that, in fact, than what is occurring. You can have a system that is more flexible, that allows weight to be given to the areas that need the attention, where you can follow the argument all the way through. We could then take time from areas where we do not need to take that amount of time.
In the previous system, there were some strengths; you could ask the line of questions all the way through to the end. Then you were able to call on the next minister, and maybe you needed less time. The fact that there was, trusting what the Treasurer just said, roughly an equivalent amount of time, it strengthens that argument that if you had the flexibility required to allow certain areas to receive the level of inquiry that is required or necessary, then you can take that time from other areas. We do not have that flexibility. We have a model in place, and it appears to be for the purpose of creating this idea or sustaining this notion that it is open, honest and transparent.
If that were the case, I put this to you: honourable members opposite, if you are so enamoured and so trusting of this system, bear in mind that you will not always be in government, will you not complain one speck once you are in opposition and we operate exactly the same system? Do not think for a moment, caught up in the idea that you have 19 members and there are four members of the opposition and two Independents, that it will last forever. You are the very group that sincerely presented an idea to the Territory that you were going to breathe life into this idea of openness, honesty and transparency.
You create a notion and structure to carry the idea, but not the substance thereof. You are the same outfit that presented, in all sincerity, to the Territory community that you would have fixed parliamentary terms. Once you came to the position to honour that agreement, suggestion and position to the Territory community, once you had the power in your hand, you changed that.
You are changing very little; you are putting your efforts into self-protection. I warn you: you will not be in government forever, and the bed that you create for yourself, you will have to lie in when you are in opposition.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order, order!
_______________________
Visitor
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Claire Ryan, who sang at the concert on Sunday night and who is a member of the Youth Minister’s Round Table. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
_______________________
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I thank members for their contributions.
I will respond to members who commented. I do not know if the Leader of the Opposition just does not get it. She went into histrionics here at the Dispatch Box about ministers answering every question and should not defer to public servants for details. It just goes to show that the Leader of the Opposition does not get what estimates is all about.
What estimates is about is scrutiny of the budget in allocations to agencies, and to ascertain if outcomes are being achieved from the allocations of funding. To expect a minister to be across the operational details of service delivery across the Northern Territory is absolutely ridiculous. If you want a political exercise, the minister would answer every question; you would have a political exercise. However, if you want access to information about service delivery, value for money, how resources are allocated to what priorities, how we are spending the money, then to have public servants provide that information is totally appropriate.
Maybe the member for Araluen, the Leader of the Opposition, lives in a cocoon here in Alice Springs. We know that she does not leave Alice very often to see what is happening around the rest of Australia, or even turn on the television to see what happens in federal parliament during the Estimates Committee process, where public servants probably answer 90%-plus of questions.
Ms Carney interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Leader of the Opposition.
Ms CARNEY: Sorry, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes withdraw, thank you.
Ms CARNEY: I withdraw, Madam Speaker.
Mr HENDERSON: Maybe the Opposition Leader does not turn on the television very often to see what happens in the rest of the world, or understand what happens in other parliaments. The establishment of this Estimates Committee in the Northern Territory was facilitated by the Public Accounts Committee doing a significant review as to how Estimates Committees operate across Australia. They visited various jurisdictions such as Tasmania. The member for Johnston went. We have a parliamentary practice in the Northern Territory, which is contemporary, for facilitating access to information.
If you look what we had before, the farcical process we had with the Committee of the Whole, yes, ministers did answer every question. Do you know what happened, Madam Speaker? The opposition was required to put every single question in writing to ministers and bureaucrats disappeared into the agencies and wrote out answers. The ministers in the Country Liberal Party government were so lazy and dim-witted, they could not answer the questions. You had to write …
Ms Carney interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Leader of the Opposition!
Mr HENDERSON: … a letter with your questions on it. It would go to the public servants. The public servants would write the answer for the minister. The shadow member would stand up and very politely read the question, and did the minister answer the question? No, the minister got his letter in reply from the public service, and read out the answer that the public servant had given. So dim-witted and lazy, they read a prepared answer from the public service.
Then you could ask follow-up questions. You would ask the minister the follow up question. Did the minister answer the question? No. No, not off the top of the head. He would go to the advisor’s box. Whisper, whisper, whisper. The CEO or the chief financial officer would give them the answer and he would stand up and repeat the answer.
To say that ministers should be able to answer the detail of each and every question, and every dollar that might be spent in an agency that has an appropriation of say $700m is absolutely farcical and certainly did not happen. It did not happen in any way, shape or form when the Country Liberal Party was in government.
The Leader of the Opposition said we ought to be able to grill public servants directly, not through the minister. The reason that process is in place is to protect public servants from monstering and vilification from the opposition. We have had countless experiences over the years where the questioning of public servants directly has been hostile, offensive and downright rude. Our public servants do not deserve that. You can be hostile, offensive and rude to ministers - that is fine. Our public servants do not deserve that. They do their job under the Westminster system of implementing government policy, and spending money as appropriated by this parliament for particular purposes. They do not deserve to be monstered or yelled at by members of the opposition. For the questions to go through the minister is totally appropriate to protect public servants from monstering by the opposition.
The Leader of the Opposition talked about time frames and what have you. We have tried to be constructive, as the Standing Orders Committee, and what we are suggesting to the Public Accounts Committee is, with respect, to get your act together. Meet two to four weeks before estimates occur, which should not be a totally political exercise.
I digress a little from the Treasurer. This is a committee of parliament. The member for Nelson said that he does not get time to scrutinise the Darwin Port Corporation. Surely, as we go through minister by minister, all members of that committee should have an opportunity to say: ’I am really interested in scrutinising this output group for the Darwin Port Corporation this year. I need about 10 or 15 minutes to do that’. The committee should work through the areas that they are interested in and come to some an agreement as a committee as to where they are going to apply their focus and what their priorities are going to be.
That has not happened in the past. It has been Rafferty’s Rules at the table; there has been no game plan. Quite often, the Independents miss out. The Public Accounts Committee that becomes Estimates Committee needs to meet earlier and work out an approach for addressing questions to each minister, the areas of priority, and to ensure, as a committee, that everyone has an opportunity rather than the opposition dominating the process and the Independents having the scraps at the end of the line. That is an organisational issue.
As the Treasurer said, we provide 43 hours for scrutiny of the government budget. It is historically in excess of any amount of scrutiny that occurred under the previous administration, farcical as that process was. The process was so farcical that there was no example similar to it in any Westminster parliament around the world. It really was a totally mickey mouse process to protect ministers who were lazy, incompetent and had no idea what was going on in their agencies.
We have had this debate over and over again. Having been in opposition for two years and having to work through the previous process, I can see that this process is much better. I would not be complaining about it. Some four-and-a-half hours is ample to get to the issues of ministerial responsibility and the budget.
The member for Nelson asked whether in Question Time ministers should be restricted to five minutes for answers. I do not have the numbers in front of me, member for Nelson, but this government is answering at, I am pretty certain, around double the number of questions that occurred under the previous 27 years of the CLP. There were a couple of times yesterday, and we have spoken about it this morning, when a couple of answers went on a bit too long. We do take account of those things. We talked about it this morning.
Again, history is there to inform the present and, hopefully, we will not repeat the mistakes of the past. You can go back to previous parliaments and you would be lucky to get four or five questions up in one day. Ministerial answers would go for 20 minutes. That certainly does not occur in this parliament under this government.
The member for Nelson said we could re-order output groups so we reach areas we did not get to last year. That is an issue for you to take up within the committee. If you really think that there are significant issues in the Darwin Port Corporation, for example, I am sure that consensus should be able to be reached on the committee, unless numbers are being crunched on you, member for Nelson, so you have some time to ask questions about it. I would be disappointed if the committee does not operate on a bipartisan basis in scrutinising the budget. If it operates on some sort of political and numbers dominance that seeks to squash the Independents out of the process, that is a pity and it should be sorted out by the committee itself.
We continue to refine the process. We have said this year ministers’ introductions are limited to five minutes, and we granted additional time for the committee to prepare its response to parliament. We made suggestions that the committee meets earlier to better prepare for estimates on areas that the committee wants to scrutinise, and get much better planning in place. Hopefully, the committee will take up that suggestion from the Standing Orders Committee,
Madam Speaker, I must say that estimates is a challenging time. It does focus government agencies and public servants on accountability. They have to be prepared to answer questions without notice. The public service does a lot of work in preparing for estimates. Where questions without notice cannot be answered at the table, they are certainly responded to later. We have had very few examples where questions have been answered outside of the committee process because the information has not been available. In the accountability in the public service, public servants understand that they have to be accountable to the Estimates Committee and it has been a very important step. It is a very important process for the people of the Northern Territory to ensure that money allocated to agencies is achieving the policy outcomes of government. With that, I conclude my contribution.
Motion agreed to.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I acknowledge the presence in the gallery of primary students from Ipolera School, accompanied by their teachers, Sian Munn and Glenda Munn. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
LEGAL PROFESSION
(CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL
(Serial 89)
(CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL
(Serial 89)
Continued from 21 February 2007.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, this is a bill which, as the Attorney-General said in his second reading speech, reflects changes in terminology concerning lawyers that have occurred following the enactment in November 2006 of the Legal Profession Act. This is a very short second reading speech. It is a very straightforward bill. Accordingly, my response will be short. Not surprisingly, Attorney-General, we support the bill.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition and the opposition for their support of the bill. It is straightforward. The bulk of the amendments have been developed within the Department of Justice to ensure that all Territory legislation accords with the new Legal Profession Act 2006.
The Supreme Court was closely involved with the amendments relating to the Supreme Court Act, and I thank the justices for their constructive suggestions and assistance. It is also supported by the Law Society. I noted in the second reading speech that the Legal Profession Act, passed by the Assembly last year, fulfilled the Territory’s part in achieving uniform regulation of the legal profession across Australia.
It was interesting last week attending the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General in Canberra. I was very pleased and proud to note that we are at the front of the queue in getting this legislation through. Other jurisdictions are following suit with their own legislation. It makes amendments consequential to the enactment of the Legal Profession Act 2006. Fifty-nine Northern Territory acts and items of subordinate legislation require such amendment, and it makes amendments which will ensure there is consistent use of terminology in the statute book when references are made to lawyers.
The key distinction between legal practitioners and lawyers is that legal practitioners practice the law as a profession, and such persons are required to have a practising certificate. Lawyers, in contrast, are persons entitled to practice law, but who have chosen not to. For example, judges do not have practising certificates. The distinction is necessary because there are many requirements under legislation for lawyers that are sufficiently met if the person is qualified but is not actively practising the law. A good example of that is chairing a statutory tribunal.
The most substantial amendment of the bill is to section 22 of the Supreme Court Act. The amendment sets out the circumstances in which matters involving a lawyer will be heard by the Full Court or by a single judge. The default position is that of a single judge except that, where rules are made to the contrary, it is anticipated that such rules will be made. The drafting of section 22 reflects suggestions and commentary from the judges of the Supreme Court.
It is primarily of a statute reform nature. There are no major policy changes contained within it. However, the Department of Justice has closely consulted with the Law Society following the development and enactment of the Legal Profession Act to ensure that it meets the expectations of the Northern Territory legal profession. It also incorporates suggestions and recommendations from other parts of government and from the judiciary so that all relevant Territory legislation works cohesively.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General)(by leave): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
JUSTICE LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 88)
Continued from 21 February 2007.
Ms CARNEY (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, my response to this bill will be longer than the previous one. This is the Justice Legislation Amendment Bill and it seeks to amend many items of Territory legislation. Some of the amendments are supportable. Others are curious, to say the least. I say from the outset that the bill should have been separated for reasons that will become obvious later.
We will deal, Attorney-General, with some of the straightforward ones first. First, I go to the Agents Licensing Act, which, as we know, is legislation that covers the registration of real estate agents, business agents and conveyancing agents. It is going to be amended by allowing a discretionary power to be extended to the Agents Licensing Board. The new power is to allow the board to admit people as agents based on experience and other qualifications as an agent. Basically, it is, in a sense, a legislative way of recognising prior learning. The board may seek an assessment of a person’s prior learning and experience in forming its opinion. The amendments to the Agents Licensing Act are supported and are decidedly supportable because, to grant discretionary power to the Agents Licensing Board is desirable and, as I understand it, the board sought this change.
Moving to the Northern Territory Employment and Training Act, again, it is a commonsense and worthy amendment and should be supported. I simply refer, I suppose it might be quicker, to the comments made by the Attorney-General in his second reading speech as to why that change came about.
We now move to amendments to the Anti-Discrimination Act. Put simply, it seems to be amended to fix a small loophole brought about by section 41 of the act. Again, it is a commonsense and supportable amendment because it is the intention of this legislation that is important. I commend the government on this amendment.
In relation to the Business Tenancies (Fair Dealings) Act, once again the amendment is commonsense and supportable. It is made so that the intention of the legislation is reflected. To a large extent, they are the easy bits.
Attorney-General, I turn to some of the other legislation affected by this bill. I hope that you will be able to address some of these matters in your reply.
I go first to amendments to the Criminal Code. In your second reading speech, Attorney-General, you said there are three amendments to the Criminal Code. As you said in your second reading speech:
- The first of these amendments to the Criminal Code repeals and replaces section 363 and repeals Schedule 4 of the Criminal Code. The amendment is proposed in response to concerns raised by the former Director of Public Prosecutions and other legal associations …’
I ask: who?
- … about the complicated rules that govern the order in which counsel address a jury at the end of a trial.
In the next paragraph appearing in the Parliamentary Record, the Attorney-General said:
- The overly complicated and unnecessary procedural steps currently set out at Schedule 4 also arguably penalise the accused if they choose to call witnesses in their case. The proposed amendments are simple and easy to follow. They allow the accused to address the jury last regardless of whether he or she is represented by counsel and … whether or not they choose to call witnesses.
A couple of important issues arise from what I have read of the Attorney-General’s second reading speech. First, Attorney-General: what is it exactly in Schedule 4 that is complicated? Schedule 4 has a series of headings, which is pretty straightforward stuff. I have not known of a lawyer who works in the area of criminal law who has put anything vaguely resembling a persuasive argument about the complicated nature of Schedule 4. I invite people to look at Schedule 4;. It is far from complicated.
The second issue that arises from those parts of the second reading speech that I read, which I think is very concerning – I will not use the word ‘trend’ because I hope this is not a trend - is the order in which counsel address the jury in criminal trials. The accused and his or her lawyer, like any advocate, must decide whether to call witnesses and what impact that will have on their client’s case. They are decisions made by legal practitioners, advocates, officers of the courts, every day. It is invariably a tactical decision, one made invariably in the interests of a lawyer’s client. It is always a matter of choice and judgment.
One wonders why there appears to be, from these comments and this change that this Attorney-General has made, a favouritism of the accused. I ask the Attorney-General in his reply to advise of a case, either in the Court of Summary Jurisdiction or the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory, that has brought about this change. It is, I would say, invariably the case when important changes like this are made to this type of legislation that there has been an example, an instance. Often they receive publicity; sometimes they do not. However, there has been something that has caused the community concern which, in turn, might cause government to say: ‘We have to do something about this. We should amend legislation so that this sort of difficulty, this problem, does not happen again’.
Attorney-General, I ask you very specifically: was there a case that brought about this change? If so, could you provide me with the citation? I have not been able to find one. Similarly, lawyers to whom I have spoken have not been able to find one. I have not talked to every lawyer in the Northern Territory, but I have spoken to some, all of whom I respect greatly and who are certainly learned in the law.
In the absence of a specific case which has brought about this change, I ask: what exactly was it? There is a view, Attorney-General, that when the former Director of Public Prosecutions retired, and in his now oft cited farewell speech at SKYCITY, he suggested the order of things should be changed. He expressed, having been a prosecutor for many years …
A member interjecting.
Ms CARNEY: No, you were not, I do not think. Having been a prosecutor for many years, he said the rules should change in favour of the defence in some respects. I was there. I heard the speech. Many lawyers still talk about it. Why am I mentioning this? It is because I would like to know whether this was done as a result of a formal or informal request by the former Director of Public Prosecutions who now co-chairs the inquiry into sexual abuse in Aboriginal communities. If it was not done informally by the former director, and it may not have been the case, can you advise whether the former Director of Public Prosecutions consulted with other prosecutors in his office as to whether these changes were (a) required or (b) desirable?
If, as you said in your second reading speech, this amendment is proposed in response to concerns raised by the former Director of Public Prosecutions, did he raise those concerns at any time with you, or your predecessor, and I am sure your staff can assist you in answering this question, while he was the DPP? I would be very grateful, Attorney-General, if you could provide me with answers to those questions.
In the absence of a specific case or any details other than concerns raised by the former DPP and other legal associations, the underlying question is: why the change? From the second reading speech, it is hard to see the policy or legal basis for the change. It is, frankly, difficult to see any political basis for the change.
The third issue is a very general one. I appreciate the Attorney-General yesterday introducing the Evidence of Children Amendment Bill. Those of us who were in the last Assembly can certainly remember that long and, at times, very heated debate, and my contribution when it came to that legislation. I understood that the legislation was going to be changed. I look forward to, after these sittings, reading the Attorney-General’s second reading speech.
However, there are some urgent changes required to the legislation which, I understand, government has known about. The Attorney-General can correct me if I am mistaken; he can either do it now or when we are talking about the legislation in due course. I make this point to illustrate that, on the one hand, you have changed the order of address for defence lawyers when addressing juries but, on the other, there are some significant changes that should have been made when reviewing legislation. Let us face it: the bill before us now does that. It begs the question: where are your priorities? Why are some quite curious changes made without, apparently, any basis at all when there are pressing changes to be made in relation to the giving of evidence by children?
I will use an example; I know there are others. The Evidence Act and the Justices Act have created an inconsistency. Members will recall that, in the Evidence Reform (Children and Sexual Offences) Bill which we debated about October 2005, changes were made regarding the pre-recording of evidence for child witnesses and people with intellectual disabilities. When we look at the Justices Act, we see that a child witness who gave a pre-recorded statement or evidence cannot be cross-examined because their statement is tendered. They are not allowed to be cross-examined but this is, as I am advised, not the case with witnesses who are intellectually disabled. That is an obvious inconsistency. It affects vulnerable witnesses. It certainly goes to the heart of the policy that the government said it was trying to address and implement when it introduced the Evidence of Children Amendment Bill. One wonders why it has taken so long to fix it. At the end of the day, it is a pretty straightforward amendment and it should be fixed. It may be in the legislation or the bill you introduced yesterday. It still, nevertheless, illustrates the point. Curiously, and without any basis, you are changing the order of address for defence counsel when addressing juries, tipping the balance, it can fairly be said, in favour of the accused. Why? For no apparent reason.
Yet, you have an inconsistency created by your own legislation that goes to vulnerable witnesses, and you have apparently ignored it or, if it was in the bill that was introduced yesterday, it has been a long time coming. They are the issues that arise from the proposed amendments to the Criminal Code.
I now move to the Domestic Violence Act. When I first looked at this amendment, as I do regularly, I wrote on the side of it: ‘An oops amendment; another oops amendment’, something to which the government forgot to turn its mind when it introduced its legislation. However, the more I looked at this, the worse it became. It is noteworthy that we are debating this bill a day or so after it became apparent that officers from the Domestic Violence Unit are going to move from that unit to other areas of policing, thus leaving Aboriginal women without the services of which the government was once so proud, and without the concentrated effort from police that these women so deserve.
The amendments in this bill to the Domestic Violence Act are, it can be said, somewhat interesting. The Leader of Government Business does get himself into trouble. We were talking about the separation of powers last night. The Leader of Government Business is a bit of a bovver boy; he was having a go. The Leader of Government Business is on the Parliamentary Record of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly saying that the separation of powers involves, and you will love this …
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Madam Speaker! I have a new-found interest in these sorts of terms, as Attorney-General, and have to come to grips with them myself, unlike a former premier in Queensland who, even near the end of his career, failed to understand exactly what separation of powers actually meant. I overheard, maybe by way of interjection, the Leader of the Opposition mumbling something along the lines, and a fairly accurate portrayal, of exactly the separation of executive government and judiciary. The point of order is that it was, in fact, the minister for Police, I think, who was referring to separation of powers, not the Leader of Government Business.
Ms CARNEY: The Honourable Paul Henderson, 1 December 2005, was Leader of Government Business and, I think, Police minister at that time. In relation to the concept of separation of powers, which is arguably interesting in itself, he referred to it as being between the parliament, the police and the judiciary. The minister for Police, a minister of the Crown, Leader of Government Business, and Chief Ministerial aspirant, does not get the separation of powers!
In this country, all sorts of people can become politicians but, I would have thought, an understanding of that one was important. I am sure some of our school students, if they have not looked at the separation of powers already, might look at in years to come.
Madam SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Leader of the Opposition, I clarify that the Deputy Chief Minister believed that you were referring to a comment made by the Police minister last night, which is what he said then.
_________________________
Distinguished Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Before we continue with debate, I acknowledge the presence in the Speaker’s Gallery of the South Australia Legislative Council President, the Honourable Bob Sneath and his wife, Mrs Sneath. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: I acknowledge students in the gallery from Year 7 from the Alice Springs High School, with teachers John Prewer and Janine Pearce. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms CARNEY: I see a couple of students who were participants in the Youth Parliament on Monday. With your indulgence, Madam Speaker, we should specifically acknowledge their attendance.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of members of the Youth Parliament who were debating in this Chamber on Monday. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
__________________________
Ms CARNEY: The former Police minister, current Leader of Government Business and Chief Ministerial aspirant does get himself into trouble.
The amendments to the Domestic Violence Act are, I should say, supportable, but you missed it the first time around. We have had a few heated debates in this parliament, and I refer members to the debate of 25 August 2005. That was when we were debating the very legislation that is being amended today. During the debate in August 2005, I said:
- The extent and the nature of the concerns simply create a level of unease within me, not only as a politician but as a person who has had a long-standing interest in this area.
I went on to say that in relation to the act the government was introducing:
- … there is some concern about tackling some areas in isolation. Many people would argue, and it is a view that I have some sympathy with, that to tinker with parts of the legislation in isolation is generally not a good approach when amending various and detailed legislative provisions.
I asked about what impact the changes that were made in August 2005 would have on the ongoing review of the act. I asked about what safeguards and what comments you had in relation to that concern. I was not answered. I quoted a letter. Most politicians, I am sure, got the same sorts of letters I received. I cannot remember; it is not immediately clear from this copy of the Parliamentary Record who this letter was from, but it can be tracked back, I am sure. I read a letter dated 30 September 2005 from a domestic violence organisation, which said:
In our view, amendments such as those contained in the bill must be considered in the context of an ongoing review of the entire act. It is premature and pre-emptive to consider the bill in isolation.
Many agencies wrote to politicians. They certainly wrote to me; I assume they wrote to government. They said: ‘Hang on, there is a review of the Domestic Violence Act. You are tinkering with it now and you are rushing it’, which you were: ‘Is that a thoughtful way to implement policy and draft legislation in any jurisdiction?’ The answer is no. I voiced my concerns; I noted the concerns of women’s groups, domestic violence services, who shared my concerns. We shared each others’ concerns.
Now I get back to the then Police minister and current Leader of Government Business. He said:
- I am surprised at the level of concern that Independents and members opposite have in regard to this bill as it is a very simple bill with very simple applications. Maybe I am just a simple man, I am not sure.
I now know, if I did not then, the answer to that question. It goes to show that the Leader of Government Business did not bother to cast his eye, learned or otherwise, over the legislation. What he did, as he usually does, is attack anyone who had some issues with the legislation. He went on and dug himself further into the hole, the man who has no concept of the separation of powers, when he said:
- Justice …
- … has worked through the checks and balances of how the laws would apply and the implication of other statutes. We have very dedicated and competent legal officers …
The minister for Police, with his usual confidence, came in here and said words to the effect of: ‘Jodeen, do not worry about it. You do not know what you are talking about. You are up on your soap box.’ - I think you did say that, actually - ‘You just sit down, girly, because we have it in hand’. Yet, what happens now? Here we are again changing the very things we were talking about in August 2005.
I seriously invite the Attorney-General to address this in his reply. Where are we up to with the review of the Domestic Violence Act? I also ask, in hindsight: would it not have been a better approach not to rush in, to be thoughtful about legislation, to have a clear policy direction? It is abundantly clear from this government in this area that, if it had a policy direction once, and I think they did, it has lost it. It has lost the plot on women’s issues. It has lost the plot on violence against women and children, much of which we will argue another day and, indeed, we have argued so far.
In respect of the Domestic Violence Act, when is the new act going to surface? When are you going to encourage members of your team to read the legislation that comes before us? When will the Leader of Government Business stop being so utterly revolting and hostile when it comes to debates involving these very serious issues?
_____________________
Distinguished Visitor
Distinguished Visitor
Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, do you mind if we pause? Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the Speaker’s Gallery of Mrs Dianne Guise MLA, Deputy Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Western Australia. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
________________________
Ms CARNEY: Madam Speaker, there are two more bills the legislation seeks to amend. I will deal first with the Vexatious Proceedings Act. That was introduced on 30 August 2006 by the Honourable Peter Toyne. The opposition supported the bill; it was a supportable bill …
Mr Stirling: Which one are you talking about?
Ms CARNEY: Vexatious Proceedings. It has happened, or was happening, or will happen pretty much all around the country. In other words, every jurisdiction is enacting vexatious proceedings legislation, as they should, and it is a good idea. However, typically from this government, we see government ministers giving second reading speeches to the Assembly, saying: ‘Yes, we have looked at his. Yes, we are satisfied with it. Rip into it. Pass the bill and, by the way, if anyone dares to criticise, politely or otherwise, strongly or otherwise, passionately or otherwise, you do not know what you are talking about, you idiots, because we have it in hand’.
I should be counting the number of what I call ‘oops bills’ because this is another oops bill. The amendment is supportable, so you got that far. Why can you not bring legislation into this Chamber that is right from the start? Why is it that ministers of the Crown, the Attorney-General, the member for Nhulunbuy, and his predecessor, Peter Toyne, on a regular basis stand there and say: ‘Yes, job is right,’ and then, down the, track: ‘Oops!’? This is yet another example and I should point it out.
The final amendments relate to the Victims of Crime Assistance Act. I note that a couple of days ago, there was a further amendment proposed to the bill which amends all of the legislation we are debating today, another amendment proposed to a bill contained in the bill. One wonders what these ministers are doing with their time.
The bill seeks to make further changes to the Victims of Crime Assistance Act, and the amendments, in essence, seek to fine-tune the act, which government amended significantly in about May last year. We strongly opposed the changes to the Victims of Crimes Assistance Act, as did the Police Association, and, from memory, a number of individuals and groups around the Northern Territory. We have had that debate. There is not a pressing need for us to revisit it.
Having said that I will, however, take the opportunity to restate one of the many objections we had in relation to the change. That was my claim and others that the changes disadvantaged those who were victims of years of child abuse, and multiple rape victims. We criticised it because there was also an introduction of a minimum threshold of $7500, which would see many victims of crime being precluded from claiming compensation. Victims of child abuse and multiple rape victims would be among the worst affected by the changes. Under the old scheme before it was changed by this Labor government, such victims were able to make an application for each offence. Of course, we are talking about victims of multiple incidents. They were able to claim for each and every offence. Labor changed that so it was no longer going to be the case. Did we have something to say about that? Yes, we did.
In legislative terms, not long after Labor changed the act for the worst, again today we are here with more amendments. Then, a couple days ago, I was provided with notice of a further amendment. What does all of this tell us? It tells us that this government does not have their eye on the ball. We have heard a lot in Alice Springs this week from the people of Alice Springs about the fact that this government does not have its eye on the ball when it comes to all things Alice Springs. It can be well demonstrated, and it can be beyond doubt, that the government does not have its eye on one of the core functions of a government, and that is to introduce sound legislation to the Legislative Assembly. I do not suggest for a moment that legislation should never be amended. Of course, it should. However, should it be amended so quickly after it was introduced? No. Should it be amended for reasons that are not outlined in the Attorney-General’s second reading speech, and I refer again to the amendments with respect to the order of address to juries? Should we have so many oops bills? No.
Madam Speaker, I have done my best to go through the issues as I see them. I have, as I have said, spoken to lawyers, particularly in relation to the domestic violence changes and the changes to the Criminal Code. I am sure that they will be interested to hear the Attorney-General’s reply. I can assure him that I will be providing his reply to them.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for her comments and support of those various parts of the amendment bill that she said they were supporting: the Agents Licensing Act, which is pretty straightforward; the Anti-Discrimination Act, which is also straightforward; and the Business Tenancies (Fair Dealings) Act amendment, which was also supported.
I believe I have managed to pick up each of the issues. If I have not, it is necessary to go into committee in relation to transition provisions, which gives the Leader of the Opposition further opportunity to ask any follow-up questions that she may have, and I will do my best to obtain an answer for them.
The issue around the amendment to the Criminal Code and the order in which parties in a criminal trial address the jury occupied a fair amount of the Leader of the Opposition’s contribution. She said you can look at the schedule and it is not particularly complicated. However, there is a dilemma here. What I understand to be the complication is the dilemma confronted by the defence lawyer when directed to address the jury last in a criminal trial, unless they want to call witnesses where they are then not able to exercise any option in relation to addressing the jury last. It seems to me it puts a hurdle there if the defence lawyer has to wrestle with this question of, on the one hand, ‘I have these witnesses who I think are invaluable to my case, to the defendant’ and, on the other, there is the desirability of addressing the jury last. They may, depending on the decision they make, choose to forgo the use of witnesses in order to retain the ability to address the jury last, or use the witnesses and, of course, not have that ability.
It is done this way in some other jurisdictions. I believe it is equally mixed across the jurisdictions of Australia. However, the Leader of the Opposition was quite keen to understand where this came from. There is no mystery here. It was the Bar Association and Criminal Lawyers Association. I am not aware, and no case was brought to my attention, as to whether there was a particular case that brought this amendment about. I am not aware of that. I saw it as a simplification process that a criminal lawyer ought to be able to do both in defence of their client in court. That is, if they wish to call witnesses, yes, do so. Did they wish to go last before the jury where they are already directed unless they called witnesses? Why should that change it? They are already directed to address the jury last unless they called witnesses and they cannot ...
Ms Carney: That is the point …
Mr STIRLING: Well, that is silly. That is just silly to me. Why they would have to wrestle with that problem? Other jurisdictions say: ‘Yes, call witnesses if you think they are going to help your case, go last’. You are directed to go last anyway. It was put to me as an exercise in simplification and that is why I was quite happy to support it. I would have thought the defence lawyer ought to be able to do both.
I am not aware of any discussion at all on this matter between the former Attorney-General and the former Director of Public Prosecutions. The Leader of the Opposition may well be aware they had a working relationship in their respective roles. Why would I be party to any previous conversation or discussion between the former DPP and the former Attorney-General? The former Attorney-General did not leave me any riding instructions, I can tell you. He did not say to me: ‘You must do this, you have to fix this’. No such conversation took place between me and the former Attorney-General. As to what may or may not have transpired between him and the former DPP, I know not, and I have no intention of finding out.
Suffice to say that in the second reading where I talk about the DPP supporting this amendment, I referred to the current DPP. The former DPP may well have supported it. According to the Leader of the Opposition, he did. So what? The comment in the second reading refers to the current DPP, and the same comments, as I said, are supported by the Bar Association, the Law Society and the judiciary, all of whom were consulted about this. I think some of them said it makes no difference, anyway.
Of course, if I can find it in the second reading, where an accused person or their representative raises issues, draws conclusions or introduces evidence in their final address to the jury that are not supported by the evidence before the court, the court is still able to grant leave to the prosecution to make a supplementary address dealing with any such issues.
I am not sure what the intent of the Leader of the Opposition’s queries were around the former DPP and the former Attorney-General and, as I said, nor am I particularly interested. It was put to me that there is a dilemma here, there is an easy way to simplify it and other jurisdictions do it this way. The amendment was canvassed, it was supported by relevant organisations, the judiciary itself, and by Cabinet, and finds its way in here as an amendment as a result.
The Leader of the Opposition went further than that. She said it is curious in terms of priorities; there are other urgent things that you should be doing around the Criminal Code. I point out to the Leader of the Opposition one of my first items of legislation in here as Attorney-General was to get rid of that ‘dangerous act causing death’. I will tell you why that was important to me, and the work was done by my predecessor, the former Attorney-General. However, I was hot on his heels about it and I will tell you why. it was because, as local member in Nhulunbuy, I know people were murdered. Make no mistake about that; they were murdered. They were alive and well one day and they were dead the next. They were dead because of an act of violence that was murder. In anyone’s view, it was murder. When it got to court, it was downgraded to manslaughter and, in three individual cases, it became ‘dangerous act causing ‘death. One of the accused individuals was released within six months of imprisonment, after murdering someone! That is why I was keen to stay on Toyne’s coat-tails, to follow this through Cabinet and get those amendments before parliament. It was because ‘dangerous act causing death’ was an excuse for murder. It is no longer part of the Criminal Code of the Northern Territory.
Members: Hear, hear!
Mr STIRLING: They are the priorities we put when we bring legislation before this House, and the Leader of the Opposition tries to suggest, in some way, that we are soft on crime.
Ms Carney interjecting.
Mr STIRLING: That we are soft on criminals.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Leader of the Opposition!
Mr STIRLING: Well, my …
Ms Carney interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Leader of the Opposition!
Mr STIRLING: … record already speaks for itself in relation to priorities around amendments. No longer will someone be murdered in my electorate - speared to death, kicked to death, trampled to death, punched to death in a drunken rage - and the person offer up ‘dangerous act causing death’. ‘Okay, sonny, six months time and you are out’. We said murder is murder, and we amended the act accordingly. There may be other urgent things we have to do and continue in the Criminal Code, and they will be brought to my attention, and we will see to it that they are.
Do not talk to me about curious priorities and what we might or might not do, Leader of the Opposition. You are welcome to bring your amendments to this parliament and you are welcome to have them considered.
In relation to the amendments yesterday, again, I thought them very important. These are around the ability of children and vulnerable witnesses to have their evidence admitted in court and accepted without having to comply with the Oaths Act, without having to go through the additional trauma and the arduous task of having to be present in court, necessarily, and confront the offender in the intimidating circumstances that the judicial system presents in the form of courts.
The Leader of the Opposition has suggested there was undue delay in getting these through. I am not aware of that. I am prepared to follow up after the process of this bill as to whether there was undue delay, and get back to the Leader of the Opposition. These issues were already well in train before I became Attorney-General. They certainly did not sit on my desk in the Cabinet submission. They were not delayed getting around the agencies. They had the backing of Cabinet, and were supported by way of introduction yesterday.
_______________________
Visitors
Madam SPEAKER: Attorney-General, do you mind if we pause to recognise some students? Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of students from Years 8 and 9 at ANZAC Hill High School with teachers, Joss Bennett, Michael Kanaan, and Naresa Hall.
We also have students from Sadadeen Primary School, Years 4 to 6 with teachers, Arama Nataira, Wendy Haynes, Emma Bollington and Martin Cardona.
On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you, Attorney-General.
_______________________
Mr STIRLING: Madam Speaker, I hope there are some budding lawyers in that audience. If they are not interested in the law, they might find this a little dry.
The Leader of the Opposition said the amendments in relation to crimes victim support was another one of those ‘oops bills’, and it is in part. I am quite prepared to accept that. However, it is also exacerbated by the outcome of an appeal decision in New South Wales which could well have had flow-on effects here. There was a bit of front-footing and the recognition that it needed to be in the act to do the job properly.
If we go back to the debate when this was put through last year, the Leader of the Opposition may have had some scepticism about it, but she was prepared to await the outcome of the regulations and see what the result would be. She supported it at the time. The government believed that the act had made it clear that all the victim had to prove was that, in fact, they had been sexually assaulted in order to claim victims of crime compensation. They did not have to subsequently prove the physical or mental harm arising from the assault itself, further trauma and further evidence, in order to be eligible for crimes victim compensation.
Under this, of course, the Director of the Crimes Victim Support Unit can award $5000 compensation up-front if they are satisfied that the victim has been subject to assault. This was the original intention, as I said: to, as far as possible, reduce any further trauma to the victim. If it was an oops, and it probably was a slight oops in the first place, it was exacerbated on the basis of the New South Wales appeal case and further legal advice to the effect that we could not achieve this through regulations, hence the amendment today.
The Leader of the Opposition asked about the Domestic Violence Act and where that is up to following the review. I am advised that the Cabinet submission is in circulation around agencies for comment as we speak. It will be before Cabinet in the near future, I would think.
Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition has a further opportunity if there is anything that I missed from her contribution that she wanted followed up because there is a committee stage amendment in relation to transition proceedings following the passage of this bill.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
In committee:
Clause 1 agreed to.
Proposed new Clause 1A:
Mr STIRLING: Mr Chairman, I move amendment 18.1. The amendment introduces a new commencement clause to the Justice Legislation Amendment Bill. The bill makes a number of minor amendments to legislation falling within the Justice portfolio. In particular, it makes amendments consequential to the passage of the Victims of Crime Assistance Act to ensure that the act operates effectively from its commencement on 1 May 2007. The provisions of the bill currently commence on assent, with assent scheduled to take place in the last week of April 2007. This would have the effect of amending legislation to remove and replace references to the current Crime Victims Assistance Act with references to the not yet commenced Victims of Crime Assistance Act. It is not possible to delay assent, as a number of other processes are dependent on the bill’s commencement.
Mr Chairman, the committee stage amendment inserts a new commencement clause into the Justice Legislation Amendment Bill. It has the effect of ensuring that the bill continues to commence on assent, with the exception of those parts of Schedule 2 which amend references to the Victims of Crimes Assistance Act. Those parts of Schedule 2 will commence on 1 May 2007.
Proposed new Clause 1A agreed to.
Remainder of bill, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Bill reported with amendment; report adopted.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
VISITORS
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of some more students who are visiting us today. We have Years 11 and 12 from Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, Sadadeen campus, with their teacher, Robyn Osland; Years 5 and 6 from the Larapinta Primary School, with teachers, Cathy Bridges and Candy Kerr; and students from Year 7 at Alice Springs High School, one of whom is Sean Chalmers, a Youth Parliament participant, and their teachers, Sharron Hill and Marg McHugh. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend to you a very warm welcome.
Members: Hear, hear!
GENERAL BUSINESS DAY
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, on behalf of the Chief Minister, I nominate Wednesday, 2 May 2007 as the next day on which precedence will be given to General Business pursuant to Standing Order 93.
STATEMENT BY SPEAKER
Appreciation for Organisation of Sittings
Appreciation for Organisation of Sittings
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, prior to calling questions today, I put on the record my thanks, and I am sure on behalf of all honourable members, to a number of people for organising these sittings in Alice Springs. As you would be aware, there is a huge amount of organisation required, to bring the entire parliament from Darwin to Alice Springs. In particular, I thank the Clerk of the Assembly, Mr Ian McNeill; Captain David Horton, the Deputy Clerk; and Derek Stafford, who does a lot of the backstage things.
Also, I thank the Parliamentary Education Unit. Over these last few days, we have had the Youth Parliament and around 1500 students visit us. I thank Mrs Jan Sporn, Anna-Maria Socci, Renee Manley and Sharon Young who have done a wonderful job in the lead-up to this.
Lastly, I thank my own staff, Chris Grace and Kent Rowe. I should say, although he would be very embarrassed about this, that Kent turned 24 on Tuesday. I thank them for all of their hard work in organising, particularly the concert on Sunday and the art competition.
I am sure members will join me in extending to these people a great many thanks.
Members: Hear, hear!
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Minister for Local Government
Minister for Local Government
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have given my leave to the Minister for Local Government to make a personal explanation.
Mr McADAM (Local Government): Madam Speaker, this is in response to the question asked by the member for Greatorex earlier. Effectively, as reported in the NT News of today, 19 April, the paragraph reads:
- At a rally of 300 people yesterday, NT Minister for Central Australia, Elliot McAdam, said Canberra’s demand that leases be signed away within a month or $50m town camp funding would be withheld was a ‘ransom demand’.
I place on the record that the question asked by the NT News was: ‘Is Tangentyere being held to ransom?’. I said: ‘It appears that way. I am very confident that there is a great capacity for Tangentyere Council, the Australian government and the NT government to get outcomes for the benefit of the people on the town camps’.
MOTION
Aboriginal Lands Act Amendment Bill 2007 – Call on Forthwith
Aboriginal Lands Act Amendment Bill 2007 – Call on Forthwith
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I seek leave to call on General Business Notice No 2 relating to the Aboriginal Lands Act Amendment Bill 2007.
Leave denied.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS
Aboriginal Lands Act Amendment Bill 2007 – Present and Pass All Stages
Aboriginal Lands Act Amendment Bill 2007 – Present and Pass All Stages
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I therefore move - That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Aboriginal Lands Act Amendment Bill 2007 being presented and passing through all stages today.
I will outline the reason I need to move this motion. It is a matter that I trust honourable members have had the opportunity to look at, as the amendment has been provided to the Attorney-General and the offer has been made to have a discussion about the nature of it. As is the case with members opposite, often when they are defending a position, they will call upon the opposition to ensure that they have had an adequate briefing. They will also call upon the members opposite to ensure that they have written a letter to seek further clarification. I have received no such letter, e-mail or request for a briefing.
Therefore, what I presume, by having even the request to have an item placed on the agenda for discussion during this parliamentary sitting denied, I am now forced to bring it on as a matter of urgency and explain why I need to do so. I only hope - and I live in the eternal hope - that this parliament will genuinely be a parliament. I trust that all members are fully briefed and conversant with this very complex issue so we can debate it on sensible and principled grounds rather than an ideological or herd basis by which they have been told by one to say: ‘When this business comes up, because it comes from the opposition, it will be rejected. Do not even bother to work out what it might contain, or how it needs to be considered in the best interest of the Northern Territory’. Not necessarily in the best interest of a political position, but in the best interest of the Northern Territory.
Any correspondence that has been circulated on this issue is on the basis that there is a high level of uncertainty at this moment within the Territory community, particularly in the Top End. What is proposed by this amendment is simply a goodwill amendment to provide an element of certainty in a time of uncertainty. It is as simple as that.
If that is understood, I will proceed to explain further why this matter needs to be put on urgency. I state again it is a matter of goodwill; it is a matter of creating certainty in a time of uncertainty.
A member interjecting.
Mr MILLS: If you mock and ridicule even that statement, honourable member, you are doing yourself no service because you do not even understand what it is …
A member interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MILLS: … that we are endeavouring to bring through. I have not received any correspondence whatsoever; not the slightest interest, no question, no seeking a briefing for a deeper understanding rather than a shallow, mocking response.
It concerns me that the parliament is being denigrated into a place where there are fixed positions. We may as well give it away and forget the charade. People do not have to bother to turn up because they know what is going to happen and we will organise it by media release.
Madam Speaker, members will be aware of the recent Federal Court decision that has caused so much controversy in the community in the Top End. There has been a stunted response by government, other than to appeal the decision to the High Court, a position that is supported by the Territory opposition. There has also been an appeal lodged by the federal government, which has taken out a full-page ad saying that it is litigating. I argue that other steps can be taken. One of the steps is to empower the Northern Land Council, in particular, to sign off on a general waiver of permits and the taking of fish on behalf of traditional owners between now and the High Court appeal. That is why we need to provide certainty. You know very well there is immense uncertainty at this point. It is a simple measure that we can pass as a parliament to ensure that there is goodwill and clarity at this point. That is all we endeavour to do, and that is why we need to proceed with this amendment so we can move to that point and bring certainty right up until the time the High Court makes a decision.
We already have an indication that there is resistance to even going down the path, which does cause some concern,. Nonetheless, I will proceed because I have 30 minutes. It may be offensive to a member opposite for me to stand and speak but, in this parliament, I have the right as an elected member to speak and explain why.
This matter is of grave community concern. It is also, as the Attorney-General at the AFANT AGM described it, quite accurately, political dynamite. Such political dynamite, notwithstanding the social impact that may be borne upon a period of uncertainty over such a profound issue as access to waterways …
Mrs BRAHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker! First, we have had no notification that this was to be brought on. We assumed that it was going to be on General Business Day. The second point is the motion is about suspending standing orders; it is not about discussing the motion.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Braitling, the notice has the date on it, Thursday, 19 April; so it was clear it was going to come on today. That aspect has already been overturned. Member for Blain, I ask you to contain your comments to the suspension of standing orders and the need for urgency in particular.
Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker, I am endeavouring to do so, but it is not a matter of just saying we need to hurry up with something but I cannot tell you what it is that we need to hurry up with and why we need to hurry it up.
Madam SPEAKER: I am aware of that, member for Blain. I am reminding you of the Standing Order to remain …
Mr MILLS: I appreciate that, thank you. That is for members who are concerned that it is difficult to understand because it is a complex matter.
As I was saying, if you are aware of it, on a social basis, it is causing grave community concern. It has the potential for social division. It is, as the Attorney-General rightly described it, political dynamite. So much so, that advice has been received by the opposition that the Labor Party is currently at work on focus groups so they can get proper intelligence to work on this matter. There are focus groups in place at the moment to give that deeper analysis because, of course, they are more concerned about the politics of this rather than the justice of it.
All we need at this point is clarification on the matter between now and the time that the High Court makes a decision. It is as simple as that. There are focus groups being conducted at the moment. We have an understanding of the sorts of questions that are being asked, which is an indication of the level of concern of the current Labor government on this issue of great political import. More importantly, it is a social matter that needs to be addressed. By addressing this as a matter of urgency today, we can provide that certainty between now and the time the High Court makes its decision.
The High Court must examine this decision. It really is the only course of action now available to government. That is not a criticism; that is understood and accepted. If the Territory loses the case, the Territory then loses the control of up to 80% of the Territory coastline unless the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act is given to the Territory to administer, and that is an offer the current government has refused to accept.
Currently, the Northern Territory Aboriginal Land Act provides that permits - and you need to understand this, honourable members; just relax a bit - must be obtained by people entering Aboriginal land. That is the Aboriginal Land Act; it sits with this parliament. It provides that permits must be obtained by people entering Aboriginal land.
The CLP amendment is a goodwill amendment. It will enable the Northern Land Council to demonstrate goodwill by waiving the compulsory requirement for permits. It provides them with the legal and legislative capacity to waive it because, currently, the act says it must be in place for people wishing to undertake recreational fishing in intertidal zones until the High Court appeal is heard. Nothing in the proposed amendment would force the NLC to waive their right to demand permits. There is no obligation. It provides the legal capacity for that option to be made in the best interests of providing certainty at this time. I expect that there would be support from members at that point, because they say they are opposed to the permit system and, yet, have a temporary arrangement. We can provide the means whereby there is no legal necessity to have those permits if the Northern Land Council so chooses.
The CLP is seeking an acknowledgement of the efforts being made at this point to try to find some clarity. Nothing in the Federal Court decision prevents the NLC or traditional owners from giving permission for fishing to occur in the waters in question. What the decision says is that the Northern Territory Fisheries Act, and this is an important point about not only access but permission to take fish, does not operate on Aboriginal land and that there is not a public right to fish.
The CLP proposes the same right that a private landowner has to allow people to come on to private land to hunt with permission. By permission, it is a choice, it is the exercise of a private right of ownership, not a public right concept that was rejected by the court. There is no attempt in the proposed bill to acquire property rights. That is most important: there is no attempt to acquire property rights. The government’s and the NLC’s response has been to dismiss the proposed amendment as being beyond the power of the Northern Territory parliament. Incorrect.
The fact is that our amendment will address the specific and, effectively, absolute requirement by law that non-indigenous people in the intertidal zone must have a permit. It will create the option for traditional owners to waive their right to issue a permit. This is something that cannot happen unless our proposed amendment is successful. It is not beyond the power of the Northern Territory parliament, the traditional owners, or representatives of the land council. The CLP is hopeful that the NLC will welcome the proposal so that they can demonstrate their goodwill leading up to the High Court decision. It is to ensure some clarity and exercises the expression of goodwill.
This should be something that the land councils welcome as it will increase the capacity for Aboriginal people to make decisions about their own land by extending to them a property right that they do not currently enjoy. This approach does not offend the philosophy of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act of the Commonwealth.
Madam Speaker, the reason that this matter is urgent is because the amendment needs to be made so that these steps can be taken by the NLC in the best interests of a harmonious Territory, and bring certainty where there is currently uncertainty.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, the government will not be agreeing to the introduction and passage of this bill today. It would be absolutely unprecedented action by an opposition, only ever attempted once in the Northern Territory parliament - and that was by Chief Minister Ian Tuxworth from the government benches in the mid-1980s.
We do understand what the opposition is attempting to do because they signalled this policy approach last week. I have touched on the basics with the member for Blain; I have not discussed it at length. However, I have pointed out to him the difficulties that I believe lie in his way. I thank the office of the Leader of the Opposition for providing us with a copy of the bill.
When we got the bill, I asked my office to send it to the Solicitor-General to have a look at it, and I will table his advice. What he says in summary is this:
- As advised in our Memorandum of Advice dated 10 April 2007, the conclusion expressed by the Full Federal Court on 2 March 2007 in the Blue Mud Bay case was that the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly does not have, either in the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act, or s 73 of ALRA, the legislative power to authorise persons to take fish or aquatic life from the tidal waters overlying Aboriginal land. In the absence of such power, the Territory cannot pass valid legislation authorising people to use the waters over Aboriginal land for the purpose of fishing, (recreational or otherwise). That is what the bill purports to do. It cannot and does not validly achieve that aim.
In conclusion, the Solicitor-General said:
- While we disagree with the court’s decision, and this will be the subject of challenge in the High Court, the law remains as declared by the Federal Court until the High Court holds otherwise. Consequently, it is our view that the Aboriginal Land (Recreational Fishing) Amendment Bill 2007 cannot be validly enacted by the Territory Legislative Assembly.
That advice from the Solicitor-General is conclusive. The bill the member for Blain is proposing to introduce and pass on urgency is not a valid bill. I table the full advice for the benefit of all members. Therefore, it is pointless proceeding any further with this discussion.
However, I do make the offer to the opposition that I did before: they are welcome to a full briefing on the Blue Mud Bay decision. They have not sought a briefing to date in what is, in the words of member for Blain, an incredibly complex decision coming out of the Federal Court. I recommend to the member for Blain and the opposition to come in for a full briefing on not just the implications of the Blue Mud Bay Federal Court decision, but the impact of it; what it means and how it disempowers, clearly, the Legislative Assembly from having any role in a legislative way out of this.
I also invite the member for Blain and the opposition to come up with their advisors and we will arrange for a full meeting with the Solicitor-General and the staff of the Solicitor-General’s office. I am happy to organise it. If the member for Blain and the opposition then think, following advice and a full briefing on the matter from the Solicitor-General’s office, there is a way through achieving what they want in legislation, government will welcome it at the first opportunity, which will be the next General Business Day in 10 days, a week-and-a-half’s time.
It is our view, and I am pretty sure it is the clear advice of the Solicitor-General in this Memorandum of Advice I just tabled, there is no way, on a Northern Territory legislative approach, that you can achieve it. However, it is incumbent on the member for Blain to accept the invitation to meet with the Office of the Solicitor-General, to hear the highest quality legal advice the government can bring to bear on such a complicated matter as this. Then, if he thinks there is still a way through, bring it back next week.
Madam Speaker, we reject the motion to suspend standing orders on urgency to have this bill heard and passed through all stages.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I will keep it brief. I appreciate the presentation by the Attorney-General. I am still not persuaded that my view is incorrect. I do not want any member to take from this that we have been trying to concoct some kind of …
A member interjecting.
Mr MILLS: No, not you. You are above reproach. It is others who, by body language, indicated they think this might be some kind of ill-considered scheme. I can assure members, just as the Attorney-General and other members who have obviously engaged themselves in the complexity of this matter, because it is such a matter that is going to involve and have an impact on all of us, they have had an opportunity to try to understand it. I will take that offer up …
Mr Stirling: Yes, I will have them …
Mr MILLS: Certainly. I am still persuaded that what we have presented has merit. I will carry that with me to the offer you have made. There is one important element to this, which is that it creates no obligation. It is simply the removal of the requirement for a permit system. With this amendment, the ball will always remain with the Northern Land Council; it simply removes an option. There is no intent to acquire any right that is currently afforded to the Northern Land Council. It just clears the way and to make it possible for clarity between this moment and the moment that the High Court makes a decision. That is all this proposition is based on. Judging by the comments that have been made by the Attorney-General, I do not think that point has been adequately grasped. There is no attempt to acquire any right.
I remain ever hopeful that these matters are being assessed independently by members, that they are not just lining up and receiving marching orders, but they are giving some consideration to these matters. I can assure members opposite, just in case you have such a view of members on this side of the Chamber, we do read, we do have our own advice, and we have spent many long hours dissecting this and trying to find a solution. This is a solution. Obviously, by weight of numbers it will be rejected. Nonetheless, we will continue on and I will attend the briefing.
Motion negatived.
MOTION
Note Statement - Government Initiatives and Achievements in Central Australia
Continued from 18 April 2007.
Mr NATT (Mines and Energy): Madam Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement. I take this opportunity to inform the Assembly of the considerable contributions that primary industry and mines make to Central Australia. As members are aware, areas of Central Australia have received good rain over the last few months, providing welcome relief to some properties that had been in the grip of one of the worst droughts on record. However, the rains did not affect all areas and there are still pastoral properties that have not received drought-breaking rains. It will take some time for properties to recover from one of the worst droughts on record in rebuilding stock levels.
This government is well aware of the hardships experienced by pastoralists in the region and we are assisting in a number of ways. In response to a detailed application by the Territory government on behalf of pastoralists in Central Australia, the federal minister has agreed that a prima facie case exists for exceptional circumstance for drought funding for pastoralists in Central Australia. This is a first for the Territory. The next step in this process is for the National Rural Advisory Committee to tour affected properties. The advisory committee plans to visit drought-affected areas before the end of this month with a view to making final recommendations shortly. This is good news for pastoralists and again shows the value of cooperation between industry and government in achieving positive outcomes.
Separate from exceptional circumstances, the second part of the process involves Northern Territory drought assistance arrangements, and will see departmental officers visiting those properties already declared in drought under the Northern Territory arrangements to determine their ongoing status. These initiatives show that solid and practical processes are in place to assist pastoralists in these difficult circumstances. I have no doubt the Assembly will hear more about this in the not-too-distant future.
While I am on the topic of drought, research and development in Central Australia’s grazing strategies project on Old Man Plains Research Station and regional pastoral properties is supplying information to assist the initiative to move from the current assistance arrangements to a drought-preparedness model. An integral approach to extending this information in the department’s grazing land and management program aims to address both sustainable management of pastoral natural resources and economic viability. These are sensible and exciting developments and bode well for the future of the industry and will play a part in ensuring that, in the future, properties are more prepared for extended dry events.
As the Chief Minister mentioned, the government is committed to ensuring that our booming resources sector continues to benefit all Territorians. The minerals and petroleum industry underpins our economy, with the mining sector accounting for 26% or $3bn per annum, making it the largest contributor to our economy.
I announced last week that the government will allocate $12m over the next four years to the program called Bringing Forward Discovery which follows on from the highly successful Building the Territory’s Resource Base. Bringing Forward Discovery is about creating jobs and keeping our economy strong by expanding the mining sector. It is a four-year program that will see $2.75m allocated to geoscientific data in the 2007-08 budget, and $0.25m put into promoting the Territory as part of the government’s long-term exploration investment strategy.
Rather than just riding the resource boom, we are actively encouraging explorers to come to the Territory. Worldwide, it is a very competitive environment. Since Building the Territory’s Resource Base began four years ago, there has been a 76% increase in mineral exploration and an outstanding 783% increase in petroleum exploration. That means two new mineral and six offshore oil/gas discoveries, and the commissioning of three new mines in 2005-06, with a further four to five mines expected into 2007-08, evidence of a government initiative that is working well for the benefit of all Territorians and our economy.
While I am on the subject of geoscience, my department’s Northern Territory Geological Survey Unit held the 8th Annual Geoscience Exploration Seminar, or AGES, in this building, the Alice Springs Convention Centre, on 20 and 21 March. AGES is the pinnacle of our NTGS and it is the meeting that explorers, researchers and industry representatives rely upon to hear about the latest research and scientific information in the world of geoscience. AGES has enormous credibility in the industry and attendance continues to grow. This year, AGES grew yet again, with 56 exploration companies represented, a 33% increase over the 2006 numbers.
There is also a Mining Services Expo and Seminar held in association with AGES. These activities are organised by the Department of Business, Economic and Regional Development, or DBERD, and although it is only the second time the activities have been run, attendance and content have grown considerably. I reported details of AGES to the Assembly in Question Time last night. Suffice to say that it continues to be the single most important minerals and energy industry meeting in which my department is involved.
Alice Springs is also about to become a solar city, a place where alternative power use is a reality, under the Commonwealth Solar Cities program. The vision is for a community where people are not only aware of and concerned for the environment, but have access to knowledge, equipment and support to enable them to act in an informed and intelligent way to actively contribute to the sustainability of the community.
The announcement made earlier this week means that over $21m in cash and in-kind contributions will be spent in Alice over the next eight years. This funding will allow a smart meter trial for some 200 homes to demonstrate how electricity bills can be reduced by using time-of-use tariffs and smart meters. It will also mean there will be widespread installation of grid connection photovoltaic systems. These convert solar energy into electricity and are similar to the systems already in use in Hermannsburg and Lajamanu power stations. Between 500 and 1000 homes will be installed with PV systems to demonstrate their effectiveness.
Finally, residential and commercial customers will be offered a range of energy efficient services and products aimed at reducing total energy consumption. All in all, Alice Springs becoming a solar city is one of the most sensible, forward-looking initiatives for Central Australia in many years.
My congratulations go to the Alice Springs Town Council as the bid coordinator, as well as the other bid partners including our Department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Mines, the Power and Water Corporation, Desert Knowledge Australia, the Tangentyere Council, the Centre for Appropriate Technology and Charles Darwin University. I am sure you will agree that there is not a city in the country more suited to the use of solar power than Alice Springs.
Continuing the theme of innovation in Central Australia, companies like Arafura Resources, Peko, Newmont and Bootu Creek Resources are interacting well with local communities and the government, and are opening up new projects in the region that provide employment and a boost to the local economy.
Arafura Resources has undertaken extensive exploration on its Nolans Bore tenement, located 135 km north of Alice Springs. Its program utilised much of the material generated and provided by my department’s Geological Survey Unit. Nolans Bore is now considered to be a major deposit by world standards. This discovery will be a huge benefit to Central Australia, and my colleague, the Minister for Business and Economic Development, has previously outlined the significant contribution that exploration and mining offers to Central Australia. Moreover, Arafura plans to construct a pilot rare earth processing facility this year, with a full treatment plant slated for 2009. This will be the second mineral value-adding plant in the Territory, Alcan’s alumina plant at Gove being the first, and will provide significant new job and local business opportunities.
Just outside Tennant Creek, there is significant activity with Peko Rehab’s tailings retreatment project, producing gold and magnetite, employing about 15 local people in the extraction process. In addition to those employed directly, this project also uses local tradesmen as required, once again giving a significant boost to the local economy.
Many of you will be familiar with Newmont’s gold mine and the processing operation in the Tanami. However, apart from the obvious economic and development benefits, this company has an exciting indigenous employment and training initiative that means around 20% of its workforce is indigenous. The company has a strong compulsory cross-cultural training program for all employees that is a model for the industry. It is initiatives like this that assist us to meet the goal of increasing indigenous employment and economic development.
I also wish to outline what has been achieved through the highly successful Indigenous Pastoral Program, or the IPP, which began in 2003. A memorandum of understanding was signed between all parties involved in the Indigenous Pastoral Project in an historic signing ceremony at Kalkarindji last August. This MOU guarantees the innovative program a further five years of funding. This means that the program’s initial three years has been extended, giving the program the opportunity to bed down the work already achieved and to tackle new projects. The program returns inactive indigenous properties to pastoral production, trains young indigenous men in station hand skills, and teaches good land management principles. The program has been outstanding since its inception and, in its first three years, saw several Indigenous Land Use Agreements signed, placed more than 50 indigenous people in pastoral employment, and saw a staggering 25 000 increase in the number of cattle being run on participating properties. It is planned that a further 10 000 head of cattle will be run on indigenous properties over the next 18 months, with the long-term aim of adding 60 000 head to the Northern Territory herd.
The IPP is a model of cooperation with the Northern and Central Land Councils, the Indigenous Land Corporation, Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association, DPIFM and the Commonwealth Department of Employment and Workplace Relations all involved. The IPP is one of the real success stories of Central Australia, developing indigenous economic capacity, improving land management, providing indigenous employment and training, and helping to keep the Territory economy strong.
While I am on the topic of our pastoral industry, there is another innovative program that my department is running in Central Australia. The 21st Century Pastoralism Project looks to explore innovative mechanisms to reduce operational expenditure of Central Australian pastoral enterprises. Part of the secret of this is to use the technologies and telemetry to manage remote watering sites and weigh stations. This is yet another example of the department working smarter and using technology to save on man hours, time and effort in running pastoral enterprises. The end result is greater efficiency and profitability. The industry has been enthusiastic in its uptake of this project.
Another program undertaken by my department in Central Australia is the Central Australian Grazing Strategies Partnership. This seeks to evaluate the impacts of different grazing systems on sustainability and productivity. It looks at water rotation trials, stocking rates as they apply to individual participating properties and a level of utilisation of natural resources. A heifer fertility project is another aspect of the program that assesses the fertility of a young breeding female and seeks to improve her fertility by establishing managing strategies.
Another highly successful program being introduced by my department across the Territory is the National Livestock Identification System or NLIS. The introduction of NLIS in the Territory will allow the tracing of an animal from farm gate to the plate, and is seen as vital to maintaining both international and domestic markets for Territory cattle. The system fills a critical need for a fast, accurate traceability system for livestock in order to maintain consumer and public confidence in the quality and safety of meat and dairy products. We have committed $790 000 directly to this initiative. At the heart of the system is the use of radio frequency identification devices, or RFIDs, which individually tags each animal and allows tracing of their movement. RFIDs are attached to the animal’s ear and are read by a scanner or wand at saleyards and trucking depots, with the information being entered in the national database.
The NLIS database is the central repository of electronically recorded stock movements and, to date, has recorded over one million cattle movements, including 740 000 individual cattle movements from property of origin, and 260 000 cattle movements via 3000 saleyards throughout the country. So far, the system has been embraced by industry to the extent that, at a recent Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Conference, a visiting American expert stated that our NLIS system was years in advance of anything in use in the USA, and he was envious of what we had achieved.
We are all aware that Central Australia is a unique region, and one that presents us with certain challenges. I am pleased to be able to report that my department is pushing ahead with several projects that not only support government priorities but address some of the challenges I mentioned a moment ago.
Cropping and horticultural activities are contributing to industry and capacity growth in Central Australia. A farm-ready program has been developed by the Anmatjere Community Government Council, the Ti Tree table grape industry, and DPIFM staff introduced the Anmatjere people to horticulture and train them in the basic skills required to obtain employment in the industry. Skills gained include pruning, irrigation maintenance and machinery operation. Ti Tree Research Farm is used for training purposes and as a base for community and industry interaction. The program has been attended by 20 local indigenous men and has recently resulted in work on commercial table grapes and melon properties. It is expected that the program will provide the foundation for Centre Farm training activities and will, ultimately, be provided by a registered training organisation.
The community gardens project aims to increase indigenous communities and individuals’ involvement and participation in horticultural enterprises and is seen as an early step in the horticultural economic development of indigenous communities. Community gardens have been developed with the assistance of the DPIFM horticultural staff at Six Mile at Ti Tree and at Emu Point in the Top End. A range of easy-to-grow crops are planted and tended by either individuals at the Six Mile or groups of Emu Point women, and have resulted in fresh fruit and vegetables being available for local consumption, and a sense of achievement for the growers.
DPIFM has assisted Centre Farm to develop environmental management guidelines for use in horticultural enterprises on indigenous country. The objective is for landowners and commercial proponents to have a set of protocols to which they can refer. Once implemented, they can reasonably expect to have sustainable production from the land into the future. The Anmatjere region development plan released by the government in November 2003 under the Building Stronger Regions, Stronger Futures initiative is well under way and is ushering in considerable expansion in the region’s horticultural industry. Indications are that existing horticultural development in the Ti Tree/Pine Hill area of approximately 25 permanent employees and 250 people at peak times can be expected to double within five years, with the local Anmatjere people providing the bulk of workers under a program administered by Centre Farm and the Central Australian Horticultural Development arm. Once again, this program is an example of cooperation between the CLC and the local community and my department for the benefit of the local community, regional economy, and the Territory as a whole.
It is not only at Ti Tree that my department is kicking goals in the field of indigenous economic development. The first ever Comprehensive Shared Responsibility Agreement in the Northern Territory has been signed covering the indigenous community at Ali Curung near Tennant Creek. The CSRA is valued at around $1.5m and sees to the department’s horticultural office engaged in on-the-ground assistance to the indigenous community to ensure that the project is an ongoing and viable horticultural venture.
In many of these projects and, indeed, in national debate, water is a key element. I am pleased to say that the government is involved in an innovative, cooperative project involving the Power and Water Corporation and DPIFM to reuse the waste water produced by Alice Springs. At present, 3000 mL of waste water from Alice Springs is evaporated. This project seeks to use that water and, once up and running, will move the Northern Territory to the forefront of commercial water reuse. This water reuse project involves turning a waste problem into a commercial opportunity by eliminating overflows of waste water into the Ilparpa Swamp. Power and Water has invested $10.4m into research development and infrastructure to produce high-quality water for reuse.
The scheme pumps the waste water via a 6 km pipeline from the city of Alice Springs to AZRI. The water will be treated and then filtered into a natural part of the channel.
Mr HENDERSON: Mr Deputy Speaker, I move an extension of time to allow the minister to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr NATT: I have nearly finished. The water will be treated and then filtrated into a natural palaeochannel, the Todd River, where, over time, an underground mound of water will form. The project has been through an extensive public consultation process and initial projections of production for the site, based on planting 100 ha of table grapes that will directly employ six permanent and 50 casual staff with considerable opportunities for indigenous training and employment, have been accepted.
In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement and ask that the Assembly note DPIFM’s projects and initiatives throughout the Territory.
Mr McADAM (Central Australia): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the statement by the Chief Minister in respect of priorities and achievements in Central Australia.
I would like to begin by making an observation in respect of the last three days in Alice Springs and this parliament. There is absolutely no doubt that there are high levels of passion, concern and feelings on a whole range of issues. Clearly, we, as parliamentarians, particularly we on this side, have been subject to some of that over the last few days. That is a very healthy sign. What it shows is that people care about their community. They are concerned about quality of life issues. They are concerned about unacceptable levels of crime and antisocial behaviour. I honestly believe that gives this community great capacity to move forward together and to work through some of the many issues that we, as a community, face in Alice Springs and, indeed, other places like Tennant Creek. There is a real sense of community here, even though there are differences.
The point is that, as a community, we have to fix it. People will be aware that there is a very significant number of people from the business community who expressed concerns, particularly about law and order issues. Again, that just shows our community is very committed to growing businesses and creating employment opportunities, equally so in respect of the North Side Action Group. They are very concerned about the placement of dongas at the Dalgety site. There is an underlying position that people were prepared to stand up and let their views be known, equally so in regards to Advance Alice. You may not agree with everything they do, but the point is they are in same position. They felt passionate, they care about the community, and they voiced their concerns in a very forthright way, but, at the same time, I believe constructively.
The same applies to Tangentyere Council, which, members will be aware, held a Special General Meeting in the mall yesterday. It is also an integral part of this community; it contributes a lot. Members are very concerned about the status of the town camps and wanted to get their views across. Equally, they believe they should be listened to and that they should be part of the solution.
I have mentioned those four because it is a really good basis for a community to get together and work through some of the very pressing issues that we face. I had the opportunity today to have lunch with Pat Turner and Neville Perkins, both born in Alice Springs. They know many of the issues. They have been out of town and they have come back. I was inspired by their commitment to and vision for Alice Springs as a community, not only from an indigenous perspective, but also from a non-indigenous perspective.
It gave me great hope in the sense that they, and a whole lot of other people here, are going to work very strongly in trying to alleviate some of the issues in this town. There are other people who, I believe, will contribute; people like Mr Tilmouth from Tangentyere Council, Mr Steven Brown from Advance Alice, Mr Murray Stewart, Heather Laughton from the Arrernte Council, Betty Pearce and Frank Ansell from Lhere Artepe, and Stephanie Bell from Central Australian Aboriginal Congress. I am certain that I have missed other people, but I know there are a lot of people of that calibre who will work in the best interests of everyone in this community to make a difference.
The Leader of the Opposition in the past, I think in Darwin probably about 12 months ago, talked about a strategy, which I understand she described as Alice in Five, as a means of engaging the community, the bottom line being to make it a more safe and secure community and a more friendly environment. At that time, I said to the Leader of the Opposition that I, as the Minister for Central Australia, would do whatever possible to engage in that process in an apolitical way. That position remains. I hope that the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Greatorex, and all members of this House, share that commitment to work together in this community to make a difference because there is no need to beat around the bush. There are some very pressing issues.
We have to be honest, straight and mature about it, and we have to tackle it together. The community forum on crime, which is going to be convened tomorrow by Her Worship the Mayor, Fran Kilgariff, is but one step in trying to get people together to deal with these issues. I mentioned it on radio a few weeks ago in the context of many of the issues in Alice Springs particularly around the issues impacting on our young people, and not only those who live in Alice Springs but those who come in from the bush communities. I said there can no longer be a time for organisations, people and individuals to work in isolation, and I believe that that is the key to the solution for this community.
Before I go on to the rest of my speech, Mr Deputy Speaker, that is the commitment I have in respect of this community, as I have to Tennant Creek and other places such as Borroloola. We do have some very pressing issues which are not going to go away. They are not going to go away, so we have a choice. We can work together, or we can choose not to, and we know where that is going to end up. However, the pressing need is to do it now, to start working now because if we do not start now and we do not get on top of some of the issues impacting on this and other communities throughout the Northern Territory and, indeed, regional Australia, then perhaps it could be too late.
I do not wish to sound alarmist, but people are going to continue to move into the regional centres. There is not much happening out in the communities; we have to be honest about that. This is where most of the health services are. This is where, in the main, in the southern region anyway, the secondary education is. This is where all the footy is being played. This is where all the shops are. Indigenous people who live in bush communities really are no different from those who live in town, and I am referring to young people here, because they have the same aspirations as non-indigenous people. They want the same opportunities and the same quality of life.
It is for that reason I believe we do have a great opportunity to work together. I know that members on my side of the House such as Karl Hampton, who is the member for Stuart, a long-time resident of Alice Springs; in fact, born in Alice Springs, is that right, Karl?
Mr Hampton: Yes.
Mr McADAM: Born in Alice Springs, from a very respected family. The member for Stuart and I speak, and we know that something has to be done. I know the member for Stuart will play a very important role in the tasks that we have ahead. The member for Macdonnell, Alison Anderson, is from this country, part of the Central Australian region. She has great expertise in being able to consult, liaise, and speak to people in the bush communities. She has excellent language skills and I know that she is committed to making a difference.
That is all I have to say in respect of this community because Alice Springs is a great place. It is one of the real innovative, creative and courageous small towns in regional Australia. That is the challenge, and I am absolutely certain that all members of this House, regardless of our political persuasions, will do everything we possibly can to make this place better.
In many cases, we know that alcohol is the single most critical reason many of these things occur. Something like 96% of contacts with police across the Northern Territory, I do not know what they are here, are alcohol related. It is for that reason I believe the alcohol management plan initiated by the Chief Minister, involving many of the people I have mentioned before and others, is a very good way of dealing with some of these issues.
It is important that we get on top of some of the grog problems. There have been some encouraging results over recent months in regard to the alcohol management plan. The figures indicate that there has been a 31% reduction in admissions to sobering-up shelters, 50% fewer people are taken into protective custody, and there has been a 12% drop in selected offences against property. As I said earlier, statistics can tell you anything, but what they do indicate is that maybe the plan is working and is part of the solution. That is why it is very important that this community continues to engage with all sectors of Alice Springs in driving alcohol reform, which is going to bring about some real differences.
In the time that I have, Mr Deputy Speaker, I will refer to some other portfolio areas. Local government, of course, is one issue which has been much discussed and debated over the last three to four months. Members of this House will be aware that the government has made a decision to reform local government as we know it across the Northern Territory. We are going to be moving to a new shire-type model which will consist of nine shires: three in the central region; one in the Barkly region; and the rest in what we describe as the Top End. Effectively, what we hope that will do is provide a greater capacity for communities to coordinate to access dollars, which have in the past, I believe, been denied.
The key to the new reform is that local government is the third tier of government right across Australia. It is a recognised form of governance, and something which is accepted by all the major parties and state governments. Effectively, I believe that this new model will provide certainty in communities going forward, because we know that many of the smaller community councils in the bush have struggled over the last few years for various reasons. Some of those reasons are because of lack of expertise and skills of employees. Another reason is that there has been a lack of commitment by governments, both Commonwealth and the NT governments, past and present. They effectively said: ‘Out of sight, out of mind’. That sort of approach has to stop, and I believe this new model will provide certainty.
It will also give councils in the bush the same opportunity to access dollars which has, perhaps, been denied in the past. There has been a tendency in the past for agencies to go to, as we knew it, the Commonwealth government’s ATSIC or, as we know it now, FaCSIA, the Commonwealth Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. Indigenous people who live out in the bush and, indeed, all people who live in the bush, should not rely on one government agency in respect of dollars. There should be the same choice to be able to access those sorts of dollars. I believe the new model will provide that.
Roads are an example. At the moment, there is much talk about roads. We have heard the Chief Minister. At the very least under this new model, we believe that communities out bush will be able to access dollars which they hitherto were not able to.
Another area is housing. Without a doubt, housing is one of the greatest challenges facing this government, particularly in the remote regions. Much has been said and written, but people have talked about a shortfall of something like $1.2bn. We know that we are not going to be in a position to secure that money in the first instance. We have to be more creative, more innovative in housing construction and design. We have to bring down construction costs. It is for that reason that the Indigenous Housing Advisory Board has been very proactive in engaging the construction industry.
The bottom line is that we have to drive down the cost of housing. Indigenous housing cannot remain insular or isolated; we have to expose it to the broader sector. That is what we are trying to do. There have been some good results of late. Most houses across the Territory cost from $360 000, $380 000 up to $0.5m. I am very pleased that Nyirranggulung in Katherine has been working with Bluescope Steel in regard to a pilot project for a three-bedroom house that meets all compliances. The advice I have received is that they have this cost down to around about $260 000. That is a really a big improvement in the cost of construction.
The other important point is that the house in question was built by employees, indigenous people, which is a great outcome, and the head of the project was an indigenous builder. It just shows you that at the very least you should try to be innovative and creative, and that is what the Aboriginal Indigenous Advisory Board has done. They have challenged past conventions in regard to housing.
Much has been said and written about the town camps issue. I probably will not go into great detail here because I do not have the time. Tangentyere Council is a very good organisation in Alice Springs which has served …
Mr BONSON: Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the member for Barkly be granted an extension of time to complete his remarks, pursuant to Standing Order 77.
Motion agreed to.
Mr McADAM: As I say, Tangentyere is a very professional organisation which has served the needs of town camps for a very long time. Members will be aware that it was the Northern Territory government which set up the Town Camps Task Force, which consists of membership of the NT government, Lhere Artepe, Tangentyere Council, Alice Springs Town Council, ICC and other agencies. Effectively, it was set up to improve the quality of life of people who live in town camps, and to provide better infrastructure such as roads and parks; better municipal-type services.
I pay tribute to the Tangentyere Council and the Alice Springs Town Council, which worked very closely to make a difference. I believe that into the future, some real changes will occur in these suburbs - they are not town camps - that will make it so much better for those who live in them.
Much has been said and written regarding the Northern Territory government’s relationship with the Commonwealth on this and other matters. Underlying all the political humbug that goes on between political parties, which we are probably charged to do although we should not do it in regard to such pressing issues, there is a great degree of coordination in trying to make a difference. I pay tribute to the federal government. We have our differences; there is no doubt about that, but they are showing real goodwill on the town camp situation in Alice Springs, and they are trying to make a difference. I am absolutely confident that the Northern Territory government, Tangentyere Council and the Commonwealth government will be able to agree on a way to secure the outcomes those communities thoroughly deserve.
In conclusion, I want to speak about my community in Tennant Creek, which is also part of Central Australia. Tennant Creek is a very strong, courageous, small community dealing with many of the same issues affecting Alice Springs and, indeed, other places like Katherine. Despite all the hardships and differences, the community as a whole takes its role very seriously. They work very hard toward overcoming some of the issues, which are not dissimilar to here. The Tennant Creek Town Council, Julalikari Council, Anyinginyi Health, Papulu Apparr-Kari Language Centre, and all the surrounding communities are working together. We are trying to make a difference, and I hope the benefits that are going to accrue in the future will make it a better place.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I have digressed from my speech but, nonetheless, I pay tribute to all those people in Central Australia, both indigenous and non-indigenous, who have the community’s interests at heart. Many of them were born here and few of them will leave. Many of those people believe in Alice Springs and Tennant Creek. I am very confident that, despite some of the difficulties and issues we have, people will work together in the interests of all.
Ms ANDERSON (Macdonnell): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement. I am fortunate to live in this unique part of the Territory. Like many, I benefit from the distinct features that make this place so great. One renowned feature is the land. That has made us who we are; the land is the foundation that makes us Central Australians. Like all who live here, I am fortunate to live near the MacDonnell Ranges, with its ancient formations and contrasts, the dry river beds, the red soil, and the rocky hills between roads and suburbs. The kinds of plants and animals that live here all have a purpose. Everything here is a reminder of the wisdom etched into this country, and there is an appreciation and connection that grows with you the longer you live here.
Members of this Legislative Assembly from other parts of the Territory are reminded of this on these occasions when parliament sits in Central Australia. Many visitors from across the globe come to see these natural wonders. They are here only for a short period but, for Alice Springs and Central Australian residents, this is the place we are fortunate to call home.
Another renowned feature that makes this place so great is its culture and people. Aboriginal culture and its strength add to the vibrancy and distinction of this place. Arrernte, Luritja, Pitjantjatjara, Pintubi, Yankunytjatjara, Warlpiri and Anmatjere are foreign names to some, but to people who live here, they are an integral part of our language and identity. To many who live here, they are more familiar than the English words that most Territorians hear and speak every day.
Understanding these dynamics is important, but it can never be fully appreciated. We can only begin to grasp the true impact this dynamic creates, but it is an important aspect to consider in formulating and shaping policy. To borrow a word from a federal counterpart, considering this point gives some context to the five second media grab: normalisation.
In summary, it is these two distinct features, our culture and land, that form two significant resources benefiting all Central Australians. They are essential components of our society, of who we are. For those who are not immersed in Aboriginal culture, they are, nevertheless, an important feature of identity and perception. For those who are, they form the bedrock of our existence. They are part of what makes us all Central Australians. They are resources that are highly valuable in terms of our regional economy. The survival of our distinct culture and the land are two resources that cannot be measured accurately. They can also be overlooked.
While members opposite are quick to polarise division, it is important to remind the Assembly of the positive features of this place. It is important to consider the dynamics that exist in our social interactions. It is important to value and acknowledge what makes this place special. I challenge members of this Legislative Assembly from Central Australia to demonstrate the importance of these features because, as I hear the rhetoric, I recognise the fundamental failure to appreciate the challenges we face. I recognise the failure to acknowledge those resources - our distinct culture and our land - that makes us strong. I fail to see how our young people, faced with many significant challenges, can ever be inspired or motivated by hearing what the CLP leadership has been saying. This is an important distinction to make.
When members opposite talk about Aboriginal issues, they are not talking with Aboriginal people, they are not talking to Aboriginal people in a constructive way. When they do talk to Aboriginal people, they sit on their high horse, the one Mal Brough sits on when he strides into town. Their motivations are punitive. Whether it is Tony Abbott talking about the need for more paternalism, or the Leader of the Opposition seeking national media attention, there is one common motivation, and that is to have discourse between non-Aboriginal people as to what the solutions are for Aboriginal people. It is to promote the idea that solutions are exclusively opposite to Aboriginal people and that they can only be embraced if Aboriginal people were to take it upon themselves to cross that line.
The Liberal and CLP leadership is more concerned about the media focus - what words to use in a four-second national media grab - than what works and what should be built on. They are more concerned with populism and rhetoric than dealing and engaging with Aboriginal people. They fail to recognise that solutions come from within, and that governments and politicians should serve an enabling and empowering purpose. They fail to recognise that their motivations can compound problems. These are the reasons why I feel it is important to remind the Legislative Assembly of the positive aspects of this place. I challenge those opposite to find similar examples; to talk positively about the identity we all share in this place.
One example I will use today is a story about the Aboriginal art industry. Last month, I visited the Kintore community near the border of Western Australia to attend the launch of art centre. The centre was built not from public tax revenue, but from the private investment of artists involved with the Papunya Tula Art Cooperative, at a cost of $1.2m. It was inspiring to see an art centre built for communal reasons; a comfortable place for every artist and resident, away from sometimes extreme weather conditions. Recent reports indicate that Aboriginal Australians will fare worse with climate change, and Kintore is one of the places most affected. The art centre will assist in countering these possibilities and will produce health benefits that cannot be accurately measured. I congratulate Papunya Tula Arts, all of the artists, artists of Central Australia, and Kintore residents on this proud achievement.
This is a proud success story of the Aboriginal art movement. Through painting on canvas, our people convert Aboriginal culture, storytelling and creative skill to produce a highly valuable resource. It is an industry that is as significant as the cattle industry, and is worth a combined $25m a year.
It is the role of the tourism industry to harness the resources that make our place so distinct and vibrant. By strengthening markets, the tourism industry attracts investment to the region. This investment, in turn, assists all sectors of our economy. In an economic climate where regional economies are facing big changes, the tourism industry continues to enjoy solid potential. I support the direction of the Martin Labor government and its support for the tourism industry. This support builds on investment made by private sector.
The Chief Minister stated in this Assembly that private sector investment in capital works programs for the December quarter of 2006 was just over $33m. This is in addition to the $58m directly invested by the Martin Labor government. This investment demonstrates confidence by the private sector. This confidence is important as it adds substance to the regional economic prospects that we share. It adds weight to the argument and counters the negativity which has become such a hallmark of the CLP. The government is making positive inroads in this town and surrounding communities. As with all Alice Springs residents, including those opposite in this Assembly, I can see the practical results of this investment. My office is located opposite the Yeperenye complex, and directly opposite the development of new office buildings. Across town, the developers of Alice Plaza Shopping Centre and the new Imparja studio are well advanced. Then there are the Quest Serviced Apartments and the Desert Knowledge Precinct. These are but some of the examples of new infrastructure that will provide lasting benefits for the town.
In the electorate of Macdonnell there are numerous developments that will assist all Central Australians. The Mereenie Loop will go a long way to building on the resources I mentioned earlier, our distinct culture and land. The $4m committed to the construction of visitor centres will enhance the capacity for tourists to learn about these timeless resources. Such investment is aimed at attracting tourists for longer periods so that they can enjoy the services offered by a range of sectors. Further, the Chief Minister noted a recent contract worth $13.4m to seal the road between Glen Helen and the southern boundary of the West MacDonnell National Park. These investments will continue to build our tourism and construction industries and will open up new paths of experience.
The rapid and expanding growth of the Territory economy in the previous six years has created the conditions for increased investment. Without the economic growth overseen by the Martin Labor government, we would not see the capacity for investment that we are seeing now. This is in stark contrast to the years prior to 2001.
I have outlined briefly two important resources that contribute to economic growth in Central Australia. All sectors of our economy benefit from these resources. These sectors actively build business structures that harness resources in a way that creates employment and benefits all. I have talked about the significant economic investment made by the Martin Labor government, both in direct financing and through an expansion of the Territory and regional economy. Maintaining a strong and growing economy is an important achievement of this government.
However, it is also important to discuss another role of government, and that is to ensure a safe and secure community. Through talking to Alice Springs residents and receiving feedback from constituents in my electorate, I am concerned about the level of antisocial behaviour. Antisocial behaviour occurs everywhere and is always unacceptable. I am concerned about the extent of abusive behaviour caused by the misuse of alcohol and other drugs. Recognising the link between such behaviour and substance misuse is a necessary step to tackling the problems.
From my own observations, I am concerned about the numbers of young people on the streets at night and the intentions of the minority. Not all young people have negative intentions, but the fear of crime should not be an emotion experienced by any person walking at night. Issues of poverty, social and individual isolation, alcohol and substance misuse, lack of housing and education, and lack of employment all have an effect on community safety. The ability of an individual to navigate through the dominant system that many of us take for granted is also relevant. Isolation is not only a geographical factor; it can affect whole communities. We must consider the effect of social isolation because when individuals face the fact of isolation, all of society is challenged.
Our challenges - and they always exist - demand a collective response, rather than polarising division. We must work and build on what we share in common because division creates an ‘us and them’ mentality and merely serves to isolate the impetus for positive change. Creating a collective response also involves moving with the people. It involves access to information and making an informed decision. I suggest using the radio and television services of Imparja and CAAMA to promote the government’s achievements and direction as outlined in this Assembly.
All people need to have confidence in the support systems of government. These systems include justice, health, welfare, and education, and they need to be shaped in the way that aligns with local circumstances. In essence, they need to be shaped in a way that considers the social dynamic I mentioned earlier.
Alcohol and substance misuse, as we are all aware, are closely linked to community safety. In many instances, it has eroded traditional authority and led to incidents that have isolated violence and harm. It often creates shame, and it always distorts perception and behaviour.
I am proud to be part of the team that recognises the connection between alcohol and substance misuse and community safety. This government recognises the importance of taking measures to reduce targeted supply. The alcohol management plan implemented by this government has produced results. It reflects leadership on the part of a government willing to implement strong measures that risk isolating its own support. This government is prepared to take leadership on such an important issue.
The results of the alcohol management plan are evident by a reduction in charges of serious assault and admissions to the Alice Springs Hospital for assault-related injuries. Those facilities which provide a safe place for people to sober up have also seen a large reduction in admissions. However, while the plan has produced positive results, we must work to improve the plan. We have the opportunity to build on the leadership credentials of a government willing to make hard decisions.
Constituents in the Macdonnell electorate have relayed to me their concerns for young ones and how the abuse of alcohol impacts upon their families and loved ones. One suggestion put to me is to mandate, as part of the ID proposal, the requirement to furnish a residential address as a place of residence. By enforcing rules of supply around a place of residence, we can enhance responsibility on the part of visitors. This system can be linked with aspirations of remote and regional communities. If elders of a community want a reduction of supply to their people, then they can have that choice. It could also be linked to the justice system in that the aspirations of elders could be enforced as part of alcohol court initiatives. Such a system will create stronger incentives for young people to seek respite, and will assist in restoring the authority of traditional family structures.
There are obvious aspects of this suggestion that need further consideration, but it is one suggestion that demonstrates strong interest on part of the Macdonnell constituents. It demonstrates a strong determination on part of Aboriginal residents to see through the problems of alcohol abuse. There are many similar suggestions. All need to be carefully examined. There is no easy answer. I am confident that we will find ways to respond collectively to the reality of alcohol misuse.
The Martin Labor government is also taking strong action on another issue that is important to community safety and that is high population mobility. Understanding population mobility patterns assists in revealing the capacity of service systems to meet demand. Like Tennant Creek, Alice Springs is the major service centre for hundreds of communities, pastoral outstations and homelands scattered throughout Central Australia.
There are a number of commonly cited reasons as to why we have such high population mobility. One reason is the need for family members to access essential health services, especially renal dialysis. One patient on renal dialysis sometimes leads to 15 family members coming into town. Another common reason is that Aboriginal artists are encouraged to stay and paint at certain places. These artists are manipulated for monetary ends. Often, the artist is given immediate benefits at the loss of making a genuine and deserved gain on their paintings. Carpetbagging is a significant problem in Alice Springs, and it attracts many elderly artists and their families to town.
Another commonly cited reason is the trend experienced across Australia. In this day and age, it is common for young people to leave regional areas and live in the metropolitan cities, often as a lifestyle choice. The fact is Alice Springs offers a significantly larger range of choices in services, businesses and social opportunities. We cannot discount this reality.
Increased mobility brings economic benefits to the region. Many people come into town with money that has been saved, and a range of businesses benefit from additional consumption. Of course, high mobility also creates pressure and places a strain on the sustainability of services in Alice Springs.
A question that appears to be irrelevant to the CLP but very much alive in Alice Springs is the question of constructing safe and affordable accommodation options to alleviate the pressures that high mobility brings. When people come into town, they are often presented with no safe options. Town camps are often chronically overcrowded. Private sector accommodation options can be too expensive, especially for those living below the poverty line. Public spaces are often the only option for too many families, and then there is the pressure of enforcing rules that relate to sleeping in public places.
This is why we are working in partnership with the Commonwealth government to provide safe, secure and affordable temporary accommodation facilities in an area that is accessible in town. Free from alcohol, these facilities will be a place where families can stay safely, and will accommodate those families who visit town for legitimate and positive reasons. The redevelopment of Stuart Lodge and Yeperenye Hostel will add to this capacity.
Addressing the lack of safe accommodation options is important in regulating public housing and town camps, and enforcing the rules relating to sleeping in public. In the current climate, such regulations and enforcements are inhumane because families simply have nowhere else to go. Safe accommodation options will create the impetus for enforcing existing regulations and rules. It is for these reasons that I support the partnership between the Northern Territory and Commonwealth governments in this important area.
In closing, I return to the start of my speech and restate how fortunate I am to live in this unique part of the Territory. I am proud to make a positive contribution in emphasising two important features of this place: our culture and land.
I ask that members of the Legislative Assembly consider some important points that will assist in moving Alice ahead. First, I ask members to embrace the leadership approach adopted by the Martin Labor government. If we are to recognise the extent of our social problems, then we must also accept reform through hard decisions. Surrendering to populism and rhetoric without responsibility is weak. I ask that members …
Mr BONSON: Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the member for Macdonnell be granted an extension of time pursuant to Standing Order 77 in order to conclude her remarks.
Motion agreed to.
Ms ANDERSON: Thank you. I ask that members consider a collective response to our social problems. Solutions are not exclusive opposites to Aboriginal people; they require commitment that first starts within. I ask that we keep a clear head and first acknowledge the strengths that bind us.
Finally, I ask that we all consider the distinct social dynamic that lives in Central Australia. It is a complex dynamic, but it gives us a glimpse as to how motivation is shaped. I ask that we consider these points in the formation of policy, and that we work towards shaping government systems to local circumstances.
I also want to urge members, as leaders, and especially the members from Central Australia, to encourage positive moves and discussions, and urge residents of Alice Springs not to take action into their own hands. As leaders, we should not be party to one group taking the law into their own hands. We have a position as leaders, people who live in Central Australia and Alice Springs, to be true to both indigenous and non-indigenous people and to talk about the issues that we face as Central Australians. I urge members opposite, especially the Central Australian members, to keep at the forefront of their minds when supporting and discussing ideas for moving Alice Springs forward, rather than supporting the negative things that are coming out of Alice Springs, and always talking down Alice Springs.
As a person who talks to young people in town camps, I see that our young Aboriginal people are not scared of violence any more. When you tell them that there are vigilante groups walking in the streets of Alice Springs, trying to get them out of the streets, their thoughts are that they will fight back. Do we really want that kind of situation to occur in our beautiful town that we call home?
Mr Deputy Speaker, I urge all members of this Assembly, and especially the members from Central Australia, to take no part in any group actions, but to stand up as true leaders and face the problems of antisocial behaviour that we have in Alice Springs.
Mr HAMPTON (Stuart): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Chief Minister’s statement on this government’s initiatives and achievements in Central Australia. This is my first parliament in Alice Springs, and I am pleased to be here representing the people of Stuart. As a local who was born in Alice Springs, I am proud of being able to speak about my home town as a member of the Legislative Assembly.
As it is my first parliament in Alice Springs, I acknowledge the traditional owners and native title representatives of Lhere Artepe on whose country we meet. We are on the country of the Arrernte people. We need to acknowledge the custodians of this land. During the ceremonial opening of parliament on Tuesday, the address by those speakers indicated to me the visions and hopes they hold for Alice Springs and Central Australia. It also demonstrated to me how seriously each speaker and the groups they represent take the traditional owners and native title owners of Alice Springs as members of our community.
I noted that all the speakers, with the exception of the Leader of the Opposition, acknowledged the Arrernte people, and Mr Frank Ansell, the Chairperson of Lhere Artepe. I do not know, maybe it was an oversight by the Leader of the Opposition. However, as I have stated, this acknowledgement is important because the Arrernte people are important stakeholders in the future of this town. We need to engage and bring them with us when we face these challenges and plan for the future.
As I stated in my first speech to parliament in Darwin in October 2006, six months ago:
- We must engage the people to deliver the health and economic outcomes that so many want to achieve.
The people of Stuart want to make the Territory, their communities, and town camps, the greatest place to live. They want to be able to obtain a good job, whether they live in a remote Territory community like Lajamanu or in a regional centre like Ti Tree. The people of Stuart want safe and harmonious communities where their children and grandchildren can grow up happy and healthy, whether they are living at Hidden Valley town camp or at Ampilatwatja. This is not be easy because of the complex political and social history that is associated with indigenous and non-indigenous people in the Territory.
We need to build trust and promote it through the considered laws and policies of this parliament, and bring forward an open and fair dialogue for all Territorians.
These words and the meaning behind them have not changed. During my first speech to parliament, I proudly spoke about many of my family’s achievements as well. Alice Springs and Central Australia have been places for my family for generations. They participated in and contributed to many aspects of our community. I would like to repeat something else that I said in my first speech, and I feel it is very important for the people of Alice Springs to hear it: the Northern Territory and Alice Springs are places of remarkable opportunities, places where someone like me can become a member of parliament. I see myself as just another local bloke who grew up in The Gap area of Alice Springs, just across the Todd River from here. Through a good education and with the help of my family and good role models along the way, I have been able to achieve something in my life. Alice Springs is my home and I am proud of the town and the diverse range of people who make up our community.
There are many reasons why so many people enjoy the lifestyle in the desert. One is the range of sports available in a town of this size and the great sporting facilities. Another reason has to be the weather to which I am sure my colleagues can attest this week; it is just fantastic. Due to living in such a small community, there is a lot of extra time to spend with family and visiting the amazing country in our region.
We can celebrate our lifestyle, but we also have to protect it. Part of protecting of our community is making sure that Alice Springs is a safer place to live. I believe that holding parliament in Alice Springs demonstrates to the people of Central Australia that this government takes this part of the Northern Territory seriously; it is genuine in its efforts to address the challenges we face. Holding parliament in the Red Centre gives people of the region an opportunity to express and demonstrate their opinion. This is good and healthy, both for the community and for we politicians to experience. Over the past few days, I have attended the rallies and listened to the very strong representations the people of Alice Springs have made.
However, it is more than just listening; this government has acted. We recognise that the people in Alice Springs are concerned about their safety and security. This is not a newly found recognition; it has been a long-held understanding. That is why this government commissioned the O’Sullivan Report. That is why this government responded to the former CLP government’s policy of recruitment inertia by rebuilding the police force over the last four years. Alice Springs now has a full quota of police, and the Police Commissioner yesterday committed to maintaining that full quota. Police have also responded by committing to the continuation of the City Safe initiative and the introduction of a social order task force, initiatives that will see more uniformed police patrolling our streets.
In a further demonstration of our commitment to making Alice a safer place to live and grow up families, the Chief Minister this week announced the $150 000 grant for the Alice Springs Town Council to contribute to the installation of CCTV in the Todd Mall. The Chief Minister and this government have been acutely aware of the need to tackle antisocial behaviour and crime.
The alcohol management plan and its component parts are aimed at reducing the harmful impact that alcohol is having on this community socially, culturally and economically. Excessive alcohol consumption is a major cause of crime and antisocial behaviour in this community. As we all know, it places a massive demand on our Police and Emergency Services, clogs up our health system and results in a disproportionate number of Aboriginal people entering the justice system. This government has taken the hard decisions to turn down the tap to limit the impact of grog on this community. It is up to all in the community - Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people - to engage and to be part of the solution. This is not just a government problem. The Chief Minister is leading from the front and we will support her every effort. I call upon all of our community members, as my colleague, the member for Macdonnell did, to do likewise. These examples highlight some of the ways this government is listening to the people of Alice Springs.
The rhetoric we hear from the member for Greatorex and the Leader of the Opposition is just that: rhetoric. The CLP does not have a plan, and their poor contributions and performances this week clearly show this. In 1990, 17 years ago, when the CLP was well entrenched in government, almost 400 Aboriginal women and children from remote communities joined forces with the people of Alice Springs and marched in the streets urging the government to listen and act. These people wanted something done about the level of alcohol-related violence in the town back then. They wanted something done about alcohol supply - and that was in 1990. The CLP’s record in government speaks for itself. Alice Springs is now reaping what the CLP government sowed by its inaction.
On Wednesday morning, I attended another rally that was attended by, I would say, around 300 people. It was a Special General Meeting of Tangentyere Council in the Todd Mall. I attended with the Minister for Central Australia, the member for Macdonnell, as well as the Treasurer and the member for Sanderson. This rally emphasised that residents of town camps are equally concerned about safety and security, and the lifestyles of everyone living in Alice Springs. Like everyone here, they have a right to expect services and infrastructure of an equivalent standard to the surrounding suburbs. They have a right to expect that governments and all members of parliament will listen to their needs and respect their aspirations for future generations.
The Chief Minister has stated in this place that Alice Springs and Central Australia are facing some significant and complex challenges, and there is no running away from them. As I have said previously, this is true with alcohol abuse, antisocial behaviour, and town camps, all major challenges for both the government and our community in Central Australia. To tackle these issues and challenges is going to take enormous courage and work from everyone from the government, from indigenous and non-indigenous people.
I try to focus on the issues at a number of levels. The first level is as an individual, parent and family member; the second is as a local member of parliament; and the third level is as a member of government. It is not easy at any one of these levels. Dealing with individuals and families in my electorate, who are at the grassroots of some of these problems, is very hard. Witnessing the heartache families endure after death of a loved one is equally hard and, sadly, far too common out there. You only have to sit in the sorry camps to feel the emotion and energy that families go through when they have lost a family member. I am sure many of my colleagues know personally of people or family members who have tragically died before their time. Through all these hard times, it is important to keep focused on what we can do to stop the abuse, the deaths and the sorrow. As I have said before, these are not new challenges. In fact, these challenges arrived when non-indigenous people settled this region. By saying this, I simply mean to demonstrate the complexity and the longevity of the issues. These challenges have developed and grown over generations of Central Australians and require a generational plan.
I was astonished to read in the NT News on Wednesday, 18 April, that the Leader of the Opposition said that Alice Springs does not want a five-, 10-, 15- or 20-year plan. That is exactly what we do need. There is no short-term fix; there is no silver bullet. These challenges require long-term, sustainable solutions developed in partnership with the people of Alice Springs. As the member for Braitling stated in her contribution to the censure motion on Tuesday, she has listened to the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Greatorex during their contributions and both of them had nothing constructive to say. The member for Braitling was right when she said it is easy to stand up in this parliament and blast each other. It is great for the crowd listening, but what is it really achieving?
Yesterday, the Chief Minister launched Moving Alice Ahead and this is a great plan. It is a comprehensive strategy to address many of the challenges we face to continually grow our economy, to maintain our fabulous lifestyle, and to deal with the complex social needs of its people.
I take this opportunity to remind people of the Chief Minster’s 20-year plan to tackle indigenous disadvantage in the Northern Territory that was brought to parliament late last year. I note that at a recent meeting of the Council of Australian Governments, there has been an agreed position to a national commitment for the Chief Minister’s generational plan. This generational plan is vitally important and significant, particularly considering that it is the 40th anniversary of the 1967 referendum on indigenous citizenship and rights this year. The hard task is getting the community and government working together to address these challenges.
As a member of government who lives in Alice Springs, I say again that this government does take the significant and complex challenges seriously and will not run away. I, as a local Alice Springs person and a member of this government, can assure everyone in the community that we have not and will not let these serious issues be ignored. I am sure my colleagues can attest to my parochialism in respect of Central Australia during meetings and conversations I have with them.
We must stop the blame game and politics that have been used in this debate, particularly by the media. The issues are too important to be used this way. We need to focus on how we can fix the problem. In recent months, I have been privileged to attend events in Alice Springs and in my electorate that give me great confidence that things are moving ahead.
The signing of the Indigenous Land Use Agreement at Mulga Bore community signifies that by working with the local people and communities, economic development can happen in the bush. The horticulture development on Pine Hill Station will include three new blocks for development. As my colleague, the Minister for Primary Industry and Fisheries, stated in his contribution, there are already up to 15 local Anmatjere men participating in horticultural training at the Ti Tree Research Farm. These are tangible examples of regional economic development providing hope, opportunity and real jobs for the future.
The next stage of the Desert Peoples Centre at the Desert Knowledge Precinct is another example that Central Australia has its own unique product which will benefit not only us living in the Centre but, potentially, everyone living in desert communities throughout the world.
Education and our young people also give me great optimism. Over recent months, I have visited many schools in Alice Springs, particularly looking at the learning units mainstream schools have established to assist town camp children with education. This is an initiative born out of the Town Camp Task Force, and I congratulate the Minister for Housing and Local Government for his vision and resolve in tackling the challenges of town camps.
In mentioning the Minister for Local Government, my colleague from the Barkly, I genuinely congratulate him on his courage for tackling the issues of town camps; also his courage in working on the reform of local government in the Northern Territory, which is not an easy one. However, he has shown great leadership and direction in both these areas. Both are areas in which the CLP has failed Territorians.
Another initiative supported by the Northern Territory government is the introduction of the Clontarf Football Academy in Alice Springs at ANZAC Hill High School, Yirara College and Alice Springs High School. The program will be established next year at Centralian College. This is groundbreaking stuff for the Territory, and I thoroughly congratulate the Minister for Employment, Education and Training for his support.
The impact of skill shortages faced by businesses in Central Australia can and will be decreased if we can recruit locally. It is fantastic to see local business getting behind the Clontarf Football Academy program. Clontarf offers young indigenous males the incentive to attend school, to stay at school and to achieve. Clontarf has achieved great results in Western Australia, and it is already showing signs of achieving great results here in Alice Springs. School attendance at Yirara College has been the best in 14 years, and at ASHS and ANZAC, school attendance is averaging about 90% for the first term, up from levels of about 50% in previous years.
From a personal point of view, as the father of one of the Clontarf students, I have seen first-hand the impact that this program has had on my son and his friends. Speaking to many parents and teachers of students who are now attending the Clontarf Academy, I can attest that it has changed the lives of many young men already.
Other initiatives, like the Polly Farmer Foundation program to be introduced at Centralian College shortly, will support individual students with mentoring, tutorial assistance and vocational planning. This is another great initiative coming from the Indigenous Education and Employment Task Force. It is a great example of what can happen when collaboration occurs. I also congratulate Centrecorp, NT DEET and DEST on their support and contributions to this wonderful program.
Getting kids to school and, importantly, keeping them there, is the essence to achieving long-term change in this community. With our changing demographic, it is incumbent on government to invest wisely and provide the right environment for our kids to grow up healthy and prosper. It is also the responsibility of all of us - government, business and the community – to develop opportunities and economic participation for all. At the centre of this is the need for and the right of Aboriginal people to be gainfully employed and active participants in the economy, not passive recipients.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I conclude my contribution to this debate by recalling and sharing the vision and words of one of our great elders who has passed on. His words give me great hope for the future, particularly for our children:
- Today there are lots of people living in this country, people who have come from all over the world but we don’t call them foreigners. We don’t ask where’s your father’s country? Where’s your country? They have been born here. Their mother’s blood is in this country. This is their country too now so all of us have to live together. We have to look after each other. We have to share this country and this means respecting each others laws and culture.
That quote was from the late Mr W Rubunjta in his book The Town Grew Up Dancing. Coincidentally, Mr W Rubuntja’s State Funeral was held in this very building on 21 July 2005. I will miss you, old man; your vision, wisdom and your words are very much needed today.
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank all those who contributed to this debate. Listening to the member for Stuart I was reminded of the book The Town Grew Up Dancing. It is a marvellous history of Alice Springs and the role Mr Rubuntja played. I was very privileged to be at the launch of the book. You forget, sometimes, when it has not been mentioned for a while, what a superb book it is and what a great contribution it is to the history of, not only Alice Springs, but the Territory.
I thank everyone for their thoughtful contributions to this statement. What really rang through many of the contributions was a real honesty about the issues faced in Alice Springs and in the Centre. There was a balance between talking about the tough issues, the ones that are creating negativity - not just in Alice Springs but the Centre broadly - and an appropriate concentration on the positive things that are happening in Alice Springs. It was a statement that covered, in so many different areas, where we are now with Alice Springs and the Central Australian community, and where we need to go.
I do not want to go back over the negatives. We have spent much of this week talking about the negatives and the difficulties being faced in the Alice Springs community, and the strong voice of the Alice Springs community saying we need to take action, and to have better focus on policing. We have been through those issues extensively this week.
The positives of Alice Springs are gigantic. What is currently happening in the economy is very positive. Tourism numbers, over the last two years, have grown by 22 000, from 111 000 to 133 000. Every business in town benefits because of that growth in tourism. Talking to operators, the start of this tourism season is very positive. The numbers look good and there is a really strong, positive spirit about tourism and its place in Alice Springs, and in the surrounding area of course. If you talk to businesses, a very positive outlook has been reflected for quite a time now. Businesses are investing in their businesses and in this community. When you look at a raw figure like the construction figure for the December quarter last year, there was $91m worth of construction taking place in the Alice Springs region. One-third of that was private sector investment.
While, on one hand, there is certainly some anxiety about some of the issues to do with the future of the Alice Springs community, there is also strong confidence that this community has a bright future. I thank those business people who are investing in the future of Alice Springs, because I believe that it represents great confidence in where this community is going.
We have also talked about government investment in the future of Alice Springs, looking at investments in key areas of roads, buildings and the hospital with $6m announced this week for a new Emergency Department. Really heartening for Alice Springs, with such a young population, are the changes to education, the investment in education and training, which is really the key to the future of the community. Young people are going to school and getting the skills they need to be part of the future. One element of that is the introduction of the Clontarf Academy with positive results after just one term. Some 170 young Aboriginal men - and I have talked to them; many people here have talked to them – are now better engaged in the school system because of that link with their love of playing football. They also have the link to go to school and achieve academically.
There are many positives. There was the announcement today that in the next budget there will be nearly $16m spent on roads in the Central Australian region and a significant increase in the repairs and maintenance budget, again, a vital component of building this community. When you think of the distances that need to be travelled, and those who come to Alice Springs because it is such a strong service hub, we have to ensure that the roads are working well. There is a lot more money going into repairs and maintenance. There is a significant capital spend when you look at areas like the Red Centre Way, one of the largest NT road contracts currently under way in Central Australia. With the balance in repairs and maintenance and capital on roads, again, it is a strong commitment to the Central Australian region.
Thank you all for your contributions to this debate. Parliament has certainly found this week a very engaging, challenging and rewarding week here in the Centre. This government is very committed to Alice Springs and to the region. We have strong local members in the members for Stuart and Macdonnell. They are certainly very strong supporters, on a daily basis, of this region and take their concerns straight to government. I am looking forward to a very strong and positive future for Alice Springs and the region. This community is a great place to work, to live and to raise a family. I believe working together, we can make it an even better place to work, live and raise a family.
Motion agreed to; statement noted.
TABLED PAPER
Remuneration Tribunal Report and Determination No 2 of 2007 for Magistrates
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, under the Assembly Members and Statutory Officers (Remuneration and Other Entitlements) Act 2006, the Remuneration Tribunal is required to at least once a year inquire into and determine the salary, allowances and other benefits that persons are entitled to receive in respect of their service as magistrates appointed under section 4(3) of the Magistrates Act. Any report or determination must be tabled within six sitting days of receipt by the minister, and the Assembly has a further 10 sitting days to disallow all or any part of the determination if it so wishes.
The Remuneration Tribunal has now handed down its latest report and Determination No 2 of 2007 for magistrates. The tribunal, in its report, deals with a range of issues including: salary levels, travelling allowance rates, conference travel, motor vehicles, mobile phones and removal expenses. The determination sets new salary rates for the various classes of magistrates, and deals with allowances if a magistrate is appointed to be the President of the Mental Health Review Tribunal and if a magistrate based in Alice Springs is performing special administrative duties under the direction of the Chief Magistrate.
In relation to travel to conferences, it includes one relevant overseas conference travel and provides for an increase in removal expenses. It is not appropriate that I go into any further detail at this point, but allow time for members to consider the report.
MOTION
Note Paper - Remuneration Tribunal Report and Determination No 2 of 2007 for Magistrates
Note Paper - Remuneration Tribunal Report and Determination No 2 of 2007 for Magistrates
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly take note of the paper, and that I have leave to continue my remarks at a later hour.
Leave granted.
Debate adjourned.
SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move that the Assembly at its rising adjourn until Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 10 am in Parliament House, or such other time and/or date as may be advised by the Speaker, pursuant to Sessional Order.
Motion agreed to.
ADJOURNMENT
Ms MARTIN (Chief Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, if that is all the business in front of the House, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mrs AAGAARD (Nightcliff): Mr Deputy Speaker, tonight I thank the many people who have been involved with the putting together of this Alice Springs sitting. It is a huge event and it has taken many people much time to organise.
First, I place on the record my thanks to the people of Alice Springs. I have been coming down regularly for the last six months in organising this, and the wonderful reception I have been receiving in relation to the organising of this sitting has been terrific. The numbers of people we have had come to Question Time, ministerial reports, and other functions throughout this sitting indicates the real interest that the people of Alice Springs have for regional sittings. I thank the government for agreeing to have the sitting in Alice Springs. It is a terrific initiative.
I extend my thanks to the staff of the convention centre, particularly Scott Lovatt, Natalie Prior and the team for their hospitality and assistance with the organising and running of this Alice Springs sitting. I believe members will agree that the layout of the precinct has been terrific.
Every year for the past 13 years, the YMCA has run Youth Parliament with the Legislative Assembly. This year is the third time that the Youth Parliament has been brought to the Centre and the first time that the Alice Springs YMCA and Darwin YMCA have worked together for Youth Parliament. Youth Parliamentarians at this sitting discussed bills with topics relevant to our lives such as public smoking, dog licences, recycling, and making Alice Springs a dry zone. I extend my congratulations and thanks to Reg Hatch from the YMCA of Central Australia and Raquel Nicholls-Skene from the YMCA of the Top End, together with Legislative Assembly staff who helped bring this together. I also make special mention of Donald Young who has also put in a lot of personal time. Without his support, staging Youth Parliament would be extremely difficult.
The family concert which we held on Sunday night was an exciting new addition to this year’s program. The free family concert saw many local acts perform in front of over 1500 Alice Springs residents. I would like to name all of the people who were involved with this concert, particularly Nicky Shonkala from Watch this Space, who coordinated the event on behalf of the parliament. She certainly worked very hard and made it into a very special night. I thank Pat Dodds for the welcome to country; to Katya Quigley from the ABC for being the master of ceremonies; to the Tangentyere Circus for their wonderful acrobatic performance; the Carl and Max Jugglers and Humbert’s Academy of Dance who roamed the audience with their performances; the Alice Springs High School Breakers with their dancing performance; the OLSH Traeger Singing Group; the Bureaucrats; Braitling Primary School Year 3 Choir for the National Anthem; Lisa Maria and Claire Ryan from St Philip’s; Bradshaw Primary School middle choir; Drum Atweme; Michelle Murphy for a wonderful country performance - Michelle was also at Telstra’s Road to Tamworth finalist; Super Raelene Brothers with some wonderful original songs; Katrina Stowe who did an interactive drumming performance; and as the sun was setting on the day, the real stars came out, such as Warren H Williams, who is the national NAIDOC Artist of the Year of 2006, and had the 2006 Song of the Year; and my personal favourite from Alice Springs, The Moxy. The Moxy had a wonderful performance at last year’s BassintheDust, and they definitely have a bright future ahead.
I need to make a special mention of His Honour the Administrator, also to the Minister for Natural Resources, Environment and Heritage, Dr Lesley Cameron, Mark Nelson, Chris Grace and Kent Rowe for letting loose and joining me dancing at the concert. There is photographic evidence of this in, I believe, today’s Alice Springs News, which is a little scary, of the minister and I dancing at the concert. I advise you to have a look at that if you cannot believe we were dancing.
During the concert we announced the winners of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly’s Central Australian Schools Artwork Competition. The competition focused on community leadership. At the start of the school year, schools in the Central Australian region were invited to be part of the competition in the lead-up to the Alice Springs sittings. Schools which entered the competition had their art displayed in the Yeperenye Centre in Alice Springs. I thank Melissa Adamson from the Yeperenye Centre for her help and support for the competition.
The first prize in the competition was $3000 for the school, and this prize was won by Wallace Rockhole School for their very beautiful work. I add that the students who put this painting together got up very early in the morning and went to school early for some weeks especially to put the painting together. It is wonderful that they have won. The second prize, which was $1000, went to Ross Park Primary School. Third prize was $500 and went to Acacia Hills School. The People’s Choice went to Sadadeen Primary School. The winning entry, the Wallace Rockhole painting, will hang permanently in Parliament House. I am considering that it will, in fact, be hanging in my office in Parliament House so that members will see that when they come to Darwin next.
I thank the people who helped with the opening of parliament. In particular, I thank Drum Atweme who backed up their performance from the concert on Sunday by playing while guests were being seated; and the Salvation Army Indigenous Choir for their beautiful rendition of a local hymn.
I thank her Worship, the Mayor of Alice Springs, Ms Fran Kilgariff, and the Alice Springs Town Council for their sponsorship of the concert and in-kind support for this sitting. It is tremendous that the parliament is able to work closely with the Alice Springs Town Council in this way, and I thank them for that.
It would not be possible to put something like this together without the extreme effort of people such as the Clerk and the Deputy Clerk. The Deputy Clerk, Mr Horton, has worked for six months now putting the sitting together and has coordinated almost every aspect of it. David, thank you very much on behalf of all members for your really hard work and dedication. Each time we have come to Alice Springs, it has become better, so thank you very much, Mr Deputy Clerk.
A feature of this sitting has been the large number of students who have come to visit. In the lead-up to the sitting, we had an education program organised by the Parliamentary Education Unit and 1500 students went through that program. Through the sittings, there have been about the same number of young people visiting. It is a terrific way for our young people to understand parliamentary democracy. I thank Jan Sporn, Anna-Maria Socci, Renee Manley and Sharon Young for their involvement in this very important area, which is one of the most significant things that we do as a parliament.
I extend a big thank you to Rita Henry, the Director of Alice Springs Region of DEET, and Annette Ballard and Sharna Richards for the coordination of the volunteers who have been involved with the Parliamentary Education Program.
In relation to the set-up, Derek Stafford from the Department of the Legislative Assembly has been a very significant and hard worker over many months, and I thank Derek for his hard work.
IT is always something which can make or break us, and I thank Clifton and Gary for their help with the set-up and all our IT needs during this time.
The Chamber staff, once again, have put in an excellent effort: Graham Gadd, Annette Brown and the Acting Serjeant-at-Arms, Steve Stokes. Thank you for your excellent service.
I thank Robyn van Dok and Joanne Burgess for their help behind the information desk. The Office of the Chief Minister has assisted with much of this work. I thank the Chief Minister for allowing some of her personal staff to assist in coordinating some of the aspects of this parliament. I particularly thank her Chief of Staff, Ross Neilson, and Aaron Ross; and from the Chief Minister’s Office in Central Australia, John Gaynor and Kelsey Rodda. It has been terrific to have that level of coordination between the parliament and the Chief Minister’s Office.
Finally, I thank the people of Alice Springs. Thank you for making this all possible and for being involved.
Dr BURNS (Johnston): Mr Deputy Speaker, it has, indeed, been a busy sitting and we are in adjournment at approximately 4.45 pm on the last day. The use of adjournments is for a whole range of purposes. I usually use it to talk about my electorate. I know that other members, including opposition members, use it to talk about matters of importance, and I am going to do that this afternoon.
This relates to false claims made by the member for Greatorex, Dr Richard Lim, the shadow minister for Health, at the last sitting in relation to nurses working 19 and 21 hours straight at the hospital.
First, I acknowledge the hard-working nurses in our hospital system who do substantial overtime to support the health system and, most importantly, their patients. Dr Lim made these claims about people working 19 and 21 hours straight at the height of an EBA negotiation between the government and the Australian Nursing Federation. I believe his comments were very inflammatory and destructive to that process.
Nonetheless, in the last four weeks or so - and I commend my colleague, the Minister for Public Employment - there has been substantial progress in this EBA negotiation. It features an 18-month agreement, with two salary increases in 2007, a 4.5% increase backdated to February, and a further 3% in August; a $1200 one-off sign-up bonus; improved rates for professional development allowance; and improved on-call allowance. There is a balloting process for the nurses, which is expected to be concluded in early May 2007. Passed by the nurses, this agreement will see Territory nurses remain amongst the best paid in Australia
The ANF did have a very important campaign in relation to nurse overtime, and it is a very important issue. It is unacceptable for any nurse to work unsafe hours. Sometimes, overtime is necessary to cope with the peaks of demand that all hospitals experience. In response to the ANF’s campaign on overtime, in consultation with the department, the CEO brought in a rule that any nurse working any more than 60 hours per week, or 20 hours overtime, must now have those extra hours approved by the Director of Nursing. Since this new system has been introduced, I am advised, that only two nurses at Alice Springs Hospital and two at Royal Darwin Hospital have worked more than the 60-hour limit in one week. I am sure that this has been after discussion with the nurse manager responsible. I can assure the House that the aim of ensuring safe working hours for nurses is being achieved.
Turning now to the member for Greatorex, on 22 February, in parliament, he tabled a number of payslips of nurses, and I have copies of them here. They have been blown up so people can see. He said in public that they constituted evidence of nurses working 19 hours on a single day and, by implication, 21 hours. I assume this is his handwriting, I have circled there, 19 hours, 21 hours. To quote what he said during Question Time:
- I table a payslip of a nurse … who, in the last pay period, worked 19 hours in one day.
By implication, he was saying that this other nurse worked 21 hours in one day which is, obviously, unacceptable.
In a media release, he started to gloat. On 15 March 2007, he said, as part of his media release, a copy of which I have here, talking about me, the Minister for Health:
When confronted with payslips showing nurses working 21 hours in one day, minister Burns sought to shift the blame to hospital administration.
These are very serious allegations and, as promised on the day, I have had the member for Greatorex’s claims investigated very thoroughly by the department. In fact, I have asked them, for the pay period the member for Greatorex talked about, to go through each and every line of overtime to ascertain whether the claims of the member for Greatorex were true.
This is the advice that has come back to me from the department. These nursing rosters for the pay period 20 January to 7 February have been examined in detail and I can report, first, no nurse in either Alice Springs or Royal Darwin Hospital worked 19 or 21 hours in one day. These payslips show overtime in two of these lines. In one line it has 25/1, 15 hours and, in another line, 25/1, six hours. What the member for Greatorex then did is total these up and say that is 21 hours. In reality, what those two lines apply to is total overtime worked within that pay period. In other words, during the pay period from 25 January to 7 February, this particular nurse worked a total of 21 hours over a two-week period. He or she did not work 21 hours in one day. I say: shame on the member for the Greatorex ...
Members interjecting.
Dr BURNS: Shame on the member for Greatorex because, in essence - I will place it on the record here - the member for Greatorex has apparently led this House to believe claims that are not true. These claims are not true, and he made political mileage out of them. He has misrepresented the true meaning of the documents he tabled. They do not represent what he said, and he has mischievously misused these documents for his own political end and to mislead the public and the media of the Northern Territory.
These are very serious claims indeed. It really shows the desperation of the member for Greatorex and the ends to which he will go to get a headline, to get himself on the media. I saw him the day after that parliament. He was dancing around like someone in front of the Eiffel Tower, but I will not say who. He had this big win; he had won the war. Short-term gains never really help anyone because you are always found out. The member for Greatorex has been found out. I have to flag to this House that I can no longer trust the member for Greatorex and the sorts of claims he makes. If he comes into parliament again during Estimates Committee with documents that purport to show this and that, I will not believe him.
The Leader of the Opposition tabled her bogus documents about police and police resources across the Territory, which were shown to be untrue as well.
Tonight, I am voicing my disappointment with the member for Greatorex because as a medical practitioner, someone who has taken an oath in this place and, with his experience and connections in health, I was looking forward to a good, clean debate with him But what have I had? The documents are not bogus but the assertions made by the member for Greatorex are. I will leave it there and move on to my normal electorate adjournment now.
I draw your attention to the recent election of volunteers to school councils around my electorate. As we are aware, school council meetings are extremely important in the running of our schools, and the committees elected to support the school are made up of fantastic, dedicated people. The councils play a vital part in ensuring the whole community is involved in the important decisions of the school.
The beginning of the school year brings a flurry of excitement for the students as they stand for SRC councils and captains and vice-captains of various houses. It is great to hear that schools encourage their students to nominate; they go through a voting process. I congratulate all candidates on school representative councils and the houses, and their willingness to stand for positions and commitment. I wish all the best for this year to all of those children.
Wagaman Primary School had its AGM on 19 February, and I congratulate Justin Heath who was returned as chairperson, together with Rose McKenzie vice chair; Kate Barnes, secretary; and Bob Babu, treasurer. Parent members include Steven Jackson, Sylvia Mavros, Tanyah Nasir, Wayne Neilson, Louise Winter and Katie Karamanakis.
The Wagaman Primary School SRC was also elected, and I congratulate Hannah Motter, president; vice-president, Somenah Dooley, secretary, Tiara Ladju; and treasurer, Emma Jackson on their success.
The class representatives are Molly Kingdon and Samantha Martin from Year 2/3; Sharny Neilson and Danica Cigobia from Year 3/4; Tristan Garces and April Camposo from Year 4/5, Tyre Neilson and John Mamartzis from Year 5; and Vernon Fransisco, Rui Sihombing, Broden Neilson, Julienne Vargas from the two Year 6/7 classes.
At Moil Primary School AGM, Sita Harrison was re-elected chair. She has done a great job over a number of years. David Adams was elected vice-chair; Ian Butler as manager administration; and treasurer, Desleigh Pidgeon and Ingrid Roche were both elected to serve as secretary; and Meagan Luis, Wendy Carpenter and Michael McRostie join the council as parent members. I extend my best wishes to all those fantastic people and look forward to working with them during the year.
The SRC was voted in during February at that school and Phoebe Mansfield and Tahlia Mason were the Year 7 representatives; Kieren Fiorenza and Daniel Lai from Year 6; Davin Ferreira and Jessica Fuller, Year 5 representatives; and Ben Rehrmann and Elliot Williams from Year 4.
House captains were also elected the same month. Congratulations to Adrienne Turner, Elysia Jongue of the Wilson Wallabies; Vaanathy Kandiah and Matthew Rehrmann of the Greenwood Greenants; Cameron McKenzie and Tegan O’Connor of the Byrne Barras; and Jessica Agung and Shane Creeper of the Lindy Lorikeets. I offer my sincere congratulations to these students and I hope I can help them at any time.
At Jingili Primary School, the executive council was elected and included Ian Johnstone as chairperson, ably assisted by Mrs Kelly Anstey as deputy chair; Ms Jane Black, secretary; and Ms Karen Avery as treasurer. Unfortunately, Ian has had to resign as chairperson for personal reasons and Kelly has kindly stepped into the breach for Term 2. I extend my best wishes to the Jingili Community Council for being on hand to assist them when and where necessary.
I also take this opportunity to farewell the Principal of Jingili Primary School, Eva Lawler, who has accepted a position in minister Henderson’s office. I know she is going to do a great job. I have worked with Eva over the years and she is a very capable person, a great educator and very experienced. During her three years with the school, Eva has been a steady hand and a great support for the parents, students and the school council. I look forward to working with her in the new role.
Ms Jodie Green has joined Jingili Primary School as Principal for Term 2 and I extend my sincere congratulations and offer my support during her tenure. Jodie was recently Assistant General Manager of Student Services and brings a wealth of experience to her new position.
The Jingili Student Representative Council went through its election in February and Shannen Pugh was voted in as school captain and citizenship ambassador. Class representatives elected include: Teka Voysey, Brayden McLennan, Ellie Price and Jordan Williams from Years 1/2; Jane Laughton and Lucien Mckaige from Years 3/4; Anthony Mehonoshen and Brianna Haase from Years 4/5; and Kailin Rosas, Theo McMahon, Mietta Russell and John Hoskins from Years 5/6/7. Congratulations to all of those students. I offer my support to the students as they work with their student school community. Jingili school does a great job in fundraising for a whole range of causes.
Casuarina Senior College held its annual general meeting on 15 March 2007. I offer my best wishes and support to the following committee members who stood and were elected: Inta Tumuls, Elizabeth Foggo Thynne, Lesley Collins, Cindy Impelmans, Jac Stirrat, Konni Ketteritzsch, Lynne Cook, with Ayriel Harburn and Anthony Watts as the student representative council representative. Mrs Inta Tumuls was subsequently voted in as chairperson.
As you are aware, Casuarina Senior College has a new Principal, Mrs Annette Jamieson who took over from Steve Sjoberg, who made a fantastic contribution to the college over his six year tenure. The college has an exciting year ahead ...
Dr LIM: A point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker!
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Excuse me, member for Johnston, there is a point of order.
Dr LIM: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I seek that the minister table the documents that he was referring to before, plus the advice that he received from his department regarding the payslips I provided at the sittings in February ...
Members interjecting.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, please members. Order! I will seek some advice. Stop the clock.
Dr LIM: I asked him to table what he was referring to in terms of his adjournment.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: I understand the question and I will seek some advice, member for Greatorex.
Member for Johnston, I am advised that if you quoted from the documents, you should table them.
Dr BURNS: These documents here, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, are the documents that the member for Greatorex tabled himself. They speak for themselves. The other documents that I have I read from. I read them into the record. The member for Greatorex can just accept that. That is the advice that I have received from my department. With your concurrence, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I will continue with my adjournment debate.
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: One second, member for Johnston. I will seek clarification. Member for Johnston, continue your speech and we will sort out the clarification in the meantime.
Dr BURNS: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, apart from these documents that the member for Greatorex has already tabled, I was reading from speech notes which I do not have to table, and which I will not table. I have already read what is in there. The member for Greatorex can deal with what I have put on the Parliamentary Record, which is the truth ...
Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Johnston, continue. We will sort this out. I will seek advice while you are concluding your remarks.
Dr BURNS: Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, the college has an exciting year, with major infrastructure being completed and the Year 10 students settling in nicely. As I stated, schools depend heavily on the work of their councils, both school and student, for the smooth management, fundraising and general community spirit. I congratulate all members of these councils and look forward to working with them during the course of the year.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Madam Speaker, I will begin my adjournment while you decide what to do with the point of order. It is amazing! It is 5 pm on the last day of sittings in parliament and the minister, in an adjournment, uses about five minutes to lash into me on a personal level. That is fine. Why now? He had three Question Times to put it on the record and have it on radio as well, and he did not. Why did he take two months to get his data here? When I asked him to provide the advice that he received from his department, he said he would not. We have to take his word for it.
I produced the documents. I produced the payslips, and I did not put one pen on those documents. Those circles, those handwritten notes, were done, obviously, somewhere else. I received the documents from the ANF and I was provided an explanation from the ANF …
Members interjecting.
Dr LIM: The minister can call me a liar. That is fine; that is the politics of this game. I can accept that. If he calls me a liar, he is calling the ANF a liar. It is up to the minister ...
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Dr LIM: Madam Speaker, what happened was I was provided the documents by the ANF at the office of the ANF. They explained to me what they understood the payslips to mean, and I came into parliament with those documents. That said, I rest my case. The minister can call me a liar, and he is calling the ANF a liar.
Madam SPEAKER: Before I call the next speaker, member for Johnston, would you mind coming to the Dispatch Box, please, with the documents? Member for Johnston, I understand from what I heard as I was coming into the Chamber that they are personal notes. Is that correct?
Dr BURNS: Basically, personal notes, Madam Speaker, some cuts and pastes, but basically handwritten personal notes with some other notes. These were my speaking notes. The substantive documents that I was speaking about are these ones, blow-ups of the ones the member for Greatorex already tabled at the last sitting of parliament. That is the long and short of it. What I did here today was to express or to reiterate the advice that I have had from my department on this issue. It is very emphatic advice. There has been a lot of effort go into this, and that is why it has taken a while because I wanted to be absolutely sure of what I said.
Madam SPEAKER: All right. Member for Johnston, I have enough information. You do not need to table your personal notes, but I ask you to table the two documents which are the same as the ones that you say that the member for Greatorex tabled previously.
Dr BURNS: Yes, I can table those documents and documents of what the member for Greatorex in his media release, and Hansard, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you. Do we have anyone else to adjourn?
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! It is a bit sad to have to use the gavel at this hour.
Mr HENDERSON (Wanguri): Madam Speaker, on to some very important issues in my electorate. I begin by extending my congratulations to Mrs Margaret Ferguson from Leanyer Primary School. Early this year, Margaret retired from teaching art at Leanyer School after 10 years of loyal service to the school and the community. Margaret had been working as a teacher for over 30 years, and is retiring to travel the world with her children and her husband. I attended a farewell lunch for Marg on Thursday, 15 April, at the school, and also at a special assembly held by the students to farewell Margaret.
Students were inspired by Margaret and, under her guidance, they developed a keen desire to participate in school and extracurricular activities. Included was the school’s active participation in the Keep Australia Beautiful and Territory Tidy Towns competitions. In these, Margaret led the way in encouraging keen and eager productivity from both older and younger students. Margaret has been an inspirational teacher whose enthusiasm positively impacted on her classes across the school into extracurricular activities, and extended to enhance Northern Territory education.
Margaret’s career was a shining light and an outstanding example to others. She has earned both the Pride of Workmanship Award from Darwin North Rotary Club and was Darwin’s Citizen of the Year in 2005. Those who come in contact with her are the richer for their association. She has been there for others; a person who willingly and unrequitedly gives of herself for others. Margaret Ferguson has made a positive difference. She has instilled in hundreds of our students a love of art and crafts that will live forever. I am certainly going to miss Margaret and her trips to the electorate office at Hibiscus where she would give me art work from her students to display in my electorate office. Marg, I wish you a very happy retirement.
In February, we celebrated Chinese New Year. On Saturday, 17 February, I attended a dinner held by the Chinese Timorese Association in their clubhouse, together with a number of other members, including the member for Sanderson. What a fantastic night! It was a cracker of a night! The NT Chinese Timorese Association put on a fantastic night filled with food, fun and fireworks. Some of those fireworks did not quite go off as expected, but nobody was hurt and it was a fabulous night. Special thanks must go to Rui Mu, George Mu and the rest of the community for putting on such a fabulous evening.
Also, on the celebration of Chinese New Year, on Saturday, 24 February, my electorate office in the Hibiscus shops was blessed by the Chung Wah Society’s Chinese lion. The lion dancers and musicians put on an amazing show. The noise was enough to scare a few shoppers. It was great to see the lion traveling around the suburbs bringing its luck to many places along the way.
We are now in the second term of the school year. The first term was filled with welcoming of new students and new teachers, as well as settling in those who were returning to school for another year. The schools are really into the swing of things with the election of new school councils. Well done to all parents and teachers who make up our 2007 school councils, which are the backbone of our schools. The schools have also been busy organising and electing school captains, vice captains, student representative council members, as well as school leaders.
I had the pleasure of attending St Andrew’s Lutheran School to present the elected school leaders with their badges. To hear those young people take their pledges to represent the school to the best of their abilities was just fantastic. Congratulations to Lucy Campbell, Brayden Keirs, Lewis Kilburn, Joel Kay, Matthew Vaughan, Paige Peek, Alison Stennett and Jacob Hazeldine, who have been elected the 2007 St Andrew’s school leaders.
I also attended Wanguri Primary School for their presentation of house captains, vice house captains, SRCs and hub monitors, of which my son, Liam, is proudly one. Again, the dedication written on the faces of these school representatives was great to see. I am sure they will work tirelessly to keep the school running smoothly. Well done to every student who has put their hand up to represent their school, and congratulations to the 2007 school leaders all over the Territory. I seek leave to incorporate around 150 names of those various school SRC members, house captains and vice captains into the Parliamentary Record.
Leave granted.
Leanyer Primary School
SRCs:
Jaime Ede, Tylah McDowell, Tayla Bulluss, Rachel Fegan, Matthew Phelps, Vicki Sffougaristos, Pieta Hawke, Diana Tam, Fergus O’Gallagher, Taylah Church, Kate Brotherton, Louise Jettner, Mikaela Freson, Chloe Ford, Ty Ede, Maddison Smith, Dakota McDowell, Holly Ferguson, Bailey Heatherington-Tait and Cameron Cable.
House Captains:
Kakadu: Lewis Mulvena and Emily Hoult; Litchfield: Fergus O’Gallagher and Pieta Hawke;
Uluru: Jack Hatcher and Courtney Maggs;
Coburg: Braedon McLean and Jaime Ede.
Vice-Captains and Junior Officials:
Jake Smalle, Louise Jettner, Hugh Williams-Richardson, Kristina Lee, Manoli Simeon, Georgia Chin, Toby Hunkin, Troy Gale, Evelyn Paradisis, Danny Ly, Mhairi Whitaker, Vicky Ly, Harrison Oakhill, Mitchell Carr, Taylah Church, Ty Ede and Samara Nothard.
Wanguri Primary School:
SRCs:
Elinor Johnston-Leek, Nikki Coggins, Jade Jones-Cubillo, Krystal Byrne, Brenton James, Michael Hagan, Mimi Johnston-Leek, TeAni Kahu-Leedie and Niamh Marah
House Captains:
Dylan Bell-Peckham, John Maillis, Kimiora Kahu-Leedie, Nikitas Koulouriotis, Rashelle Wilcox, Brittany Robinson and Shanice Calma
Vice Captains:
Dylan Fisher, Nicole Jurgens, Jessica Hunt, Chad Ellison, Lewis Seamons, Myra Anderson and Michael Halkitis Koum
Hub Monitors:
Shaquille Coehn, Freya Cox, Mikaela Hudson, Jihad Konda, Natasha James, Liam Henderson, Emily Hudson and Faneromeni Koulouriotis
St Andrew’s Primary School:
School Leaders: Lucy Campbell, Brayden Keirs, Lewis Kilburn, Joel Kay, Matthew Vaughan, Paige Peek, Alison Stennett and Jacob Hazeldine.
Mr HENDERSON: Mr Deputy Speaker, still on schools, I have had a chance to catch up with all the principals, including Mrs Bernadette Morriss, the new principal at Holy Spirit Primary School. It was great to sit down and to spend some time with Bernadette. Bernadette has settled in very well. Getting around to all the schools is a great part of being in the job; I certainly enjoy it. I wish Bernadette all the best as the new principal at Holy Spirit Primary School.
On Monday, 2 April, I made an announcement at Wanguri Primary School that, in the 2007-08 Territory budget, $1m has been set aside to undertake upgrades to the primary and the preschool. This funding will see redevelopment of a second preschool unit, improvements to the school assembly area, an upgrade of the current transition area, another two existing classrooms, as well as an upgrade to the reception area and offices. With Wanguri Primary School being the main feeder school for the new Lyons development, which will see 700 new houses built over the next few years, an upgrade is certainly required. All current and future teachers and students will benefit from these upgrades and redevelopments. I look forward to watching Wanguri Primary School become even better.
Talking of the Lyons subdivision, earlier this year, I went down to see the new suburbs of Lyons for a site tour. What amazing progress! I have since driven there again and have seen new Defence Housing Authority houses that have sprung up, seemingly overnight. The community centre is coming along well. Once the tenants move into the houses, I can really see a sense of community is going to develop. Everyone at DHA, and the developers, are doing a great job.
With those words, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, it has been great to be in Alice Springs again. My personal thanks, as Leader of Government Business, to all staff of the Department of Legislative Assembly who have worked so hard to make this sitting such a big success – certainly to the IT people. It is a huge logistical and technical exercise to hook up for Hansard and give all members access to IT facilities down here. Everyone has done a fantastic job. We will see Alice Springs again as an Assembly in a few years.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016