2007-06-29
Madam Speaker Aagaard took the Chair at 4.30 pm.
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received from his Honour the Administrator Message No 21, notifying assent to a bill passed in the June sittings of the Assembly.
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members that responses to Petition Nos 54 and 57 have been received and circulated to honourable members.
Continued from 21 June 2007.
In committee:
Mr CHAIRMAN: I call upon the Chairman of the Estimates Committee to present the report of the Estimates and Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committees.
Mr BURKE: Mr Chairman, I have pleasure in tabling the report of the Estimates Committee and the Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee, and its considerations of the estimates of proposed expenditure contained in the schedule to the Appropriation Bill 2007-08 (Serial 94).
I advise honourable members that any outstanding information, including outstanding answers from questions taken on notice, will be tabled during the August 2007 sittings of the Assembly. Upon receipt of outstanding answers, the committee secretariat will update the Questions Taken on Notice database. When completed, a composite set of questions and answers will be placed on the Legislative Assembly website.
The sixth public hearing of the Estimates Committee provided members with 45 hours to scrutinise the Appropriation Bill 2007-08. As members are fully aware, there have been occasions in the past where agencies have not been provided adequate appearance time before the committee and, in some cases, not appeared at all. The Standing Orders Committee took this issue on board and, in a letter to the committee, advised that all ministers would be restricted to an opening statement not exceeding five minutes in duration. The Standing Orders Committee also suggested that it may be an advantage to reconsider the prioritising of agencies as it related to the schedule of ministers’ appearances and the budget papers. The members of Estimates Committee took these suggestions on board. I reiterate the points raised in my opening address, and I quote:
I also made the statement:
Notwithstanding my previous comments, I personally thank the members of the Public Accounts Committee, who formed the core membership of the Estimates Committee, for the manner in which these public hearings have been conducted. I also place on record a vote of appreciation from the committee to all other members who participated in the public hearing process. On behalf of myself and the Deputy Chair for these proceedings, I thank all members, ministers and those who sat on the committee at various times, for your cooperation throughout. It certainly made the job of Chair a lot easier.
I also thank the Legislative Assembly staff who worked tirelessly behind the scenes to ensure the whole process ran smoothly, particularly the Table Office and Hansard for their prompt delivery of the Daily Hansard rushes during the day. In particular, I thank Terry Hanley; Joanne Burgess; Maria Viegas; Brian Cook; Kellie Trout; Pat Hancock and Kim Cowcher from Parliamentary Committees; Graham Gadd, Steve Stokes and Annette Brown from the Table Office; and Helen Allmich, Robyn Smith, Elizabeth Olajos and Sue Gray from Hansard.
Mr Chairman, there were 61 questions taken on notice this year, which is slightly up on last year, but I believe it is a reflection of the level of integrity of the questions being asked. There have been 25 answers provided over the course of the four days but, with the tight time frame from the completion of the Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee and the opening of this session of the Assembly, it means that the secretariat will follow up those remaining answers and table a composite document during the August sittings.
In addition to these questions, there was one question taken on notice during the Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee hearing this morning, and the response to this question was reported back to the committee prior to the closure of the public hearing.
I acknowledge the Government Owned Corporation Scrutiny Committee which sat for the sixth time. Power and Water Corporation officials provided members with valuable insight into the operation of the organisation. I place on record in this Chamber the committee’s appreciation of the time and effort put in by Mr Neil Philip, Chairman of the Board, and Mr Andrew Macrides, Managing Director, as well as the team of people they, no doubt, had working with them.
Mr Chairman, I have a few awards to announce as part of my report. I will not steal the thunder of the Opposition Leader, who presented an award of her own during the sittings of the committee. I would like to give an award for most surprised look, which goes to the Opposition Leader when told that the microphone she was singing to was actually live and broadcasting. The quickest bolt from estimates would have to go to minister McAdam, who immediately left estimates to board a plane for Brisbane for a meeting with the Prime Minister and Chief Minister. For best synchronised tag team questioning, possibly also best example of short-term memory, to the members for Nelson and Katherine who, during questioning of minister Scrymgour on parks and reserves conservation management program, remembered a series of final questions whilst the other was on their final question. The friendliest session would have to, again, go to the session in which minister Scrymgour presented, proving once again that in the Northern Territory we like our natural resources and environment ministers frilled not grilled.
For services to the measuring industry, or perhaps raising awareness of executive office envy, to the members of the opposition. In the military, when you go out for some time, as well as the rations, most seasoned soldiers will take something a bit special for themselves to nibble on while they are out bush. These are referred to as jack rations. For the best jack rations for the sittings of the committees, that award goes to my deputy chair, the member for Port Darwin.
Prior to commending the report to the committee, may I inform the Assembly that my office on Level 5 is 23.1 m2, the en suite is 7 m, and the reception area is 16.4 m. I commend the report to the committee.
Mr CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr Chair. Honourable members, pursuant to the resolution of the Assembly dated 20 June 2007, the committee has before it for consideration the Appropriation Bill 2007-08 (Serial 94) and the reports of the Estimates Committee and the Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee.
The question is that the proposed expenditure be agreed to, and that the resolutions for expressions of opinion as agreed to by the committee in relation to the proposed expenditure for the output with reference to the Appropriation Bill 2007-08 (Serial 94); all the activities, performances, practices and financial management of the Power and Water Corporation with reference to its Statement of Corporate Intent for 2007-08 be noted.
I remind members that speech times set for this debate are as follows: ministers, Leader of the Opposition and shadow ministers, 20 minutes; all other members, 10 minutes. The maximum period for consideration and conduct of this debate is five hours. As the time is now 4.45 pm, if debate is not concluded by 9.45 pm, I will put the question.
Mr Stirling: A bit optimistic, Mr Chairman.
Mr CHAIRMAN: We live in hope. Honourable members, when consideration of this bill and the reports have been concluded and the question put, the following question will then be put forthwith, without debate: that the remainder of the bill be taken as agreed to. The bill will then be reported to the Assembly. Following this report, the Speaker will then call upon the Treasurer to move the third reading of the bill.
Ms CARNEY: Mr Chairman, it has been, as we know, a long and interesting week. I thought that, as is usually the practice, I would do something of a summary in respect of my portfolios, but also on behalf of the opposition. I will then come to the Estimates Committee itself. In order to respond to the member for Brennan's creation of the awards, I decided to write a couple for myself as well. I will match you, member for Brennan.
We, the opposition, see the budget in the way that it should be seen quite properly, and in the same way that Territorians see the budget papers if they cared to look: output is service delivery; input is the expenditure to produce the service; and outcome, quite obviously, is what has been achieved.
We can say many things about the budget but it can be best put in these terms: this government is an increasingly efficient tax collector but, at the same time, is an inefficient service deliverer. It has received unprecedented revenue, never seen before in the Territory’s history. On any measure the numbers are up, whether it is own source revenue or current grants and subsidies. The fact is the Territory is awash with money. Under Labor’s watch, they have received more and more money, and it looks as though they will be receiving even more.
It was interesting to hear what former senior bureaucrat - in fact, the former Director of Economic Policy - Rolf Gerritsen, said on the AM program this morning. When asked where the money was going, referring to the Chief Minister, he said - and there is a swear word here, Mr Chairman. I know I cannot say it, so I will use the word ‘blank’. Mr Gerritsen, referring to the Chief Minister said: ‘She is basically blank money up against the wall’. That is, Chief Minister, a damning indictment.
When we break it down in what our fellow Territorians expect and deserve, the questions they are asking are things like: ‘How are the hospitals?’, ‘How are the waiting lists?’, ‘Have the waiting lists been reduced?’, ‘Do we still need to wait on hospital trolleys?’ Waiting lists have not been reduced and they are waiting on hospital trolleys. People at barbecues are asking: ‘Has antisocial behaviour been reduced?’ No. ‘How about the crime rates?’ No. ‘Have education standards improved?’ No. They are the indicators that many Territorians use when assessing a government. They are very concerned why it is that a government that is awash with funds has not been able to achieve the outcomes. The achievements that this government says it wants to achieve have not been delivered.
This Chief Minister has overseen a flood of money coming into the Territory. At the same time, and as a result of her failure, her own conduct and her lack of priorities and lack of action, we have seen an unprecedented response from a federal government as we have seen last week in its decision to move in on the Territory and act as a result of this Chief Minister’s failure to act.
The Chief Minister has known about the high levels of child abuse for years and simply ticked the economic box by saying consistently more resources have been provided. Indeed, thanks to revenue, the likes of which has never been seen in the Territory, more money has been injected into this area as it should have been - as any government would have done had it been the recipient of an extra $1.1bn a year. A failure to do so would, indeed, have been unthinkable. However, it needed more than money alone. Most importantly, it needed leadership, commitment and attention. The Chief Minister failed on every count.
In 2004, she knew about the high rate of STIs in young children. She supported the stance of her minister and rejected a call for an inquiry. Over a year ago, she mishandled, in the most embarrassing way, the issue of child abuse after two Lateline interviews. It was, therefore, ironic that the Chief Minister said in estimates that the sexual abuse inquiry report delivered to her a couple of weeks ago had opened the door and lifted the veil of silence, when she had previously and perniciously attacked all involved in the Lateline stories.
The Chief Minister has made much of her Office of Indigenous Policy, yet it is difficult to see what it actually does. The Chief Minister’s Agenda for Action, issued through that office, was a document about which, only a year ago in estimates, the Chief Minister said was ‘a very comprehensive and detailed strategy’. It made no mention of child abuse or child sexual abuse. That was her agency’s plan and her plan for indigenous Territorians and, yet, it failed to address this important issue.
It is all the more remarkable for a party that talks incessantly about its commitment to indigenous Territorians. There was no agenda for action in relation to child abuse. There has not been one; there is none now from the Chief Minister; and that is why the federal government has stepped in. At a time when everyone was looking for leadership, this Chief Minister has delivered none. It was a shameful admission, in the opposition’s view, that the Chief Minister said in estimates that, had the Agenda for Action document been written now, it would include child abuse as a priority. We say it is too little too late and, on any measure, just too shallow. One gets the impression that the Office of Indigenous Policy is very much like the Chief Minister herself; just there for show and lacking substance.
The Chief Minister’s handling of this important issue of child abuse that has given the Territory attention all around this country and, indeed, all around the world, has been a litany of failures and excuses by this Chief Minister.
In relation to the Chief Minister’s Department, it has enormous resources. It seems to have a focus, as we gleaned from estimates, on its Marketing and Promotions Unit. That seems to be - that is marketing and promotion - a priority for this government. In this regard, I recall in Paul Keating’s interview - I think it was on Lateline a couple of weeks ago - where he said that Kevin Rudd could not get out of bed without being told by a focus group which side to get out on. The same can be said of this Chief Minister because she arranged for the polling of the people of Alice Springs just before the Alice Springs sittings in April.
There are two Labor members of parliament who live in Alice Springs. There is the Office of Central Australia or, as is now called, the Chief Minister’s Office, which has a significant budget and adequate resources in staff. When talking about resources, we cannot possibly forget that, since coming to office, Labor has received an extra $1.1bn each and every year due to GST, Commonwealth grants and own source revenues. With this incredible sum we have to ask: why are things the way they are in our capital city, our regional centres and in the bush? Labor promised so much to indigenous Territorians and, indeed, all Territorians, but Labor has let them down.
Mr Chairman, I do not propose to go through all of the portfolio areas, after speaking with your Whip earlier this afternoon, but I do wish to refer to a couple. It follows on neatly from earlier comments. In relation to Justice, this government says it is committed to victims of crime. My view is that that cannot be sustained if you look at the so-called private and secure waiting area that victims and witnesses use in the Alice Springs Courthouse. I implore the Attorney-General to act to fix this room as soon as possible. It is a service that needs to be delivered, and it is an outcome that has not been achieved.
In relation to police, again, with the role police can play in the child abuse issue that is galvanising this country, I was stunned by the attitude of the minister for Police. I felt also, at one point, almost embarrassed for him, because I saw people sitting behind him - those he could not see - who looked as embarrassed for him as I was. When you see other people rolling their eyes at conduct that, at best, can be described as juvenile, it is cause for reflection.
Having said that, though, I thank the chairman, who conducted himself, for the most part, very well. We know what happened on Thursday. You are becoming predictable; we knew what was going to happen on Thursday.
Again, we were concerned about the lack of time. We say this each year. Traditionally, the Treasurer talks about the old days and insists that Labor’s way is better than the CLP’s. I cannot say, because I have only experienced the Labor way. What I can say, however, is that more time is needed. That is a view held beyond the walls of this Chamber. The timing is always difficult when, as we have had in the past with Peter Toyne who held Justice and Health, two very big portfolios. It is very difficult to ask the type of questions an opposition wants to, and can and should, with a two–and-a-quarter hour time split, even if you split it in half.
Unfortunately, that was the case again, perhaps not surprising given that the same minister holds Health and Police. To say that Health should not have had many questions would be unfair, because the health of our fellow Territorians is a very serious issue. The amount in the budget is a very serious amount of money, and we know that the public servants across all agencies do a serious amount of preparation. Every output is important, as is Police. Even on a two-and-a-quarter hour split, in the opposition’s view, Health, and Police in particular, certainly need more time.
In relation to the Treasurer, this is the year when I am going to break from tradition. I have traditionally quoted the Treasurer’s speech when he introduced the estimates process. He will probably be relieved to know that I do not propose to do that this year. I do not know whether the old way was perfect, but this is not perfect either. I encourage the committee to look at that in due course and see what can be done.
The opposition thanks very much all of the public servants who, clearly spend, as we know, many months preparing the answers. So many of them constantly bring in all of their folders, sit there for a couple of hours, and are told that their output group will not get on. I believe that the system can be improved so that we can get to each output.
To the Assembly staff, thank you very much for your efforts - much appreciated. Working as we do up close and personal in that room, I can say that the opposition really does have an insight into the hard work you put in. I thought the cordless microphones worked well. Whether or not I sang into them is neither here nor there, but the cordless microphones do work well.
We do have a suggestion for the PAC and, perhaps, the staff of the Assembly. We wondered whether it might be possible in future, on the monitors in all of our rooms, to put a text over the screen with the output group. I am sure all members, when they are not in the committee room, have the monitors on in their rooms. Often, the volume is down because we are taking a phone call, or what have you. If we could put Output Group 1.0 or whatever, that would generally assist those who are not in the estimates room. I would be grateful if the staff would have a look at that one.
Finally, to the awards. The worst performers award was an even split between the Chief Minister and the minister for Mines. The most bizarre award goes to the minister for Police, and the award for making the least impression goes to the Minister for Family and Community Services. We have our own awards, and it is probably not appropriate that I discuss what they are in this Chamber. They are the awards, so I have matched you, member for Brennan. Thank you very much for your efforts and we look forward to estimates next year.
Mr STIRLING: Mr Chairman, I thank the member for Brennan for his role in chairing the committee over the past week. It is not an easy task, and I thank him for his efforts. I thought he shone in that role and did an excellent job. I thank all members of the committee for their efforts during the week, as well as the Legislative Assembly staff who do so much to assist the work of the Estimates Committee.
I want to pick up on the remarks made by the Leader of the Opposition in relation to a little media commentary throughout the past 24 hours in relation to indigenous expenditure - by someone who would have no idea, frankly, Mr Chairman. Someone wrote a few speeches or contributed a bit of policy in not a very enlightened fashion, I would have thought, inside the Chief Minister’s Department. It certainly is not a person who had anything to do with Treasury, understood budgets, expenditure, revenue and the rest.
The 2004-05 budget was intensively and comprehensively pulled apart by Treasury in response to criticism that the Northern Territory was receiving revenue for indigenous purposes and not acquitting it against indigenous expenditure. That was why the 2004-05 budget was so intensively analysed and explored to get to the bottom of this methodology. It found that, in fact, 43.2% of all revenue flowing into the Northern Territory government financially in 2004-05 could be earmarked for indigenous expenditure purposes. In fact, in that 2004-05 budget year, 49.7% of all expenditure accrued by the Northern Territory government went to indigenous purposes. Approximately $175m more - 6.5% - was spent on indigenous-related expenditure than actually received into revenue for that precise purpose.
In fact, the health budget, which we have been stepping up each successive year since we came to government in 2001, goes to 60%; that is, 60% of the entire health budget spend goes into indigenous. That is recognition of the ill health that many remote living indigenous people suffer, but it also goes, of course, to the cost of delivering that service across remote areas. That review, and all of its findings, was ticked off by Queensland University Professor, Ken Wiltshire, Head of Economics. It was ticked off by none other than - and this is the methodology I am talking about - Saul Eastlake, the Chief Economist for the ANZ Bank in Australia. Mr Saul Eastlake is probably Australia’s foremost economist.
They can talk about internal reviews. I am keen when the Commonwealth Grants Commission - and there is always a lag factor on this - data rolls around and we get to 2005-06 levels of data, that we have an independent review. Maybe we will get Access Economics, maybe we will get Saul Eastlake himself - someone to pull that budget apart and see how we went in expenditure.
If we take the decision now that we will roll an extra $100m over five years - $20m of Territory own revenue - into indigenous housing into remote areas over the next five years and, given that we have not taken anything away from indigenous expenditure, that extra $100m - $20m a year over the next five years – will, of course, push that percentage figure even higher. I do not accept the comments of a part-time policy input person around what we may or may not have done with the money. I do not accept that they have any credibility at all.
On ABC radio this morning, I was asked: ‘How can you spend $1bn on the waterfront?’ Excuse me? $1bn? I said: ‘This government has put in a little over $100m into that waterfront, most notably around community infrastructure. It did so in a concerted and strategic effort with the private sector in a partnership that drives in excess of $1bn expenditure over 10 years’ - a bit over $100m from this government, and a bit over $900m from the private sector. Not a bad return for that sort of investment when you consider that government, as well as delivering the health, education and policing services, and the rest, across the Northern Territory, has an obligation and a responsibility to develop the Territory, the jurisdiction which it is responsible for, in an economic sense. If you do not have that economic growth, and that growth in revenue, you are not able to provide the same levels of services that people like Mr Gerritsen complain about. That facility down there will be driving market convention tourism into Darwin, into the Northern Territory, for the next 50 years. That will be revenue into this government’s coffers which will allow it to continue to expand and deliver those services right across the Territory, including remote indigenous communities.
About 12 months ago, the Chief Minister went to Canberra with a 20-year plan to address the historic and systemic indigenous disadvantage suffered by remote living indigenous Territorians, and the Prime Minister remained unmoved. Sure, we needed a lot of work to fill in the detail. We needed a five-year strategic objective so that we could tick off progress against that plan. As recently as yesterday, when the Chief Minister met with the Prime Minister in Brisbane, he remains locked into a short-term view, unable to see beyond the next electoral cycle. That is a real problem when you have a Prime Minister who knows the historic and systemic disadvantage that is suffered there, and that it is going to require a sustained effort not for weeks or months, but over many years, in order to lift our communities and people out of this level of disadvantage.
Last November, the Chair of the Commonwealth Grants Commission, Mr Alan Morris, was speaking to a House of Representatives committee in Canberra. He was being quizzed about the Commonwealth Grants Commission process and how it allocates revenue across the states and territories. He said the Commonwealth Grants Commission processes are excellent in recognising a disadvantage regarding the service delivery, and allocating expenditure accordingly. However, the Commonwealth Grants Commission process itself does not have the capacity to address huge backlogs and huge systemic disadvantage such as we see in the Northern Territory.
When John Ah Kit was the Minister for Housing in this parliament he used to talk about an $800m backlog in indigenous housing. The current Minister for Housing now refers to a $1.4bn backlog in Aboriginal community housing. That is the sort of endemic need and crisis need that Alan Morris, the Chair of the Commonwealth Grants Commission, recognises. That is the need the Northern Territory government recognises as a part of the disfunctionality in some of these communities that leads to all the other social disfunctionality that we have seen and which, of course, has surfaced in the findings in the child sexual abuse inquiry.
There are people of that ilk who well recognise the tremendous level of disadvantage here that is simply beyond the capacity of this government to respond to in the time frame that is required. We have a $3.3bn budget year in and year out, and a $1.4bn need on its own for one item: housing in Aboriginal communities. We do not pretend that you can get there in weeks, months or years. That is why the Chief Minister, along with the other state leaders of this country, was so keen to work with the Commonwealth on a 20-year plan to work our way out of that level of disadvantage.
We welcome the federal government’s involvement and intervention on these matters. However, if the focus remains short-term, as it is, we will not achieve those outcomes necessary to even begin to address that high level of disadvantage that we know is out there and has been experienced for so long by our remote indigenous communities.
We have put our money where our mouth is; we have put our $20m per year over the next five years, $100m, into indigenous housing. That is $100m out of a $1.4bn need, while Treasurer Costello and Prime Minister Howard sit on this year, last year and the year before, a $15bn-plus surplus. A $15bn-plus surplus, and they cannot find their way, even for a 20-year plan, to commit some of that surplus in a modest fashion to overcome this tremendous disadvantage. We are going to continue to ask the Commonwealth to contribute to this because they will continue to sit, while the economy is going as strongly as it is, on massive surplus budgets from one year to the next.
Members with remote communities in our electorates will be visiting all of our communities over the next few weeks to sit down with our constituents to allay their concerns and anxieties about what they have seen on television in relation to the intervention by the Commonwealth. We will be taking information out with us and working with them to settle them down in the first instance, and encourage cooperation with the federal government’s plans where we agree that those plans are practical and effective, and will achieve the sorts of aims that we are all on about here.
It could have been achieved much more smoothly than it has if the federal government had bothered to consult with this government and given this government and, indeed, itself an opportunity to consult with indigenous communities before launching into the intervention in the fashion that they have.
It is a dramatic intervention; we acknowledge that, but we do welcome it. All of us with remote electorates will work with our communities, talking with our people as soon as we can get on the ground next week, to begin to work through these issues with our constituents. A big part of the responsibility, particularly if you are looking at a 20-year plan, does rest with the Commonwealth. I am hopeful that, come October, there may be a change of view from The Lodge in Canberra and there will be a different incumbent. We can only hope and pray and work to that outcome because we need a government in Canberra that is prepared to look beyond the short-term electoral cycle, and is prepared to take the long-term view on long-term disadvantage, because you are not overcome it any other way.
Mr CHAIRMAN: The question is that the proposed expenditure be agreed to, and that the resolutions of expressions of opinion as agreed to by the committee in relation to the proposed expenditure for output with reference to the Appropriation Bill 2007-08 (Serial 94), and the activities, performances, practices and financial management of the Power and Water Corporation with reference to its Statement of Corporate Intent for 2007-08 be noted.
Motion agreed to.
Remainder of bill, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Madam Speaker, I put on the record my thanks to Under Treasurer, Jennifer Prince, and the amazing staff in Treasury, who burn the midnight oil so often in the lead-up to the preparation for the 2007-08 Budget. For those outside Treasury, I do not think they have any real understanding of the number of man hours that go into the deliberation and preparation of a budget.
I thank my Cabinet colleagues for what has been a terrific outcome in the 2007-08 Budget. I mentioned the committee staff and the Estimates Committee process before. Again, I thank the member for Brennan for his efforts and each of the committee members and staff who supported the process of the Estimates Committee, for their diligence and efforts for what is a pretty trying week. I acknowledge the efforts of all members, particularly members opposite, who put in long hours.
With those comments, once again, thanks to Treasury. I feel far and away the most supported Treasurer in this country, without really knowing how well supported any of those others are. You could not be more supported in the job as Treasurer than this Under Treasurer and her staff support me, and I thank them for their efforts.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Continued from 3 May 2007.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, as I propose to deal with this bill in a separate manner, I would need to wait for the third reading before I can proceed to do that.
Madam SPEAKER: I will seek some advice, but I do not believe that is correct. Member for Blain, it is appropriate for you to speak now, and the debate that you wish to bring on comes at the end of the second reading debate after the motion has been put.
Mr MILLS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Whilst there is no likelihood of success from opposition’s point of view …
Ms Carney: You never know, Millsy.
Mr MILLS: I press on regardless. The issue of the Revenue (Budget Initiatives) Amendment Bill is that it contains a number of elements. The objection raised by opposition in this event, as has been raised on other occasions, is the combining of several different elements. I can only guess that it is, perhaps in the best case scenario, a matter of convenience for government to be able to bundle things together and put them through because they all relate to revenue. However, the fact remains for anyone who has an eye to see and recognise, that there are three very separate components of this revenue bill. Two of them are eminently supportable but, regarding the third one, there are questions. It does not give anyone with an interest in testing the nature of the bill the right to be able to address concerns specifically related to one, so that we can assess that one on its own individual merits. We are not afforded that opportunity in this case, as we have on a number of other occasions where elements are brought together into one omnibus-type arrangement. This wheels the lot through.
On balance, opposition will be supporting the bill, because there are important elements in here that we have no option but to support. However, there is one there that we have reservations about. For that reason, I will be moving, hopefully with the support of honourable members on both sides, to separate the bills into three separate components so we can assess each one individually, and then be satisfied that we have been truly honouring our obligations as legislators.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, the government will not support the motion to suspend standing orders to divide the Revenue (Budget Initiatives) Amendment Bill. The benefits contained in it for Territorians were extensively canvassed in the media, in this Chamber and, indeed, at Estimates Committee. I make the strong point that it is not just entirely appropriate, but desirable, that all components of this legislation be considered and voted on as one.
Nothing in that dissuades the member for Blain from making his comments in relation to one part of the bill; that he has some opposition to one part of the bill. He is quite at ease to put that on the Parliamentary Record. It is up to his conscience, at the end of the day, whether he supports the package of the amendments in one bill or not. Parliamentary Counsel state very clearly that this is the practice around Australia, and has always been undertaken here; that all revenue initiatives are combined in one bill. Attempting to split the components into separate bills to supposedly vote for some and against others, I believe, demonstrates a lack of understanding of the measures contained within them overall.
I note, for example, that amendments to the Stamp Duty Act and the Taxation Administration Act must be passed at the same time because both are required to implement the abolition of stamp duty on hiring arrangements. For these reasons, government opposes the motion and looks forward to passing the bill.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I move that so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent me for moving a motion as follows:
(a) the committee divide the Revenue (Budget Initiatives) Amendment Bill 2007 (Serial 95) into three bills; namely:
(i) Stamp Duty Amendment Bill;
(iii) First Home Owner Grant Amendment Bill;
I have outlined the reason for this. Contained within this bill are three very separate components. If we are able to assess them each on their own individual merits, there may well be the capacity for some contribution to be made to adjustments, or assessment being made as to the suitability of, particularly, the matter related to stamp duty on conveyancing of non-real property. This matter was raised during estimates. Whilst the explanations provided by the Taxation Commissioner satisfy in a logical sense, when you probe deeply, you raise the concern that, when those interested in collecting taxes refer to the sharpening and refining of definitions, it sounds to me that it is an endeavour to suit the purposes of the tax collecting agency - akin to a butcher sharpening a knife.
There are some concerns in the tightening of these definitions. It serves to strengthen the capacity of the Treasurer to collect taxes by changing the definitions of that which can be regarded as property. It effectively now includes goodwill, and has the capacity for goodwill to be taxed. It is matters such as this that need to be raised. We have raised it with a number of sectors, and they are concerned about it. If it were not for the opposition raising these matters and seeing how these could possibly apply - particularly to the pastoral industry and, more importantly, the mining industry - these things just happen and then they find out in due course. Then, that causes some issues for government as they endeavour to catch up with the impact that befalls those who are endeavouring to contribute to the economy through their own endeavours.
It is for that reason we ask and seek support of honourable members to have the bill separated, so that we can assess each on its merit. We have no problems whatsoever with two of those elements - one will do. I urge members to support of the motion.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, it is probably necessary to go into a little detail around this bill so that the member for Blain has a more comprehensive understanding of it. The amendments provide legislative guidance on the application of the current legislation imposing stamp duty on the full value of property. It does not operate, as you just claimed, to make business goodwill, or information, taxable as part of the value of land. In most cases, the transfer of goodwill and mining information is already the subject of stamp duty so there is no change.
He is saying this bill will tax goodwill; it already does. The treatment of information relating to dutiable property is consistent with the current treatment. The Valuer-General has confirmed that the amendments clarify that valuation under the legislation is in accordance with accepted valuation practice.
A bit of history here for the member for the Blain, just to suggest to him where he is treading. In 1988, the Country Liberal Party government amended the stamp duty legislation so that stamp duty was imposed on the full value of land. This was done to counter an avoidance practice whereby some value attributable to the land could be artificially apportioned to site goodwill. Site goodwill is attributes of the land which may influence its value, such as the land being in a desirable location. Despite this change, avoidance activity is still being experienced whereby inflated values are being attributed to non-dutiable property. As far back as 1988, which in my estimation is 19 years ago, the then Country Liberal Party government recognised this as an opportunity for tax avoidance and moved to strengthen it. This amendment is doing no more than the 1988 amendments attempted to do then.
This proposed amendment is being made to provide guidance in the legislation that the full value of land is to be determined for stamp duty purposes according to ordinary valuation principles; that is, it inserts statutory rules that confirm current practice. It has not been made with any one industry or transaction in mind. It does not result in the goodwill of the business conducted on land, or information about the land, being taxed as part of the value of the land. It merely requires, as a matter of ordinary valuation practice, that a valuer recognises that some land is more valuable because it has commercial advantages, such as site goodwill, attached to aspects or attributes of the land.
For example, land on which a business is operated, or could be operated, is more valuable than similar land on which there is no business, or is not zoned for commercial use. Land zoned for multi—storey developments is more valuable than land zoned for a single dwelling. Waterfront land is more valuable than non-waterfront. That is consistent with a number of court cases which have held that the value of goodwill generated by a business conducted on land is separate from, and not included in, the value of the land. However, those cases have recognised the businesses do enhance the value of the land on which they are conducted. In most cases, the transfer of goodwill and information is already subject to stamp duty.
The CLP government amended the stamp duty legislation in 1991 to tax information about mining tenements as if it is part of the mining tenement. The change was made in response to avoidance activity involving significant value being apportioned from the mining tenement to associated mining information. The proposed amendments clarify the ordinary valuation practice that any information which enhances the value of the land is to be taken into account when determining the value of the land.
In valuing land, it will be assumed a reasonable purchaser possesses knowledge of all existing information relating to the land so the value of the land will not be reduced by the cost to acquire this information. This reflects ordinary valuation practice. For example, a mining tenement which has proven extractable mineral deposits is more valuable than one which has not been explored. When a separate value is attributed to information relevant to the value of property, the value attributed to this information will be included in the value of the property and the information will not be treated as separate from the property. It is consistent with how mining information is currently treated, with the information being included in the definition of land.
The Valuer-General of the Northern Territory was consulted during the drafting of the valuation provisions. The Valuer-General believes that the provisions reflect accepted valuation practices. The Valuer-General also indicated that the provisions are consistent with the International Valuation Standards Committee definitions of market value, and that the value of land should be assessed at the highest and best use of the property, whether that is the current use or a potential use that is more valuable than the existing use.
The member for Blain pointed the finger at the Commissioner of Taxation and said he is sharpening the sword. No more than the CLP did in 1988 and in 1991. This is a move that is fully accepted and judged as the proper thing to do. This only reflects accepted valuation practice by none other than the Valuer-General of the Northern Territory. If the member for Blain opposes this legislation, he opposes what the CLP tried to do in 1988 and in 1991, and he opposes the views of none other than the Valuer-General of the Northern Territory.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, the briefing that was just read to reinforce the position of the Treasurer still does not answer the fundamental question. First, I will deal with the argument that this occurred in the past. Because it occurred under the CLP and I am CLP, therefore it is good and I must support it. That does not necessarily follow. Therefore, I can dispense with that.
Second, if this was in place, as it has been, as the Treasurer reports, and it is no different from measures that have been applied in the past, then why on earth are we bringing this bill if there is no change to what has been previous practice? If it is a matter that has been brought in because it attends to a problem that we are troubled by, that is a different matter. However, there is no reference to any existing internal problem that gives rise to the need for this legislative fix. That issue was raised during estimates as well.
I remain unconvinced that there is a pre-existing problem that requires a legislative fix. If there were measures in the past that were in place to meet the needs of Treasury‘s capacity to impose duties on conveyancing of non-real property, then why do we have to further tighten the definition? I imagine it is for only one purpose; that is, to suit the purposes of the Treasurer. From what I understand from the briefings that we received during estimates, there was no existing problem to be addressed that has given rise to this change. It is just an alteration to tighten up a definition to suit the future purposes of Treasury. For that reason, I ask that the bill be separated so that we can attend to the matters in order and give proper debate to this important revenue bill.
Motion negatived.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly at its rising adjourn until Tuesday, 21 August 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.
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Madam SPEAKER: Before I call you, member for Greatorex, I acknowledge that this is the last time that the member for Greatorex will be present in this House. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend warm wishes for your retirement, member for Greatorex. I was saddened to hear that your wife, Sharon, is unwell and that your parents are unwell. I hope that retirement brings you great happiness with your family.
I would also like to say that I have given indulgence to the member for Greatorex to speak for 20 minutes rather than 15 for this speech.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Thank you, Madam Speaker, I appreciate that. I thank you for your words of farewell; I truly appreciate it.
Madam Speaker, you know that I try to utilise the adjournment speeches to comment or raise issues relevant to my electorate of Greatorex or the Northern Territory. Tonight though, I rise not to raise more issues, but to bid my farewell to the Legislative Assembly, my colleagues, present and past, and to the people who have worked with me since my first election on 4 June 1994.
On midnight, 9 July 2007, I will step down as the member for Greatorex. Thirteen years since I was first elected, and 13 years before that, to the day, my family and I moved to Alice Springs. Thirteen seems a good number.
Where does one start a farewell speech, Madam Speaker - at a beginning or at the end? Why did I get into politics in the first place and how did it happen? I got into politics because I thought I could make a difference. I wanted to make a difference and, as a medical practitioner, I could make a difference with, at best, some 2000 families in any one year. In politics, especially in government, one good policy could affect, in a positive way, many Territorians and, directly or indirectly, many other people on a national scale. However, one does not have to be in government to influence change. Did I make a difference? Yes, I did. I believe I did.
I wanted to be a good member of parliament. I wanted, and still do want, to be an agent of positive social change. This is, I believe, what being a member of parliament is all about. I also know that politics is a business of compromise and, therefore, it was absolutely important for me to stay focused on my own targets. I believe I was elected to represent the electorate but, at the same time, to be a community leader.
How does one be a representative that is a follower and, at the same time, a leader? In my mind, a good member of parliament is one who is able to find the fine balance between the two - knowing when to follow and when to lead. I try to hold to my core values, not sway with the electoral wind in any which way it blows, voting one way because the electorate instructed me and, at another time, voting in the opposite way on the same issue when the electorate demanded that of me.
My desire, in and out of politics, has been, and will be, to do what I could do to promote equity - equity of access to the unlimited opportunities that the Territory and Australia have to offer. It is not good enough for us in this parliament to say that we create opportunities for people. Are these opportunities accessible? We might as well have no opportunities if there is no access to opportunities. People who belong to minority groups will know full well what I mean about the inequality of access to opportunities.
This focus has served me well through the 13 years as the member for Greatorex. It helped me serve the electorate of Greatorex as a good local and very parochial member. It made me put the interests of constituents very much in the forefront of what I do for the electorate. I have worked hard for them, sometimes to the detriment and sacrifice of my family – James, you should not have done that. I was pretty well composed until you did that …
A member: You are making me cry.
Dr LIM: Let us let it go at that. I have worked hard for my electorate. Sometimes – this is so silly of me. I do not know whether to laugh or cry. Anyway, there is a big sacrifice to family.
Without Sharon at my side through our married life of 33 years, and when we first - do not go - joined the Country Liberal Party 24 years ago, I could not have achieved the things I have. Her support goes beyond anything that I have any right to expect. We both joined as members of the Alice Springs Branch of the CLP in 1983, then the only branch in Alice Springs. Climbing through the ranks, Sharon was on management with Josephine Stone and formed the Country Liberal Women, and was its inaugural chair. In the meantime, I became the party’s vice president for a total of six years, until becoming the preselected candidate for Greatorex in 1994. I served the party president, Shane Stone, a former Chief Minister, Gary Nairn, the current federal Minister of State, and Suzanne Cavanagh.
The CLP class of ’94 included the six members who were elected then: the former member for Brennan, Denis Burke, the former member for Millner, Phillip Mitchell, the former member for Daly, Tim Baldwin ...
Mrs Miller: The rat pack!
Dr LIM: It was! … the former member for Casuarina, Peter Adamson, the member for Braitling, and me. Stupid me, the last of the class of ‘94, am still here – still from the CLP. We started in June 1994 in the temporary Parliament House across the road we call the Chan Building, moving across here to this House in October that year. I remember it was a very special occasion.
After the general election in 1994, Sharon and I formed the small branch of Greatorex with the support of many loyal friends such as Brendan and Bev Heenan, Bronwyn Adami, Brian Corcoran, Terry and the late Norma Leigh, Brian and Fran Marlor, Colin and Joy Saunders, Ian and Francois Builder, David Forrest, Michael Jones, and many other branch members. We rebuilt the Greatorex Branch - we really did - into a thriving, cashed-up branch with over 100 members. It took on the responsibilities of other electorates – initially, the electorate of Macdonnell in Alice Springs - eventually amalgamating with the other branches serving Central Australia to, once again, become a single branch in the Centre. In the same period, I served in government under Chief Ministers Marshall Perron, Shane Stone, and Denis Burke.
One of my most memorable occasions during debates in this House was on the Rights of the Terminally Ill Bill in 1995 where, as a brand new member of nine months, I was thrown into the deep end, debating in committee stage the two most senior members of the Assembly, the then Chief Minister, Marshall Perron, and the then Leader of the Opposition, Brian Ede. The marathon debate started about 10.30 am or 11 am and went unabated until about 4 am the next morning. It is all in the Parliamentary Record. After it became law and after Marshall Perron retired and went on the speaking circuit around the country, I was privileged to go to many of the venues he spoke at, to present an opposing view – fortunately, not at the same time. For a member of parliament, wet behind the ears, that was a great and sobering experience.
My most rewarding experiences as the member for Greatorex are the times when I was able to successfully intervene on behalf of constituents. The satisfaction of being able to help constituents far surpasses that of becoming a minister of the Crown. By the same token, it was a distinct privilege to be the first person of Chinese ethnicity, born overseas or in this country, to be a Cabinet Minister and, before that, to be elected to the Lower House in any jurisdiction in Australia.
As minister, I had responsibility for Housing, Local Government and Central Australia. While from the backbench, I could influence change, as a minister I could effect change. Three changes come to mind as those I made, each as the minister for Housing, Local Government and Central Australia. As Minister for Housing, we commenced the Papunya model of house construction with contractors undertaking trainees and implementing skills transfer to the community in which they were building. As Minister for Local Government, I brought together Tiwi Island local government. While there may be criticism that it did not work well, in my defence, had the CLP won the subsequent election, I would have continued to nurture the fledgling council to ensure its success. History will judge how much nurturing it received from the Martin Labor government during those early years. Through my capacity as the Minister for Central Australia, I called and chaired one of the first alcohol summits in Alice Springs in recent memory, at which the former member for Stuart was present. I repeat, as minister one can effect change. Those now in government and in the ministry will understand what I mean. Use your powers well.
The support of dragon boat racing was initiated when I was the parliamentary secretary to the Chief Minister and to Cabinet. Through Austin Chin, my co-patron of Dragon Boat NT, and his encouragement and hard work with private and government support, we were able to generate sufficient interest to establish dragon boat racing in Darwin. Accompanied by Daryl Manzie, the then Minister for Asian Relations and Trade, as a novice team we went to Sabah, winning the gold medal in the international challenge. Dragon boat paddling has gone from strength to strength in the Northern Territory and, through it, the formation of the Pink Ladies which now has gone international.
I have been privileged to be adopted by the Chung Wah Society. Its president, Adam Lowe, invited me to be involved. I became its vice president for several years. Through that involvement, I made very strong friendships within the Chinese community, and was given the privilege of learning its history and connection in the Territory’s social and business fabric.
I must mention Daryl Chin, and his wife, Lisa, and their three children. Thank you for taking me into your family. Then there is Henry Yap and Jason Lee and the Jape family, in particular Alan Jape. I must mention here my dinner group: Bruce Sampson, Leslie Allaway, Jennifer Xi, Stephanie Zhang and Peter Wignell. Thank you all for your friendship.
Through the Chung Wah Society and the Chinese community, we have introduced the very successful Moon Festival. About 1100 people attended the very first function at the Darwin High School hall in 1998 and, the next year, over 1400 people squeezed into the Foskey Pavilion. We started the traditional blessing of Parliament House each Chinese New Year, and the blessing of the Chamber at the start of each year’s sittings of parliament. This is, in part, recognition of the significant contribution the Chinese have made in the Territory since the middle 1800s. This is the only parliament in Australia in which this significant blessing takes place during Chinese New Year celebrations each year, so I feel privileged that it happened during my watch.
In the same period of over a decade, blessings have gone to Alice Springs to share with the people of Alice Springs Chinese New Year celebrations. I trust that this parliament will continue to honour the Chinese in the Northern Territory by these events and allow future members of Greatorex to lead the lion into the Chamber. In my life after politics, I will, among other things, focus on establishing a support group in Alice Springs to cater for its growing Chinese population.
To be in opposition is not much fun, especially when down to only four members. However, to my opposition colleagues, I encourage the team to always look forward and stay true as Territorians. Believe, as Eleanor Roosevelt said: ‘The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams’.
Madam Speaker, even from opposition we can achieve things and, truly, we have. Being in opposition has made me a better member of parliament. I have learnt new skills in opposition and have enjoyed the opportunity that few in this room have experienced. I have been a backbencher in government. I have been a minister in Cabinet. I am now in opposition with 10 shadow responsibilities for which I have to do my own research and investigations. Government briefings are not particularly useful when officers hide more than they tell during the briefings. However, if one listens closely, they reveal more by what they do not tell than what they do.
Yes, I have learnt to be a better member of parliament since coming to opposition, and this observation is correct, as you can clearly see by the performances of the members in government. The members for Nhulunbuy and Wanguri were in opposition for a long while, and they are now the most effective members of government.
To give my colleagues encouragement, let me say that not only can the opposition embarrass the government into action - and we have seen evidence of that, for example in education, health and community service fields - we can also bring about positive social change by mere persistence through our debates. I believe the concentrated efforts of the opposition have improved working conditions and salary scales for Territory teachers and nurses. The campaigns that we waged on behalf of teachers just before the last election made a difference. The campaign in support of nurses during their last negotiation with government enabled them to secure a satisfactory outcome from themselves, and forced government to recognise that the establishment numbers for nurses are well short of what is required.
I also refer to MARVIN and cord blood harvesting projects. Both these projects came to my attention in the latter days of the CLP government. In opposition, I continued my support for these projects and raised them repeatedly in debates. They finally came to fruition, even though MARVIN took nearly three years to achieve any status, and cord blood harvesting only last year. It could have been implemented much earlier had the government been more capable during those early days. They are now in place and they will continue to benefit the Territory and humanity in general for generations to come. I am satisfied.
As a member of the Information Management Advisory Committee, the opposition has been able to influence changes in the way the Assembly has adopted information technology. Deputy Clerk, David Horton, and the Director of Parliamentary Services, Vicki Long, will be happy now; they will not have to listen any more to the noisy demanding member who uses IT to the max.
Madam Speaker, I cannot, in my last adjournment, refrain from addressing the Commonwealth government’s looming winding back on the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act. After almost 30 years of self-government, during which Territorians pushed for more constitutional powers, we have this government going down in history as the one which gave cause for self-government to be wound back. I hope this will never be repeated.
The Martin Labor government was elected with an overwhelming mandate to deal with indigenous issues. The fact that there are six members of indigenous descent says it all. However, the government failed, especially in the matter of child sexual abuse. I add that the CLP has nothing to be proud of but, with the financial resources this government has, it failed the very people to whom they promised much and delivered little.
I am glad that the Commonwealth government has intervened. I believe they will be here for the long haul to make generational change.
As a local member, there will always be things to do in the electorate, and there is always unfinished business. However, it is time I passed on the baton - I hope to another person with commitment, energy and enthusiasm to carry on with his or her brand of service to the electorate. I will be there to support this person if it happens that the CLP retains the seat.
In closing - and I am sorry, Madam Speaker, that my time is running out - I seek leave to incorporate the rest of my speech, if I may?
Madam SPEAKER: How much longer do you think you have there, member for Greatorex?
Dr LIM: A couple of pages, that is all - not much. About another three minutes.
Madam SPEAKER: I will indulge you, member for Greatorex.
Dr LIM: Thank you, Madam Speaker, I appreciate that. James, it is still your fault.
In closing, I thank the Clerk, Ian McNeill and staff of the Legislative Assembly for their support, their patience and understanding, and making every effort to ensure that my work could be done with as little interference as possible. In those 13 years, I have made some good friends in the Assembly. I will treasure my friendships with Clerk-Assistant, Graham Gadd, affectionately called Gaddy, and Serjeant-at-Arms, Helen Allmich; directors of committees, Pat Hancock and Terry Hanley; Parliamentary Liaison, Jan Sporn; Table Office Manager, Steve Stokes or Stokesy; Maintenance Officer, Tony Hibberd; and Office Services Manager, Mary-Anne Almond. To all of you, named and unnamed, including Rex Schoolmeester, Maria Viegas, Jo Carbone, Anna-Maria Socci, Sonny Rachman, Alice Tsang, Jan Bradley, Lorraine Caldwell, Liz McFarlane, Samantha Day-Johnston and all her security crew, and all at Hansard, I say thank you.
I have had a wonderful line-up of very capable electorate officers, especially Jacky Jessop, Caroll Cailler and Donna Ellice, and the regular locum officers, Bev Ayres, Chris Cope and Chris Potts. A local member’s work could never be done without the unstinting devotion of our electorate officers. I want to thank them all for their loyalty and dedication to the work and my ethos as a local member, even at the most difficult of times. My electorate officers were very well supported by the capable staff at the Leader of the Opposition’s office: James Lantry, Kylie Silvey, John Elferink, a fellow member of parliament for nearly eight years - miss you here, mate, miss you here. Greg Charter, I will miss our happy repartee, but especially your good advice on media. And my young cuz, Rebecca McAlear. Where are you? Hey, cuz! You know what I mean - thank you all. James worked with me during the last election campaign in Alice Springs. His recruitment into the Leader of the Opposition’s office was a godsend. His strength and focused approach have been of great benefit to our small team. He is a great team leader and I hope the Army Reserves soon realise that if they have not already. Kylie, without your skills we would still be designing things and looking for information with pen and paper. I will miss your happy face and dedication to work.
To my colleagues, especially the member for Araluen and Leader of the Opposition, Jodeen Carney; the member for Blain, Terry Mills; the member for Katherine, Fay Miller - it has been a great time working with you all. For a little team, we have kept the government accountable. I wish my CLP colleagues good hunting. The government’s flank is totally exposed - aim your barbs well. Without all their untiring support throughout these years, I would not have been the member that I have been. You have done me proud. Thank you all.
Most of all, I want to thank my wife, Sharon, who, as you all know, has been unwell for the past 12 months. Her illness has weighed heavily on our minds. She has provided me with unstinting, constant, patient and loyal companionship, and support that I should have no right to expect. We both got into politics, not realising the enormity of the job. It is now my turn to give her the support that she needs and together, enjoy our children, Kinta and Letisha and, hopefully, their children when they arrive; and also my son, Michael, his wife and his four children.
While I weep - and I do not know why – be happy for me. Seriously, be happy for me. I bid you all a fond farewell.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, the member for Greatorex always has an effect on this parliament. I am not sure whether there are too many dry eyes. It is fairly obviously that my friend and colleague, Dr Lim, became emotional when some people came into the gallery. They are the Lantry family. Hansard will be given a bottle of wine as a result of this reference. James Lantry is our Chief of Staff. We have an enormous number of young children in our office belonging to the staff. Most of them are under six, which is quite incredible.
Richard has, as we all do, a close association with James and his family. I know that James and Richard have gone through a lot, and have a very special relationship. As for James’ children, they refer to Richard as ‘Dr Richard’. They say: ‘Are we going to see Dr Richard today, Daddy?’ Whenever James goes to Alice Springs, they say: ‘Are you going to see Dr Richard?’ I think it was Isaac who had a sore arm. He got into a bit of strife at home or preschool. It was Dr Richard he wanted, and Dr Richard who bandaged up the arm and gave this little boy a sling, just like every little boy, and girl for that matter, would want.
The member for Greatorex has special relationships with many people, as you would when you have been in a place like this for a long time, and when you are the type of character that the member for Greatorex is. I believe it is great that people become emotional in this place, because this place should be a place of passion. It should be a place that experiences great happiness and great sadness. The member for Greatorex, quite rightly, becomes emotional on a number of very important issues, as we all do. However, it is great to have seen the trigger of the Lantry family. No doubt, James will get a few words later. It was very good of his family and our staff to come down for this important occasion. Thank you.
It must be difficult to say goodbye to parliament. I have only been here, five, coming up to six years, and my colleague, Richard Lim, has been a parliamentarian for 13 years. In fact, when I joined the CLP, it was Richard Lim who assisted me. He did everything he possibly could. I was a young member, and I knew I wanted to be a member of parliament. Richard gave me unprecedented assistance in those early days in Alice Springs. He warmly embraced me when I went to branch meetings, and was generous in everything he gave to me and, indeed, many other young politicians who wanted to be involved in the party. I thank you very much for that, Richard. I know you will continue to help many more young, and perhaps not so young, people in the party as well.
Richard was born in Malaysia. I say that because it provides some insight into him as a human being, and as a politician. The Malaysia Richard grew up in was a country of quotas, and the quota system discriminated against Chinese Malays. For bright young Chinese Malays, securing a place in university or the public service was not easy. In recognising the difficulties in fulfilling his potential under the quota system, Richard’s parents sent him to Australia to complete his education, and the Territory has gained as a result. As a result, it instilled in Richard a profound sense of equality of opportunity and a fierce determination - an incredible determination. Those qualities, of course, have served him well in his career as both a doctor and a member of parliament.
You might not always agree with Richard Lim, but it is impossible to deny his passion and commitment. All of us have seen that in this place. As a novice parliamentarian, Richard followed his conscience and, when the then Chief Minister, Marshall Perron, introduced legislation to legalise voluntary euthanasia in the Territory, not only did Richard oppose the legislative changes his Chief Minister was sponsoring, but he travelled the Territory and, indeed, the nation, arguing the no case. I know that Richard continues to feel strongly and passionately about that issue.
I remember not long after I was preselected, getting a phone call from Marshall Perron. It was assumed by Marshall that I supported his view on euthanasia. He should have asked. After I was preselected he asked me what my view was. My view is the same as Richard’s. Richard and I did not talk about euthanasia until a couple of years ago, and I think he was a little surprised my view was exactly the same as his, and as passionately held on the issue of euthanasia.
People in this place, regardless of their party allegiances, should be independent and strong. Richard is both of those things. His compassion is well known and respected. People will remember that in the terrible aftermath of the Bali bombings, Dr Richard went straight to the Royal Darwin Hospital to help with the injured. That speaks volumes about his compassion and his willingness to help others. It is a knee-jerk response for Dr Lim.
In terms of our team, we will miss a wealth of experience. We will lose the only person in our very small team who has been a minister of the Crown, sadly. We do not know whether any of us will ever be ministers of the Crown, so we will not have someone in our team to ask the sort of questions that people who have not been ministers of the Crown might ask regarding Cabinet process and so on.
Over Richard’s career, I think his time in the CLP was about as good as you can get because he served under Perron, Stone and Burke - all very different and interesting politicians, men, characters - all of whom, in their very different ways, made significant contributions to the place in which we live.
I should correct something, Madam Speaker. I have a note in typical doctor’s handwriting from Dr Lim, which is almost as bad as mine. I understood that he did go to RDH. I am advised that he offered to go to RDH to help, but was not needed - my apologies, Richard.
To have served under Perron, Stone and Burke would have been a very interesting experience in itself. To have served in a party that governed the Northern Territory for such a long time must have been fascinating. Richard, more than Mrs Miller and Mr Mills and, certainly me, has really experienced the highs and lows of political parties but, in particular, the Country Liberal Party. He has been involved in the CLP for about 25 years, climbing his way through the ranks.
I remember the vision after the 2001 election of Denis Burke, Steve Dunham, Tim Baldwin and Richard Lim coming out of Government House after doing what was necessary after the loss. I felt for those men, whose pride meant a lot to them and who were the public face of the CLP’s election loss in 2001. However, all of them continued on in the best way they could, as did Richard.
Richard not only continued on, but continued on through thick and thin – and I am happy to say that it has not happened since 2005 - through that pretty awful period 2001 to 2005. Why it is that a politician of Richard’s standing and years of service did not throw it in and go fishing, I do not know. However, Richard Lim stood up and played a role in ensuring that our parliamentary team and our party did not sink any lower.
Richard really has experienced the highs and lows of politics. The highs have been very high and the lows have been very low in the past for the Country Liberal Party. No doubt, he will continue to take a great interest.
I described Richard the other day as a colourful politician, and he is. He is also a controversial politician. He has been ejected from parliament a few times over the years. He is colourful, and when you say ‘colourful’, you immediately think of the blessing of the Chamber every year, as Richard said, for which he was responsible for introducing to the parliament. Of course, it goes beyond the parliament; it travels down to Alice Springs, and Richard does his stuff under the dragon’s head …
Dr Lim: Lion.
Ms CARNEY: Lion, sorry, my apologies. The lion’s head in Alice Springs.
I would say, also, of Richard, that he is compassionate, passionate and he is hard-working. The CLP - and I know I speak on behalf of everyone in the CLP - is very thankful for his involvement over a 25-year period, 13 of which have been as a politician.
We wish you well, Richard, for your retirement. It is often said that you can tell a lot about a person by how clean their shoes are. I like people with clean shoes. It is the first thing I look at. Dr Lim always has very nicely polished shoes and can I say, Richard, that I wish you well such that when you knock off, you can take your highly polished shoes off and you can walk around in your runners. We wish you well.
Mr McADAM (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I also pay tribute to Dr Lim this evening. As indicated previously, it is 13 years since you were first elected. That, within itself, is a very great honour for any individual. It is fair to say you have faithfully represented the views of your constituents over that period. I guess the best judge of that are the people themselves, who, obviously, have great faith in you. One of the reasons why is that, occasionally, in my capacity as a minister, I get telephone calls from members of the opposition. It is fair to say that I probably get mostly e-mails and a few telephone calls from Dr Lim, particularly in respect to matters that were of concern to his constituents. That, to me, says something about a member of parliament; that he cares very much for his constituents.
The other thing I wish to say is that we all have our views, we are all of different persuasions and, sometimes, we forget about that in this House. However, it is fair to say, Richard, that you have represented your party in a very professional way. You have also represented your constituents, the people within your electorate. They are probably not constituents, they are probably more like friends, and I guess that would apply to all of us. As the Minister for Central Australia, we do share that in common. You were once a minister as I am now and, obviously, despite the political differences, we probably share the same ideals and commitment in trying to make a difference in the concerns of the people in that region and, indeed, across the Northern Territory.
I wish you all the very best for your future. I also wish all the very best to your wife, Sharon, and your family. In this House we are not always in control of the things that we do, for lots of obvious reasons. However, I also understand that you are a pilot, an aviator, and maybe that will give you the opportunity of a lifetime to take the controls once again. I wish all the very best to you and your family. I have no doubt that I will be seeing you in Alice Springs around the place, and I suspect that I might be getting a few more telephone calls and letters. I have a gut feeling that there might be a few other media events around the Alice. All the best.
Dr Lim: Thank you.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I need to make a few remarks - I hope I do not get all underdone again, Richard - because Richard and I are part of the class of ’94, and I see it passing before me. I have to admit, I seriously thought over the last 24 hours whether perhaps I should join Richard. However, I spoke to my family and they said: ‘Mum, no! What are you going to do? We have not planned for your retirement’. I think they had visions of me moving in with them or something.
Richard, I hope you have plans for your retirement, that you do the things that you have always wanted to do and that you needed to do but, perhaps, never did, because you were doing things for other people.
The class of ‘94 has certainly been a very colourful group. We have achieved a lot. We have done many things. Your contribution to the Northern Territory has to be acknowledged, because this particular group came in here, fresh, enthusiastic and, as we both have, been on both sides of the House. We have experienced the whole of political life, and that is probably something not many people want to do, but we have done it.
What I admire most about Richard is that he takes his work very seriously. He is quite a dedicated politician and electorate member. His constituents in his electorate will say that they only have to go to his office, and they can be reassured that if he can help them he will. That is what we are here for. We are not here for ourselves, but for the people who vote us in.
I remember when I first joined the CLP, I was almost terrified of Richard because he was one of the powerbrokers. He was such a strong force in the CLP. His wife, Sharon, in particular, was there standing so strong. I felt quite intimidated by the fact that there was such a strong party link there. It was interesting that there was this doctor from far away who came to Alice Springs and took such a strong interest and participation in a political party, obviously, with the intent of being able to contribute to the country that he had adopted as his own. Richard, you have done that.
I know that, sometimes, we have politically clashed. I guess we could say that of many of us in the House. However, I will always remember, Richard, that you were one of the first people to visit me when Graham passed away, and I will not forget that ever. Your concern for me was very obvious, and I appreciate that. Thank you. God, we are a lot of sooks here tonight. There are the little things like that that make you appreciate people and remember the strength of their character and personality.
Richard, look after Sharon - she is really important to you. Look after yourself first of all so that you both can enjoy your retirement together, because, really, the most important thing in your life is you and Sharon. So, good luck. Thank you on behalf of all Territorians for what you have done. I wish you well. I have to stop sooking.
Dr Lim: Thank you.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Speaker, and also add - not a long contribution, but a short one - for the member for Greatorex. I do not have the same length of career as the member for Braitling or the members of the opposition, or the time that they have spent with Dr Lim. However, I did spend a fair bit of time with him when I first came into this Chamber. I can say that I do not think that there was one time that I ever agreed with the views of Dr Lim. Even when we were on the sessional committee inquiring into substance abuse, there were many robust discussions and disagreements. Nevertheless, through those disagreements, you begin to understand that person. As part of that understanding, you develop a respect for that person’s view and their willingness to at least be brave enough to air those views. That is certainly something that I saw with the member for Greatorex.
I remember when I was first elected, I would listen to his contribution to debates, and walk out of this Chamber in complete frustration. I will not repeat what I used to say in that lobby but, nevertheless, it was with complete frustration. However, I remember when my son got into trouble and with a personal thing for me when I was seriously ill - which I do not think many people in this Chamber are aware of - I was very surprised at the kind words and the card and the message that I received from the member for Greatorex. We all have such busy and individual lives, and I suppose I do not get to talk much to the member for Greatorex. When I was going through all those struggles with my health a couple of years ago, I really appreciated, Richard, those kinds words to get well - certainly someone from whom I least expected. Madam Speaker, I certainly appreciated it and it went a long way.
Richard, to your wife, Sharon, and your family, they are getting you back. All of us with families know what they go through. I used to, certainly in my previous occupation, say politicians were overpaid; that they did not do much. Coming into this job you learn, and the people who do suffer as a consequence of us being in these positions are our families. Therefore, I thank your wife and your children.
Just quickly, I do not know how many members, both past and present, have ever seen Dr Lim in a pair of tights. I will keep that story for another day. On many of our trips when we were on the substance abuse committee, the times that I saw Dr Lim in running gear, and the member for Nelson as well. I used to tell them both to go back to their rooms because they would scare the whole community, because we not out there to scare the communities; we were out there to talk to the communities about the impact of substance abuse.
Richard, enjoy that retirement. You have added some contentious views but, as I said, I have not - and I do not think I have ever - agreed with some of them. There was one agreement I think we both had, and that was in relation to mandatory treatment and what needed to be done with alcohol abuse in the Northern Territory. Thank you, and I wish you well.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I advise the House that I have not seen the member for Greatorex wearing tights. And they are good legs.
We are put in a position where we have the opportunity to reflect on the contribution that a member has made. I have been impressed by Richard from the beginning, and I will go into that in some detail. However, what has always emanated from Richard is his desire to serve and work very hard to achieve an outcome, and to make a contribution. That has been a constant thing and a passionate desire of Richard. I have not met Richard’s dad but I know that Richard has conveyed to me that his dad has wondered why he left the medical profession and went into politics. I know why he did. It is his heart that has taken him there; he wanted to make a contribution. When Richard phoned me from Malaysia, I conveyed a message via Richard, which I told he must pass it on to his dad: ‘Dad, you should be proud of Richard’.
Richard has really stood up to principles and values and been earnest in his execution of things that he holds dear. He is hard-working. He is an inspiration in that respect. Not many people have the work ethic of Richard Lim. I am concerned about his retirement because he will not stop working in retirement. I often rebuked Richard about his hard work, about his work ethic and his tenacity - like a super ball, he just bounces; he has so much energy. That is such a good and precious thing to witness and be involved in, in a close working relationship. He is loyal - very loyal - and that is something that has impressed me. We do not often have the opportunity to assess the quality of loyalty. That has been a notable feature that has impressed me deeply. Richard is honest. Richard is not the sort of man who can comfortably tell a lie. That is something I admire more than anything; the capacity for honesty.
However, more importantly, right from the beginning, in a similar sense to the member for Braitling, when I entered the parliament, I tell you I was bewildered. It was overwhelming. I came in on a by-election at the same time as the member for Wanguri. The CLP was at its peak. There were lots of egos, and energies around the place, and I certainly came in to try to find my way of making a contribution.
I have to say that the climate at the time was one where there was a lot of energy focused on achieving politically, and I was at sea. I was not sure how it was meant to work and, because you come in on a by-election, you do not necessarily have the culture around you to inculcate you. You just come on in and away you go.
Richard took the time to assist me. He showed such kindness that I have never forgotten that. My mother noticed that kind man who was providing helpful advice. It was a special connection at that difficult early stage. That kindness is a very precious thing. I have had the privilege of working with Richard and getting to know him, and I value him deeply; the attributes he has shown are an inspiration to me. The times of the leadership and the deputy leadership were immensely difficult, and I could not have had the voice of anyone better beside me. I valued Richard’s constant counsel. He is able to provide good counsel, a doctor able to pierce through the issues and to provide very good advice. He does not beat around the bush but, because it is borne out of kindness and a clarity of mind, it is most useful.
I am going to say in one respect I will miss it, but I know, with the qualities Richard has, his phone will be picked up when I ring; something I will not abuse, but I will appreciate. His generosity is extraordinary. Small things are no problem. To go the extra mile; that has been consistent. I have never known him to withhold something he can give to someone else. Medical advice; it is extraordinary. I have a professional background but I do not remember everything. However, Richard seems to know just about everything which you ask. He just knows the answer. If the computer has gone a bit weird; you just have to turn around and Richard is able to fix it. He understands complex and technical things, and that is a rare skill. He is renowned around networks. If you cannot work out something, you phone Richard, as he is the person who will be able to give it a better shot than anyone I know of …
Mr Wood: Small fee!
Dr Lim: No, no.
Mr MILLS: No, never, advice is free.
When it comes down to practices in the parliament, legislative advice and corporate knowledge, his has all been immensely valuable. Sadly, I must say that it is only when it comes to the end - and I was asked last night whether Richard was going to retire or not and I said: ‘I do not know about that’, but I did know all the time. I have known for a little while and, in that time of dwelling on the fact that we travel through life and we do not always have the people around us forever.
It was in the last month or so that I was really able to recognise the value of Richard Lim. I notice we did the same with Peter Toyne. Peter Toyne left and, all of a sudden, we recognised the gem. Perhaps we draw could something from that and recognise who we have around us while they are still here.
Richard, you have a wonderful wife. As soon as I came into the party, she lobbied on your behalf straight up. She is a wonderful supporter and I admire that you are able to make this decision to stand beside her when she needs you most. To your mum and dad, as the eldest son, you have obligations which some of us do not understand. I respect those obligations you have discharged as best you can in a difficult time.
The attention to detail regarding your plan, your exit strategy, has been extraordinary. You have taken great care to leave no unfinished business which is a burden to others. You will make a tidy exit, and that is a demonstration of the care that you have demonstrated all the way through for those who have an eye to see. Sometimes, we do not notice these things, but I have noticed, Richard. Finally, Bapak Richard, orang baik. Selamat jalan.
Dr Lim: Terima kasih.
Mr HENDERSON (Wanguri): Mr Deputy Speaker, I, too, would like to acknowledge the very significant contribution that Richard Lim has made to Territory politics, and particularly the parliament, over 13 years - but 25 years in politics in the Northern Territory. For our Westminster system to be effective, there really does need to be a contest of ideas, and 25 years is a long time to put such energy and commitment into a political party. I certainly recognise, Richard, that that is a significant contribution to the Northern Territory and the contest of ideas over those 25 years.
I do not know Richard Lim well personally but, certainly politically, I have known him for the 20 years that I have been involved in politics in the Northern Territory, and the eight years that I have been in this House. By way of observation, I concur that Richard is recognised, particularly in Alice Springs and in his electorate - I have friends, through my wife in Alice Springs - as being an extraordinarily hard worker at an electorate level. As somebody has said in contribution tonight, which is very true, it is a very great honour to represent your constituents. Reading your comments in the Northern Territory News today about the greatest satisfaction that you have had in your time in the job is to represent your constituents, and to take on their issues and causes and try to resolve them, I concur with that. That is the greatest satisfaction I get in this job - working on behalf of my constituents to try to resolve their individual issues.
Thirteen years – that is a lot of sausage sizzles. That is a lot of money spent on sausages over 13 years. If I get the chance to be like Richard Lim and I am in here that long – I am adding up the number of sausages that I buy - it runs into the many thousands. That is a lot of sausage sizzles, a lot of doorknocking, a lot of staying in touch with people, and a lot of memories. I am sure, Richard, you will have many great memories to take into retirement.
Not only a hard worker electorally, you have been a very hard worker in here. As the member for Blain just said, we came in after a by-election in 1999. I was on that side. In fact, I used to sit in that chair, Dr Lim. For the two years in opposition, it was obvious that you worked very hard in your role. Now, in opposition, in contributing to debate in this House, there are very few debates that we have on ministerial statements or legislation where you do not make a contribution. I might disagree with your contribution, but you have stood here, you have put the work in, and you have made that contribution. I acknowledge that you have made a big contribution to the debate.
Politics is played hard. You played the game hard and you have been ruthless. That is a recognition in the political game; that is not a word that should be taken in any way with animosity. Politics is a ruthless game, and you have certainly been ruthless in the way that you have played the game. Politics is played hard and I respect you for the way that you have made that contribution. Over those 25 years - as I said, I have been in politics for 20 years in the Northern Territory - both of our parties have had our ups and downs. However, you have been an unfailing supporter for the CLP, and carrying that standard and the ideals of the CLP, you have never let that drop. I respect you for the way that you have carried the colours of your party over those 25 years.
Richard, I wish you and your family well. Enjoy the time back with your family. As everybody here knows, it is the people we hurt most when we taken on the responsibilities and the honour of the role we have. It is our family that really does wave goodbye to us for such a long time. I do not know your family personally, but I wish you, Sharon, and your family well, and good luck in your retirement.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Deputy Speaker, I also wish Richard all the very best in his retirement - or his retirement from politics, I should say. I cannot picture this man ever using that word …
Mr Wood: Point of order! That does not apply to the member for Greatorex. You cannot use it.
Mrs MILLER: Is that the wrong word?
Mr Wood: Sorry, I take that back.
Mrs MILLER: It is not a word that is appropriate. Retirement, I do not think, in the true sense of the word, would ever come into the member for Greatorex’s vocabulary. I just cannot picture it.
The first time I met Richard Lim - and I am going to call him Richard Lim tonight – it was in about the year 2000. I was an alderman on Katherine Town Council and the Mayor, Jim Forscutt, phoned us and said: ‘We have a very special visitor coming to see us to discuss local government. Can you all be here?’ ‘Yes. Who is it?’ ‘It is the Minister for Local Government’. We all made sure that we took time off from our respective businesses and went to bow to the Minister for Local Government …
Dr Lim: Oh, no, we sat round around the table.
Mrs MILLER: Mayor Jim Forscutt was very chuffed that the Minister for Local Government had made a visit to Katherine Town Council and had listened to the concerns of the aldermen of Katherine Town Council. He did say it was the first time ever that he had had a Minister for Local Government visit. That just goes to show the character of this man - and your dedication, Richard, to your position.
Several of the speakers have spoken about by-elections, and that happens to be how I am standing here, after a by-election in 2003. I wondered what on earth I had struck when I came across Richard Lim. He was the deputy at the time, and I could not believe the amount of energy this man had. It was a flurry of paper in the morning. The minute we had a wing meeting, of which I had no understanding of the process at all, Richard had all of the day’s agenda worked out; ‘This is what we were doing’. He made sure everybody was totally organised all of the time. I was a little in awe of him and, I think, a little scared of him when I first came in because you had so much knowledge, Richard - and so much experience from being in this place.
It would have been a very difficult time for you, because it was after the 2001 defeat of the Country Liberal Party. You were very conscientious as a minister and then, to be in opposition and to be a shadow minister would have been an extremely difficult position for you to have been in. I have never ever been in a position on that side of the House, but I can imagine the difference it would have been then, coming onto this side to the opposition. For the short time that you were the minister, I know that your dedication to that position was very much appreciated, especially by the Katherine Town Council, because you were genuine in your enthusiasm.
The day that you visited, I will remember well, because I believe there were four aldermen and the mayor who met in the committee room. Richard, being very enthusiastic and diligent, was sitting on the edge of his seat. We were all lounged back, listening and wanting to put our point of view to this minister, and he was seated on the edge of his seat, pen and paper, furiously writing the whole time he was there. We felt somebody had listened to us and was genuinely listening to the problems and concerns that we had as Katherine Town Council. We really did appreciate it at that time.
Since I have been in this House, I have appreciated the assistance and advice you have given me, Richard. I will never in a million years have the experience and the knowledge you have. I can get an e-mail from you at 11.35 pm, and I wonder what on earth he was doing on a Saturday or Sunday night at 11.35 pm; I must speak to him. Perhaps he needs to get a life. That used to worry me.
However, he is totally committed to what he does. Conscientious is a word used by other members in this House tonight, and you do know the true meaning of being conscientious, Richard. You are also extremely loyal and that is a quality I value in somebody. It does not matter what your belief is, you are loyal and conscientious to it. I really respect that. I know whatever you do in you life, you will always be conscientious and very loyal. I know you will always be loyal to the Country Liberal Party, and to your family, which you have displayed, especially with the illnesses of your parents and Sharon. Your loyalty to your family has now taken precedence, as it should, to your position in the Country Liberal Party and on the opposition.
You do not miss a trick, and you are always in the right place at the right time. Last year, when I had my car accident north of Alice Springs, I remember looking at this face in the Alice Springs Hospital. I cannot say on the Parliamentary Record what he actually said, as I would not be allowed to say it, but it was something like: ‘Um hmm hmm, you are so um hmm hmm’, and it ended with ‘lucky’. There were a lot of expletives through that, but he was shaking his head, looking at me with a broken neck, and being very concerned - sincerely concerned. When Richard had a look at my MRI scans and X-rays, I had an honest opinion, which I knew I would get. It was: ‘Do not move, just do not move’. Richard, it was very comforting to have you there at that time, both you and Sharon, and it was a pity I could not take you with me to Adelaide. I appreciated it so very much.
One thing which does concern me is what you going are to do with all those hats when you clean out your office. Over the years, Richard has collected a lot of memorabilia from his trips away, and from different experience he has had. His life for the last 20 years, I would suggest, can be told through his hats. I think the first domestic you will have with Sharon when you get home is where you are going to put those hats. I am sure it will be an interesting discussion. I will call it a high-level discussion that you will have. However, knowing you, you will appreciate and respect that they will be in a tidy place in the house somewhere and not collecting dust.
Richard, I really do wish you and Sharon, your daughters, and your son and his wife and family, all the very best in whatever you chose to do from this point on. It certainly will not be retirement, and I know that. You know we are going to miss your bundle of energy around here. I certainly will, and I have no idea of how your shoes are going to be filled.
Dr Lim: Little shoes.
Mrs MILLER: No, they will have to be shiny shoes, I know that.
My sincere best wishes to you and Sharon, and your family. Keep in touch, and I am sure the phones will be ringing hot to you every now and then. You are very comforting with your advice and it has been a wonderful experience which we have really appreciated.
All the best, Richard.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): I promise not to cry, Mr Deputy Speaker, because I believe very much in water conservation.
I would like to say goodbye to Richard. I have known Richard in different stages of my political life: one as President of the Litchfield Shire Council; and as Deputy President of the Local Government Association. He would know very well we had our differences of opinion on amalgamations, but it seems like I keep doing it with the present government. That is all part of why we are in public office - because we are in this job to help people and to do the best we can. Of course, we do not always agree, but that does not mean we do not respect one another and enjoy one another’s company.
The member for Arafura pointed out great memories of you in a pair of tights. I do not have that personally, but I will always remember you after Shave Hair Day. It is pretty rare to see a Chinese person bald. It is not a sort of thing you see a lot. In my case, it runs in the family so it is no big deal. I remember when Richard was in the House and there was not a lot of hair there. I tell you it was not a pleasant sight. It was probably a lot better when he was the person who put on the Chinese dragon outfit, because then we did not see it. I will remember him for that as well. As he said, he introduced that to the opening of parliament and it is a great tradition. I do not know how much money I gave him, but I put a lot of IOUs in those little red envelopes.
Ms Carney interjecting.
Mr WOOD: That is right. There are a couple of other things Richard will always be remembered for. He certainly gave it all he could during debates. I did not always agree with him, but there is no doubt he had great passion when he put his point of view. Sometimes, when he was contributing to a fiery debate, even I got emotional, as you may well remember during a certain debate. At that time, he was maltreated in the manner in which some people spoke to him.
He also is an IT wizard. I know that because I visited him in his office - I do not know how many years ago, a couple of years ago. I could talk to the secretary but I could not talk to Richard because Richard had some other bloke there, with wires trying to connect up computers, and they had all sorts of things. I said hello to Richard, but I believe I did not say much more because he loves his IT; there is no doubt about that. Look in his office! It looks like something out of NASA with bits and pieces everywhere. He certainly loves that side of it.
Richard, you will be missed. Although people did not always agree with you, to me you are a character - not in a silly way; you are the sort of person parliament needs. It is a bit like some people complaining about football teams these days; that they are all the same. We do not even have any Jackos doing handstands in the goal square, or using a bit of biff. Parliament needs some characters to give it some life, otherwise, we may as well just put a bunch of robots here. Although, coming from an Independent’s point of view, when I see parties in the voting mode, it sometimes looks like a bunch of robots. However, that is another issue. I believe you will be missed for that. Not only did you bring different points of view, you raised debate. Maybe you threw in a few controversial phrases every now and again to bait the other side, but at least you got people to say something about the debate that was on hand at the time, and that was good.
To me, you will be missed for that reason. I will certainly miss you. I have been sitting next to you since the last election. I have been given private medical advice when I have been feeling a bit crook here - not billed which is good …
Dr Lim: Not billed, just bills.
Mr WOOD: No, not bills, but plenty of bills.
Also, we shared a bit of advice. You have more knowledge of parliamentary procedures than I, and that is one area I know you are very good on. The number of times you have stood and mentioned a clause from this fantastic book, Parliamentary Procedures. I think you just about know that book off by heart, as you were extremely good with your knowledge of parliamentary practice as well. For me, that was very beneficial.
All the best to your family. I do not know your family very well. I might have met your wife once, and your parents. It is good that you have made, in many ways, a big sacrifice, because your emotion shows that you love parliament, you love your job, but you have shown that you are willing to give that away for the benefit of your family. That is a very honourable thing to do.
There is one other thing I have to say. It is actually going to be in the form of a bit of protest tonight. I used to be Deputy Speaker too, Mr Deputy Speaker, and sat in that chair night after night. And what did the honourable member for Greatorex do? Every night he would do an adjournment debate. Well, as I have 10 minutes to go, I …
Members interjecting.
Mr WOOD: I was not going to do anything. What I will say, member for Greatorex, thank you for coming. Go and have your drinks. I forgot to stand up and give my comments about the Estimates Committee. I will give those. You do not have to listen to them.
Dr Lim: You are not allowed to do it now.
Mr WOOD: Trust you to say that.
Dr Lim: I will call a point of order on that.
Mr WOOD: Well, I will not talk about the Estimates Committee, I am just going to give my awards. That is all. I do not have any awards really, because the government has told me about the 3% efficiency dividend, which meant I do not have any money to give any, so I decided not to give any.
I thank very much all the staff who were involved in the estimates who did all the hard work. I thank the member for Brennan officially on behalf of the Independents, because he did an excellent job. Also, the member for Port Darwin, who took his place from time to time, and also Hansard, who must go through great agony trying to understand what I say because, even when I read the Daily Hansard, I have trouble understanding what I had to say. I thank them; they are bilingual up there.
Dr Lim: Multilingual.
Mr WOOD: … and multiskilled and I thank them very much. With that, and not having to put you through too much revenge, I would wish you all the best, and I am sure I will see you in Alice Springs in the near future.
Dr Lim: Thank you.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
MESSAGE FROM ADMINISTRATOR
Message No 21
Message No 21
Madam SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have received from his Honour the Administrator Message No 21, notifying assent to a bill passed in the June sittings of the Assembly.
RESPONSE TO PETITIONS
The CLERK: Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 100A, I inform honourable members that responses to Petition Nos 54 and 57 have been received and circulated to honourable members.
- Petition No 54
Open Road Speed Limit
Date presented: 17 April 2007
Presented by: Ms Carney
Referred to: Minister for Infrastructure and Transport
Date response due: 29 August 2007
Date response received: 29 June 2007
Date response presented: 29 June 2007
- Response:
- As you will no doubt be aware, the Northern Territory government has recognised the seriousness of the Territory’s ongoing poor road use culture and announced a package of road safety reforms to be implemented throughout 2007 to help reduce road fatalities and serious injuries. The first of the reforms, the introduction of a default speed limit on 110 km/h on rural roads and 130 km/h on the Stuart, Barkley, Arnhem and Victoria Highways, unless otherwise signposted, was introduced on 1 January 2007.
For road safety reforms to be effective, they must be an integrated evidence-driven package of complementary measures which address all three elements of sanctions, enforcement and education.
The introduction of speed limits is a fundamental element in the government’s efforts to change the poor road use culture in the Territory. Speed is a factor in all crashes, affecting both the likelihood of a crash occurring and the severity of any resulting injuries.
- Petition No 57
Repeal 130 km/h Speed Limit on Territory Roads
Date presented: 18 April 2007
Presented by: Dr Lim
Referred to: Minister for Infrastructure and Transport
Date response due: 29 August 2007
Date response received: 29 June 2007
Date response presented: 29 June 2007
- Response:
- As you will no doubt be aware, the Northern Territory government has recognised the seriousness of the Territory’s ongoing poor road use culture and announced a package of road safety reforms to be implemented throughout 2007 to help reduce road fatalities and serious injuries. The first of the reforms, the introduction of a default speed limit on 110 km/h on rural roads and 130 km/h on the Stuart, Barkley, Arnhem and Victoria Highways, unless otherwise signposted, was introduced on 1 January 2007.
For road safety reforms to be effective, they must be an integrated evidence-driven package of complementary measures which address all three elements of sanctions, enforcement and education.
The introduction of speed limits is a fundamental element in the government’s efforts to change the poor road use culture in the Territory. Speed is a factor in all crashes, affecting both the likelihood of a crash occurring and the severity of any resulting injuries.
APPROPRIATION BILL 2007-08
(Serial 94)
(Serial 94)
Continued from 21 June 2007.
In committee:
Mr CHAIRMAN: I call upon the Chairman of the Estimates Committee to present the report of the Estimates and Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committees.
Mr BURKE: Mr Chairman, I have pleasure in tabling the report of the Estimates Committee and the Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee, and its considerations of the estimates of proposed expenditure contained in the schedule to the Appropriation Bill 2007-08 (Serial 94).
I advise honourable members that any outstanding information, including outstanding answers from questions taken on notice, will be tabled during the August 2007 sittings of the Assembly. Upon receipt of outstanding answers, the committee secretariat will update the Questions Taken on Notice database. When completed, a composite set of questions and answers will be placed on the Legislative Assembly website.
The sixth public hearing of the Estimates Committee provided members with 45 hours to scrutinise the Appropriation Bill 2007-08. As members are fully aware, there have been occasions in the past where agencies have not been provided adequate appearance time before the committee and, in some cases, not appeared at all. The Standing Orders Committee took this issue on board and, in a letter to the committee, advised that all ministers would be restricted to an opening statement not exceeding five minutes in duration. The Standing Orders Committee also suggested that it may be an advantage to reconsider the prioritising of agencies as it related to the schedule of ministers’ appearances and the budget papers. The members of Estimates Committee took these suggestions on board. I reiterate the points raised in my opening address, and I quote:
- … members of the committee have reviewed the schedule of appearance over the last three years, paying particular attention to areas within agencies that may not have been provided adequate appearance time before the committee to date. As a result of this review, and by mutual agreement between all members of the committee, the decision has been taken to allocate priority status to the Darwin Port Corporation.
I also made the statement:
As there is a total of 45 hours which has been scheduled for minsters and agency officers to appear before this committee, I take this opportunity to remind all members it is incumbent upon them to maximise their time over the next four days so that all agencies are provided with the time frame which will enable thorough investigation of specific issues within their particular output groups.
Notwithstanding my previous comments, I personally thank the members of the Public Accounts Committee, who formed the core membership of the Estimates Committee, for the manner in which these public hearings have been conducted. I also place on record a vote of appreciation from the committee to all other members who participated in the public hearing process. On behalf of myself and the Deputy Chair for these proceedings, I thank all members, ministers and those who sat on the committee at various times, for your cooperation throughout. It certainly made the job of Chair a lot easier.
I also thank the Legislative Assembly staff who worked tirelessly behind the scenes to ensure the whole process ran smoothly, particularly the Table Office and Hansard for their prompt delivery of the Daily Hansard rushes during the day. In particular, I thank Terry Hanley; Joanne Burgess; Maria Viegas; Brian Cook; Kellie Trout; Pat Hancock and Kim Cowcher from Parliamentary Committees; Graham Gadd, Steve Stokes and Annette Brown from the Table Office; and Helen Allmich, Robyn Smith, Elizabeth Olajos and Sue Gray from Hansard.
Mr Chairman, there were 61 questions taken on notice this year, which is slightly up on last year, but I believe it is a reflection of the level of integrity of the questions being asked. There have been 25 answers provided over the course of the four days but, with the tight time frame from the completion of the Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee and the opening of this session of the Assembly, it means that the secretariat will follow up those remaining answers and table a composite document during the August sittings.
In addition to these questions, there was one question taken on notice during the Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee hearing this morning, and the response to this question was reported back to the committee prior to the closure of the public hearing.
I acknowledge the Government Owned Corporation Scrutiny Committee which sat for the sixth time. Power and Water Corporation officials provided members with valuable insight into the operation of the organisation. I place on record in this Chamber the committee’s appreciation of the time and effort put in by Mr Neil Philip, Chairman of the Board, and Mr Andrew Macrides, Managing Director, as well as the team of people they, no doubt, had working with them.
Mr Chairman, I have a few awards to announce as part of my report. I will not steal the thunder of the Opposition Leader, who presented an award of her own during the sittings of the committee. I would like to give an award for most surprised look, which goes to the Opposition Leader when told that the microphone she was singing to was actually live and broadcasting. The quickest bolt from estimates would have to go to minister McAdam, who immediately left estimates to board a plane for Brisbane for a meeting with the Prime Minister and Chief Minister. For best synchronised tag team questioning, possibly also best example of short-term memory, to the members for Nelson and Katherine who, during questioning of minister Scrymgour on parks and reserves conservation management program, remembered a series of final questions whilst the other was on their final question. The friendliest session would have to, again, go to the session in which minister Scrymgour presented, proving once again that in the Northern Territory we like our natural resources and environment ministers frilled not grilled.
For services to the measuring industry, or perhaps raising awareness of executive office envy, to the members of the opposition. In the military, when you go out for some time, as well as the rations, most seasoned soldiers will take something a bit special for themselves to nibble on while they are out bush. These are referred to as jack rations. For the best jack rations for the sittings of the committees, that award goes to my deputy chair, the member for Port Darwin.
Prior to commending the report to the committee, may I inform the Assembly that my office on Level 5 is 23.1 m2, the en suite is 7 m, and the reception area is 16.4 m. I commend the report to the committee.
Mr CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr Chair. Honourable members, pursuant to the resolution of the Assembly dated 20 June 2007, the committee has before it for consideration the Appropriation Bill 2007-08 (Serial 94) and the reports of the Estimates Committee and the Government Owned Corporations Scrutiny Committee.
The question is that the proposed expenditure be agreed to, and that the resolutions for expressions of opinion as agreed to by the committee in relation to the proposed expenditure for the output with reference to the Appropriation Bill 2007-08 (Serial 94); all the activities, performances, practices and financial management of the Power and Water Corporation with reference to its Statement of Corporate Intent for 2007-08 be noted.
I remind members that speech times set for this debate are as follows: ministers, Leader of the Opposition and shadow ministers, 20 minutes; all other members, 10 minutes. The maximum period for consideration and conduct of this debate is five hours. As the time is now 4.45 pm, if debate is not concluded by 9.45 pm, I will put the question.
Mr Stirling: A bit optimistic, Mr Chairman.
Mr CHAIRMAN: We live in hope. Honourable members, when consideration of this bill and the reports have been concluded and the question put, the following question will then be put forthwith, without debate: that the remainder of the bill be taken as agreed to. The bill will then be reported to the Assembly. Following this report, the Speaker will then call upon the Treasurer to move the third reading of the bill.
Ms CARNEY: Mr Chairman, it has been, as we know, a long and interesting week. I thought that, as is usually the practice, I would do something of a summary in respect of my portfolios, but also on behalf of the opposition. I will then come to the Estimates Committee itself. In order to respond to the member for Brennan's creation of the awards, I decided to write a couple for myself as well. I will match you, member for Brennan.
We, the opposition, see the budget in the way that it should be seen quite properly, and in the same way that Territorians see the budget papers if they cared to look: output is service delivery; input is the expenditure to produce the service; and outcome, quite obviously, is what has been achieved.
We can say many things about the budget but it can be best put in these terms: this government is an increasingly efficient tax collector but, at the same time, is an inefficient service deliverer. It has received unprecedented revenue, never seen before in the Territory’s history. On any measure the numbers are up, whether it is own source revenue or current grants and subsidies. The fact is the Territory is awash with money. Under Labor’s watch, they have received more and more money, and it looks as though they will be receiving even more.
It was interesting to hear what former senior bureaucrat - in fact, the former Director of Economic Policy - Rolf Gerritsen, said on the AM program this morning. When asked where the money was going, referring to the Chief Minister, he said - and there is a swear word here, Mr Chairman. I know I cannot say it, so I will use the word ‘blank’. Mr Gerritsen, referring to the Chief Minister said: ‘She is basically blank money up against the wall’. That is, Chief Minister, a damning indictment.
When we break it down in what our fellow Territorians expect and deserve, the questions they are asking are things like: ‘How are the hospitals?’, ‘How are the waiting lists?’, ‘Have the waiting lists been reduced?’, ‘Do we still need to wait on hospital trolleys?’ Waiting lists have not been reduced and they are waiting on hospital trolleys. People at barbecues are asking: ‘Has antisocial behaviour been reduced?’ No. ‘How about the crime rates?’ No. ‘Have education standards improved?’ No. They are the indicators that many Territorians use when assessing a government. They are very concerned why it is that a government that is awash with funds has not been able to achieve the outcomes. The achievements that this government says it wants to achieve have not been delivered.
This Chief Minister has overseen a flood of money coming into the Territory. At the same time, and as a result of her failure, her own conduct and her lack of priorities and lack of action, we have seen an unprecedented response from a federal government as we have seen last week in its decision to move in on the Territory and act as a result of this Chief Minister’s failure to act.
The Chief Minister has known about the high levels of child abuse for years and simply ticked the economic box by saying consistently more resources have been provided. Indeed, thanks to revenue, the likes of which has never been seen in the Territory, more money has been injected into this area as it should have been - as any government would have done had it been the recipient of an extra $1.1bn a year. A failure to do so would, indeed, have been unthinkable. However, it needed more than money alone. Most importantly, it needed leadership, commitment and attention. The Chief Minister failed on every count.
In 2004, she knew about the high rate of STIs in young children. She supported the stance of her minister and rejected a call for an inquiry. Over a year ago, she mishandled, in the most embarrassing way, the issue of child abuse after two Lateline interviews. It was, therefore, ironic that the Chief Minister said in estimates that the sexual abuse inquiry report delivered to her a couple of weeks ago had opened the door and lifted the veil of silence, when she had previously and perniciously attacked all involved in the Lateline stories.
The Chief Minister has made much of her Office of Indigenous Policy, yet it is difficult to see what it actually does. The Chief Minister’s Agenda for Action, issued through that office, was a document about which, only a year ago in estimates, the Chief Minister said was ‘a very comprehensive and detailed strategy’. It made no mention of child abuse or child sexual abuse. That was her agency’s plan and her plan for indigenous Territorians and, yet, it failed to address this important issue.
It is all the more remarkable for a party that talks incessantly about its commitment to indigenous Territorians. There was no agenda for action in relation to child abuse. There has not been one; there is none now from the Chief Minister; and that is why the federal government has stepped in. At a time when everyone was looking for leadership, this Chief Minister has delivered none. It was a shameful admission, in the opposition’s view, that the Chief Minister said in estimates that, had the Agenda for Action document been written now, it would include child abuse as a priority. We say it is too little too late and, on any measure, just too shallow. One gets the impression that the Office of Indigenous Policy is very much like the Chief Minister herself; just there for show and lacking substance.
The Chief Minister’s handling of this important issue of child abuse that has given the Territory attention all around this country and, indeed, all around the world, has been a litany of failures and excuses by this Chief Minister.
In relation to the Chief Minister’s Department, it has enormous resources. It seems to have a focus, as we gleaned from estimates, on its Marketing and Promotions Unit. That seems to be - that is marketing and promotion - a priority for this government. In this regard, I recall in Paul Keating’s interview - I think it was on Lateline a couple of weeks ago - where he said that Kevin Rudd could not get out of bed without being told by a focus group which side to get out on. The same can be said of this Chief Minister because she arranged for the polling of the people of Alice Springs just before the Alice Springs sittings in April.
There are two Labor members of parliament who live in Alice Springs. There is the Office of Central Australia or, as is now called, the Chief Minister’s Office, which has a significant budget and adequate resources in staff. When talking about resources, we cannot possibly forget that, since coming to office, Labor has received an extra $1.1bn each and every year due to GST, Commonwealth grants and own source revenues. With this incredible sum we have to ask: why are things the way they are in our capital city, our regional centres and in the bush? Labor promised so much to indigenous Territorians and, indeed, all Territorians, but Labor has let them down.
Mr Chairman, I do not propose to go through all of the portfolio areas, after speaking with your Whip earlier this afternoon, but I do wish to refer to a couple. It follows on neatly from earlier comments. In relation to Justice, this government says it is committed to victims of crime. My view is that that cannot be sustained if you look at the so-called private and secure waiting area that victims and witnesses use in the Alice Springs Courthouse. I implore the Attorney-General to act to fix this room as soon as possible. It is a service that needs to be delivered, and it is an outcome that has not been achieved.
In relation to police, again, with the role police can play in the child abuse issue that is galvanising this country, I was stunned by the attitude of the minister for Police. I felt also, at one point, almost embarrassed for him, because I saw people sitting behind him - those he could not see - who looked as embarrassed for him as I was. When you see other people rolling their eyes at conduct that, at best, can be described as juvenile, it is cause for reflection.
Having said that, though, I thank the chairman, who conducted himself, for the most part, very well. We know what happened on Thursday. You are becoming predictable; we knew what was going to happen on Thursday.
Again, we were concerned about the lack of time. We say this each year. Traditionally, the Treasurer talks about the old days and insists that Labor’s way is better than the CLP’s. I cannot say, because I have only experienced the Labor way. What I can say, however, is that more time is needed. That is a view held beyond the walls of this Chamber. The timing is always difficult when, as we have had in the past with Peter Toyne who held Justice and Health, two very big portfolios. It is very difficult to ask the type of questions an opposition wants to, and can and should, with a two–and-a-quarter hour time split, even if you split it in half.
Unfortunately, that was the case again, perhaps not surprising given that the same minister holds Health and Police. To say that Health should not have had many questions would be unfair, because the health of our fellow Territorians is a very serious issue. The amount in the budget is a very serious amount of money, and we know that the public servants across all agencies do a serious amount of preparation. Every output is important, as is Police. Even on a two-and-a-quarter hour split, in the opposition’s view, Health, and Police in particular, certainly need more time.
In relation to the Treasurer, this is the year when I am going to break from tradition. I have traditionally quoted the Treasurer’s speech when he introduced the estimates process. He will probably be relieved to know that I do not propose to do that this year. I do not know whether the old way was perfect, but this is not perfect either. I encourage the committee to look at that in due course and see what can be done.
The opposition thanks very much all of the public servants who, clearly spend, as we know, many months preparing the answers. So many of them constantly bring in all of their folders, sit there for a couple of hours, and are told that their output group will not get on. I believe that the system can be improved so that we can get to each output.
To the Assembly staff, thank you very much for your efforts - much appreciated. Working as we do up close and personal in that room, I can say that the opposition really does have an insight into the hard work you put in. I thought the cordless microphones worked well. Whether or not I sang into them is neither here nor there, but the cordless microphones do work well.
We do have a suggestion for the PAC and, perhaps, the staff of the Assembly. We wondered whether it might be possible in future, on the monitors in all of our rooms, to put a text over the screen with the output group. I am sure all members, when they are not in the committee room, have the monitors on in their rooms. Often, the volume is down because we are taking a phone call, or what have you. If we could put Output Group 1.0 or whatever, that would generally assist those who are not in the estimates room. I would be grateful if the staff would have a look at that one.
Finally, to the awards. The worst performers award was an even split between the Chief Minister and the minister for Mines. The most bizarre award goes to the minister for Police, and the award for making the least impression goes to the Minister for Family and Community Services. We have our own awards, and it is probably not appropriate that I discuss what they are in this Chamber. They are the awards, so I have matched you, member for Brennan. Thank you very much for your efforts and we look forward to estimates next year.
Mr STIRLING: Mr Chairman, I thank the member for Brennan for his role in chairing the committee over the past week. It is not an easy task, and I thank him for his efforts. I thought he shone in that role and did an excellent job. I thank all members of the committee for their efforts during the week, as well as the Legislative Assembly staff who do so much to assist the work of the Estimates Committee.
I want to pick up on the remarks made by the Leader of the Opposition in relation to a little media commentary throughout the past 24 hours in relation to indigenous expenditure - by someone who would have no idea, frankly, Mr Chairman. Someone wrote a few speeches or contributed a bit of policy in not a very enlightened fashion, I would have thought, inside the Chief Minister’s Department. It certainly is not a person who had anything to do with Treasury, understood budgets, expenditure, revenue and the rest.
The 2004-05 budget was intensively and comprehensively pulled apart by Treasury in response to criticism that the Northern Territory was receiving revenue for indigenous purposes and not acquitting it against indigenous expenditure. That was why the 2004-05 budget was so intensively analysed and explored to get to the bottom of this methodology. It found that, in fact, 43.2% of all revenue flowing into the Northern Territory government financially in 2004-05 could be earmarked for indigenous expenditure purposes. In fact, in that 2004-05 budget year, 49.7% of all expenditure accrued by the Northern Territory government went to indigenous purposes. Approximately $175m more - 6.5% - was spent on indigenous-related expenditure than actually received into revenue for that precise purpose.
In fact, the health budget, which we have been stepping up each successive year since we came to government in 2001, goes to 60%; that is, 60% of the entire health budget spend goes into indigenous. That is recognition of the ill health that many remote living indigenous people suffer, but it also goes, of course, to the cost of delivering that service across remote areas. That review, and all of its findings, was ticked off by Queensland University Professor, Ken Wiltshire, Head of Economics. It was ticked off by none other than - and this is the methodology I am talking about - Saul Eastlake, the Chief Economist for the ANZ Bank in Australia. Mr Saul Eastlake is probably Australia’s foremost economist.
They can talk about internal reviews. I am keen when the Commonwealth Grants Commission - and there is always a lag factor on this - data rolls around and we get to 2005-06 levels of data, that we have an independent review. Maybe we will get Access Economics, maybe we will get Saul Eastlake himself - someone to pull that budget apart and see how we went in expenditure.
If we take the decision now that we will roll an extra $100m over five years - $20m of Territory own revenue - into indigenous housing into remote areas over the next five years and, given that we have not taken anything away from indigenous expenditure, that extra $100m - $20m a year over the next five years – will, of course, push that percentage figure even higher. I do not accept the comments of a part-time policy input person around what we may or may not have done with the money. I do not accept that they have any credibility at all.
On ABC radio this morning, I was asked: ‘How can you spend $1bn on the waterfront?’ Excuse me? $1bn? I said: ‘This government has put in a little over $100m into that waterfront, most notably around community infrastructure. It did so in a concerted and strategic effort with the private sector in a partnership that drives in excess of $1bn expenditure over 10 years’ - a bit over $100m from this government, and a bit over $900m from the private sector. Not a bad return for that sort of investment when you consider that government, as well as delivering the health, education and policing services, and the rest, across the Northern Territory, has an obligation and a responsibility to develop the Territory, the jurisdiction which it is responsible for, in an economic sense. If you do not have that economic growth, and that growth in revenue, you are not able to provide the same levels of services that people like Mr Gerritsen complain about. That facility down there will be driving market convention tourism into Darwin, into the Northern Territory, for the next 50 years. That will be revenue into this government’s coffers which will allow it to continue to expand and deliver those services right across the Territory, including remote indigenous communities.
About 12 months ago, the Chief Minister went to Canberra with a 20-year plan to address the historic and systemic indigenous disadvantage suffered by remote living indigenous Territorians, and the Prime Minister remained unmoved. Sure, we needed a lot of work to fill in the detail. We needed a five-year strategic objective so that we could tick off progress against that plan. As recently as yesterday, when the Chief Minister met with the Prime Minister in Brisbane, he remains locked into a short-term view, unable to see beyond the next electoral cycle. That is a real problem when you have a Prime Minister who knows the historic and systemic disadvantage that is suffered there, and that it is going to require a sustained effort not for weeks or months, but over many years, in order to lift our communities and people out of this level of disadvantage.
Last November, the Chair of the Commonwealth Grants Commission, Mr Alan Morris, was speaking to a House of Representatives committee in Canberra. He was being quizzed about the Commonwealth Grants Commission process and how it allocates revenue across the states and territories. He said the Commonwealth Grants Commission processes are excellent in recognising a disadvantage regarding the service delivery, and allocating expenditure accordingly. However, the Commonwealth Grants Commission process itself does not have the capacity to address huge backlogs and huge systemic disadvantage such as we see in the Northern Territory.
When John Ah Kit was the Minister for Housing in this parliament he used to talk about an $800m backlog in indigenous housing. The current Minister for Housing now refers to a $1.4bn backlog in Aboriginal community housing. That is the sort of endemic need and crisis need that Alan Morris, the Chair of the Commonwealth Grants Commission, recognises. That is the need the Northern Territory government recognises as a part of the disfunctionality in some of these communities that leads to all the other social disfunctionality that we have seen and which, of course, has surfaced in the findings in the child sexual abuse inquiry.
There are people of that ilk who well recognise the tremendous level of disadvantage here that is simply beyond the capacity of this government to respond to in the time frame that is required. We have a $3.3bn budget year in and year out, and a $1.4bn need on its own for one item: housing in Aboriginal communities. We do not pretend that you can get there in weeks, months or years. That is why the Chief Minister, along with the other state leaders of this country, was so keen to work with the Commonwealth on a 20-year plan to work our way out of that level of disadvantage.
We welcome the federal government’s involvement and intervention on these matters. However, if the focus remains short-term, as it is, we will not achieve those outcomes necessary to even begin to address that high level of disadvantage that we know is out there and has been experienced for so long by our remote indigenous communities.
We have put our money where our mouth is; we have put our $20m per year over the next five years, $100m, into indigenous housing. That is $100m out of a $1.4bn need, while Treasurer Costello and Prime Minister Howard sit on this year, last year and the year before, a $15bn-plus surplus. A $15bn-plus surplus, and they cannot find their way, even for a 20-year plan, to commit some of that surplus in a modest fashion to overcome this tremendous disadvantage. We are going to continue to ask the Commonwealth to contribute to this because they will continue to sit, while the economy is going as strongly as it is, on massive surplus budgets from one year to the next.
Members with remote communities in our electorates will be visiting all of our communities over the next few weeks to sit down with our constituents to allay their concerns and anxieties about what they have seen on television in relation to the intervention by the Commonwealth. We will be taking information out with us and working with them to settle them down in the first instance, and encourage cooperation with the federal government’s plans where we agree that those plans are practical and effective, and will achieve the sorts of aims that we are all on about here.
It could have been achieved much more smoothly than it has if the federal government had bothered to consult with this government and given this government and, indeed, itself an opportunity to consult with indigenous communities before launching into the intervention in the fashion that they have.
It is a dramatic intervention; we acknowledge that, but we do welcome it. All of us with remote electorates will work with our communities, talking with our people as soon as we can get on the ground next week, to begin to work through these issues with our constituents. A big part of the responsibility, particularly if you are looking at a 20-year plan, does rest with the Commonwealth. I am hopeful that, come October, there may be a change of view from The Lodge in Canberra and there will be a different incumbent. We can only hope and pray and work to that outcome because we need a government in Canberra that is prepared to look beyond the short-term electoral cycle, and is prepared to take the long-term view on long-term disadvantage, because you are not overcome it any other way.
Mr CHAIRMAN: The question is that the proposed expenditure be agreed to, and that the resolutions of expressions of opinion as agreed to by the committee in relation to the proposed expenditure for output with reference to the Appropriation Bill 2007-08 (Serial 94), and the activities, performances, practices and financial management of the Power and Water Corporation with reference to its Statement of Corporate Intent for 2007-08 be noted.
Motion agreed to.
Remainder of bill, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Madam Speaker, I put on the record my thanks to Under Treasurer, Jennifer Prince, and the amazing staff in Treasury, who burn the midnight oil so often in the lead-up to the preparation for the 2007-08 Budget. For those outside Treasury, I do not think they have any real understanding of the number of man hours that go into the deliberation and preparation of a budget.
I thank my Cabinet colleagues for what has been a terrific outcome in the 2007-08 Budget. I mentioned the committee staff and the Estimates Committee process before. Again, I thank the member for Brennan for his efforts and each of the committee members and staff who supported the process of the Estimates Committee, for their diligence and efforts for what is a pretty trying week. I acknowledge the efforts of all members, particularly members opposite, who put in long hours.
With those comments, once again, thanks to Treasury. I feel far and away the most supported Treasurer in this country, without really knowing how well supported any of those others are. You could not be more supported in the job as Treasurer than this Under Treasurer and her staff support me, and I thank them for their efforts.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
REVENUE (BUDGET INITIATIVES) AMENDMENT BILL
(Serial 95)
(Serial 95)
Continued from 3 May 2007.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, as I propose to deal with this bill in a separate manner, I would need to wait for the third reading before I can proceed to do that.
Madam SPEAKER: I will seek some advice, but I do not believe that is correct. Member for Blain, it is appropriate for you to speak now, and the debate that you wish to bring on comes at the end of the second reading debate after the motion has been put.
Mr MILLS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Whilst there is no likelihood of success from opposition’s point of view …
Ms Carney: You never know, Millsy.
Mr MILLS: I press on regardless. The issue of the Revenue (Budget Initiatives) Amendment Bill is that it contains a number of elements. The objection raised by opposition in this event, as has been raised on other occasions, is the combining of several different elements. I can only guess that it is, perhaps in the best case scenario, a matter of convenience for government to be able to bundle things together and put them through because they all relate to revenue. However, the fact remains for anyone who has an eye to see and recognise, that there are three very separate components of this revenue bill. Two of them are eminently supportable but, regarding the third one, there are questions. It does not give anyone with an interest in testing the nature of the bill the right to be able to address concerns specifically related to one, so that we can assess that one on its own individual merits. We are not afforded that opportunity in this case, as we have on a number of other occasions where elements are brought together into one omnibus-type arrangement. This wheels the lot through.
On balance, opposition will be supporting the bill, because there are important elements in here that we have no option but to support. However, there is one there that we have reservations about. For that reason, I will be moving, hopefully with the support of honourable members on both sides, to separate the bills into three separate components so we can assess each one individually, and then be satisfied that we have been truly honouring our obligations as legislators.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, the government will not support the motion to suspend standing orders to divide the Revenue (Budget Initiatives) Amendment Bill. The benefits contained in it for Territorians were extensively canvassed in the media, in this Chamber and, indeed, at Estimates Committee. I make the strong point that it is not just entirely appropriate, but desirable, that all components of this legislation be considered and voted on as one.
Nothing in that dissuades the member for Blain from making his comments in relation to one part of the bill; that he has some opposition to one part of the bill. He is quite at ease to put that on the Parliamentary Record. It is up to his conscience, at the end of the day, whether he supports the package of the amendments in one bill or not. Parliamentary Counsel state very clearly that this is the practice around Australia, and has always been undertaken here; that all revenue initiatives are combined in one bill. Attempting to split the components into separate bills to supposedly vote for some and against others, I believe, demonstrates a lack of understanding of the measures contained within them overall.
I note, for example, that amendments to the Stamp Duty Act and the Taxation Administration Act must be passed at the same time because both are required to implement the abolition of stamp duty on hiring arrangements. For these reasons, government opposes the motion and looks forward to passing the bill.
Motion agreed to; bill read a second time.
____________________
Motion
Proposed Suspension of Standing Orders – Divide Bill into Three Bills
Proposed Suspension of Standing Orders – Divide Bill into Three Bills
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I move that so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent me for moving a motion as follows:
- That, pursuant to Standing Order 183(b) it be an instruction to the Committee of the Whole that:
(a) the committee divide the Revenue (Budget Initiatives) Amendment Bill 2007 (Serial 95) into three bills; namely:
(i) Stamp Duty Amendment Bill;
(iii) First Home Owner Grant Amendment Bill;
- and
I have outlined the reason for this. Contained within this bill are three very separate components. If we are able to assess them each on their own individual merits, there may well be the capacity for some contribution to be made to adjustments, or assessment being made as to the suitability of, particularly, the matter related to stamp duty on conveyancing of non-real property. This matter was raised during estimates. Whilst the explanations provided by the Taxation Commissioner satisfy in a logical sense, when you probe deeply, you raise the concern that, when those interested in collecting taxes refer to the sharpening and refining of definitions, it sounds to me that it is an endeavour to suit the purposes of the tax collecting agency - akin to a butcher sharpening a knife.
There are some concerns in the tightening of these definitions. It serves to strengthen the capacity of the Treasurer to collect taxes by changing the definitions of that which can be regarded as property. It effectively now includes goodwill, and has the capacity for goodwill to be taxed. It is matters such as this that need to be raised. We have raised it with a number of sectors, and they are concerned about it. If it were not for the opposition raising these matters and seeing how these could possibly apply - particularly to the pastoral industry and, more importantly, the mining industry - these things just happen and then they find out in due course. Then, that causes some issues for government as they endeavour to catch up with the impact that befalls those who are endeavouring to contribute to the economy through their own endeavours.
It is for that reason we ask and seek support of honourable members to have the bill separated, so that we can assess each on its merit. We have no problems whatsoever with two of those elements - one will do. I urge members to support of the motion.
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer): Madam Speaker, it is probably necessary to go into a little detail around this bill so that the member for Blain has a more comprehensive understanding of it. The amendments provide legislative guidance on the application of the current legislation imposing stamp duty on the full value of property. It does not operate, as you just claimed, to make business goodwill, or information, taxable as part of the value of land. In most cases, the transfer of goodwill and mining information is already the subject of stamp duty so there is no change.
He is saying this bill will tax goodwill; it already does. The treatment of information relating to dutiable property is consistent with the current treatment. The Valuer-General has confirmed that the amendments clarify that valuation under the legislation is in accordance with accepted valuation practice.
A bit of history here for the member for the Blain, just to suggest to him where he is treading. In 1988, the Country Liberal Party government amended the stamp duty legislation so that stamp duty was imposed on the full value of land. This was done to counter an avoidance practice whereby some value attributable to the land could be artificially apportioned to site goodwill. Site goodwill is attributes of the land which may influence its value, such as the land being in a desirable location. Despite this change, avoidance activity is still being experienced whereby inflated values are being attributed to non-dutiable property. As far back as 1988, which in my estimation is 19 years ago, the then Country Liberal Party government recognised this as an opportunity for tax avoidance and moved to strengthen it. This amendment is doing no more than the 1988 amendments attempted to do then.
This proposed amendment is being made to provide guidance in the legislation that the full value of land is to be determined for stamp duty purposes according to ordinary valuation principles; that is, it inserts statutory rules that confirm current practice. It has not been made with any one industry or transaction in mind. It does not result in the goodwill of the business conducted on land, or information about the land, being taxed as part of the value of the land. It merely requires, as a matter of ordinary valuation practice, that a valuer recognises that some land is more valuable because it has commercial advantages, such as site goodwill, attached to aspects or attributes of the land.
For example, land on which a business is operated, or could be operated, is more valuable than similar land on which there is no business, or is not zoned for commercial use. Land zoned for multi—storey developments is more valuable than land zoned for a single dwelling. Waterfront land is more valuable than non-waterfront. That is consistent with a number of court cases which have held that the value of goodwill generated by a business conducted on land is separate from, and not included in, the value of the land. However, those cases have recognised the businesses do enhance the value of the land on which they are conducted. In most cases, the transfer of goodwill and information is already subject to stamp duty.
The CLP government amended the stamp duty legislation in 1991 to tax information about mining tenements as if it is part of the mining tenement. The change was made in response to avoidance activity involving significant value being apportioned from the mining tenement to associated mining information. The proposed amendments clarify the ordinary valuation practice that any information which enhances the value of the land is to be taken into account when determining the value of the land.
In valuing land, it will be assumed a reasonable purchaser possesses knowledge of all existing information relating to the land so the value of the land will not be reduced by the cost to acquire this information. This reflects ordinary valuation practice. For example, a mining tenement which has proven extractable mineral deposits is more valuable than one which has not been explored. When a separate value is attributed to information relevant to the value of property, the value attributed to this information will be included in the value of the property and the information will not be treated as separate from the property. It is consistent with how mining information is currently treated, with the information being included in the definition of land.
The Valuer-General of the Northern Territory was consulted during the drafting of the valuation provisions. The Valuer-General believes that the provisions reflect accepted valuation practices. The Valuer-General also indicated that the provisions are consistent with the International Valuation Standards Committee definitions of market value, and that the value of land should be assessed at the highest and best use of the property, whether that is the current use or a potential use that is more valuable than the existing use.
The member for Blain pointed the finger at the Commissioner of Taxation and said he is sharpening the sword. No more than the CLP did in 1988 and in 1991. This is a move that is fully accepted and judged as the proper thing to do. This only reflects accepted valuation practice by none other than the Valuer-General of the Northern Territory. If the member for Blain opposes this legislation, he opposes what the CLP tried to do in 1988 and in 1991, and he opposes the views of none other than the Valuer-General of the Northern Territory.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, the briefing that was just read to reinforce the position of the Treasurer still does not answer the fundamental question. First, I will deal with the argument that this occurred in the past. Because it occurred under the CLP and I am CLP, therefore it is good and I must support it. That does not necessarily follow. Therefore, I can dispense with that.
Second, if this was in place, as it has been, as the Treasurer reports, and it is no different from measures that have been applied in the past, then why on earth are we bringing this bill if there is no change to what has been previous practice? If it is a matter that has been brought in because it attends to a problem that we are troubled by, that is a different matter. However, there is no reference to any existing internal problem that gives rise to the need for this legislative fix. That issue was raised during estimates as well.
I remain unconvinced that there is a pre-existing problem that requires a legislative fix. If there were measures in the past that were in place to meet the needs of Treasury‘s capacity to impose duties on conveyancing of non-real property, then why do we have to further tighten the definition? I imagine it is for only one purpose; that is, to suit the purposes of the Treasurer. From what I understand from the briefings that we received during estimates, there was no existing problem to be addressed that has given rise to this change. It is just an alteration to tighten up a definition to suit the future purposes of Treasury. For that reason, I ask that the bill be separated so that we can attend to the matters in order and give proper debate to this important revenue bill.
Motion negatived.
____________________
Mr STIRLING (Treasurer)(by leave): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to; bill read a third time.
SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly at its rising adjourn until Tuesday, 21 August 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
Mr HENDERSON (Leader of Government Business): Madam Speaker, I move that the Assembly do now adjourn.
Madam SPEAKER: Before I call you, member for Greatorex, I acknowledge that this is the last time that the member for Greatorex will be present in this House. On behalf of all honourable members, I extend warm wishes for your retirement, member for Greatorex. I was saddened to hear that your wife, Sharon, is unwell and that your parents are unwell. I hope that retirement brings you great happiness with your family.
I would also like to say that I have given indulgence to the member for Greatorex to speak for 20 minutes rather than 15 for this speech.
Dr LIM (Greatorex): Thank you, Madam Speaker, I appreciate that. I thank you for your words of farewell; I truly appreciate it.
Madam Speaker, you know that I try to utilise the adjournment speeches to comment or raise issues relevant to my electorate of Greatorex or the Northern Territory. Tonight though, I rise not to raise more issues, but to bid my farewell to the Legislative Assembly, my colleagues, present and past, and to the people who have worked with me since my first election on 4 June 1994.
On midnight, 9 July 2007, I will step down as the member for Greatorex. Thirteen years since I was first elected, and 13 years before that, to the day, my family and I moved to Alice Springs. Thirteen seems a good number.
Where does one start a farewell speech, Madam Speaker - at a beginning or at the end? Why did I get into politics in the first place and how did it happen? I got into politics because I thought I could make a difference. I wanted to make a difference and, as a medical practitioner, I could make a difference with, at best, some 2000 families in any one year. In politics, especially in government, one good policy could affect, in a positive way, many Territorians and, directly or indirectly, many other people on a national scale. However, one does not have to be in government to influence change. Did I make a difference? Yes, I did. I believe I did.
I wanted to be a good member of parliament. I wanted, and still do want, to be an agent of positive social change. This is, I believe, what being a member of parliament is all about. I also know that politics is a business of compromise and, therefore, it was absolutely important for me to stay focused on my own targets. I believe I was elected to represent the electorate but, at the same time, to be a community leader.
How does one be a representative that is a follower and, at the same time, a leader? In my mind, a good member of parliament is one who is able to find the fine balance between the two - knowing when to follow and when to lead. I try to hold to my core values, not sway with the electoral wind in any which way it blows, voting one way because the electorate instructed me and, at another time, voting in the opposite way on the same issue when the electorate demanded that of me.
My desire, in and out of politics, has been, and will be, to do what I could do to promote equity - equity of access to the unlimited opportunities that the Territory and Australia have to offer. It is not good enough for us in this parliament to say that we create opportunities for people. Are these opportunities accessible? We might as well have no opportunities if there is no access to opportunities. People who belong to minority groups will know full well what I mean about the inequality of access to opportunities.
This focus has served me well through the 13 years as the member for Greatorex. It helped me serve the electorate of Greatorex as a good local and very parochial member. It made me put the interests of constituents very much in the forefront of what I do for the electorate. I have worked hard for them, sometimes to the detriment and sacrifice of my family – James, you should not have done that. I was pretty well composed until you did that …
A member: You are making me cry.
Dr LIM: Let us let it go at that. I have worked hard for my electorate. Sometimes – this is so silly of me. I do not know whether to laugh or cry. Anyway, there is a big sacrifice to family.
Without Sharon at my side through our married life of 33 years, and when we first - do not go - joined the Country Liberal Party 24 years ago, I could not have achieved the things I have. Her support goes beyond anything that I have any right to expect. We both joined as members of the Alice Springs Branch of the CLP in 1983, then the only branch in Alice Springs. Climbing through the ranks, Sharon was on management with Josephine Stone and formed the Country Liberal Women, and was its inaugural chair. In the meantime, I became the party’s vice president for a total of six years, until becoming the preselected candidate for Greatorex in 1994. I served the party president, Shane Stone, a former Chief Minister, Gary Nairn, the current federal Minister of State, and Suzanne Cavanagh.
The CLP class of ’94 included the six members who were elected then: the former member for Brennan, Denis Burke, the former member for Millner, Phillip Mitchell, the former member for Daly, Tim Baldwin ...
Mrs Miller: The rat pack!
Dr LIM: It was! … the former member for Casuarina, Peter Adamson, the member for Braitling, and me. Stupid me, the last of the class of ‘94, am still here – still from the CLP. We started in June 1994 in the temporary Parliament House across the road we call the Chan Building, moving across here to this House in October that year. I remember it was a very special occasion.
After the general election in 1994, Sharon and I formed the small branch of Greatorex with the support of many loyal friends such as Brendan and Bev Heenan, Bronwyn Adami, Brian Corcoran, Terry and the late Norma Leigh, Brian and Fran Marlor, Colin and Joy Saunders, Ian and Francois Builder, David Forrest, Michael Jones, and many other branch members. We rebuilt the Greatorex Branch - we really did - into a thriving, cashed-up branch with over 100 members. It took on the responsibilities of other electorates – initially, the electorate of Macdonnell in Alice Springs - eventually amalgamating with the other branches serving Central Australia to, once again, become a single branch in the Centre. In the same period, I served in government under Chief Ministers Marshall Perron, Shane Stone, and Denis Burke.
One of my most memorable occasions during debates in this House was on the Rights of the Terminally Ill Bill in 1995 where, as a brand new member of nine months, I was thrown into the deep end, debating in committee stage the two most senior members of the Assembly, the then Chief Minister, Marshall Perron, and the then Leader of the Opposition, Brian Ede. The marathon debate started about 10.30 am or 11 am and went unabated until about 4 am the next morning. It is all in the Parliamentary Record. After it became law and after Marshall Perron retired and went on the speaking circuit around the country, I was privileged to go to many of the venues he spoke at, to present an opposing view – fortunately, not at the same time. For a member of parliament, wet behind the ears, that was a great and sobering experience.
My most rewarding experiences as the member for Greatorex are the times when I was able to successfully intervene on behalf of constituents. The satisfaction of being able to help constituents far surpasses that of becoming a minister of the Crown. By the same token, it was a distinct privilege to be the first person of Chinese ethnicity, born overseas or in this country, to be a Cabinet Minister and, before that, to be elected to the Lower House in any jurisdiction in Australia.
As minister, I had responsibility for Housing, Local Government and Central Australia. While from the backbench, I could influence change, as a minister I could effect change. Three changes come to mind as those I made, each as the minister for Housing, Local Government and Central Australia. As Minister for Housing, we commenced the Papunya model of house construction with contractors undertaking trainees and implementing skills transfer to the community in which they were building. As Minister for Local Government, I brought together Tiwi Island local government. While there may be criticism that it did not work well, in my defence, had the CLP won the subsequent election, I would have continued to nurture the fledgling council to ensure its success. History will judge how much nurturing it received from the Martin Labor government during those early years. Through my capacity as the Minister for Central Australia, I called and chaired one of the first alcohol summits in Alice Springs in recent memory, at which the former member for Stuart was present. I repeat, as minister one can effect change. Those now in government and in the ministry will understand what I mean. Use your powers well.
The support of dragon boat racing was initiated when I was the parliamentary secretary to the Chief Minister and to Cabinet. Through Austin Chin, my co-patron of Dragon Boat NT, and his encouragement and hard work with private and government support, we were able to generate sufficient interest to establish dragon boat racing in Darwin. Accompanied by Daryl Manzie, the then Minister for Asian Relations and Trade, as a novice team we went to Sabah, winning the gold medal in the international challenge. Dragon boat paddling has gone from strength to strength in the Northern Territory and, through it, the formation of the Pink Ladies which now has gone international.
I have been privileged to be adopted by the Chung Wah Society. Its president, Adam Lowe, invited me to be involved. I became its vice president for several years. Through that involvement, I made very strong friendships within the Chinese community, and was given the privilege of learning its history and connection in the Territory’s social and business fabric.
I must mention Daryl Chin, and his wife, Lisa, and their three children. Thank you for taking me into your family. Then there is Henry Yap and Jason Lee and the Jape family, in particular Alan Jape. I must mention here my dinner group: Bruce Sampson, Leslie Allaway, Jennifer Xi, Stephanie Zhang and Peter Wignell. Thank you all for your friendship.
Through the Chung Wah Society and the Chinese community, we have introduced the very successful Moon Festival. About 1100 people attended the very first function at the Darwin High School hall in 1998 and, the next year, over 1400 people squeezed into the Foskey Pavilion. We started the traditional blessing of Parliament House each Chinese New Year, and the blessing of the Chamber at the start of each year’s sittings of parliament. This is, in part, recognition of the significant contribution the Chinese have made in the Territory since the middle 1800s. This is the only parliament in Australia in which this significant blessing takes place during Chinese New Year celebrations each year, so I feel privileged that it happened during my watch.
In the same period of over a decade, blessings have gone to Alice Springs to share with the people of Alice Springs Chinese New Year celebrations. I trust that this parliament will continue to honour the Chinese in the Northern Territory by these events and allow future members of Greatorex to lead the lion into the Chamber. In my life after politics, I will, among other things, focus on establishing a support group in Alice Springs to cater for its growing Chinese population.
To be in opposition is not much fun, especially when down to only four members. However, to my opposition colleagues, I encourage the team to always look forward and stay true as Territorians. Believe, as Eleanor Roosevelt said: ‘The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams’.
Madam Speaker, even from opposition we can achieve things and, truly, we have. Being in opposition has made me a better member of parliament. I have learnt new skills in opposition and have enjoyed the opportunity that few in this room have experienced. I have been a backbencher in government. I have been a minister in Cabinet. I am now in opposition with 10 shadow responsibilities for which I have to do my own research and investigations. Government briefings are not particularly useful when officers hide more than they tell during the briefings. However, if one listens closely, they reveal more by what they do not tell than what they do.
Yes, I have learnt to be a better member of parliament since coming to opposition, and this observation is correct, as you can clearly see by the performances of the members in government. The members for Nhulunbuy and Wanguri were in opposition for a long while, and they are now the most effective members of government.
To give my colleagues encouragement, let me say that not only can the opposition embarrass the government into action - and we have seen evidence of that, for example in education, health and community service fields - we can also bring about positive social change by mere persistence through our debates. I believe the concentrated efforts of the opposition have improved working conditions and salary scales for Territory teachers and nurses. The campaigns that we waged on behalf of teachers just before the last election made a difference. The campaign in support of nurses during their last negotiation with government enabled them to secure a satisfactory outcome from themselves, and forced government to recognise that the establishment numbers for nurses are well short of what is required.
I also refer to MARVIN and cord blood harvesting projects. Both these projects came to my attention in the latter days of the CLP government. In opposition, I continued my support for these projects and raised them repeatedly in debates. They finally came to fruition, even though MARVIN took nearly three years to achieve any status, and cord blood harvesting only last year. It could have been implemented much earlier had the government been more capable during those early days. They are now in place and they will continue to benefit the Territory and humanity in general for generations to come. I am satisfied.
As a member of the Information Management Advisory Committee, the opposition has been able to influence changes in the way the Assembly has adopted information technology. Deputy Clerk, David Horton, and the Director of Parliamentary Services, Vicki Long, will be happy now; they will not have to listen any more to the noisy demanding member who uses IT to the max.
Madam Speaker, I cannot, in my last adjournment, refrain from addressing the Commonwealth government’s looming winding back on the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act. After almost 30 years of self-government, during which Territorians pushed for more constitutional powers, we have this government going down in history as the one which gave cause for self-government to be wound back. I hope this will never be repeated.
The Martin Labor government was elected with an overwhelming mandate to deal with indigenous issues. The fact that there are six members of indigenous descent says it all. However, the government failed, especially in the matter of child sexual abuse. I add that the CLP has nothing to be proud of but, with the financial resources this government has, it failed the very people to whom they promised much and delivered little.
I am glad that the Commonwealth government has intervened. I believe they will be here for the long haul to make generational change.
As a local member, there will always be things to do in the electorate, and there is always unfinished business. However, it is time I passed on the baton - I hope to another person with commitment, energy and enthusiasm to carry on with his or her brand of service to the electorate. I will be there to support this person if it happens that the CLP retains the seat.
In closing - and I am sorry, Madam Speaker, that my time is running out - I seek leave to incorporate the rest of my speech, if I may?
Madam SPEAKER: How much longer do you think you have there, member for Greatorex?
Dr LIM: A couple of pages, that is all - not much. About another three minutes.
Madam SPEAKER: I will indulge you, member for Greatorex.
Dr LIM: Thank you, Madam Speaker, I appreciate that. James, it is still your fault.
In closing, I thank the Clerk, Ian McNeill and staff of the Legislative Assembly for their support, their patience and understanding, and making every effort to ensure that my work could be done with as little interference as possible. In those 13 years, I have made some good friends in the Assembly. I will treasure my friendships with Clerk-Assistant, Graham Gadd, affectionately called Gaddy, and Serjeant-at-Arms, Helen Allmich; directors of committees, Pat Hancock and Terry Hanley; Parliamentary Liaison, Jan Sporn; Table Office Manager, Steve Stokes or Stokesy; Maintenance Officer, Tony Hibberd; and Office Services Manager, Mary-Anne Almond. To all of you, named and unnamed, including Rex Schoolmeester, Maria Viegas, Jo Carbone, Anna-Maria Socci, Sonny Rachman, Alice Tsang, Jan Bradley, Lorraine Caldwell, Liz McFarlane, Samantha Day-Johnston and all her security crew, and all at Hansard, I say thank you.
I have had a wonderful line-up of very capable electorate officers, especially Jacky Jessop, Caroll Cailler and Donna Ellice, and the regular locum officers, Bev Ayres, Chris Cope and Chris Potts. A local member’s work could never be done without the unstinting devotion of our electorate officers. I want to thank them all for their loyalty and dedication to the work and my ethos as a local member, even at the most difficult of times. My electorate officers were very well supported by the capable staff at the Leader of the Opposition’s office: James Lantry, Kylie Silvey, John Elferink, a fellow member of parliament for nearly eight years - miss you here, mate, miss you here. Greg Charter, I will miss our happy repartee, but especially your good advice on media. And my young cuz, Rebecca McAlear. Where are you? Hey, cuz! You know what I mean - thank you all. James worked with me during the last election campaign in Alice Springs. His recruitment into the Leader of the Opposition’s office was a godsend. His strength and focused approach have been of great benefit to our small team. He is a great team leader and I hope the Army Reserves soon realise that if they have not already. Kylie, without your skills we would still be designing things and looking for information with pen and paper. I will miss your happy face and dedication to work.
To my colleagues, especially the member for Araluen and Leader of the Opposition, Jodeen Carney; the member for Blain, Terry Mills; the member for Katherine, Fay Miller - it has been a great time working with you all. For a little team, we have kept the government accountable. I wish my CLP colleagues good hunting. The government’s flank is totally exposed - aim your barbs well. Without all their untiring support throughout these years, I would not have been the member that I have been. You have done me proud. Thank you all.
Most of all, I want to thank my wife, Sharon, who, as you all know, has been unwell for the past 12 months. Her illness has weighed heavily on our minds. She has provided me with unstinting, constant, patient and loyal companionship, and support that I should have no right to expect. We both got into politics, not realising the enormity of the job. It is now my turn to give her the support that she needs and together, enjoy our children, Kinta and Letisha and, hopefully, their children when they arrive; and also my son, Michael, his wife and his four children.
While I weep - and I do not know why – be happy for me. Seriously, be happy for me. I bid you all a fond farewell.
Members: Hear, hear!
Ms CARNEY (Araluen): Madam Speaker, the member for Greatorex always has an effect on this parliament. I am not sure whether there are too many dry eyes. It is fairly obviously that my friend and colleague, Dr Lim, became emotional when some people came into the gallery. They are the Lantry family. Hansard will be given a bottle of wine as a result of this reference. James Lantry is our Chief of Staff. We have an enormous number of young children in our office belonging to the staff. Most of them are under six, which is quite incredible.
Richard has, as we all do, a close association with James and his family. I know that James and Richard have gone through a lot, and have a very special relationship. As for James’ children, they refer to Richard as ‘Dr Richard’. They say: ‘Are we going to see Dr Richard today, Daddy?’ Whenever James goes to Alice Springs, they say: ‘Are you going to see Dr Richard?’ I think it was Isaac who had a sore arm. He got into a bit of strife at home or preschool. It was Dr Richard he wanted, and Dr Richard who bandaged up the arm and gave this little boy a sling, just like every little boy, and girl for that matter, would want.
The member for Greatorex has special relationships with many people, as you would when you have been in a place like this for a long time, and when you are the type of character that the member for Greatorex is. I believe it is great that people become emotional in this place, because this place should be a place of passion. It should be a place that experiences great happiness and great sadness. The member for Greatorex, quite rightly, becomes emotional on a number of very important issues, as we all do. However, it is great to have seen the trigger of the Lantry family. No doubt, James will get a few words later. It was very good of his family and our staff to come down for this important occasion. Thank you.
It must be difficult to say goodbye to parliament. I have only been here, five, coming up to six years, and my colleague, Richard Lim, has been a parliamentarian for 13 years. In fact, when I joined the CLP, it was Richard Lim who assisted me. He did everything he possibly could. I was a young member, and I knew I wanted to be a member of parliament. Richard gave me unprecedented assistance in those early days in Alice Springs. He warmly embraced me when I went to branch meetings, and was generous in everything he gave to me and, indeed, many other young politicians who wanted to be involved in the party. I thank you very much for that, Richard. I know you will continue to help many more young, and perhaps not so young, people in the party as well.
Richard was born in Malaysia. I say that because it provides some insight into him as a human being, and as a politician. The Malaysia Richard grew up in was a country of quotas, and the quota system discriminated against Chinese Malays. For bright young Chinese Malays, securing a place in university or the public service was not easy. In recognising the difficulties in fulfilling his potential under the quota system, Richard’s parents sent him to Australia to complete his education, and the Territory has gained as a result. As a result, it instilled in Richard a profound sense of equality of opportunity and a fierce determination - an incredible determination. Those qualities, of course, have served him well in his career as both a doctor and a member of parliament.
You might not always agree with Richard Lim, but it is impossible to deny his passion and commitment. All of us have seen that in this place. As a novice parliamentarian, Richard followed his conscience and, when the then Chief Minister, Marshall Perron, introduced legislation to legalise voluntary euthanasia in the Territory, not only did Richard oppose the legislative changes his Chief Minister was sponsoring, but he travelled the Territory and, indeed, the nation, arguing the no case. I know that Richard continues to feel strongly and passionately about that issue.
I remember not long after I was preselected, getting a phone call from Marshall Perron. It was assumed by Marshall that I supported his view on euthanasia. He should have asked. After I was preselected he asked me what my view was. My view is the same as Richard’s. Richard and I did not talk about euthanasia until a couple of years ago, and I think he was a little surprised my view was exactly the same as his, and as passionately held on the issue of euthanasia.
People in this place, regardless of their party allegiances, should be independent and strong. Richard is both of those things. His compassion is well known and respected. People will remember that in the terrible aftermath of the Bali bombings, Dr Richard went straight to the Royal Darwin Hospital to help with the injured. That speaks volumes about his compassion and his willingness to help others. It is a knee-jerk response for Dr Lim.
In terms of our team, we will miss a wealth of experience. We will lose the only person in our very small team who has been a minister of the Crown, sadly. We do not know whether any of us will ever be ministers of the Crown, so we will not have someone in our team to ask the sort of questions that people who have not been ministers of the Crown might ask regarding Cabinet process and so on.
Over Richard’s career, I think his time in the CLP was about as good as you can get because he served under Perron, Stone and Burke - all very different and interesting politicians, men, characters - all of whom, in their very different ways, made significant contributions to the place in which we live.
I should correct something, Madam Speaker. I have a note in typical doctor’s handwriting from Dr Lim, which is almost as bad as mine. I understood that he did go to RDH. I am advised that he offered to go to RDH to help, but was not needed - my apologies, Richard.
To have served under Perron, Stone and Burke would have been a very interesting experience in itself. To have served in a party that governed the Northern Territory for such a long time must have been fascinating. Richard, more than Mrs Miller and Mr Mills and, certainly me, has really experienced the highs and lows of political parties but, in particular, the Country Liberal Party. He has been involved in the CLP for about 25 years, climbing his way through the ranks.
I remember the vision after the 2001 election of Denis Burke, Steve Dunham, Tim Baldwin and Richard Lim coming out of Government House after doing what was necessary after the loss. I felt for those men, whose pride meant a lot to them and who were the public face of the CLP’s election loss in 2001. However, all of them continued on in the best way they could, as did Richard.
Richard not only continued on, but continued on through thick and thin – and I am happy to say that it has not happened since 2005 - through that pretty awful period 2001 to 2005. Why it is that a politician of Richard’s standing and years of service did not throw it in and go fishing, I do not know. However, Richard Lim stood up and played a role in ensuring that our parliamentary team and our party did not sink any lower.
Richard really has experienced the highs and lows of politics. The highs have been very high and the lows have been very low in the past for the Country Liberal Party. No doubt, he will continue to take a great interest.
I described Richard the other day as a colourful politician, and he is. He is also a controversial politician. He has been ejected from parliament a few times over the years. He is colourful, and when you say ‘colourful’, you immediately think of the blessing of the Chamber every year, as Richard said, for which he was responsible for introducing to the parliament. Of course, it goes beyond the parliament; it travels down to Alice Springs, and Richard does his stuff under the dragon’s head …
Dr Lim: Lion.
Ms CARNEY: Lion, sorry, my apologies. The lion’s head in Alice Springs.
I would say, also, of Richard, that he is compassionate, passionate and he is hard-working. The CLP - and I know I speak on behalf of everyone in the CLP - is very thankful for his involvement over a 25-year period, 13 of which have been as a politician.
We wish you well, Richard, for your retirement. It is often said that you can tell a lot about a person by how clean their shoes are. I like people with clean shoes. It is the first thing I look at. Dr Lim always has very nicely polished shoes and can I say, Richard, that I wish you well such that when you knock off, you can take your highly polished shoes off and you can walk around in your runners. We wish you well.
Mr McADAM (Barkly): Madam Speaker, I also pay tribute to Dr Lim this evening. As indicated previously, it is 13 years since you were first elected. That, within itself, is a very great honour for any individual. It is fair to say you have faithfully represented the views of your constituents over that period. I guess the best judge of that are the people themselves, who, obviously, have great faith in you. One of the reasons why is that, occasionally, in my capacity as a minister, I get telephone calls from members of the opposition. It is fair to say that I probably get mostly e-mails and a few telephone calls from Dr Lim, particularly in respect to matters that were of concern to his constituents. That, to me, says something about a member of parliament; that he cares very much for his constituents.
The other thing I wish to say is that we all have our views, we are all of different persuasions and, sometimes, we forget about that in this House. However, it is fair to say, Richard, that you have represented your party in a very professional way. You have also represented your constituents, the people within your electorate. They are probably not constituents, they are probably more like friends, and I guess that would apply to all of us. As the Minister for Central Australia, we do share that in common. You were once a minister as I am now and, obviously, despite the political differences, we probably share the same ideals and commitment in trying to make a difference in the concerns of the people in that region and, indeed, across the Northern Territory.
I wish you all the very best for your future. I also wish all the very best to your wife, Sharon, and your family. In this House we are not always in control of the things that we do, for lots of obvious reasons. However, I also understand that you are a pilot, an aviator, and maybe that will give you the opportunity of a lifetime to take the controls once again. I wish all the very best to you and your family. I have no doubt that I will be seeing you in Alice Springs around the place, and I suspect that I might be getting a few more telephone calls and letters. I have a gut feeling that there might be a few other media events around the Alice. All the best.
Dr Lim: Thank you.
Mrs BRAHAM (Braitling): Madam Speaker, I need to make a few remarks - I hope I do not get all underdone again, Richard - because Richard and I are part of the class of ’94, and I see it passing before me. I have to admit, I seriously thought over the last 24 hours whether perhaps I should join Richard. However, I spoke to my family and they said: ‘Mum, no! What are you going to do? We have not planned for your retirement’. I think they had visions of me moving in with them or something.
Richard, I hope you have plans for your retirement, that you do the things that you have always wanted to do and that you needed to do but, perhaps, never did, because you were doing things for other people.
The class of ‘94 has certainly been a very colourful group. We have achieved a lot. We have done many things. Your contribution to the Northern Territory has to be acknowledged, because this particular group came in here, fresh, enthusiastic and, as we both have, been on both sides of the House. We have experienced the whole of political life, and that is probably something not many people want to do, but we have done it.
What I admire most about Richard is that he takes his work very seriously. He is quite a dedicated politician and electorate member. His constituents in his electorate will say that they only have to go to his office, and they can be reassured that if he can help them he will. That is what we are here for. We are not here for ourselves, but for the people who vote us in.
I remember when I first joined the CLP, I was almost terrified of Richard because he was one of the powerbrokers. He was such a strong force in the CLP. His wife, Sharon, in particular, was there standing so strong. I felt quite intimidated by the fact that there was such a strong party link there. It was interesting that there was this doctor from far away who came to Alice Springs and took such a strong interest and participation in a political party, obviously, with the intent of being able to contribute to the country that he had adopted as his own. Richard, you have done that.
I know that, sometimes, we have politically clashed. I guess we could say that of many of us in the House. However, I will always remember, Richard, that you were one of the first people to visit me when Graham passed away, and I will not forget that ever. Your concern for me was very obvious, and I appreciate that. Thank you. God, we are a lot of sooks here tonight. There are the little things like that that make you appreciate people and remember the strength of their character and personality.
Richard, look after Sharon - she is really important to you. Look after yourself first of all so that you both can enjoy your retirement together, because, really, the most important thing in your life is you and Sharon. So, good luck. Thank you on behalf of all Territorians for what you have done. I wish you well. I have to stop sooking.
Dr Lim: Thank you.
Ms SCRYMGOUR (Arafura): Madam Speaker, and also add - not a long contribution, but a short one - for the member for Greatorex. I do not have the same length of career as the member for Braitling or the members of the opposition, or the time that they have spent with Dr Lim. However, I did spend a fair bit of time with him when I first came into this Chamber. I can say that I do not think that there was one time that I ever agreed with the views of Dr Lim. Even when we were on the sessional committee inquiring into substance abuse, there were many robust discussions and disagreements. Nevertheless, through those disagreements, you begin to understand that person. As part of that understanding, you develop a respect for that person’s view and their willingness to at least be brave enough to air those views. That is certainly something that I saw with the member for Greatorex.
I remember when I was first elected, I would listen to his contribution to debates, and walk out of this Chamber in complete frustration. I will not repeat what I used to say in that lobby but, nevertheless, it was with complete frustration. However, I remember when my son got into trouble and with a personal thing for me when I was seriously ill - which I do not think many people in this Chamber are aware of - I was very surprised at the kind words and the card and the message that I received from the member for Greatorex. We all have such busy and individual lives, and I suppose I do not get to talk much to the member for Greatorex. When I was going through all those struggles with my health a couple of years ago, I really appreciated, Richard, those kinds words to get well - certainly someone from whom I least expected. Madam Speaker, I certainly appreciated it and it went a long way.
Richard, to your wife, Sharon, and your family, they are getting you back. All of us with families know what they go through. I used to, certainly in my previous occupation, say politicians were overpaid; that they did not do much. Coming into this job you learn, and the people who do suffer as a consequence of us being in these positions are our families. Therefore, I thank your wife and your children.
Just quickly, I do not know how many members, both past and present, have ever seen Dr Lim in a pair of tights. I will keep that story for another day. On many of our trips when we were on the substance abuse committee, the times that I saw Dr Lim in running gear, and the member for Nelson as well. I used to tell them both to go back to their rooms because they would scare the whole community, because we not out there to scare the communities; we were out there to talk to the communities about the impact of substance abuse.
Richard, enjoy that retirement. You have added some contentious views but, as I said, I have not - and I do not think I have ever - agreed with some of them. There was one agreement I think we both had, and that was in relation to mandatory treatment and what needed to be done with alcohol abuse in the Northern Territory. Thank you, and I wish you well.
Mr MILLS (Blain): Madam Speaker, I advise the House that I have not seen the member for Greatorex wearing tights. And they are good legs.
We are put in a position where we have the opportunity to reflect on the contribution that a member has made. I have been impressed by Richard from the beginning, and I will go into that in some detail. However, what has always emanated from Richard is his desire to serve and work very hard to achieve an outcome, and to make a contribution. That has been a constant thing and a passionate desire of Richard. I have not met Richard’s dad but I know that Richard has conveyed to me that his dad has wondered why he left the medical profession and went into politics. I know why he did. It is his heart that has taken him there; he wanted to make a contribution. When Richard phoned me from Malaysia, I conveyed a message via Richard, which I told he must pass it on to his dad: ‘Dad, you should be proud of Richard’.
Richard has really stood up to principles and values and been earnest in his execution of things that he holds dear. He is hard-working. He is an inspiration in that respect. Not many people have the work ethic of Richard Lim. I am concerned about his retirement because he will not stop working in retirement. I often rebuked Richard about his hard work, about his work ethic and his tenacity - like a super ball, he just bounces; he has so much energy. That is such a good and precious thing to witness and be involved in, in a close working relationship. He is loyal - very loyal - and that is something that has impressed me. We do not often have the opportunity to assess the quality of loyalty. That has been a notable feature that has impressed me deeply. Richard is honest. Richard is not the sort of man who can comfortably tell a lie. That is something I admire more than anything; the capacity for honesty.
However, more importantly, right from the beginning, in a similar sense to the member for Braitling, when I entered the parliament, I tell you I was bewildered. It was overwhelming. I came in on a by-election at the same time as the member for Wanguri. The CLP was at its peak. There were lots of egos, and energies around the place, and I certainly came in to try to find my way of making a contribution.
I have to say that the climate at the time was one where there was a lot of energy focused on achieving politically, and I was at sea. I was not sure how it was meant to work and, because you come in on a by-election, you do not necessarily have the culture around you to inculcate you. You just come on in and away you go.
Richard took the time to assist me. He showed such kindness that I have never forgotten that. My mother noticed that kind man who was providing helpful advice. It was a special connection at that difficult early stage. That kindness is a very precious thing. I have had the privilege of working with Richard and getting to know him, and I value him deeply; the attributes he has shown are an inspiration to me. The times of the leadership and the deputy leadership were immensely difficult, and I could not have had the voice of anyone better beside me. I valued Richard’s constant counsel. He is able to provide good counsel, a doctor able to pierce through the issues and to provide very good advice. He does not beat around the bush but, because it is borne out of kindness and a clarity of mind, it is most useful.
I am going to say in one respect I will miss it, but I know, with the qualities Richard has, his phone will be picked up when I ring; something I will not abuse, but I will appreciate. His generosity is extraordinary. Small things are no problem. To go the extra mile; that has been consistent. I have never known him to withhold something he can give to someone else. Medical advice; it is extraordinary. I have a professional background but I do not remember everything. However, Richard seems to know just about everything which you ask. He just knows the answer. If the computer has gone a bit weird; you just have to turn around and Richard is able to fix it. He understands complex and technical things, and that is a rare skill. He is renowned around networks. If you cannot work out something, you phone Richard, as he is the person who will be able to give it a better shot than anyone I know of …
Mr Wood: Small fee!
Dr Lim: No, no.
Mr MILLS: No, never, advice is free.
When it comes down to practices in the parliament, legislative advice and corporate knowledge, his has all been immensely valuable. Sadly, I must say that it is only when it comes to the end - and I was asked last night whether Richard was going to retire or not and I said: ‘I do not know about that’, but I did know all the time. I have known for a little while and, in that time of dwelling on the fact that we travel through life and we do not always have the people around us forever.
It was in the last month or so that I was really able to recognise the value of Richard Lim. I notice we did the same with Peter Toyne. Peter Toyne left and, all of a sudden, we recognised the gem. Perhaps we draw could something from that and recognise who we have around us while they are still here.
Richard, you have a wonderful wife. As soon as I came into the party, she lobbied on your behalf straight up. She is a wonderful supporter and I admire that you are able to make this decision to stand beside her when she needs you most. To your mum and dad, as the eldest son, you have obligations which some of us do not understand. I respect those obligations you have discharged as best you can in a difficult time.
The attention to detail regarding your plan, your exit strategy, has been extraordinary. You have taken great care to leave no unfinished business which is a burden to others. You will make a tidy exit, and that is a demonstration of the care that you have demonstrated all the way through for those who have an eye to see. Sometimes, we do not notice these things, but I have noticed, Richard. Finally, Bapak Richard, orang baik. Selamat jalan.
Dr Lim: Terima kasih.
Mr HENDERSON (Wanguri): Mr Deputy Speaker, I, too, would like to acknowledge the very significant contribution that Richard Lim has made to Territory politics, and particularly the parliament, over 13 years - but 25 years in politics in the Northern Territory. For our Westminster system to be effective, there really does need to be a contest of ideas, and 25 years is a long time to put such energy and commitment into a political party. I certainly recognise, Richard, that that is a significant contribution to the Northern Territory and the contest of ideas over those 25 years.
I do not know Richard Lim well personally but, certainly politically, I have known him for the 20 years that I have been involved in politics in the Northern Territory, and the eight years that I have been in this House. By way of observation, I concur that Richard is recognised, particularly in Alice Springs and in his electorate - I have friends, through my wife in Alice Springs - as being an extraordinarily hard worker at an electorate level. As somebody has said in contribution tonight, which is very true, it is a very great honour to represent your constituents. Reading your comments in the Northern Territory News today about the greatest satisfaction that you have had in your time in the job is to represent your constituents, and to take on their issues and causes and try to resolve them, I concur with that. That is the greatest satisfaction I get in this job - working on behalf of my constituents to try to resolve their individual issues.
Thirteen years – that is a lot of sausage sizzles. That is a lot of money spent on sausages over 13 years. If I get the chance to be like Richard Lim and I am in here that long – I am adding up the number of sausages that I buy - it runs into the many thousands. That is a lot of sausage sizzles, a lot of doorknocking, a lot of staying in touch with people, and a lot of memories. I am sure, Richard, you will have many great memories to take into retirement.
Not only a hard worker electorally, you have been a very hard worker in here. As the member for Blain just said, we came in after a by-election in 1999. I was on that side. In fact, I used to sit in that chair, Dr Lim. For the two years in opposition, it was obvious that you worked very hard in your role. Now, in opposition, in contributing to debate in this House, there are very few debates that we have on ministerial statements or legislation where you do not make a contribution. I might disagree with your contribution, but you have stood here, you have put the work in, and you have made that contribution. I acknowledge that you have made a big contribution to the debate.
Politics is played hard. You played the game hard and you have been ruthless. That is a recognition in the political game; that is not a word that should be taken in any way with animosity. Politics is a ruthless game, and you have certainly been ruthless in the way that you have played the game. Politics is played hard and I respect you for the way that you have made that contribution. Over those 25 years - as I said, I have been in politics for 20 years in the Northern Territory - both of our parties have had our ups and downs. However, you have been an unfailing supporter for the CLP, and carrying that standard and the ideals of the CLP, you have never let that drop. I respect you for the way that you have carried the colours of your party over those 25 years.
Richard, I wish you and your family well. Enjoy the time back with your family. As everybody here knows, it is the people we hurt most when we taken on the responsibilities and the honour of the role we have. It is our family that really does wave goodbye to us for such a long time. I do not know your family personally, but I wish you, Sharon, and your family well, and good luck in your retirement.
Mrs MILLER (Katherine): Mr Deputy Speaker, I also wish Richard all the very best in his retirement - or his retirement from politics, I should say. I cannot picture this man ever using that word …
Mr Wood: Point of order! That does not apply to the member for Greatorex. You cannot use it.
Mrs MILLER: Is that the wrong word?
Mr Wood: Sorry, I take that back.
Mrs MILLER: It is not a word that is appropriate. Retirement, I do not think, in the true sense of the word, would ever come into the member for Greatorex’s vocabulary. I just cannot picture it.
The first time I met Richard Lim - and I am going to call him Richard Lim tonight – it was in about the year 2000. I was an alderman on Katherine Town Council and the Mayor, Jim Forscutt, phoned us and said: ‘We have a very special visitor coming to see us to discuss local government. Can you all be here?’ ‘Yes. Who is it?’ ‘It is the Minister for Local Government’. We all made sure that we took time off from our respective businesses and went to bow to the Minister for Local Government …
Dr Lim: Oh, no, we sat round around the table.
Mrs MILLER: Mayor Jim Forscutt was very chuffed that the Minister for Local Government had made a visit to Katherine Town Council and had listened to the concerns of the aldermen of Katherine Town Council. He did say it was the first time ever that he had had a Minister for Local Government visit. That just goes to show the character of this man - and your dedication, Richard, to your position.
Several of the speakers have spoken about by-elections, and that happens to be how I am standing here, after a by-election in 2003. I wondered what on earth I had struck when I came across Richard Lim. He was the deputy at the time, and I could not believe the amount of energy this man had. It was a flurry of paper in the morning. The minute we had a wing meeting, of which I had no understanding of the process at all, Richard had all of the day’s agenda worked out; ‘This is what we were doing’. He made sure everybody was totally organised all of the time. I was a little in awe of him and, I think, a little scared of him when I first came in because you had so much knowledge, Richard - and so much experience from being in this place.
It would have been a very difficult time for you, because it was after the 2001 defeat of the Country Liberal Party. You were very conscientious as a minister and then, to be in opposition and to be a shadow minister would have been an extremely difficult position for you to have been in. I have never ever been in a position on that side of the House, but I can imagine the difference it would have been then, coming onto this side to the opposition. For the short time that you were the minister, I know that your dedication to that position was very much appreciated, especially by the Katherine Town Council, because you were genuine in your enthusiasm.
The day that you visited, I will remember well, because I believe there were four aldermen and the mayor who met in the committee room. Richard, being very enthusiastic and diligent, was sitting on the edge of his seat. We were all lounged back, listening and wanting to put our point of view to this minister, and he was seated on the edge of his seat, pen and paper, furiously writing the whole time he was there. We felt somebody had listened to us and was genuinely listening to the problems and concerns that we had as Katherine Town Council. We really did appreciate it at that time.
Since I have been in this House, I have appreciated the assistance and advice you have given me, Richard. I will never in a million years have the experience and the knowledge you have. I can get an e-mail from you at 11.35 pm, and I wonder what on earth he was doing on a Saturday or Sunday night at 11.35 pm; I must speak to him. Perhaps he needs to get a life. That used to worry me.
However, he is totally committed to what he does. Conscientious is a word used by other members in this House tonight, and you do know the true meaning of being conscientious, Richard. You are also extremely loyal and that is a quality I value in somebody. It does not matter what your belief is, you are loyal and conscientious to it. I really respect that. I know whatever you do in you life, you will always be conscientious and very loyal. I know you will always be loyal to the Country Liberal Party, and to your family, which you have displayed, especially with the illnesses of your parents and Sharon. Your loyalty to your family has now taken precedence, as it should, to your position in the Country Liberal Party and on the opposition.
You do not miss a trick, and you are always in the right place at the right time. Last year, when I had my car accident north of Alice Springs, I remember looking at this face in the Alice Springs Hospital. I cannot say on the Parliamentary Record what he actually said, as I would not be allowed to say it, but it was something like: ‘Um hmm hmm, you are so um hmm hmm’, and it ended with ‘lucky’. There were a lot of expletives through that, but he was shaking his head, looking at me with a broken neck, and being very concerned - sincerely concerned. When Richard had a look at my MRI scans and X-rays, I had an honest opinion, which I knew I would get. It was: ‘Do not move, just do not move’. Richard, it was very comforting to have you there at that time, both you and Sharon, and it was a pity I could not take you with me to Adelaide. I appreciated it so very much.
One thing which does concern me is what you going are to do with all those hats when you clean out your office. Over the years, Richard has collected a lot of memorabilia from his trips away, and from different experience he has had. His life for the last 20 years, I would suggest, can be told through his hats. I think the first domestic you will have with Sharon when you get home is where you are going to put those hats. I am sure it will be an interesting discussion. I will call it a high-level discussion that you will have. However, knowing you, you will appreciate and respect that they will be in a tidy place in the house somewhere and not collecting dust.
Richard, I really do wish you and Sharon, your daughters, and your son and his wife and family, all the very best in whatever you chose to do from this point on. It certainly will not be retirement, and I know that. You know we are going to miss your bundle of energy around here. I certainly will, and I have no idea of how your shoes are going to be filled.
Dr Lim: Little shoes.
Mrs MILLER: No, they will have to be shiny shoes, I know that.
My sincere best wishes to you and Sharon, and your family. Keep in touch, and I am sure the phones will be ringing hot to you every now and then. You are very comforting with your advice and it has been a wonderful experience which we have really appreciated.
All the best, Richard.
Mr WOOD (Nelson): I promise not to cry, Mr Deputy Speaker, because I believe very much in water conservation.
I would like to say goodbye to Richard. I have known Richard in different stages of my political life: one as President of the Litchfield Shire Council; and as Deputy President of the Local Government Association. He would know very well we had our differences of opinion on amalgamations, but it seems like I keep doing it with the present government. That is all part of why we are in public office - because we are in this job to help people and to do the best we can. Of course, we do not always agree, but that does not mean we do not respect one another and enjoy one another’s company.
The member for Arafura pointed out great memories of you in a pair of tights. I do not have that personally, but I will always remember you after Shave Hair Day. It is pretty rare to see a Chinese person bald. It is not a sort of thing you see a lot. In my case, it runs in the family so it is no big deal. I remember when Richard was in the House and there was not a lot of hair there. I tell you it was not a pleasant sight. It was probably a lot better when he was the person who put on the Chinese dragon outfit, because then we did not see it. I will remember him for that as well. As he said, he introduced that to the opening of parliament and it is a great tradition. I do not know how much money I gave him, but I put a lot of IOUs in those little red envelopes.
Ms Carney interjecting.
Mr WOOD: That is right. There are a couple of other things Richard will always be remembered for. He certainly gave it all he could during debates. I did not always agree with him, but there is no doubt he had great passion when he put his point of view. Sometimes, when he was contributing to a fiery debate, even I got emotional, as you may well remember during a certain debate. At that time, he was maltreated in the manner in which some people spoke to him.
He also is an IT wizard. I know that because I visited him in his office - I do not know how many years ago, a couple of years ago. I could talk to the secretary but I could not talk to Richard because Richard had some other bloke there, with wires trying to connect up computers, and they had all sorts of things. I said hello to Richard, but I believe I did not say much more because he loves his IT; there is no doubt about that. Look in his office! It looks like something out of NASA with bits and pieces everywhere. He certainly loves that side of it.
Richard, you will be missed. Although people did not always agree with you, to me you are a character - not in a silly way; you are the sort of person parliament needs. It is a bit like some people complaining about football teams these days; that they are all the same. We do not even have any Jackos doing handstands in the goal square, or using a bit of biff. Parliament needs some characters to give it some life, otherwise, we may as well just put a bunch of robots here. Although, coming from an Independent’s point of view, when I see parties in the voting mode, it sometimes looks like a bunch of robots. However, that is another issue. I believe you will be missed for that. Not only did you bring different points of view, you raised debate. Maybe you threw in a few controversial phrases every now and again to bait the other side, but at least you got people to say something about the debate that was on hand at the time, and that was good.
To me, you will be missed for that reason. I will certainly miss you. I have been sitting next to you since the last election. I have been given private medical advice when I have been feeling a bit crook here - not billed which is good …
Dr Lim: Not billed, just bills.
Mr WOOD: No, not bills, but plenty of bills.
Also, we shared a bit of advice. You have more knowledge of parliamentary procedures than I, and that is one area I know you are very good on. The number of times you have stood and mentioned a clause from this fantastic book, Parliamentary Procedures. I think you just about know that book off by heart, as you were extremely good with your knowledge of parliamentary practice as well. For me, that was very beneficial.
All the best to your family. I do not know your family very well. I might have met your wife once, and your parents. It is good that you have made, in many ways, a big sacrifice, because your emotion shows that you love parliament, you love your job, but you have shown that you are willing to give that away for the benefit of your family. That is a very honourable thing to do.
There is one other thing I have to say. It is actually going to be in the form of a bit of protest tonight. I used to be Deputy Speaker too, Mr Deputy Speaker, and sat in that chair night after night. And what did the honourable member for Greatorex do? Every night he would do an adjournment debate. Well, as I have 10 minutes to go, I …
Members interjecting.
Mr WOOD: I was not going to do anything. What I will say, member for Greatorex, thank you for coming. Go and have your drinks. I forgot to stand up and give my comments about the Estimates Committee. I will give those. You do not have to listen to them.
Dr Lim: You are not allowed to do it now.
Mr WOOD: Trust you to say that.
Dr Lim: I will call a point of order on that.
Mr WOOD: Well, I will not talk about the Estimates Committee, I am just going to give my awards. That is all. I do not have any awards really, because the government has told me about the 3% efficiency dividend, which meant I do not have any money to give any, so I decided not to give any.
I thank very much all the staff who were involved in the estimates who did all the hard work. I thank the member for Brennan officially on behalf of the Independents, because he did an excellent job. Also, the member for Port Darwin, who took his place from time to time, and also Hansard, who must go through great agony trying to understand what I say because, even when I read the Daily Hansard, I have trouble understanding what I had to say. I thank them; they are bilingual up there.
Dr Lim: Multilingual.
Mr WOOD: … and multiskilled and I thank them very much. With that, and not having to put you through too much revenge, I would wish you all the best, and I am sure I will see you in Alice Springs in the near future.
Dr Lim: Thank you.
Motion agreed to; the Assembly adjourned.
Last updated: 04 Aug 2016